So quotes this reviewer, among many others on Rotten Tomatoes, that pretty much say The Last Airbender sucks so bad even vacuum cleaners are ashamed.
No surprises here, but I had hoped it would at least be entertaining once through. Sounds like it may not even be that.
Posted by Shanna (Member # 7900) on :
Simultaneously, that sentence is the best and worst thing I've heard all week.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
URG. Bad enough he had to whitewash the movie. Why much movie versions of things I like be suckified?
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
When was the last time he did a good movie?
Posted by The White Whale (Member # 6594) on :
I like Lady in the Water, Unbreakable, Signs, and Sixth Sense.
Did not at all like Happening. This one looks like a flop.
IMO, he still has more good movies than bad. I hope he can figure himself out. Soon.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote: Why much movie versions of things I like be suckified?
Why is anybody surprised anymore?
Posted by Nighthawk (Member # 4176) on :
This was planned as a trilogy.
Maybe, if we're lucky, that plan will be dead before it continues.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
Unbreakable and Sixth Sense were excellent, I thought. Really enjoyable. After Signs and The Village, though...well, really Signs is what killed him as a good maker of movies for me.
Freakin' lethally vulnerable to water.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head:
quote: Why must movie versions of things I like be suckified?
Why is anybody surprised anymore?
I try to be optimistic, but often my movie hopes are dashed to the ground. *Will spend the weekend seeing Toy Story3 getting illustrated and watching Avatar the Last Airbender on Netflix.*
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:I try to be optimistic
There's your problem.
Posted by Tresopax (Member # 1063) on :
In fairness to M. Night, Lady in the Water made it clear that he's not too concerned with impressing critics. Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :
I thus far liked every movie I saw and minor plotholes and repetitiveness aside are an interesting breath of creativity in otherwise stagnant genres.
Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh:
Freakin' lethally vulnerable to water.
Seriously...I like how his movies start, and often I like the middle...but the climaxes are not worthy of the first 2/3 of the movie, except Sixth Sense.
Posted by MightyCow (Member # 9253) on :
The Village was filmed beautifully, but it seems to have been written and directed by a fifth grader with no previous experience.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
The guy is an imbecile. How he keeps getting work is beyond me.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
Different Strokes I guess. I liked Signs enough to buy it on DVD.
Posted by Bella Bee (Member # 7027) on :
I liked Signs too.
But at the end you just have to imagine that up on the Mothership, the Science Officer is standing embarrassedly in front of the Captain's chair saying 'Um. There seems to have been an error with the scans sir. Um. We were almost nearly kind of certain that all the blue stuff was copper sulfate. Um. Sorry.'
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
I always thought of it more in terms of, yes water is poisonous but they need resources that badly they are willing to risk it. Besides the odds somebody will figure out water hurts them are not strong.
*spoilers* In any case, the aliens actually succeeded in running off with people.
/spoilers
Posted by Teshi (Member # 5024) on :
When I was watching signs, I found the scientific reaction hard to believe.
"The ships are invisible, but apparently solid."
And I'm screaming at the screen, "Shoot water at them!"
Turned out, that would have been a pretty good plan.
quote:Besides the odds somebody will figure out water hurts them are not strong.
Given the amount of water on the planet and the fact that they deliberately parked themselves away from large bodies of water, I would have thought someone would have noticed.
But it wasn't a scientific movie at all, so I suppose we can't really complain too much.
Posted by Emreecheek (Member # 12082) on :
I've never seen the series. The movie was horrible. Even by M. Night's falling standards.
Like, seriously. The entire theater erupted into laughter at so many places where they weren't supposed to. And nobody was angry about it (The laughter, I mean; people were of course angry at the shoddy nature of the movie). Even the cosplayers thought the movie was hilarious in its serious bits.
Probably the worst M. Night film. Seriously. I'd suggest watching it if you enjoy watching bad movies and laughing at them.
It did intrigue me enough so that I will start watching the series, I believe. But, yeah. That was a horrible movie.
Favorite line (No spoilers, I promise)
Person 1: I think your son is that person, and he has become traitor and betrayed his tribe Person 2: Are you saying my son is a traitor who has betrayed his tribe? Person 1: <Dramatic pause> Yes. End scene.
Posted by advice for robots (Member # 2544) on :
My first thought was that there is enough water in the air to do them serious damage as soon as they step off the ship.
What alien race is smart enough to build interstellar ships and dumb enough not to protect themselves against an obviously hostile atmosphere? I'm in the camp that says M. Night is terrible at ending movies.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
This honestly makes me very sad. The Sixth Sense still stands as one of the best movies I've ever seen. I'd put it on my list of top ten movies ever.
WHAT HAPPENED??!?!?!??
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
Too much success, so that nobody could edit him anymore?
Posted by umberhulk (Member # 11788) on :
oh well.
Might watch it just for effects and the water princess ya.
Posted by Uprooted (Member # 8353) on :
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head: Too much success, so that nobody could edit him anymore?
The George Lucas syndrome?
Posted by Jon Boy (Member # 4284) on :
Or maybe he was just sort of a one-(or two-)hit wonder. Just because you can come up with one brilliant or entertaining movie doesn't necessarily mean you can repeat your success.
Posted by Ron Lambert (Member # 2872) on :
M. Night has three very good movies to his credit, Unbreakable, Signs, and Sixth Sense. After that, he just hasn't had very good story ideas. The Village was based on a premise that was just too stupid to be acceptable, one that anyone could see through after the first few scenes. None of the other movies he has made had the magic of those sterling three.
Sometimes you just have to get lucky and have a really good story idea come to you. M. Night can tell a good story when the story idea is good. Let's hope eventually he gets lucky again. It can be a real challenge to follow a really good success with another, then another, and keep on doing it.
I wish M. Night would do a sequel to Unbreakable. Maybe even a whole series! It works for Spiderman, and his hero is a lot better than Spiderman. (Come on, a bite from a radioactive spider? Give me a break! And the Unbreakable hero is a mature adult, while Spiderman is an immature kid.)
Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :
Its a genetically engineered spider now with something akin to a retrovirus, his pre-2000's origin story was just as plausible in comparison to his peers.
The 'X' Gene for instance.
Also, SUSPENSION OF DISBELIEF
ITS A SUPER HERO STORY its not supposed to be 99% plausible or even 10%, do you realize just how many secondary powers every Marvel and DC hero needs to not kill themselves or others with their primary powers and how much handwaving is needed to make even superman not be full of plot holes?
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
Hmmm... I don't know about the plotholes. I kind of like my fantasy with a dose of reality, or at least logic, or it tends to make me growl.
Unbreakable would make a good sequel... Just like Square should do a remake of FF7 where they do it the same as the old only with new technology.' But will they do that? NO!
Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :
Those seem like two entirely different requests.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
well, yeah, but you can't say a remake of ff7 wouldn't be awesome. It would make me buy a ps3. A used one, but one nonetheless.
Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :
YOU DONT WANT A USED ONE!!!! YOU CRAZY!? WARRANTY! FIVE YEARS MINIMUM! THEY ARE DESIGNED TO BREAK AFTER ONE YEAR!!!!!!!!
Posted by Dan_Frank (Member # 8488) on :
The caps lock is extremely unnecessary, Blayne. Please edit that to normal case?
Also Syn I can definitely say a remake of FF7 wouldn't be awesome. The last remotely decent Final Fantasy was 3 (fanboys call it 6, but my SNES cartridge says 3, dagnabbit.)
Posted by umberhulk (Member # 11788) on :
Did you just imply that Tactics, was like, not good. Holy shit.
There actually was a designer change from 3/6 (it is the sexth official final fantasy as far as the creators are concerned) and 7 on.
And another guy who did Tactics and 12 (same guy who did 7 on did 13 though)
Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dan_Frank: The caps lock is extremely unnecessary, Blayne. Please edit that to normal case?
Also Syn I can definitely say a remake of FF7 wouldn't be awesome. The last remotely decent Final Fantasy was 3 (fanboys call it 6, but my SNES cartridge says 3, dagnabbit.)
Clear case of ignorance AND casual elitist denigration of an entire fanbase, awesome.
There's a good reason why in both casual conversation and over the internet to talk to them by their accurate names, FFIII is actually confusing to everyone but those who've only ever played FF6 the fact of the matter is for anyone whose played a majority or all of the games in the series the actual FF3 is its own different game, that's a fact, sorry man but your absolutely not justified in your sneering.
And a remake would be alright, I wouldn't say it would radically change anything or be something amazing it would be met by me by the same reaction as seeing the Daleks remade into new designs, something nice to make any replay of the game more enjoyable now that our standards for graphics had risen considerably.
Final Fantasy Seven standardized everything that makes a JRPG good, a wide cast of driven motivated characters, a genuinely cool and ambigious big bad/final boss, cutscenes to enhance the narrative, a sprawling indepth world, the materia/summon/magic system (existed before but its still something that is good), an excellent story and narrative, STEAMPUNK!
Also one of the first games I have ver played to have dark and troubled characters and not the previous "12 year old messiah destined to save the world" archetypes that in retrospect I was probably getting tired of.
The games after that while had their excesses are still good games, they may not be to your taste but their still good.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
quote:M. Night has three very good movies to his credit, Unbreakable, Signs, and Sixth Sense. After that, he just hasn't had very good story ideas. The Village was based on a premise that was just too stupid to be acceptable, one that anyone could see through after the first few scenes. None of the other movies he has made had the magic of those sterling three.
I would include Signs on the list, but the gotcha of that film renders it, for me, firmly out of 'very good story idea'. I mean, it'd be one thing if it was a trivial detail that turned out to be completely silly. I can swallow those no problem, all part of the suspension of disbelief. In this case, though, the vulnerability to water was completely fundamental (or should have been) both to the story overall and to the big spooky twist. One of the cornerstones of the film was very stupid.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Agreed, Rakeesh. It is a beautiful movie with a monstrously fatal flaw.
Unbreakable I didn't particularly like, in part because I think it relied too much on a familiarity with and acceptance of comic book tropes. It relied on the tension provided elsewhere, and on its own was a bit dreary.
The Sixth Sense, however, was absolute magic. It can't have been a shooting star. It just can't. It's possible again. I want to believe.
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
I liked Tactics.
And SS and Unbreakable. I thought Unbreakable was outstanding.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:I would include Signs on the list, but the gotcha of that film renders it, for me, firmly out of 'very good story idea'.
That wasn't the "gotcha" that bothered me. The "twist" that bothered me was "Oh, God must exist because my wife, as she died unfairly and before her time, saw a vision that I would remember years later at a useful time."
Posted by umberhulk (Member # 11788) on :
I like unbreakable. But the editing and camera angles are more akward than I am. They still work, somehow. Also, the part where hes knocked underwater, for like five minutes, didnt make any sense.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson:
quote:I would include Signs on the list, but the gotcha of that film renders it, for me, firmly out of 'very good story idea'.
That wasn't the "gotcha" that bothered me. The "twist" that bothered me was "Oh, God must exist because my wife, as she died unfairly and before her time, saw a vision that I would remember years later at a useful time."
Yup. That bugged me a lot, too.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
Hmm, I don't recall that part even a little. Perhaps it's because the water thing just overrode all other irritations in my brain.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
I consider the entire last twenty minutes of the movie to be the fatal flaw.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
I considered the water thing to be a deliberate tribute to Isaac Asimov's "Rain Rain Go Away," and didn't think we were supposed to be analyzing the movie on scientific grounds in the first place. So I wasn't terribly worried about it.
The "OMG God exists 'cause my particular son had asthma, who cares about everyone else's children!" bugged the hell out of me.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
quote:I considered the water thing to be a deliberate tribute to Isaac Asimov's "Rain Rain Go Away," and didn't think we were supposed to be analyzing the movie on scientific grounds in the first place. So I wasn't terribly worried about it.
See, I'm fine with not 'analyzing a movie on scientific grounds'. But only for minor things, and even then usually when it's, y'know, relatively complex or something. Not when it's a fundamental aspect of the entire film, and not at all complicated. Then again, I haven't read that Asimov story, so maybe it was a tribute. *shrug*
Posted by Bella Bee (Member # 7027) on :
quote: The "OMG God exists 'cause my particular son had asthma, who cares about everyone else's children!" bugged the hell out of me.
SPOILERS FOR SIGNS!!!
But then, it was a story about a preacher who had lost his faith because he thought that god wouldn't allow something so awful to happen to his wife. Therefore god couldn't exist.
Having the something awful turn out to be basically the reason why his son survived (because his wife telling him what to do) seemed an in-character reason for him to believe in god again. It's logical to him.
It made character sense, but in no way meant that, even within the universe of the story, he had actually proven god's existence. People lose and gain faith for all sorts of odd reasons. Mostly personal reasons - if every terrible thing that happened to someone else's child made everyone lose their faith, no-one would believe.
I'm an atheist and it didn't bother me at all. It wasn't like the film was preaching at me. It was just a story about this one guy.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
Oh it was perfectly in character, but it's exactly the kind of shallow, self centered faith that gets way too much positive press in general and absolutely didn't need a movie glorifying it.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
I don't know that I would call that sort of faith shallow, thought it is self-centered.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
eh, I guess you could make that argument, but if your faith in God is so self centered that it is going to be impacted by positive and negative events in your personal life (when you are well aware that such events are going on all the time to other believers in the world), then I think it's a kind of self-centered-ness that can't help but be shallow.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
I think whether or not something is shallow depends on its importance. The life and death of one's child or spouse surely qualifies as anything but unimportant, right? Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that's a valid reason to have faith, because as you say, it happens all the time, bad things and good things that is. I'm just disputing the shallow qualifier.
