OH BOY OH BOY!!! I LOVE MY GIRLBOSS SLAY KWEENS!!!!!!
 It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
 |
It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
OH BOY OH BOY!!! I LOVE MY GIRLBOSS SLAY KWEENS!!!!!!
OH BOY OH BOY!!! I LOVE MY GIRLBOSS SLAY KWEENS!!!!!!
It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
|
It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
Oh lord she's gonna outright beat Pakku isn't she?
You think Pakku is going to be anywhere other than the laundry hut?
If she does then why would she want him as her teacher?
>expecting logical consistency from a Netflix adaptation
They are going to reveal that Paku has a sister and she is a way better waterbender than him and trained in secret or copied him when he wasn't looking and overtime was just better than him.
>trained
>copied
She just tried it once and was better at it then any waterbender before just to be outshined by Katara
What do you think Netflix for? Amateurs?
Shit you got me. Frick I'm an idiot.
Knowing Netflix theres 2 possible scenarios:
1) Katara meets Pakku, only to beat Pakku easily and saying she needs no teacher.
2) Pakku has been turned into fat black lesbian.
they already casted Pakku numbnuts
Then its scenario A), Katara is going to be some kind of secret chosen prodigy despite Aang already being one, and she's going to humiliate Pakku because modern californian product can't have men telling women what to do.
>Katara is going to be some kind of secret chosen prodigy despite Aang already being one
Black person did you even watch the show? Katara being a waterbending prodigy is both explicit and plot important
I did, yet she needed training to bring that out. Its a fricking guarantee the Netflix show she's going to need no man and waterbends perfectly from the start. Learn to read you dumb troony frick.
>yet she needed training to bring that out
She was almost entirely self-taught, which is why her being able to get into her fight with Pakku when he was being a big dumb sexist meanie was a big deal to the other characters and to him specifically.
Yeah and they ended up having a teacher-student relationship afterwards. If you think Netflix is going to lower Katara to a role of a student for a Problematic Man, then you're delusional.
>I have deliberately made up an imaginary scenario in my head pre-emptively and that scenario upsets me
>Netflix has never ruined any show with their troony bullshit before!
Back to Resetera with you.
I love how haters just make up whatever bullshit they want in order have things to b***h about and think this makes their argument valid
I love how shills like you are ready to defend big corporations with a long history of producing shitty woke shows that flop. Keep sucking that Netflix wiener.
Two more weeks and Netflix will go broke. Stand the line!
How dare people decide how they spend their money? Netflix is entitled to their wages.
You're like an NPC, incapable of any rational discussion and reasoning. Just post the cookie-cutter RLM meme pic. Please clap for the reference.
>She was almost entirely self-taught
yeah for the basics, she wasn't a proper waterbender.
You didn't watch the show
She's gonna frick Pakku
If they wrote out Sokka being sexist and then maturing after the Kiyoshi Warriors kick his ass, because a good guy having problematic views and an arc is "too complex for modern audiences," then they're not going to have Pakku and the good guy Northern Tribe being sexist either.
>"Teach me, Pakku"
>"No, child. There's nothing you can learn from me, a man. You already know everything you need to know, you've got WaterTribe Girl Magic"
This will unironically happen and people will unironically defend this
Pakku’s sub plot won’t even exist
Most likely
Twitter threads should be punishable by death
Would it be so hard to keep all of this outrage farming and bait to one thread?
>the fool looks at the finger
Ruining everything with insane woke gender idealogy should be punishable by death.
im tired, for the bait, for me taking the bait and also because this shit in general
I just want to bend for pete's sake
a face made for deepfake porn.
homie she looks like a 14 year old chubby boy
also shes wh*te
Stop trying to prove his point
Ayo
>An adaptation changed something? BAAAAAAAWWWWWWWWWWW
>Nooooooooo you can't just complain about changes, even though they make things worse
I bet you love the movie too.
