The Last Airbender

[Octoberist]

to my amusement, the one thing that I find funny about fandom is how people tend to paint things in broad strokes. Yes there are extreme haters or lovers but to brush it all off and ignore whatever valid points there were made initially is silly.

 

[Ghostvirus]

After seeing this movie. I have yet to see a valid point the haters have made.

I usually don't like to call people out in such a broad way. I didn't with Lady In The Water or The Happening. Because I could kind of see where the more logical haters were coming from. But I still liked the films.

This movie on the other hand. All I have seen or read is pure illiogical hatred. Even though I know that statement wasn't just directed my way. I feel in this case that a broad stroke is completely justified.

 

[Brother Jack]

I don't understand how you can't at least see the criticisms with the acting and much of the dialogue. I also don't get why you're taking it so personally that a lot of people hated this movie.

 

[Sam Fisher]

I think the "haters" do have some valid points. The cartoon, while it had some mature storylines, was lighthearted and lots of fun. I haven't seen the movie, but from what I've heard, M Night{and no, I'm not a M. Night hater} sucked all the fun and life the series had out of the movie. Imagine if someone took out all the quips and funny humor out of Spider-man, turned him into a dark broding Batman-esqe character, and made that into a movie. It just doesn't work.

 

[Ipodman]

So what you are saying is that its the studio's fault for choosing such a stylized director in the first place?

 

[Lighthouse]

After seeing this movie. I have yet to see a valid point the haters have made.

I usually don't like to call people out in such a broad way. I didn't with Lady In The Water or The Happening. Because I could kind of see where the more logical haters were coming from. But I still liked the films.

This movie on the other hand. All I have seen or read is pure illiogical hatred. Even though I know that statement wasn't just directed my way. I feel in this case that a broad stroke is completely justified.

You are taking this far too personally. I find this to be one of the worst movies of the year, and one of the worst big studio productions I've seen in years, but I won't hold it against someone if they like it for some reason. I don't understand how you can see anything illogical about why people hate this film. Some may take it more personally than others because it's ruined a franchise they love, and which had serious potential as a movie franchise.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

After seeing this movie. I have yet to see a valid point the haters have made.

I usually don't like to call people out in such a broad way. I didn't with Lady In The Water or The Happening. Because I could kind of see where the more logical haters were coming from. But I still liked the films.

This movie on the other hand. All I have seen or read is pure illiogical hatred. Even though I know that statement wasn't just directed my way. I feel in this case that a broad stroke is completely justified.

How can you say that about the dialogue, writing, and complete lack of character interaction? There is literally no character building dialogue amongst Team Avatar. All their lines are exposition.

 

[Sam Fisher]

So what you are saying is that its the studio's fault for choosing such a stylized director in the first place?

I think M. Night is a good director, but I just think he was the wrong choice to direct this movie.

 

[gregtestagent]

I think the "haters" do have some valid points. The cartoon, while it had some mature storylines, was lighthearted and lots of fun. I haven't seen the movie, but from what I've heard, M Night{and no, I'm not a M. Night hater} sucked all the fun and life the series had out of the movie. Imagine if someone took out all the quips and funny humor out of Spider-man, turned him into a dark broding Batman-esqe character, and made that into a movie. It just doesn't work.

They already did that, his name is Sam Raimi. Technically he lessened the amount of quips by 90%, gradually made Peter emo, and inserted his own brand of sick humor. *thinks of unnecessary dance number in SM3, shudders*

 

[gregtestagent]

How can you say that about the dialogue, writing, and complete lack of character interaction? There is literally no character building dialogue amongst Team Avatar. All their lines are exposition.

I would have just sat down the entire cast for an Avatar marathon and tell them to take notes. "Do it like that!" i'd say, and have them shamelessly lift entire sections of dialogue from the series. Have them meet with the voice actors and force them to exchange the idea and traits of characters to the live action cast. And first an foremost, I'd fire Shyamalan, hire him for the cabbage man role, and fire him again.

 

[Ghostvirus]

I don't understand how you can't at least see the criticisms with the acting and much of the dialogue. I also don't get why you're taking it so personally that a lot of people hated this movie.