ETA: Unless you mean 'shallow' to be 'not well thought out', that kind of shallow. Also, I'm not quite sure I agree with the 'so self-centered' characterization, either. I mean, death of a spouse or saved life of a child-that's about as important as things get, right? So, saying, "If he's so self-centered that..." well, why wouldn't the death of a spouse have a big impact on any number of thoughts and ideas?
It's still self-centered, I just don't think it takes a high degree of self-centered-ness for something such as the death of a loved one to create or shake faith. Just because a huge type of one event instills or destroys faith doesn't mean the person was exceptionally that sort of person prior. Difficult for me to express, I think.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
I think I get what you're saying. I don't entirely disagree, I just think the extent to which people are not only allowed but ENCOURAGED by these movies to have their faith so poorly thought out is frightening.
Posted by Geraine (Member # 9913) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dan_Frank: The caps lock is extremely unnecessary, Blayne. Please edit that to normal case?
Also Syn I can definitely say a remake of FF7 wouldn't be awesome. The last remotely decent Final Fantasy was 3 (fanboys call it 6, but my SNES cartridge says 3, dagnabbit.)
Sorry Blayne, I have to agree with Dan. FF7 is overhyped. For most fanboys, FF7 was either the first Final Fantasy game they ever played, or the game that introduced them to the RPG genre.
The story is ok, but not great. It is about an Emo kid and a guy with mommy issues. Tifa's character design puts Barbie to shame (not to mention the back issues she must have!) and Aeris acts like a love drunk 13 year old. Barrett is a mix between Mr. T and (insert random rapper name here). The rest of the characters are forgettable and really do not add anything to the story. The only character that is remotely cool is Red XIII.
A remake would be great....With a completely different cast and script.
Final Fantasy VI was great. Final Fantasy V was as well. I also enjoyed Final Fantasy IX. Tactics is still one of my favorite games, and revolutionized the SRPG genre.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
Put another way: the shallow part is not where their faith is challenged when their wife is killed. The shallow part is that their faith doesn't get better until something randomly good happens to them.
Posted by umberhulk (Member # 11788) on :
Final Fantasy Vll is great. Some overrate, but the gameplay and soundtrack are balling. It's story was urban contrast to RPGs at the time and the language in that game was surprising for it's time. But **** story; the gameplay was good.
Also a fully explorable Midgard would be awesome as ... a fully explorable midgard.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
The plot holes in Signs bothered me so much that the ending was a failure anyway; the craptastic theology is...believed by a large number of people, so I'm willing to chalk that up to Your Mileage May Vary.
My issue is actually with the very idea that everything happens for a reason. I don't think it does, and I'm pretty offended by the suggestion that it is, and that when children/lives/businesses/sanity are saved, it is proof of the love of God, because of the inescapable conclusion that the people who lost children/lives/businesses/sanity are NOT loved by God. It doesn't work that the major bad things are random and don't mean anything and the good things are proof of love. I ESPECIALLY loathe it when people say that trials - specifically, the trials of the person they are talking to - is a blessing in disguise. No one who has actually undergone serious trials could say something so monumentally stupid. MNS was raised wealthy, in an intact family, was supported and achieved success in his difficult choice of career, is still married to his college sweetheart, both his parents are still alive, and hasn't (most likely) undergone major health problems. He has NOT experienced the kind of major sorrow that might give him some insight as to what it takes to come to peace with it, and the stupid, stupid, condescending ending of Signs is proof of it.
Posted by Geraine (Member # 9913) on :
quote:Originally posted by umberhulk: Final Fantasy Vll is great. Some overrate, but the gameplay and soundtrack are balling. It's story was urban contrast to RPGs at the time and the language in that game was surprising for it's time. But **** story; the gameplay was good.
Also a fully explorable Midgard would be awesome as ... a fully explorable midgard.
The gameplay was good. The materia system was something that had never been seen before in an RPG. It allowed for some awesome (Though gamebreaking) combinations. Of course, after a certain point Final Fantasy X could be broken too.
I guess I'm just sick of FFVII. All of the sequels, prequels, etc are just tiring. A sequel to FFX was welcome (Though it was horrible) because the story was left open to be able to accomodate it. FFVII had a definitive end. Sephiroth died, and Meteor was stopped, and Red XIII and his kids saw it covered in flora at the end. One of the most definitive endings of any Final Fantasy game.
The Genesis storyline from Crisis Core was interesting, and the secret ending from Dirge of Cerberus showed Genesis alive and apparently breaking out of where he was held. If they had built around that I think all of these sequels would be more bearable. Afterall, he was more powerful than Sephiroth ever was. He also contained something Sephiroth did not: A personality.
Make a sequel, ditch cloud and bring in a new protagonist, and include Genesis and I'll buy the game. Bring Sephiroth back yet again and use the same cast and I'm not going to bite. Its played out, its old, and I want something new.
Posted by umberhulk (Member # 11788) on :
Most games can be broken at some point. Theres some brain mushing way to break every n1 game. Certain classes in Tactics are over powered. Skies of Arcadia had an overpowered attack.
Also, FFX as a whole is way too easy. I got all the way to that caged mammoth sinspawn thing without using any spheres and it was my first JRPG. I died on the way, but I got there. The Sphere grid is pretty cool though. Game is okay.
Posted by umberhulk (Member # 11788) on :
Also, square says Final Fantasy X is a sequel to Vll. Completely serious.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
Raymond,
quote:I think I get what you're saying. I don't entirely disagree, I just think the extent to which people are not only allowed but ENCOURAGED by these movies to have their faith so poorly thought out is frightening.
'Allowed'? I get what you mean, though;)
I do agree that self-centered, ill-conceived notions of faith are pretty irritating. You've got us butts in seats for 90m minimum, give us something thought-provoking and meaningful! When you're talking about faith and life and death and suffering, it's not as though the subject matter isn't there.
quote:Put another way: the shallow part is not where their faith is challenged when their wife is killed. The shallow part is that their faith doesn't get better until something randomly good happens to them.
I would dispute the shallow again on the same grounds as before, for a given definition of shallow, depending on how big the good thing is, how important.
Just to reiterate, I'm not saying that something good happening to one is an adequate reason to have faith, just that it might not be shallow. Unless you mean ill-conceived sort of shallow.
Posted by Sterling (Member # 8096) on :
What I've read of Shyamalan suggests that he got too famous too fast and started to believe his own hype. I'm very sorry to be hearing that Airbender is bad, though; the previews showed some promise, and I don't really want to see Shyamalan's star fall any further to satisfy some sense of schadenfreude. There just doesn't seem to be any "intervention" system for talented people who lose their way.
Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :
quote:Originally posted by umberhulk: Also, square says Final Fantasy X is a sequel to Vll. Completely serious.
It makes a bit of sense.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
quote:Just to reiterate, I'm not saying that something good happening to one is an adequate reason to have faith, just that it might not be shallow. Unless you mean ill-conceived sort of shallow.