>make things worse
You don’t even know what the change is exactly . You’re whining for the sake of whining
I'd call you a homosexual, but actual gay men suck less dick than you.
NTA, but I have seen that image a bunch of time, and it's funny and accurate, but even if he stuffed a cooked turkey in there, doesn't "shitting" describe the act, not the item? Like, if you were to stuck a dildo in your ass and then push it out, aren't you shitting out a dildo?
Shitting is both the act (to shit something out) and the thing (fecal matter). If you shat out gold, no one would complain. The issue here is that I'm expecting literal feces.
kek saved
i'd self-insert into katara if you catch my meaning
I do...
>it's a katara seducing her brother episode
Doesn't really narrow things down
"gender issues"
That means they are not mature enough to see and live in the world that was created.
Yes, you still have your sensibilities and morals and they can make you disagree with what you are watching but you are not watching a show made by you for you to conform to you.
TLDR: It is not about YOU.
Because, as we all know, critiquing art is useless. Why would anyone actually discuss art for any reason?
Change bad because change always bad is not good critique.
Good thing its not the critique then, right? The critique is "modern trends cause me to be skeptical about this show" which is a great critique. People will pay you to analyze media like that.
"gender issues" change is bad, yes
change good because change always good is not a good defense
Nobody is saying that. Seethe more.
>Change bad because change always bad
yes
Who are you quoting?
Its moronic. One of the good points of the show was showing the two kids didn't have to be limited by their gender role in the water tribe.
Just doing away with it undermines the point.
>Gutting character development to seem progressive is….good!
How are “gender issues” related to character development? Are you moronic?
Sokka's gender issues are standard conservative male sexism.
That is overcome by him dealing with skilled and intelligent women outside of his little clan. And instead of fully going away, it becomes part of a chivalrous attitude he keeps to the end of the series.
Katara's gender issues are her being a nag and wannabe team-mom that tries to mother hen and tell everyone else what to do and force herself into the role of the heart of the team. She develops by learning to stop trying to make herself the moral boss of the team and its 'adult' and stop trying to embody that feminine role of Team Mom under all circumstances.
She also deals with sexism in a direct manner. Although, we can agree that is guaranteed to still be in the show.
Changing her role as the group mom just because they think it’s “sexist” for a female character to be maternal is inexcusable bullshit. That’s the core of her character! If she becomes just another snarky hardass like Toph then they might as well cancel the adaptation.
>guaranteed replies even when you're a mouthbreather
slow clap
Fine. Let's wait and see, then. When it comes out, we can all judge it by it's own merits. You can even screenshot this post and all the seething replies so you can rub it in our faces if it's good. But if the changes suck, we will all rightfully expect you to eat shit. Fair?
I don’t care one way or another but you seem awfully emotionally invested over a children’s cartoon potentially getting a mediocre tv adaptation
Either way they're still right. Changing something in an adaptation is not inherently bad.
Changing aspects of the story to explore different storylines with the characters is acceptable under some conditions. Changing fundamental points of character growth because "it doesn't hold up to modern standards" is shit.
You’re over exaggerating the significance of Sokka learning to be of a sexist dick.
>Character growth is not important!
Feminist writer spotted.
It’s superfluous character development in the grand scheme of things. It adds very little actual value. There are other things that time could be spent on in terms of developing Sokka that doesn’t involve doing an entirely bland “don’t be sexist, m’kay” after school special lesson that Cinemaphile traditionally loves to b***h about.
