Although a lesser issue, I want to start with the CGI. I'm not one of those "practical is always superior" pedants (see Phantom Menace Yoda for why), but nothing ages a movie more than bad digital effects. The Lord of the Rings films stand out to me: the Battle of the Pelennor Fields is a bigger hindrance to Return of the King than a help, mostly because the goofy looking digital oliphaunts and cartoon Legolas. Black Panther will not age well: some its effects already looked dated in the theater (I'm looking at you, dancing waterfall crowd!). With how much time is dedicated to action scenes in this film, this may by itself be a ticking timebomb for the movie's lastability.
The CGI is not the beginning nor the end of the problems the two major action scenes (South Korea and the Wakandan Civil War-spoilers BTW) in this movie create. The South Korean chase scene really hurts what otherwise is a very consistent set of villains tonally: Klaue's been off the Wakandan radar for 30 years, but he's so much larger than life that he brings a small personal army to a clandestine deal (an army which he brings explicitly to deal with the Wakandans and yet he arms with weapons he knows are ineffective against Wakandan armor).
There's also the problem of stakes: the chase takes up a significant portion of the films runtime, but there's never really any doubt of Black Panther's success. He basically just sits in plain view soaking a never ending stream of bullets, and even Klaue's sonic cannon has been seen to basically just knock him backwards while charging his "burst" power. There's not even a real risk of Klaue escaping, as Black Panther is able to just steal any car on the street and have his sister drive it for him. Klaue is driving an incredibly conspicuous black SUV, and we already know that T'Challa's ship can easily track vehicles. With no stakes, there's no tension, and the scene could have been a tenth the length.
The Wakandan Civil War scene is problematic for two reasons, and while neither is "I don't know how to end a drama, so let's just have a CGI fight with giant rhinos," that didn't help. The first is that so much of the tension is deliberately introduced. There is no reason for M'Baku not to help T'Challa. We've already established that M'Baku is real big on preserving tradition (that's one of his biggest reasons for challenging T'Challa) and on his tribe getting the respect it deserves (which he asserts on the day of challenge and with his line about T'Challa being the first king to visit his hall in centuries): as a character, those are his motivations. Both of those motivations should have him backing T'Challa: technically the duel is not over, as T'Challa is not dead nor did he yield, so he has the right to challenge Killmonger. Likewise, Killmonger has done nothing to recognize M'Baku's people, Queen Ramonda offered him the purple heart flower because she saw him as Wakanda's best hope, and T'Challa makes a good case that Killmonger will go to war with him before he tries to bring him peacefully into the fold. So why didn't M'Baku march with T'Challa? Basically so he could show up at the "all is lost" moment and "turn the tide."
The second reason is W'Kabi's loyalty to Killmonger. Withuot W'Kabi's backing, Killmonger would have had no choice but to submit to the ritual duel, as even the Dora Milaje turned against him at that point. W'Kabi's dissatisfaction with T'Challa is the reason for the Wakandan Civil War, and there's no reason for it. W'Kabi backs Killmonger because he did what T'Challa could not: deliver the man who killed his parents, Klaue. But here's the thing: T'Challa knows that Killmonger is the one who freed Klaue. If, during the throne room scene, while Killmonger was making his claim, T'Challa had just said, "By the way, W'Kabi, the reason Killmonger brought you Klaue instead of me is that he was working with Klaue, and in fact he freed him from my custody," at the very least W'Kabi probably would have been a little less in Killmonger's pocket.
So really the two action set piece both have reasons they shouldn't be in the movie, which in and of itself isn't a big deal. Where it becomes problematic is that it breaks the narrative flow of the movie. The final conflict of the film should have been another duel, not an action scene. That may seem like an oxymoron: aren't I saying that instead of a fight there should have been a smaller fight? Why would that matter?