I guess I am just using a different definition of shallow, but I don't think it's unfair to be... I dunno, "comparing relative shallowness." I mean, yes having your son not die is a big deal. But compared to the notion that there is an omnipotent god who awards salvation and damnation and is weaving vastly complex plans for humanity? I realize that that may not FEEL like that big a deal compared to your son who you just almost lost, but the fact is, it IS a bigger deal, if true.
If your faith in that can waver and rekindle due to events in your life, however important those events, that makes your faith pretty shallow compared to what your faith SHOULD be if you were truly comprehending what it was you had faith in.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
I can agree with that, the faith itself being shallow and not the person in cases like dead loved one or not dead loved one. Shallow as in lacking knowledge, not necessarily shallow as in petty.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
Unnecessary semantic argument FTW!
I was about to follow my last post up with "I guess that it makes more sense to judge humans by how shallow they are compared to other humans as opposed to abstract ideas that don't even necessarily mean anything." But I would also note that I'd often define shallow as not merely lacking knowledge but uninterested in acquiring more. (Like, someone interested in a hot girl who doesn't care about her personality is specifically uninterested in learning more interesting things about her.)
Posted by Geraine (Member # 9913) on :
quote:Originally posted by Blayne Bradley:
quote:Originally posted by umberhulk: Also, square says Final Fantasy X is a sequel to Vll. Completely serious.
It makes a bit of sense.
People came to this conclusion based on a few lines spoken by an NPC late in the game. Most people think the lines are just a homage to FF-VII, but some people take it literally.
The same thing happened with Xenogears and Xenosaga. There was a lot of homage, but that is all.
Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :
I vagelely recall some Shrug of God that implied this was the case on part of the developers.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
Halo/Marathon.
Posted by umberhulk (Member # 11788) on :
No, but since like 2005 or something, square's been saying that it is. Not that it matters.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
Blayne, for the love of God can you PLEASE use real words to say things?
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
That'd be pretty mainstream, Raymond;)
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:Originally posted by Raymond Arnold: Blayne, for the love of God can you PLEASE use real words to say things?
It's your own fault that you keep reading his posts. Blayne has made it crystal clear that if you are not fluent in TVT, you are not part of the intended audience for his posts.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: That'd be pretty mainstream, Raymond;)
Dunno which specific post this was referring to. God the conversation in this thread is so weird.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
Ahh, actually it's referring to a different conversation about the same movie, sorry Raymond.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:Originally posted by Raymond Arnold: Blayne, for the love of God can you PLEASE use real words to say things?
Ban tvtropes references
Posted by Omega M. (Member # 7924) on :
I didn't think Last Airbender was that bad. Some of the acting was stiff, but not more so than that of other okay movies. The big problem I had was that I couldn't keep track of who everybody was. (I've never watched the cartoon.)
Posted by Dan_Frank (Member # 8488) on :
I had to leave during the expository scene following the appalling "EARTHBENDERS! THERE'S EARTH ALL AROUND YOU!" scene.
When we had the extreme close-ups of Ah-ng, Katara, and Soak-ka, and we're treated not just to terrible exposition but also to bizarre, inhuman repetition of that exposition. It was just too much.
Aang: They said I couldn't have a family. Katara: Why did they say you couldn't have a family? Aang: That's what I asked! They said I couldn't have a family because...
And I knew that it was time to go. Plus, we were hungry, and the movie wasn't distracting us from our hunger.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
i have no idea what was up with those close facial shots.
Posted by Emreecheek (Member # 12082) on :
Oh Lord, the repeats of the dialogue were horrible.
Five minutes in -
Character 1: wow, that flash of light will draw the attention of everybody around.
Flash to a mysterious man on a ship: Wow, look at that Light shining, let's get it.
Flash back to character 1, and his attacked village. "Those people here aren't here by coincidence. They're here because of that flash of light. You know, the one we saw 2 whole minutes ago. Yeah, that one. They're definetly here because of that.
The dialogue was bad. Through the whole movie.
Also, it was my understanding that in the series, all of the imprisoned Earth Benders were on a ship made of plastic or something, so that they couldn't break out by using their earth bending skills.
Oh, and the special effects were bad, too. I thought they looked cheesy. And the fight scenes were stupid; I could see them *not hitting each other*. That was abhorant. I've seen stage combat live that was better and more convincing than the battles they had in this movie.
Oh. Oh. OH! They did Tai Chi for long amounts of time for no apparent reason. It was silly.
And they didn't really talk much about this "Spirit world", though they did assure us it was important. And aparently the dragon wasn't supposed to talk. But it did, which really made some fans angry. I just didn't know why it was talking nonsense and using modern English Colloquialisms.
The end.
PS: Please excuse my fantastic inability to articulate myself intelligently right now. I've just gotten overly excited and eschewed proper grammar and punctuation for a little bit. I'll be back to normal soon. Maybe... [/self-indulgence]
Posted by FoolishTook (Member # 5358) on :
quote:When we had the extreme close-ups of Ah-ng, Katara, and Soak-ka, and we're treated not just to terrible exposition but also to bizarre, inhuman repetition of that exposition. It was just too much.
Ugh, the close-ups. Did, like, a 3-year-old get a hold of that camera? Or maybe the cameraman was disgruntled.
Also, what 12-year-old boy even thinks about having a family? (By family, I'm assuming a wife and kids.) The movie didn't need to give us a reason for Aang wanting to run away. Anyone with a thread of human understanding would figure it out on their own.
Posted by AchillesHeel (Member # 11736) on :
I can accept crappy movie status, and still be willing to pay five bucks to see this film... but mispronouncing main characters names that were created to spoken in english. I am tempted to destroy my copy of Lady in the Water just to spite M. Night.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
ong
soak-a
Posted by Dan_Frank (Member # 8488) on :
My favorite was Ahvatar or Ovatar or however it would be spelled.
I mean, they can't even use the "oh we're pronouncing it right and fixing that silly show!" excuse.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
Since you've decided to Take It To The Forums Blayne, I'll tell you why you're Hitting People's Berserk Button.
The Shrug of God comment and indeed most of your tropisms are played straight, and that's convenient. But when you start seeing everybody's comments and think, "This looks like a job for AquaTVTropesman!" It gets Incredibly Frustrating. We've already got words that work just fine for saying just about anything, even if you feel the need to add flourishes. It's like you see TVTropes as Mundane Utility, while the rest of us see it as the Department of Redundancy Department. You're inverting Obfuscating Stupidity. Even I feel the need for a Precision F Strike right about now, but I'm not a Cowboy Cop.
You need to do a Heel Face Turn, and double quick. /tropes
Look maybe the idea of crafting ideas into pithy phrases you can toss into your sentences appeals to your mind. Maybe it helps you say what you want to say. But it's also getting in the way of people caring what you have to say. It's sorta like Ender's game. They have their own battle school slang and it's how they talk. Now if you just rolled up and started using your own slang, you'd be ignored unless you were really charismatic in which case you'd create memes left and right.
