The Last Airbender

So... I get it now.

In 2010, my friends who were huge Avatar fans said we should go to the midnight premiere of this movie because they wanted to see a live adaptation of their beloved cartoon they grew up with. I went along with for the hell of it. This was 2010, it was still early internet and the movie dialogue online wasn't as loud as it is today. If this movie had come out today, it'd be panned by critics before the general going audience could even have the chance to check it out, but we remained in blissful ignorance for one of the more entertaining viewings I've ever had.

The movie started off bad but there were enough people who gave a crap to shush the people who were laughing (like myself) early on. But as the movie went on, more jeers started becoming vocal and the audience ended the viewing straight up laughing at scenes that were supposed to be taken seriously, especially in the climax of the film.

So yeah, in 2010, I knew this movie was bad. But now, I get it. I get that not only is it just a bad movie in a general sense, it's just a horrendous adaptation of the first season it was supposed to be adapting and... I understand why people got upset.

The Last Airbender is a movie adaptation of the first season of Avatar: The Last Airbender. It is set in a world where there are people who can wield the elements of water, earth, fire, and air depending on what part of the world they're from. Two kids from the water tribe named Sokka and Katara (played by Jackson Rathbone and Nicola Peltz respectively) find, and join an air bender named Aang (played by Noah Ringer) as he discovers what it means to be the chosen Avatar, the one who can bring balance to the world and bend all four elements.

The movie follows the journey of the trio as they travel to the North Pole to find a water bending master so Aang can master the four elements and become the full fledged Avatar.

Along the way they're being hunted by members of the Fire Tribe, namely the disgraced Prince Zuko and his uncle Iroh (played by Dev Patel and Shaun Toub respectively), as well as General Zhao (played by that dude from the Daily Show, Aasif Mandvi).

And if none of these names mean anything to you because you haven't watched the show, don't worry, the show both explains everything in immense detail as well as making you not give a flying fuck about any of them.

So before I get really in depth into the plot and mainly what didn't work about this movie, there are a couple of behind the scenes things I want to discuss first.

Oddly enough, after watching the movie again, I kind of feel bad for Shyamalan. I mean not that much, but for how bad this movie is, I think I do see signs of a good movie trying to get out.

He was given the task of condensing 20 episodes into a 90 minute long movie. Personally, (speaking as someone who has not made a movie so take this all with a grain of salt) I am of the belief that while we have the ability to put things on TV and it has become a more accepted option lately, I don't think we should use that as a crutch or the consistent go to answer. I see this in a couple of complaints of movies and I have used it myself that a movie probably should have been a TV show instead. But then I look at something like Harry Potter that didn't have that option at the beginning of the 2000's and I think it is possible. While I think TV is probably the better medium, I do think that this story could have been condensed to a feature length movie with a number of different decisions. Furthermore, I do recognize that there are some nuggets of good in this movie. It's a bad movie through and through, but there are some parts that I had to nod and say, that wasn't the worst thing ever. There are a few redeeming parts about this movie.

I also want to talk about the white washing issue because for this film it is... odd to put it lightly. Not blatantly horrible, just odd.

I am of the thought process that white washing is an overblown phenomena. Sometimes its warranted, and sometimes its not. Look at something like Doctor Strange and how the casting of Tilda Swinton as a Tibetan monk really isn't talked about anymore because it worked for the story. Nikola Peltz and Jackson Rathbone aren't bad in this movie because they're white, they're bad because the script is bad.

If these kids were the best choices for the role, that's one thing. It's another when it seems like the studio though it would be more profitable to have white leads and that's where you start getting into issues.

Now I don't know if that was the case, but it does feed into my second thought on this and that's the aesthetic. Two white kids in eskimo costumes look a little weird and unnatural compared to an actor of color in it. The costume design isn't necessarily bad, it just doesn't fit diagetically with what the audience might expect based on norms that we are familiar with. That doesn't make or break the film there, but it does divert attention away from the story. Furthermore, it seemed more and more like a studio profit choice because everyone else in the village they're from looks like they're of Inuit origin.