Go back, I really hope you're a 15 yo contrarian and not a grown ass man
jesus christ literally
I like how they created this meme then proceeded to jerk off to Picard S3 because it had a lot of fanservice
they've never been serious or consistent, RLM has a lot of massive flaws as entertainers but the biggest one was Plinket reviews (which is probably why they stopped doing them) and through them, despite most of it being mindless poop/fart jokes, it's pretty clear Mike and probably the rest of the guys can't fricking comprehend basic logic or reason from a High School level of thinking. They are clearly goofy, drunk, silly man-children (be this a good thing as in friend sim or not necessarily a bad thing when looking for some 'content' to blow an hour on or while you're washing dishes or some shit) but it's that phenomenon like in roger rabbit, you make someone laugh once and they follow you like lemmings. Whole movie communities hanging of their every word, citing Plinket criticisms while ignoring the context of it being said between the character murdering his wife or having explosive shits, ignoring the frequent mistakes they make in their half in the bag show or the times they contradict themselves for a joke. It's the kind of obsessive fandom that turns you off something somewhat good and ruins it if you look too deep.
It’s always this same npc response when you can’t do anything to articulate your counter position and just have to resort to accusing the other person of being corporate shill.
You are a loud, obnoxious homosexual and you should work to change that and become a more positive influence
If it means we can fully skip the Fortuneteller episode, I'm all for that
her hair skin and eyes are the wrong color
I recently read the original Maltese Falcon book and watched the movie. It was stunning just how close the movie adhered to the book, basically verbatim dialogue and scenes.
Pity we've been inundated by morons that think they can "improve" on the source material.
That’s a cool anecdote, bro. There’s also tons of other adaptations that changed shit left and right and it made for a far better movie/people fricking loved it even when it didn’t religiously stick to the source material.
Case in point:
Jackie Brown
Clockwork Orange
The Shining
Forrest Gump
Who Framed Roger Rabbit
Wizard of Oz
The Princess Bride
Blade Runner
There will be blood
Bela Lugosi Dracula
Boris Karloff Frankenstein
The Mist
Fight Club
Etc. etc. etc.
Let me ask you one thing about these originals, did anyone even care about them before the movie? Was there a giant fandom about Forrest Gump before the movie? Were there conventions about Roger Rabbit before the movie? Did anyone write shipping fanfic about Fight Club before the movie?
They were for the most part either already popular or cult books with fandoms, dear uncultured swine.
>Y-you’re arguing in bad faith!
>Now let me sperg about political agendas, how putting out a tv show is about making money and how triggered I am because AHHHH I AM BEING GENOCIDED BECAUSE CARTOON GIRL BOSS IS NOW A LIVE ACTION GIRL BOSS!
You mean a few ten thousand people bought these books? Wow, amazing, that certainly compares to these tens of millions of fans for stuff like Avatar
>Oh yeah well way more whiny spergs watched a cartoon than ever read let alone opened a book so there!!!
LMAOOOOOOOOO
You have no intentions of adequately defending your position, do you? Its going to be "Well, (irrelevant thing) so (irrelevant thing)", and when people correct you, you'll go "(quote mine) LMAOOOOO" like you've made a point. Can't you pollute some other discussion?
the point is that one is already immensely popular and the other is not. It's not about quality you moron, it's about meeting expectations. Almost no one cared about these books, which is why there were no expectations. Heck, most don't even know these are adaptions.
But let's take another book example, since you're so pretentious you can't separate two different arguments. Lord of the rings. This book DID had a giant huge fandom before the movies, and you know what happened? These fans made a big deal about any small change the movies made. Surprise surprise
>Almost no one cared about these books
It’s time to shut up already. This is absolutely embarrassing level of cope and mental gymnastics to create an alternative reality
>Forrest Gump: The novel initially sold an estimated 30,000 copies.[3] After the 1994 film adaptation was released, starring Tom Hanks, the novel sold over a million copies
>Fight Club: The film "failed" at the box office,[41] but a cult following emerged with the DVD edition
And I didn't even find anything about Who Censored Roger Rabbit
Just because they were books, doesn't mean people cared you fricking moron. Your highschool teacher lied to you
Yeah, exactly like I said. You're making bad faith post. Studios putting DEI into movies for investor money is a well documented thing, and to response with nonsense like "i'm triggered" or "i'm being genocided" can only be bad faith actions.