If that's what you are trying to do by all means continue. If you are right all the haters will continue to hate but maybe maybe somebody will start using your manner of speaking. That person will convince another to start, and pretty soon in one small way the language changes because of you. But if you want people here to enjoy talking to you, you won't.
I'd rather you talk like a five year old as long as your grammar is correct. TVTropes is fun in that you can see ideas boxed up in phrases as I said before. But it's not designed to be a means of communication. If it was, you'd have something like A Clockwork Orange except it's English with more English slang and no Russian.
People aren't interested in conversing with somebody who changes their manner of speaking that much. It's just too much inconvenience. What's worse is not only are you letting TVTropes change your manner of speaking, you constantly refer to it as some sort of authority when discussing opinions. In the minds of many you are now synonymous with TVTropes. Sorta like Scott R and writing, Ron Lambert and Evangelism, Lisa and Israel. Maybe you want the label, but nobody means it in any friendly sense of the word.
I know you aren't talking about it as much as you used to, I'm not even sure if it's right for me to as you to stop, technically you can talk however you please. But don't expect people to bend over backwards trying to understand you. It's hard enough to communicate on a forum without intentionally obfuscating your point by using references and inside jokes nobody gets.
Well, I should have been studying all this time, and I probably should have fixed up my trope sentences so they flow better, but frankly it gave me a headache trying to do it.
[ July 08, 2010, 10:34 AM: Message edited by: BlackBlade ]
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
quote:Sorta like Scott R and writing,
Aw. Um...thanks?
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by Scott R:
quote:Sorta like Scott R and writing,
Aw. Um...thanks?
I didn't mean it negatively Scott. I wasn't trying to connect negative people with negative things, just people with things.
edit: Also, I'm not brave enough to ask what I'm known for.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
S'okay. The funny thing about that is that there are more successful authors here-- and more talented writers, too. I guess I just have a bigger mouth than them when it comes to story telling.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
Man, I was totally going to jump on that. (Just between you and me, Scott, BlackBlade totally meant it like that. We were all gabbing and laughing about it earlier.)
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
You? Gabbing? How out of character. Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
Better to have gabbing be in character than have being associated with good writing be out of character, as BlackBlade secretly indicated! Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
It's also in character for you to be a complete mook.
Mook.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
Aww, now I'm all nostalgic.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
I know! It sucks.
Not as much as Pat, but still...
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Great post, BlackBlade. Posted by Xavier (Member # 405) on :
I think the best thing, Blayne, would be to go ahead and still reference TvTropes, but change the manner in which you do so.
Instead of:
quote:I vaguely recall some Shrug of God that implied this was the case on part of the developers.
Perhaps say:
quote:I vaguely recall reading some quotes from the developers that implied that this was the case, though they were largely non-committal about the whole thing. (On TvTropes, that's called a "Shrug of God")
You still get to reference TvTropes, but you aren't using trope names as a substitution variable for some concept from that site. I strongly doubt anyone would object to those sorts of references. Then they aren't the meat of your posts, but rather just additional flavor.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
I don't think SDA is evangelical having been SDA, but OK...
I reckon I am known for general randomness.
Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :
quote:Since you've decided to Take It To The Forums Blayne, I'll tell you why you're Hitting People's Berserk Button.
Bwha, when did I do this?
quote:The Shrug of God comment and indeed most of your tropisms are played straight, and that's convenient. But when you start seeing everybody's comments and think, "This looks like a job for AquaTVTropesman!" It gets Incredibly Frustrating. We've already got words that work just fine for saying just about anything, even if you feel the need to add flourishes. It's like you see TVTropes as Mundane Utility, while the rest of us see it as the Department of Redundancy Department. You're inverting Obfuscating Stupidity. Even I feel the need for a Precision F Strike right about now, but I'm not a Cowboy Cop.
You need to do a Heel Face Turn, and double quick. /tropes
At first I was like this but then I became like this Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :
quote:Originally posted by Geraine:
quote:Originally posted by Dan_Frank: The caps lock is extremely unnecessary, Blayne. Please edit that to normal case?
Also Syn I can definitely say a remake of FF7 wouldn't be awesome. The last remotely decent Final Fantasy was 3 (fanboys call it 6, but my SNES cartridge says 3, dagnabbit.)
Sorry Blayne, I have to agree with Dan. FF7 is overhyped. For most fanboys, FF7 was either the first Final Fantasy game they ever played, or the game that introduced them to the RPG genre.
The story is ok, but not great. It is about an Emo kid and a guy with mommy issues. Tifa's character design puts Barbie to shame (not to mention the back issues she must have!) and Aeris acts like a love drunk 13 year old. Barrett is a mix between Mr. T and (insert random rapper name here). The rest of the characters are forgettable and really do not add anything to the story. The only character that is remotely cool is Red XIII.
A remake would be great....With a completely different cast and script.
Final Fantasy VI was great. Final Fantasy V was as well. I also enjoyed Final Fantasy IX. Tactics is still one of my favorite games, and revolutionized the SRPG genre.
As someone whose played and beaten FFI I take offense to this, and also just because it became overhyped doesn't make it a bad game, that's Hype Backlash, it is still on its own merits for its time a genuinely objectively great game.
A) Pionered CGI cutscenes and 3D gameplay from FF6's 2d 16bit character designs. Kinda like how Mario 64 changed stuff before that.
B) Scifi focus in FF which was steampunk previously, awesome way to breakout the genre and encourage some experimentation.
C) You cannot criticize the character design without remembering context, the polygons for when the designs are roughly a result of the limitations of the engine. Her actual breast size is much more reasonable as shown in Advent children (B cup I think, no more than C).
quote:It is about an Emo kid and a guy with mommy issues.
Cloud's angst is hardly emo, he's not given enough credit for the growth he goes through as a character throughout the game, and remember at the beginning when he was amnesiac he was actually fairly upbeat and cheerful.
quote:and Aeris acts like a love drunk 13 year old.
I see her more as an Yamato Nadeshiko/Team Mom, the relationship between her and cloud or lack there of was to me something more of an unrequited crush on Cloud's end and something of a replacement goldfish friendship on Aeris's. (I will kill the next mofo who uses "Aerith")
quote:Barrett is a mix between Mr. T and (insert random rapper name here).
First of all how is this a bad thing even if true? Secondly he seemed more like a Mr T and Angry Black guy cross, Berret never rapped afaik, just swore alot and loudly. His back story was also to my mind fairly deep, he was the leader of AVALANCH after all and the reasons driving it were fairly thoughtout and for the time refreshing.
quote:The rest of the characters are forgettable and really do not add anything to the story. The only character that is remotely cool is Red XIII.
Shennanigans! I call this out as subjective opinion, many people have their own favorites from the shippers who prefer Aerith to Tifa (or Aerith WITH Tifa), Cid has his own dedicated fanbase (he freakin better as hes the ensemble darkhorse in nearly everygame), Yufie's a freaking NINJA kleptomaniac that would put Tasslehoff to shame, seriously if your willing to go through the backstories to each of the characters they get fairly interesting past their introductions.