The second reason is W'Kabi's loyalty to Killmonger. Withuot W'Kabi's backing, Killmonger would have had no choice but to submit to the ritual duel, as even the Dora Milaje turned against him at that point. W'Kabi's dissatisfaction with T'Challa is the reason for the Wakandan Civil War, and there's no reason for it. W'Kabi backs Killmonger because he did what T'Challa could not: deliver the man who killed his parents, Klaue. But here's the thing: T'Challa knows that Killmonger is the one who freed Klaue. If, during the throne room scene, while Killmonger was making his claim, T'Challa had just said, "By the way, W'Kabi, the reason Killmonger brought you Klaue instead of me is that he was working with Klaue, and in fact he freed him from my custody," at the very least W'Kabi probably would have been a little less in Killmonger's pocket.
So really the two action set piece both have reasons they shouldn't be in the movie, which in and of itself isn't a big deal. Where it becomes problematic is that it breaks the narrative flow of the movie. The final conflict of the film should have been another duel, not an action scene. That may seem like an oxymoron: aren't I saying that instead of a fight there should have been a smaller fight? Why would that matter?
The reason I don't call the duels action scenes is because their main point is to symbolically explore the characters. The South Korea scene and the Wakandan Civil War scene both, as I hope I've demonstrated, don't serve the plot in any significant way. Their purpose is to show you something cool. The duels, on the other hand, both teach you about characters and their motivations: each one represents T'Challa and where he's at in his personal struggle. In the first duel, he's afraid he's unworthy to be king, with his biggest fear being that he won't be able to live up to the history and traditions that go along with that (and specifically the legacy of his father). Low and behold, who is his opponent? M'Baku, a very traditional Wakandan straight out of the history books. M'Baku is the past, and T'Challa defeats him, demonstrating mastery.
At the time of the second duel, T'Challa is at conflict with himself. He's on track to being a good traditional king just like his father, but he's learned what that really means. T'Chanka's words, "It's hard for a good man to be a king," have been given their full context, but it's too much for T'Challa. Suddenly, there is a new challenger. His opponent? Killmonger, an embodiment of all the pain and suffering the traditional kings ignored, a wellspring of hatred and violence created by their strict isolationism. In response to this, T'Challa rejects his father and tries his hardest to be a good man, surrendering his advantage over Killmonger by asking him to yield, unwilling to accept the nature of his father's sins. Killmonger's response is to disable him and then discard him. T'Challa's outright rejection of his father's words leads to defeat.
At the time of the second duel, T'Challa is at conflict with himself. He's on track to being a good traditional king just like his father, but he's learned what that really means. T'Chanka's words, "It's hard for a good man to be a king," have been given their full context, but it's too much for T'Challa. Suddenly, there is a new challenger. His opponent? Killmonger, an embodiment of all the pain and suffering the traditional kings ignored, a wellspring of hatred and violence created by their strict isolationism. In response to this, T'Challa rejects his father and tries his hardest to be a good man, surrendering his advantage over Killmonger by asking him to yield, unwilling to accept the nature of his father's sins. Killmonger's response is to disable him and then discard him. T'Challa's outright rejection of his father's words leads to defeat.
So what's the conclusion to this arc? We don't really get one. T'Challa and Killmonger fight, but there's not a lot going on symbolically. T'Challa wins due to his ingenuity and skill, which is great, but there's no payoff to his character arc here since he's been ingenious and skilled the entire movie. A duel might have demonstrated T'Challa as master of both worlds, both the traditional as he kills Killmonger without the hesitation present in their first duel, but also demonstrating the new path for Wakanda by showing real remorse at Killmonger's fate and, instead of shutting down Killmonger's project, simply replacing the weapons and sending out the ships anyway. I should say this movie does have two scenes that demonstrate T'Challa's mastery of both worlds, but it's telling that they happen after the climax of the movie (T'Challa taking Killmonger to see the sunset and opening the outreach center in Oakland), not during it.
So again, is Black Panther bad? No. But does it have the staying power of great movies? I don't think so. Great movies stay relevant because of their consistent theming and the coherence: they become the ruler by which other movies are measured. Black Panther has some gaps in both. I hope it will lead to greater diversity and inclusion in the casting and writing of future films, and I think it will last, but I think in 40 or 50 years it'll be remembered as one of the good Marvel movies, but I don't think it'll stand on its own.
