Why the film fails as an adaptation

[The Blue Cinic]

Nono, I'm very spiritual. I've even studied spirituality and dozens of different religions. I'm just wondering what parts and why you considered it spiritual.

And yes, Harry Potter is built on fantasy. It's fantasy meets real-life.

[Rawgii Elekt]

Different opionons. Tell ya what the Blue cinic agni ki you can move as fast as you want. I will move at no more than two punches per minute. Six feet per minute. Bet I still win. Why? Because I have the respect to know that speed, strength, and power is not full without knowledge, courage, heart and mystery.
"Don't under estimate the power of the force.": Darth Vader

[The Blue Cinic]

Okay... practicality and coma inducing pace aside, what are you talking about? We're talking about why the film fails as an adaptation, not why the bending is slow and boring.

And knowledge, courage, heart and mystery is important, but it's not everything. You need gas for a car to work, but you need a car to use gas. It takes both. I'd whoop ya if you just stood still and let me wail on you. You need to have both skill and the power to use your skills to triumph.

"I... I don't believe it."
"That is why you fail."

[VictorZamora]

I don't know why I didn't do this sooner....

[The Blue Cinic]

A review? No... You flatter me, sir.

This series of topics is not a review: it's a thesis of why this movie sucks. A review is far to general; it needs to be on a broad enough scale so that everyone can just pick it up and read/watch it, and probably shouldn't go into too much detail. No, this is a point-by-point explanation of how this movie (epically) failed, and I'm doing my best to cover all the points (which are quite extensive)

So no, Boomie, this is not a review.

Hehehehehe(snort)hehehe

[elaborinth8993]

Thank you.

I am glad I am not the only one that thinks the adaptation sucked.

I agree with you on all your opinions, but those opinions are not why i hate the film.

In the television series, Aang is an 11 year old boy, and has the maurity level of an 11 year old boy, Meaning he wants to have fun and play games, (example: the first words he said in the series "will you go penguin sledding with me?")

But in the film he has the maurity level 50 year old. he never ever cracked one joke.

The only successful part of the film was the opening bending sequence, and even in that scene they screwed up. it was too flourished. to much movement, too over dramatic.

(sorry for any misspellings, no spell check)

[Delmaar]

I've thought about it and I think the failure of the movie, for an American audience, was the fact that they dropped out the "American" part and made it too Eastern.

The emphasis on spirituality that does not involve a monotheistic god. Yes it was there in the show, but the movie really kicked it up a notch and made it more central to the plot.

The name changes.

Dropping out the humor. The humor in the cartoon is so strongly based on 100's of years of American slapstick humor traditions (which led to cartoon humor traditions), that by taking it out, it de-Americanized the movie and made it harder for American audiences to get into.

I've noticed with most franchise adaptions that really succeed - like Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings, and even Twilight, part of the success is being really faithful to the source material. I just don't think you could stay faithful to the source material and turn it into a movie. The only way to do that would be to make a new adventure with a new story, keep it a cartoon, and make a movie out of it.

[Archsage]

I've thought about it and I think the failure of the movie, for an American audience, was the fact that they dropped out the "American" part and made it too Eastern.

The emphasis on spirituality that does not involve a monotheistic god. Yes it was there in the show, but the movie really kicked it up a notch and made it more central to the plot.

The name changes.

Dropping out the humor. The humor in the cartoon is so strongly based on 100's of years of American slapstick humor traditions (which led to cartoon humor traditions), that by taking it out, it de-Americanized the movie and made it harder for American audiences to get into.

Very, very interesting! I've actually never thought about it like that.... "they dropped out the "American" part and made it too Eastern"... I think this is so true.

They did focus on spirituality in a weird way in the movie -- they really focused on animism and 'fear of spirits' more-so than I think they should, and on the parts where they should have focused on major spiritual motifs they just plain didn't (like Aang actually being an AVATAR for the Ocean Spirit at the end, displaying the typical 'righteous anger' of enraged deities). I don't think that the movie did too much spirituality -- but I think they presented it in such a different way from the show.

The name changes were all clearly designed to make it seem more Asian. But, hell, Avatar is not an Asian show. It's an American show that uses the "Asian world" for a theme. Like Star Wars uses Space Exploration as a theme or Spongebob uses underwater as a theme. They focused too much on the 'asian' theme and then wanted to make the names reflect that. But in doing so they (again) alienated themselves from both the series and the audience. The majority of us Avatar watchers are not Asian. We speak American English and have English dialects. Don't say "Ahng" or "Ahv-atar" or "Soh-ka"...

Your notes on humor are, by far, the most interesting thing I see in your post, Delmaar. Part of the reason why Avatar worked so was to do with something that you don't get from Hollywood, and you don't get from the "asian world". Cartoon-humor. If Avatar didn't have that Cartoon Humor, it would not fit on Nickelodeon. It could not be on the same line-up with shows like Spongebob or i-Carly. Cartoon Humor is something that made Avatar so lovable by many generations. It didn't pride itself in being too "epic". This is what really sets it apart from many Japanese Animations (which tend to be too serious or so unbelievable quirky) and Hollywood.

[elaborinth8993]

I've noticed with most franchise adaptions that really succeed - like Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings, and even Twilight, part of the success is being really faithful to the source material. I just don't think you could stay faithful to the source material and turn it into a movie. The only way to do that would be to make a new adventure with a new story, keep it a cartoon, and make a movie out of it.

I would of been amazingly happy if that happened.

why do we need the story retold, if the story just ended like 6 months before the movie came out.

M.Knight Shamalan dumb down the movie to relate to the "majority" americans.

(what i am surprised by is that, M.Kight is famous for putting twist in his movies, and he did not do it with this one. bravo)

[Archsage]

M.Knight Shamalan dumb down the movie to relate to the "majority" americans.

Well, he clearly failed.