Look, look, I can see how much of what made FF7 unique and excellent may not cut the same grass as well now as before, that's understandable everything in the story that was fresh then has been tried, bulldozed, and purged with fire and salt in many other games since then and yes I can see how some of the bad direction in games may have something originated with FF7.
But this doesn't make it a bad game, just a game that hasn't aged as well as say Earthbound.
For when it was released it was probably the closest thing to solid gold ever released on console and the fact that it made the PS1 and by extension the PS2 the outstanding successes they are is credence to this.
Posted by Godric (Member # 4587) on :
quote:Originally posted by Blayne Bradley: (I will kill the next mofo who uses "Aerith")
...
I call this out as subjective opinion, many people have their own favorites from the shippers who prefer Aerith to Tifa (or Aerith WITH Tifa),
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
quote:Originally posted by Synesthesia: I don't think SDA is evangelical having been SDA, but OK...
I reckon I am known for general randomness.
It occurs to me that I've been entirely too mellow. I've got to brush up on my outspokenness.
Posted by umberhulk (Member # 11788) on :
Fully explorable midgard.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
Vincent is my favourite. He wasn't even in the ending CGI. He's so cool. They should remake the game and make him a regular character. He's so hard to get too.
Posted by Launchywiggin (Member # 9116) on :
I think Shyamalan's movies get more criticism than they deserve. At least they're not painfully formulaic. He plays around and does things differently. The storytelling isn't good, but it's not Michael Bay bad either.
And on top of that, I've always found his cinematography to be great. He's a master at setting the tone of a scene with camera direction. He just needs someone to take over writing his weird stories for him.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
i ... shyamalan used to HIRE or HAVE good cinematographers (Tak Fujimoto, for one!) and his movies were excellently visually composed. That .. faded away, with the same oddity with which the rest of the qualities of his movies degraded over time.
The cinematography on his projects ('his cinematography') isn't good anymore.
Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :
quote:Originally posted by Godric:
quote:Originally posted by Blayne Bradley: (I will kill the next mofo who uses "Aerith")
...
I call this out as subjective opinion, many people have their own favorites from the shippers who prefer Aerith to Tifa (or Aerith WITH Tifa),
Freudian slip, I meant to use Aeris in seciond sentence.
Posted by scifibum (Member # 7625) on :
Blayne, "Freudian slip" implies more than using the wrong word or name by accident. Do you mean to imply those things every time you say "Freudian slip"?
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
Perhaps he's saying that he secretly longs to kill himself. I hope not, though.
Posted by Geraine (Member # 9913) on :
quote:Originally posted by Blayne Bradley: As someone whose played and beaten FFI I take offense to this, and also just because it became overhyped doesn't make it a bad game, that's Hype Backlash, it is still on its own merits for its time a genuinely objectively great game.
When did you play FF I? Before or after FFVII? I played FFI the day it was released domestically here in the US, and have picked up and played through every single one since. Even Final Fantasy Mystic Quest. I regret that one.
quote: A) Pionered CGI cutscenes and 3D gameplay from FF6's 2d 16bit character designs. Kinda like how Mario 64 changed stuff before that.
For Final Fantasy Gamaes, yes. For the gaming industry as a whole, no.
quote:
B) Scifi focus in FF which was steampunk previously, awesome way to breakout the genre and encourage some experimentation.
You considered it Sci-Fi? I still considered it steam punk. Xenosaga is Sci Fi. Chrono Trigger is Sci Fi / Fantasy. FF VII has an asteroid. Other than that it is a standard steam punk setting.
quote: C) You cannot criticize the character design without remembering context, the polygons for when the designs are roughly a result of the limitations of the engine. Her actual breast size is much more reasonable as shown in Advent children (B cup I think, no more than C).
I'm sorry, but you are wrong. Go back and look at the CGI cut scenes in this game, and tell me Tifa was not made to look like a plastic surgery addict. The polygons had an excuse, the CGI didn't.
quote:
Cloud's angst is hardly emo, he's not given enough credit for the growth he goes through as a character throughout the game, and remember at the beginning when he was amnesiac he was actually fairly upbeat and cheerful.
What game did you play? Cloud had a apathetic attitude at the beginning of the game, and the only person that got him out of his shell was Aeris, who practically threw herself on him. Later in the game he became a little better, but I was still waiting for him to bust out the razor blades and cut himself at any given time.
quote:
quote:and Aeris acts like a love drunk 13 year old.
I see her more as an Yamato Nadeshiko/Team Mom, the relationship between her and cloud or lack there of was to me something more of an unrequited crush on Cloud's end and something of a replacement goldfish friendship on Aeris's. (I will kill the next mofo who uses "Aerith")
Compare Aeris in FF VII to Aeris in Crisis Core. Two COMPLETELY different characters. Where as Aeris in FFVII CC was mature, Aeris in FF VII acted more immature than a high school student in a romantic anime comedy. And btw, wasn't Aerith the name the Japanese version used?
quote:
quote:Barrett is a mix between Mr. T and (insert random rapper name here).
First of all how is this a bad thing even if true? Secondly he seemed more like a Mr T and Angry Black guy cross, Berret never rapped afaik, just swore alot and loudly. His back story was also to my mind fairly deep, he was the leader of AVALANCH after all and the reasons driving it were fairly thoughtout and for the time refreshing.
I am white, but was fairly surprised and even offended that the localization team took Barret and turned him into a stereotypical "angry black man." The dialogic that they put in for Barret had lines like "Fo Sho' " and "Foo" and other ebonic like phrases. Every time a dialog box popped up for Barret I could count on seeing at least one "Damn," "Hell," or "Shit." Not so for any other character.
I liked Barret's backstory and found it interesting, but that does not excuse the dialog. This is what I was referring to.
quote:
quote:The rest of the characters are forgettable and really do not add anything to the story. The only character that is remotely cool is Red XIII.
Shennanigans! I call this out as subjective opinion, many people have their own favorites from the shippers who prefer Aerith to Tifa (or Aerith WITH Tifa), Cid has his own dedicated fanbase (he freakin better as hes the ensemble darkhorse in nearly everygame), Yufie's a freaking NINJA kleptomaniac that would put Tasslehoff to shame, seriously if your willing to go through the backstories to each of the characters they get fairly interesting past their introductions.
And how is this different than hundreds of anime shows out there that have the same CRAZY character or personality types? The only one that I found unique was Red XIII.
quote:
Look, look, I can see how much of what made FF7 unique and excellent may not cut the same grass as well now as before, that's understandable everything in the story that was fresh then has been tried, bulldozed, and purged with fire and salt in many other games since then and yes I can see how some of the bad direction in games may have something originated with FF7.
But this doesn't make it a bad game, just a game that hasn't aged as well as say Earthbound.
For when it was released it was probably the closest thing to solid gold ever released on console and the fact that it made the PS1 and by extension the PS2 the outstanding successes they are is credence to this.
