The second chapter seeks to highlight how ​Black Panther ​engages with characters of the African diaspora and questions who is responsible for the global marginalization of Black people but is missing any explicit narrative threads on European imperialism or U.S. systematic racism. Black Panther's ​villainization of Erik Killmonger, and not these institutional forces, further exemplify how the film seeks to conform to dominant systems rather than challenge them.

The third and concluding chapter analyzes the style of ​Black Panther revealing how it possesses little variance from dominant cinema both in terms of form and content. The core ideas of these three chapters—which seek to expose ​Black Panther's adherence of white patriarchal capitalism, its limited exploration of the racist forces which oppress the Black world, and its adherence to the stylistic codes of mainstream cinema respectively—work in unison to debunk the notion of Black Panther being a "revolutionary and "alternative" project. The film cannot possess such a title because it upholds, rather than challenges, mainstream understandings of race, gender and class. ​Moonlight and ​Belly are later introduced as examples of alternative Black films which both challenge the system of white patriarchal capitalism and the dominant style of mainstream cinema.

Lastly, this thesis stresses the importance of questioning the "image" in cinema. Rather than focus on the aesthetics of what is being presented, as much of the academic literature and film criticism of ​Black Panther does, it's important to question how these images are presented to viewers through elements of film form.