I can understand if you saw the cartoon first you wouldn't like the dialogue. The Cartoon Dialogue was hoaky to the max. So this more serious tone is much different from tne cartoon. I prefer the movie.

I had no problem with any of the acting. I thought it was fine. I also was fine with Zuko's lessening of humor. In the cartoon he bordered on Jar Jar Binks type humor. It was painful to watch. So I enjoyed his more subtle dry humor.

I am not really taking it personally. I am just tired of seeing this vicious circle. So you want Night off the film? Well what if a much worse director comes in?

This movie reeked of nothing but set up for the next film. I have no doubt in my mind that if Shams gets to do the sequel. This movie will look much better when the meat of the story is out there.

If you replace Shyamalan now. There will be continuity errors, a completely different tone & style. Everything that he has setup in this film will not bare fruit.

The action sequences alone were amazing! No quick cuts just a little slow mo to let you take in the beauty.

If Shyamalan doesn't direct the sequel all the action sequences from here on out will be smash cuts & close ups to the point that you wont be able to enjoy the action.

The only gripe I have is the beginning of the film moves fast. But I realised that is how Shams roles. He likes to start the movie fast & then slow it down.

As far as the exposition goes. Once again this was a setup movie. It was establishing everything that will happen in the next films. If you switch filmmakers now you just screw with that as well. A lot of this talking was no different than the talking in A New Hope. By comparison of the full Wars saga A New Hope is boring. So perhaps when all is said & done. This movie will be looked at as the same?

Look folks I am not saying for sure that if he does all of these movies they will turn out great. But I am saying that if he doesn't do the next ones. The movie series will be inconsistant. So why dont we just lay off him. Let him do his thing. & if the whole shoo-bang turns out to suck. Who cares you got the cartoon.

 

[Downhere]

I can understand if you saw the cartoon first you wouldn't like the dialogue. The Cartoon Dialogue was hoaky to the max. So this more serious tone is much different from the cartoon. I prefer the movie.

I had no problem with any of the acting. I thought it was fine. I also was fine with Zuko's lessening of humor. In the cartoon he bordered on Jar Jar Binks type humor. It was painful to watch. So I enjoyed his more subtle dry humor.

While some of the dialogue in the animated series could be considered "hoaky," it is still a million times better than what was displayed in the movie. The animated series dialogue had charm, intellect, and humor, which the movie had none of. Also, I think your mixing up character's. Zuko is not a humorous character, I think your thinking of Sokka. Sokka's humor in the animated series is nothing like Jar Jar Binks, I don't even know where you are pulling that comparison from. Sokka is the sarcastic and pessimistic type and his pessimism provides great comic relief because everything that can go wrong for him usually does. In the movie, Sokka had no humor whatsoever, not even dry humor, he was just a blank and expressionless character throughout the whole thing. A total travesty to the character that was established in the animated series.

I am not really taking it personally. I am just tired of seeing this vicious circle. So you want Night off the film? Well what if a much worse director comes in?

Speaking as someone who loves the animated series, there is no director worse than M. Night for these films that I can see. He has already proven he didn't understand the source material and turned a beloved cartoon into a lifeless, emotionless, driveling pile of crap that is so far removed from the animated series that it should be called TLAINO (The Last Airbender In Name Only). I would much rather see someone who has an understanding of the source material and someone who would find a way to balance the humor and seriousness the animated series presented.

This movie reeked of nothing but set up for the next film. I have no doubt in my mind that if Shams gets to do the sequel. This movie will look much better when the meat of the story is out there.

If you replace Shyamalan now. There will be continuity errors, a completely different tone & style. Everything that he has setup in this film will not bare fruit.

Of course this movie reeked of a setup for the next, that's what it was supposed to do. The problem is that the story only gets better in Book 2 and a new character is introduced who is by far one of the best of the series, but with M. Night at the helm, he will end up butchering the story just like he did with the first film. Not to mention, the awesome character of Toph will most likely become another drone that neither shows emotion or humor and is simply reading lines for the sake of reading lines.

Personally, I don't think there will be continuity errors with a director change. And honestly, I'd prefer if there were changes just to get the story back to how the animated series presented it. But, if you look at something like the Harry Potter films, there really wasn't any continuity errors between the films and those had different director's. As far as a complete different tone and style, yes please! Get the second film closer to how the story should be and give the film a brighter look than the drab setting we got in the first film.