I'm not saying it is a bad game. I enjoyed it. The customization was great. We simply did not have customization like that at the time. In that regard I would say that FF VII was a pioneer in the RPG genre. As far as the story and character design and development are concerned though, I think they were lackluster.
[ July 09, 2010, 07:43 PM: Message edited by: Geraine ]
Posted by PSI Teleport (Member # 5545) on :
Was there really character development in FF7? Seems like something fan fiction added later.
And there's absolutely nothing wrong with Aerith. Both "s" and "th" are represented by the ス in katakana.
Posted by Geraine (Member # 9913) on :
Fan Fiction and to a lesser extent Crisis Core. Advent Children had the same Cloud that we saw in FFVII.
The writers (or localization team) did a better job on the prequel. Cloud actually had a personality and Aeris acted more like an adult and less like a japanese school girl with dreams of dating the most popular boy in class.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
I didn't think Aeris acted like a Japanese school girl. She actually was pretty strong.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
Aeris annoyed me to no end. I always kept her out of my party when I could. When she was murdered, it didn't really affect me because I felt like her, and Cloud's relationship didn't feel real.
I wasn't sure what made Aeris any different, she was just nice to Cloud despite his apathy. All the other characters were too though. I thought the point of FF7 would be Cloud finding redemption by saving the world with his new friends, but instead that got retcon'd for Advent Children and it was kinda lame.
Spoilers*
Instead we get the same Cloud who jumped off the train in FF7 who already has friends, but he's aloof from them. They all show up to help him anyway, and they save the world again, and this time he gets over himself.
Why would it have been so bad to have Cloud already moving on, shacking up with Tifa, running their business together. The geo-stigma is harming Denzel and the other orphans they take care of. Kadash and Co show up looking for "mother" and Cloud gets pulled back in by Shinra to stop Kadash.
Denzel and the other children get taken by Kadash, Tifa gets beaten up by Loz, the materia is stolen. Cloud is taken back to when he couldn't stop Aeris from dying. He feels despair for not being able to protect those he loves and now his materia is gone.
He tracks down Kadaj and Co and starts getting beaten pretty bad whereupon Vincent swoops in and saves him. Cloud is even more depressed because he feels utterly powerless to stop Kadaj and save these kids, Vincent works it out with him and notifies the other members of the gang. Bahamut is summoned though that morning in the square and Cloud, Vincent, Reno, and Rude can't handle it.
The other members of the team show up in dramatic fashion and they proceed to kill the dragon. Kadaj gets the head from Rufus, takes off on his motorcycle with Loz and Yazoo, Cloud chases, the rest of the movie could then go on as planned.
Sure that kills the whole "Cloud Smiles" for the first time ever at the end, but I felt like that was a bogus point in the first place. I didn't feel sufficiently convinced that just because Aeris sorta appeared to him in some dreams, as well as appearing to him with Zack for a few moments before walking off into the light that then Cloud could feel OK moving on.
/spoilers
Anyway, I would have rather watched that movie.
Posted by Launchywiggin (Member # 9116) on :
quote:The cinematography on his projects ('his cinematography') isn't good anymore.
I'll strongly disagree. I thought the best redeeming qualities of Lady in the Water and The Happening were in the camera work. And say what you want about "his cinematography" not really being "his", the director always gets the final say, period. It's not like he became a director without knowing how to compose a shot. For a quick example: here's the commercial he made for American Express. It's not his best work (some of it is too obvious), but some of it is very subtle. I'll repeat: he's great at setting the tone of a scene with the camera.
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
I haven't had the internet for the last week, as I just finished moving, and I don't see a better thread for this so I'll just say it here:
I love Avatar .
I spent the last week watching the series straight through, from start to finish, after having only caught bits and pieces of it on TV. I can't believe how good it is, how emotionally invested I was, how great the character development was, how interesting the story was, on and on. I was sad when it ended, glad that it ended so well, with no loose ends. I wish more shows treated their stories the way that Avatar's creators did: with a clearly defined story that had a beginning, middle and end, that wasn't designed to last forever, but rather to tell a story and end. I can't wait for whatever they come up with next. I kept waiting to hate it for being too childish, but I found the comedy enjoyable, and I kept thinking there's no way they could make it mature enough to like, but they did, without making it overly terrifying or violent.
I haven't seen the live-action version, and I'm not sure if I want to. I'm usually pretty hard on adaptations, and I really don't want to be disappointed. But I just had to shout to the mountaintops somewhere how great I think the original is.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:Originally posted by Launchywiggin:
quote:The cinematography on his projects ('his cinematography') isn't good anymore.
I'll strongly disagree. I thought the best redeeming qualities of Lady in the Water and The Happening were in the camera work. And say what you want about "his cinematography" not really being "his", the director always gets the final say, period. It's not like he became a director without knowing how to compose a shot. For a quick example: here's the commercial he made for American Express. It's not his best work (some of it is too obvious), but some of it is very subtle. I'll repeat: he's great at setting the tone of a scene with the camera.
I'm saying it isn't good anymore based on what I saw in The Last Airbender. It was just so weeeirrrd.
Posted by Emreecheek (Member # 12082) on :
It appears that M. Night can indeed ruin the world; he started with Avatar, and has aparently moved on to FFVII.
Posted by Shanna (Member # 7900) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lyrhawn: I was sad when it ended, glad that it ended so well, with no loose ends.
With the exception of poor Zuko's mom.
You'll be happy to hear that there is another animated "Avatar" series in the works. A few weeks ago it was leaked that Bryan and Michael (the show's creators) were getting involved in a new project and had begun looking for staff. Shortly after Viacom filed a trademark for the title "Avatar Legend of Korra."
The most popular rumor is that the series is set 100 years after "The Last Airbender." It'll probably follow the future Waterbending Avatar which could lead room for an Aang appearance if he mentors this future Avatar like Roku did for him.
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
Spoiler alert...
Oh yeah, I forgot about that. I guess I sort of assumed that Zuko found her. I guess the only other real question is if Aang really was the last Airbender, or if he somehow refounded the nation. I guess we'll find out about that in the next series. I think it'd be a shame if they couldn't find a way to bring the Air Nomads back. So much of what I liked about Aang was his peaceful nature, and the lessons he recounted from the monks. And especially, the conflict between the violence inherent in being the Avatar and the peaceful non-violence he was taught growing up. It was the exact opposite of the lesson Zuko had to learn, since he was inherently violent, but had to learn peace.
And just for the sake of balance in the world, I'd hate it if they were gone, as theirs was probably the culture I liked the most.
I'd heard that they were working on another series, and I read the rumor that it was about the future. Some were saying that it might be Aang and Katara's daughter, but unless Aang dies before she is born, I don't see how. Either way, yeah, there will be plenty of chances to bring Aang back as a helper spirit.
I'm really curious as to what it'll be about. I mean, it wouldn't make sense if the next Avatar had to do the same thing that Aang did in such a short period of time. Her training will be more traditional, like Roku's was. Though, if Aang does not refound the Air Nomads, it'll be interesting to see how she learns. It'd be cool if her mission as Avatar, to restore balance, was to find some lost tribe of Air Benders to bring back the nation.