Imagine talking about US politics, and when the border is brought up, people pretended problems relating to it weren't real and you're insane for even talking about it. That'd be weird, right? But I guess you doing that now is fine.
You are triggered. Media adaptations making changes due to deals, changing cultural norms, funding stipulations, etc. is nothing new. It’s just a way for people like you pretend you are on some kind of a high moral ground and justified to always complain about superficial and inane things that are entirely driven by culture wars rather than any kind of actual real adherence to “faithful adaptation” practices, because that would automatically require you to disown most iconic and beloved media adaptations by default and it would immediately paint you as a dumbass.
>You are triggered
Typical. You can't defend your position, so instead of confronting someone else's opinions, you dismiss them outright.
>Media adaptations-
You might as well stop. I can't accept your opinion when you're making it clear you'll do everything in your power to ignore mine and insult me for it. Try this with someone else.
Try not have such stupid opinions that crumble down with minor scrutiny. You are obviously just upset about boogiemen “agendas” inside your own head and argue based on that, and refuse to admit that your arguments are easily countered by numerous examples that did the same thing and were highly popular and improved the material. Your unwillingness to admit such things isn’t my problem, neither is the public humiliation that you subject yourself by acting like a fool.
>Try not have such stupid opinions that crumble down with minor scrutiny.
How would you know the strength of my opinions? You did everything possible to side step them. Including ignoring the fact that, yes, companies are incentivized to meet DEI goals in order to receive money. That's not my opinion, that's a fact. Some companies bragged about it.
To that fact, you called me triggered, said I was "genocided" or something and other nonsense. Your feelings about my opinions are irrelevant; you can't even tell me what they are.
>GIRL BOSS!
Frankenstein literally created the science fiction genre and Dracula has become a name synonymous with Vampires to the point people think more of him than them.
You picked movies that talented auteurs made, not Netflix hacks
Stop with the bad faith posts. Its not about "changing things", its about altering movies to serve a political agenda or to earn investor money. We could get three whole seasons focusing on Zuko exclusively for the adaptation, and as long as it was written as an actual examination of the character, it'd be fine. But it won't. It'll be about some ultra OP OC female girl boss. Did that do that in the clockwork orange adaptation? Do you care?
The political purpose of not focusing on Katara's season 1 constant nagging and dimestore feminism?
They're still going to focus on that, they're just going to remove any part that would be considered a flaw.
you notice how all of these are from 30+ years ago
So is the Maltese Falcon
>wehrl, ackchually, thowsse are all from thirty yearsssh ago
And they're just as agenda laden as the media you're trying to criticize.
The agenda was one made by people that had something to say and the intellect to say it.
The cadre making Netflixslop doesn't have anything to say and are too moronic to say it anyhow.
>current media bad because it is pushing an agenda!
>w-w-well actually agenda pushing is okay whenever I happen to like it in old movies that I didn’t register it as a child, b-but that’s totally different and doesn’t count because uh uh they were just better creators! Yeah that’s right I just changed my entire argument on the fly but don’t pay attention to that!
>heres adaptations that changed things
>cant name an example from this century that we are a quarter of the way through
>WELL THOSE ARE OLD, THEY DON’T COUNT!!!
Yes they do. When you’re complaining about how changes are bad and jerk off to notion about how old movies sometimes were doing stuff in verbatim your argument is entirely that any changes are fundamentally bad and it’s impossible to improve the material in adaptation, both notions that are blatantly wrong. The second you start trying to pivot to “W-w-well those examples are x years old so it doesn’t count!” you already admit the original assertion about changes was stupid and wrong and now try to save face by trying to shift the goal posts to whining about how changes can sometimes be bad, which nobody is denying. Plenty of 30+ years old adaptations were bad when they changed the material too.