Again, I don't think white washing totally destroys the film, but especially for something like this, you have to remain consistent or its gonna look weird and I get why people were pissed off.

And yeah... changing the antagonist tribe from clearly Chinese or Asian decent to clearly Middle Eastern was an odd choice as well, especially since there didn't really seem to be a purpose for it outside of this movie came out after 9/11.

I think this is a really good segway into what should be kept the same and what should changed in adaptation. Again, changing the ethnicity of the Fire Nation isn't necessarily a bad choice, but what's your rationale for it? Is the clothing, buildings, culture, and language going to change to fit an Arab look? Well that doesn't happen. Shyamalan just inserted Middle Eastern decent people into an aesthetic from the show that fits an Asian Influence so again, I have to ask, why?

Honestly, I've heard differently things about Shyamalan's approach to this film. On one hand, he's an artist. He's always made films with a more art house feel to it and I think he does better with smaller budget films. I can identify with the idea of wanting to do things your way and not be constrained by someone else's work. But on the other hand, why are you agreeing to do an adaptation in that case? And why is so much in the film seem to be pulling from the source material?

And that's another weird plus I'll give this movie. Visually, both artistically and source material-wise, its not a bad movie to look at. Put aside the characters being the wrong ethnicity, there are a lot of things Shyamalan pulled straight from the TV show that are cool to see in live action. I had a couple of moments during the re-watch where I had to stop and say, wow. That's actually impressive that they were able to recreate certain things visually for a live action medium.

Yeah, there are a lot of things they get wrong, but the visuals are there and nobody said this is badly shot movie. It's over indulgent at times and I will talk more about the action later, but despite the moments that didn't work, I can at least look at the attempt and say, I think I know what you were going with and while you failed miserably, I won't say you didn't outright not try at all.

That being said, there is a lot of stuff that it didn't seem like there was a lot of effort in.

The script for this movie is a pile of hot trash. It has this weird mix of the movie thinking the audience knows exactly whats going on and feeling like they don't have to explain who these characters are, what their motivations are, or why we should care about them. But also they try to fit in every bit of exposition and explanation of the world at every point that they can because this is a very expansive world and it wouldn't make sense if you didn't.

But the actors (ethnicity conversation aside) are just bad overall. They're bad because the script is bad and the script is bad because its boring. And when a script is boring the eye wanders and you start to get distracted by things that may not have been an issue before, like Shyamalan's unique and over indulgent camera work.

I don't wanna shit on the actors too much because like Dakota Johnson and whats his face from Fifty Shades of Grey, its not their fault they signed on to a big blockbuster film that made them a lot of money, they're working actors, they showed up to do a job.

But when the show is already going above and beyond its core mission, entertaining both kids and adults because the characters are so relateable and unique, it becomes difficult to ignore that Noah Ringer, Nikola Peltz, Jackson Rathbone, and even Dev Patel at times, are struggling to make these characters accessible at all, much less the way the show was able to.

Nikola Peltz was 15 at the time of this film and Noah Ringer was 13. Those two are the core of the show and without Aang and Katara being strong relateable characters, the movie is going to struggle. Furthermore, these are characters who are young in the show and have moments of having fun and being childish but yet have a range of being very mature and wise at times.

These characters do none of that. Katara is a blank slate, Aang always looks confused on what is happening in the scene, and Sokka, the comic relief of the show, is just the most dower and mopey guy in the world.

The closest thing to characters that I cared about were Dev Patel playing Zuko and Shaun Toub playing Iroh. I found this odd on the rewatch because I actually remember disliking Dev Patel in this role and rethinking if he was a good actor after this film. I have since seen him in a lot of roles that I like since and figure its more the script and him being a young actor not knowing how to make the best of it, but while the other characters are boring, Patel is at least trying to do something with it. It's not good and any human connection is overshadowed by a bad script, but for some reason I'm trying to be a little more positive about this film rather than just shit on it like everyone else.