I hope they start it soon. I hope it has complicated villains who experience well-developed character growth and are sympathetic.
It's going to be weird moving to a world that's 100 years after this show. Theoretically, they COULD bring back a lot of characters. Gran Gran and Bumi were from a hundred years ago. But I have to abandon all the characters I just finished falling in love with. I'm sure I'll love the new ones though.
Posted by FoolishTook (Member # 5358) on :
I'm on Book II of Avatar right now.
I love the show. I don't normally care for anything animated or cartoonish, but the story is pretty good.
When I heard M. Night was making The Last Airbender, I wanted to learn a little about the story. I was only ever interested in Avatar because of M. Night. I'm an unabashed Shyamalan fan and love all of his movies--don't make me go all Chris Crocker on everyone--with the exception of The Last Airbender (I'm still torn between hate/love/disappointment/frustration/disgust/hope that maybe, somewhere, somehow, there's a good cut of the movie.)
Anyway, I love the series, but I'm a wee bit late to the game. (How about some Spoiler Warnings, folks? ) Taking my time to watch it, because I hate when good things come to an end.
Posted by scifibum (Member # 7625) on :
Geraine: you don't consider steampunk to be science fiction?
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
quote:Originally posted by scifibum: Geraine: you don't consider steampunk to be science fiction?
I'm not sure *I* consider steampunk science fiction. A good deal of it relies on the continuation and propagation of technology that shouldn't realistically last long at all.
But I sure do enjoy it!
Posted by Shanna (Member # 7900) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lyrhawn: Spoiler alert...
Oh yeah, I forgot about that. I guess I sort of assumed that Zuko found her. I guess the only other real question is if Aang really was the last Airbender, or if he somehow refounded the nation. I guess we'll find out about that in the next series. I think it'd be a shame if they couldn't find a way to bring the Air Nomads back. So much of what I liked about Aang was his peaceful nature, and the lessons he recounted from the monks. And especially, the conflict between the violence inherent in being the Avatar and the peaceful non-violence he was taught growing up. It was the exact opposite of the lesson Zuko had to learn, since he was inherently violent, but had to learn peace.
And just for the sake of balance in the world, I'd hate it if they were gone, as theirs was probably the culture I liked the most.
I'd heard that they were working on another series, and I read the rumor that it was about the future. Some were saying that it might be Aang and Katara's daughter, but unless Aang dies before she is born, I don't see how. Either way, yeah, there will be plenty of chances to bring Aang back as a helper spirit.
I'm really curious as to what it'll be about. I mean, it wouldn't make sense if the next Avatar had to do the same thing that Aang did in such a short period of time. Her training will be more traditional, like Roku's was. Though, if Aang does not refound the Air Nomads, it'll be interesting to see how she learns. It'd be cool if her mission as Avatar, to restore balance, was to find some lost tribe of Air Benders to bring back the nation.
SPOILER ALERT!!
I'm also really interested in how they're going to bring the Air Nomads back. Its hard to imagine the Avatar universe without them! And the show never addressed whether bending is something that is genetic or cultural or whatever. And we also don't know about about the Air Nomad lifestyle. They're described as nomadic and Aang mentioned on a few occasions that he had friends all over the world. And yet they obviously have "homebases" with the four temples. But what we've seen of life in the temples, its largely elder monks and young monks. Aang described Gyatso as a father figure but never mentioned his own parents. So where are the baby airbenders? Were they born at one temple and then sent off to train at another temple once they reach a certain age? Do monks who reach a certain level of mastery "graduate" from being students and do they stay at the temples or take on a truly nomadic lifestyle?
As for her being Aang's and Katara's daughter...I don't know. I agree it'll probably be a female lead. But I don't know how I feel about the daughter thing. One some level, it could be cool and certainly carry a certain amount of emotional weight especially since he'd have to die before she was born. On the other hand, there's a certain squick factor to that and it feels alittle overdone to me. I think I'd rather something fresh.
I heard a cool theory the other day that I liked. It'd be cool if the conflict revolved more around the Spirit World. SOOO many fans loved Koh and so we know there are good spirits and bad spirits and good spirits who can turn bad if people screw with them.
quote:Originally posted by Lyrhawn: I hope they start it soon. I hope it has complicated villains who experience well-developed character growth and are sympathetic.
It's going to be weird moving to a world that's 100 years after this show. Theoretically, they COULD bring back a lot of characters. Gran Gran and Bumi were from a hundred years ago. But I have to abandon all the characters I just finished falling in love with. I'm sure I'll love the new ones though.
I'm trying to imagine 100+ year old Sokka. The image makes me laugh quite a bit. At the same time, I feel like maybe it should be a fresh new start and hopefully not rely on the previous generation outside a small cameo or quick mention.
I feel like Bryan and Michael have proven themselves as world-builders and great storytellers. Its like, we watch Book One and we've Sokka as the comedic sidekick. And then Book Two comes along and add Toph as a variation on the same role. We saw the same thing happen with Zuko and Azula. There's a certain structure and archetype that works, but they're really good at giving it a fresh twist and keeping it original.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
I think it's reasonable science fiction to say "if this particular idea WERE true, what would be consequences?" In this case, if you did have people who could manipulate fire at will, I think it's reasonable to expect technology to leap forward in interesting ways. The War Balloons and Steam Ships definitely make sense. The tanks... eh, a little more out there but still doable.
Posted by scifibum (Member # 7625) on :
quote:Originally posted by Scott R:
quote:Originally posted by scifibum: Geraine: you don't consider steampunk to be science fiction?
I'm not sure *I* consider steampunk science fiction. A good deal of it relies on the continuation and propagation of technology that shouldn't realistically last long at all.
But I sure do enjoy it!
Why is "I" emphasized, out of curiosity?
Steampunk's chief identifying characteristic is a certain sort of (speculative) technological milieu. That is one of the most clear cut identifiers for science fiction, IMO.
I think an unrealistic (or incoherent) steampunk milieu might affect the quality of the product, but not its genre alignment...same as bad space opera. (Which is not to say there can't be genre overlap, of course. Just that broadly, the things that make steampunk steampunk also make it science fiction.)
Posted by Dan_Frank (Member # 8488) on :
quote:Originally posted by scifibum:
quote:Originally posted by Scott R:
quote:Originally posted by scifibum: Geraine: you don't consider steampunk to be science fiction?
I'm not sure *I* consider steampunk science fiction. A good deal of it relies on the continuation and propagation of technology that shouldn't realistically last long at all.
But I sure do enjoy it!
Why is "I" emphasized, out of curiosity?
Because Scott is the ultimate authority on science fiction.
No, wait, that's not it. Probably because you were asking Geraine, but he also wanted to answer that question, and wanted to stress that he was not answering for Geraine.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
I liked Tactics. ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
but then I became like this ![[Evil Laugh]](graemlins/evillaugh.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)