And we all know all this kneejerk b***hing about Netflix and Avatar is actually about low hanging fruit culture war bullshit because you just want to have an excuse to b***h and moan about shit you don’t know anything about except that something is going to be changed in some unknown way because your eternal brainrot means YOU JUST KNOW it’s going to be bad because that’s your pre-existing bias.
The point about no good movies that were changed in the past 30 years is that it seems writers are no longer able to make changes that improve the source material.
Those original books were relatively unknown to the general public before they were changed, so few people objected to the changes and it was easier to make changes that would benefit the new medium (TV, movies) that didn't exist when many were written. By contrast when you change something already popular there will be more opposition and it's harder to improve upon it.
Lord of the Rings had a lot changes and not just the one involving removing the shire in RotK
But it kept the core. Now compare that to the nonsene that is Amazon and the Rings of Power. A wholesale creation of their own. Which has only lost money.
Not really, the LOTR books are adventure travelogues. The movies are action blockbusters. The latter emphasizes the battles way more than the books ever did and cuts down the characters to more familiar hollywood archetypes. The themes and messages also feel conflicting as a result.
Nah I just like pointing out that modern "writers" are dogshit at their jobs and ai can do it better than they can
>but ai is generic garbage
I know, and its still better than kodern writers for the past 30 years.
Throw in Eon's James Bond films. They've made 007 into an icon by changing things from the source material, and the film version of Goldfinger changes so much that the book is comparatively nonsensical.
Guy you're replying to here.
I'm not arguing that it's impossible to deviate from the source material and make something good.
I'm saying we've been flooded with bad writers trying to "improve" upon great source material, meanwhile the number of faithful adaptations has fallen off dramatically. There have always been filmmakers that "take liberties" with the source material. It would just be nice to get more movies/shows that, y'know... don't do that, and just adapt what's there.
>I'm saying we've been flooded with bad writers trying to "improve" upon great source material
How are we “flooded”? Based on what metric? Changing shit has been happening since day one of something being adapted to another format. It happens all the time. There’s always been bad adaptations, bad and dumb changes. This is not new. The only real difference is that you now have an entire generation of butthurt nerds whining about everything all the time simply because they can’t handle changes or that bad adaptations happen.
Also “bad writers” is a nothing argument because writers do not single-handedly just dictate and decide these things, they work based on requirements and whatever limitations the producers, budgets and other production issues lay on them. And if you want to talk about quality of writing being down, that’s another discussion entirely and it’s not as simplistic as “le writer bad”. If you paid any attention last year to the writers strike you’d know the quality of scripts is down because studios have spent countless years cutting corners and production budgets at the cost of writers having less resources, time and wages to work with and being treated as disposable “anybody can do this, quality doesn’t matter” to a point they essentially wanted to bring in human writers only for couple of weeks to punch up ChatGPT scripts.
>meanwhile the number of faithful adaptations has fallen off dramatically
Again, based on what metric? Have you any fricking idea how much adapted material is produced every year that you don’t even register? Not to mention how that has largely been the norm for decades. In the golden age of Hollywood books and broadway shows were being turned into movies all the time. And their hit or miss rate hasn’t fundamentally changed. There are countless of examples of egregious changes being made throughout history and like always sometimes it made something better and sometimes it didn’t.
>There’s always been bad adaptations, bad and dumb changes.
But only recently has it been done to push an agenda.
>The only real difference is that you now have an entire generation of butthurt nerds whining about everything all the time simply because they can’t handle changes or that bad adaptations happen.
Because writers are mainly adapting what is/was popular to push their politics instead of taking obscure series and trying to improve them.
>Also “bad writers” is a nothing argument because writers do not single-handedly just dictate and decide these things, they work based on requirements and whatever limitations the producers, budgets and other production issues lay on them.
None of which excuses adding your personal politics or fetishes into the script.