The action sequences alone were amazing! No quick cuts just a little slow mo to let you take in the beauty.

If Shyamalan doesn't direct the sequel all the action sequences from here on out will be smash cuts & close ups to the point that you wont be able to enjoy the action.

Did we see the same movie? While it was nice that there were no quick cuts, the action sequences lacked imagination and awe. They were very pedestrian and you would think for the money put into this picture that M. Night could have conceived better ways to showcase the bending, it was all just blah. And honestly, there were way too many moves just to get the bending going, too slow. It needed to be faster, more slick and quick.

Look folks I am not saying for sure that if he does all of these movies they will turn out great. But I am saying that if he doesn't do the next ones. The movie series will be inconsistent. So why don't we just lay off him. Let him do his thing. & if the whole shoo-bang turns out to suck. Who cares you got the cartoon.

I know for a fact that if he continues on as director these movies will continue to suck. He's already proven he doesn't understand the source material, doesn't understand how it should have been presented, and will just continue to make mediocre sequels that pale in comparison to their animated counterparts. I'd rather the series be inconsistent, so that the next two films can be put back on track to how they should be and that is closer to the animated series. It needs to be ambitious, smart, humorous, and downright epic without losing the character interactions that made the series what it is.

 

[gregtestagent]

u guys are ready to accept this first film, whether u liked it or not, and are talking about sequels. I still want a reboot with Peter Jackson and the script written by the series creators, and their team of writers.

 

[Fanticon]

I can understand if you saw the cartoon first you wouldn't like the dialogue. The Cartoon Dialogue was hoaky to the max. So this more serious tone is much different from tne cartoon. I prefer the movie.

I had no problem with any of the acting. I thought it was fine. I also was fine with Zuko's lessening of humor. In the cartoon he bordered on Jar Jar Binks type humor. It was painful to watch. So I enjoyed his more subtle dry humor.

I am not really taking it personally. I am just tired of seeing this vicious circle. So you want Night off the film? Well what if a much worse director comes in?

This movie reeked of nothing but set up for the next film. I have no doubt in my mind that if Shams gets to do the sequel. This movie will look much better when the meat of the story is out there.

If you replace Shyamalan now. There will be continuity errors, a completely different tone & style. Everything that he has setup in this film will not bare fruit.

The action sequences alone were amazing! No quick cuts just a little slow mo to let you take in the beauty.

If Shyamalan doesn't direct the sequel all the action sequences from here on out will be smash cuts & close ups to the point that you wont be able to enjoy the action.

The only gripe I have is the beginning of the film moves fast. But I realised that is how Shams roles. He likes to start the movie fast & then slow it down.

As far as the exposition goes. Once again this was a setup movie. It was establishing everything that will happen in the next films. If you switch filmmakers now you just screw with that as well. A lot of this talking was no different than the talking in A New Hope. By comparison of the full Wars saga A New Hope is boring. So perhaps when all is said & done. This movie will be looked at as the same?

Look folks I am not saying for sure that if he does all of these movies they will turn out great. But I am saying that if he doesn't do the next ones. The movie series will be inconsistant. So why dont we just lay off him. Let him do his thing. & if the whole shoo-bang turns out to suck. Who cares you got the cartoon.

surely you meant sokka.

don't take everyone's opinion so personal.

my personal feelings are that everything looked good going in, with a few red flags that started to pop up here and there as spoilers and plot details were revealed, but still it seemed to be shaping up.

I believe M. Night was a good choice, maybe not the best, but interesting, and then I really got behind him. Believing he was due for a hit, and that it would be easier for him to pull this off because it was an adaptation of very strong source material with big potential for a live action translation. He claimed to love the series as much as the fans, so essentially this movie could have been made for fans as faithfully as possible while still appealing to general audiences and could have been critic proof if that had happened.

I wanted it to be critically praised, that would have been too perfect. But the finished product looked like it needed another six months to complete. And maybe there is no amount of editing in the world that could have fixed the holes and bad dialogue but it couldn't have hurt.