The truth is, there are a lot of elements about this movie that I had forgotten because I hadn't watched it in close to 10 years. I can shit on the acting and how its a bad adaptation all day, but the visuals and other elements of the movie are a little hard to outright say are horrible. They're not good, but there's something there that is trying to get out.

A criticism that is well founded is how long the bending and just action in general takes. In the show, the bending was fast paced, to the point, and intense. In this movie, there's so much arm and body movement for so little pay off.

Even bending aside, the action is lethargic when it should be fast paced and high tempo. This is often due to the fact that Shyamalan is trying to be artistic, or do something in one shot. Because of this, you have these weird pregnant pauses where the enemies are waiting to attack because either the hero needs to wind up some crazy bending move or they're waiting for the shot to line up before the effect or action can be taken. Shyamalan knows his camera work and how to make an intriguing shot, but that doesn't blend well with action sequences, especially element bending

I think while its funny to think about all the things that Shyamalan got wrong in this film, its actually kind of interesting to think about how much he got right, or could have gotten right with a few tweaks and changes.The beneft of watching the show and then watching the movie is that I have a better idea of what the show was going for and how things could be done right. I see, at least a half assed, attempt to hit some of the same notes from the show but never enough to make you feel anything for the characters or the situations they're in.

This isn't Shyamalan's first attempt into the fantasy or supernatural genre and I think there's something there. There were a couple of darker, almost horror elements wanting to get out of this film but he was constrained by the fact that this was a Nickelodean film, but also, it's an adaptation not his own thing. And that's the weird dynamic you see. Avatar is already its own pretty unique fantasy world and Shyamalan has a unique look on fantasy, but he has yet to really make that perspective an effective reality, and two unique perspectives don't always match up.

This has been a pretty unorthodox review but this is a pretty unorthodox movie. I discussed this movie with the same friends I went and saw it in 2010 with a little bit before my re-watch, but after I had finished the first season. I was more angry about the film then than I am now because I am seeing this film from a different light but without the emotional baggage of seeing this as a kid and having it be a formative part of my life. I still think this movie is hot garbage, there's not excuse around it. But, I think its less horrible because nobody was trying, but rather that they were trying and it was just the wrong choices.

Choosing Shyamalan to direct this movie was a bad choice but again, he has a unique perspective, why not give him the chance to adapt a unique story. Shyamalan or the studio deciding to cast white actors instead of people of color was a bad choice, but if it worked people wouldn't be talking about it as much. Making the bending more artistic rather than fast paced was a bad choice but if it had worked it would have been a unique aesthetic to the movie making it more recongizable. Focusing on the lore rather than the characters was a bad choice, but to be fair the lore in the show is pretty awesome as well. The list goes on of bad choices, but their not unheard of choices.

I remember being in the theater during that midnight show, delirious from wanting to go to sleep and just laughing out loud at the final scene where the music is swelling, the actors are trying their best to act in this super dramatic moment, and all the audience was doing is laughing. And then I think about how different that feeling is at the end of the first season. Very similar story and sequence of events, but very different outcome.

The Last Airbender is a great example of how horrible adaptation can go wrong when you don't understand the material. And as much as I can give Shyamalan the benefit of the doubt and write a review of this movie that still says its terrible but at least kind of understands where he was going with it, I still recognize that he was given the keys to a castle and didn't know what to do with all the tools right in front of him.

There are rumors that Netflix is adapting a live action TV remake of the series which seems odd to me. Let's hope that they learn where Shyamalan went wrong and where the show went right.

But those are my thoughts on The Last Airbender. Are there any other "redeeming" qualities about this film? Do you think a live action adaptation of Avatar can be done? Did you go into Avatar thinking that that was the live action version of this show? Even not knowing anything about the show in 2010 I thought that was weird. I don't know if it was a legal thing but I think it's funny. Comment and Discuss below! You can also send me your thoughts on Twitter @MovieSymposium as well as send me your requests for films or TV shows I should review in the future. If you follow me on Twitter, you can get updates on future movie news and reviews coming out of this blog.

Thanks for reading!