The liberties Night took with the source material are now very astounding to me. If it aint broke then don't try and fix it. Night rose to the challenge of bringing this world to life, everything from FX, sets, costumes and locations, etc. felt like the cartoon. All this big budget stuff no one thought he could do, actually worked out great. But you can do all of these things right and none of it will matter if the writing doesn't quite work. And with this movie it all came down to dialogue, acting out this dialogue, plot holes, and excessive exposition. Everyone agrees that it was too short and felt rushed and we know for a fact just by watching any of the previews that scenes were shot, chopped and completely cut from the movie. So we can blame M. Night, or we can blame the "yes-men" producers, or the studio itself. Or we can defend this movie for what it is.

But nothing at this point will help it recover financially or even favorably with fans and the general public. I have accepted that an attempt was made, failed, and ruined all hopes of seeing the 2nd and third books being made.

 

[Downhere]

But nothing at this point will help it recover financially or even favorably with fans and the general public. I have accepted that an attempt was made, failed, and ruined all hopes of seeing the 2nd and third books being made.

This is on track to hit $300 million worldwide ($130-140 million domestically and another $160+ million internationally). I have a feeling a sequel will be green lit. The question remains, will Paramount listen to the reviews and comments from fans and get rid of M. Night or will they let him continue to wreak havoc on this beloved franchise...time will tell.

 

[Brother Jack]

This movie reeked of nothing but set up for the next film. I have no doubt in my mind that if Shams gets to do the sequel. This movie will look much better when the meat of the story is out there.

That's one of my biggest problems with it actually, that it's less of an actual complete film but a set-up for a movie franchise. The ending was aggravatingly anti-climactic.

 

[Fanticon]

This is on track to hit $300 million worldwide ($130-140 million domestically and another $160+ million internationally). I have a feeling a sequel will be green lit. The question remains, will Paramount listen to the reviews and comments from fans and get rid of M. Night or will they let him continue to wreak havoc on this beloved franchise...time will tell.

it has a long way to go to reach 130m domestically. i don't know where your getting that tracking info. Internationally I agree the movie stands a chance.

 

[Timstuff]

u guys are ready to accept this first film, whether u liked it or not, and are talking about sequels. I still want a reboot with Peter Jackson and the script written by the series creators, and their team of writers.

Since when did Peter Jackson become "the reboot guy?" He's never even made a friggin' reboot, and I doubt he's even seen the Avatar cartoon.

Also, the series creators DID help write the script for this movie, and there's no way they're going to reboot it anyway. What would they do differently next time to differentiate it, anyway? The story would be pretty much exactly the same, except maybe with The Great Divide.

 

[Downhere]

it has a long way to go to reach 130m domestically. i don't know where your getting that tracking info. Internationally I agree the movie stands a chance.

Um, as of yesterday it is 78% of the way to $130 million. It's at $101,813,808 as of yesterday and is only 2 weeks into its box office run. I'm thinking it can make an additional $28 million from here on out.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Since when did Peter Jackson become "the reboot guy?" He's never even made a friggin' reboot, and I doubt he's even seen the Avatar cartoon.

Also, the series creators DID help write the script for this movie, and there's no way they're going to reboot it anyway. What would they do differently next time to differentiate it, anyway? The story would be pretty much exactly the same, except maybe with The Great Divide.

The series creators didn't write a thing. Don't confuse "i asked for insight" with "they helped me write it". Two completely different things. It is obvious whatever insight they may have provided, M Night ignored it.

Secondly while I don't particular care for a reboot, one could easily be done with plenty of material to add.

- Kyoshi Warriors
- A fully realized opening featuring more from the first two episodes
- Katara's training in the North
- Jet
- The Deserter
- Roku
- The Spirit World
- The pirates
- Omashu

 

[Ghostvirus]

I am a little taken back by the fact that some of you "adults" are taking a CHILDRENS cartoon so serioiusly.

This wasn't meant for you. You keep saying the fans. The children are supposed to be the fans. This isn't meant for grown ass men. Most children seemed to like it. The actual demographic that this was intended for. I gotta say I think some of you need to either realise that at the end of the day this is for children & just enjoy watching it for what it is. Or not watch it, enjoy the cartoon, & ignore the movies.

Either way I really think some of you need stop worrying about the fate of a childrens cartoon, & maybe consider growing up a little bit. I know that seems harsh. I am just speaking my mind.

 

[Ipodman]

I am a little taken back by the fact that some of you "adults" are taking a CHILDRENS cartoon so serioiusly.

This wasn't meant for you. You keep saying the fans. The children are supposed to be the fans. This isn't meant for grown ass men. Most children seemed to like it. The actual demographic that this was intended for. I gotta say I think some of you need to either realise that at the end of the day this is for children & just enjoy watching it for what it is. Or not watch it, enjoy the cartoon, & ignore the movies.

Either way I really think some of you need stop worrying about the fate of a childrens cartoon, & maybe consider growing up a little bit. I know that seems harsh. I am just speaking my mind.

There are children movies like Toy Story and UP that appeal to all ages, even adults.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

I am a little taken back by the fact that some of you "adults" are taking a CHILDRENS cartoon so serioiusly.

This wasn't meant for you. You keep saying the fans. The children are supposed to be the fans. This isn't meant for grown ass men. Most children seemed to like it. The actual demographic that this was intended for. I gotta say I think some of you need to either realise that at the end of the day this is for children & just enjoy watching it for what it is. Or not watch it, enjoy the cartoon, & ignore the movies.

Either way I really think some of you need stop worrying about the fate of a childrens cartoon, & maybe consider growing up a little bit. I know that seems harsh. I am just speaking my mind.

The funny thing is that Avatar was the watched more by older demographics than kids on Nick. It was that popular a show that kids were actually in the minority when it came to watching this show.

No offense Ghostvirus that a BS copout excuse and you know it. Just because its aimed for kids doesn't mean you should get lazy when it comes to writing, directing, and editing this film. No director should ever film a movie with the mindset "Its for the children so I don't have to work as hard."

There are plenty of films that are aimed for kids with Universal appeal, such as (what Ipodman said) Pixar films, Dreamworks animation films, earlier Harry Potter films, and it goes on.

And who cares if its a Children's cartoon? If many demographics were entertained watching the tv show there would be no reason to dumb it down or make it accessible to only kids for the film. They weren't only marketing it for kids though anyway to begin with.

Its not like its Alvin and the Chipmunks, which aims for only kids. MKS wanted universal appeal and he failed on that front.

 

[Ipodman]

The funny thing is that Avatar was the watched more by older demographics than kids on Nick. It was that popular a show that kids were actually in the minority when it came to watching this show.

No offense Ghostvirus that a BS copout excuse and you know it. Just because its aimed for kids doesn't mean you should get lazy when it comes to writing, directing, and editing this film. No director should ever film a movie with the mindset "Its for the children so I don't have to work as hard."

There are plenty of films that are aimed for kids with Universal appeal, such as (what Ipodman said) Pixar films, Dreamworks animation films, earlier Harry Potter films, and it goes on.

And who cares if its a Children's cartoon? If many demographics were entertained watching the tv show there would be no reason to dumb it down or make it accessible to only kids for the film. They weren't only marketing it for kids though anyway to begin with.

Its not like its Alvin and the Chipmunks, which aims for only kids. MKS wanted universal appeal and he failed on that front.

I would put that even lower than "kids" lol t:

 

[Lighthouse]

The funny thing is that Avatar was the watched more by older demographics than kids on Nick. It was that popular a show that kids were actually in the minority when it came to watching this show.

No offense Ghostvirus that a BS copout excuse and you know it. Just because its aimed for kids doesn't mean you should get lazy when it comes to writing, directing, and editing this film. No director should ever film a movie with the mindset "Its for the children so I don't have to work as hard."

There are plenty of films that are aimed for kids with Universal appeal, such as (what Ipodman said) Pixar films, Dreamworks animation films, earlier Harry Potter films, and it goes on.

And who cares if its a Children's cartoon? If many demographics were entertained watching the tv show there would be no reason to dumb it down or make it accessible to only kids for the film. They weren't only marketing it for kids though anyway to begin with.

Its not like its Alvin and the Chipmunks, which aims for only kids. MKS wanted universal appeal and he failed on that front.

Not to mention that all of us are posting on a superhero message board