>If you paid any attention last year to the writers strike you’d know the quality of scripts is down because studios have spent countless years cutting corners and production budgets at the cost of writers having less resources, time and wages to work with
The writers complained because series are shorter but take longer to make they're hired for less time. So rather than being hired for 26 weeks every year to make 26 episodes they're hired for 13 weeks every 2 years to write 13 episodes.
Of course none of this excuses things like Masters of the Universe killing He-Man and trying to make Teela the main character. That's purely the fault of the writer/producer.
>But only recently has it been done to push an agenda.
Oh shut up and go frick yourself. It’s amazing someone this moronic even knows how to type.
That guy is moronic and brainrotted, but so is anyone pretending that unfaithful adaptations of anything and everything even remotely popular with changes made specifically to cater to non-fans and fit in with whatever the current popular social justice trend is haven't become massively common in the last 10 years or so.
Yes bad adaptations have been a thing since forever, and yes bad writers trying to push an agenda have been around since the dawn of time, but ignoring clear and present trends in hollywood and calling people who don't insane just makes you a massive homosexual.
Changed are ALWAYS made to appeal wider audiences, you dumb nerd.
Often but not always, and that wasn't even remotely the point of the post you're replying to, you illiterate homosexual.
A show aimed at teens and up following current day social norms and attitudes when adapting something in order to appeal to the bigger potential number of people is exactly what they are doing. Acting like an out of touch boomer makes you just that, out of touch person upset everything isn’t stuck to whatever arbitrary year you decided nothing should change anymore
What change in social norms justify the removed elements?
What's even the point of adapting ATLA "faithfully" into Live Action? They may as well make it different if they're remaking it IMO. It's the only part of this that interests me as a once diehard ATLA fan.
What's the problem with all them changing shit if they were hypothetically good?
all the recent changes we've seen have been awful, why would you want another remake?
yes anon there can be good changes, we know
that doesn't instantly make all changes good. everything they talk about in marketing for this series is "we removed [thing]". sokka's sexism, aang going on detours and katara's "outdated" parts... and the other announcements aren't good either, like "we want the game of thrones audience".
when the least shit announcement you made is "we're gonna show the air nomad genocide" there is a big problem
None of these things they’ve talked about are something worth making endless threads complaining about it. They are turning a kids cartoon to a live action and have almost three times less episodes to work with in a season. Avatar is not some sacred text with no flaws. There’s plenty of wonky and dumb shit that should be cut and it’s nearly twenty years old, of course some things are outdated and require new approaches and changes, especially because what works in a kiddie cartoon won’t necessarily play out well when you do it with humans and a live action environment.
why are you in a thread for TLA adaptation if you think discussing it is stupid and pointless?
people talk about it because they clearly care and we've had a lot of buzz around it. Avatar is a beloved series and of course in an Avatar topic people will put a lot of focus on it. none of the news are good even assuming the best possible way to do and people voice their opinions.
you're here disingenuously arguing because you think you're smart and you must impose your enlightened knowledge on us
You can talk about something without being a reactionary idiot about it. So far the discussion in the past couple of weeks have been almost exclusively “they said they changed something without us knowing exactly what it means? BAAAAAAWWWWWW THE WEST HAS FALLEN THIS IS WOKE SHIT” type of moronic let’s jump to being butthurt just for the sake of being angry because this is the latest culture war topic by people who have meltdowns basically every day now over any excuse
There is no reason not to be reactionary.
The writers have not indicated that they are competent in the slightest, and every claimed change they're making is only taking away from the series, instead of adding to it.
I have personally always been of the mindset that the existence of a live action adaptation of Avatar was a moronic idea with no fricking purpose, so I don't really give a shit one way or the other, but when the only news that they keep putting out about it is "we changed [thing] because [reason]" that's extremely vague and obviously worded in such a way that it can and will be interpreted by the reader to mean "we're MODERNIZING things because duh of course we know BETTER now" then yeah of course morons on the internet are going to latch onto that and have moronic culture war arguments about it, because that was always their goal in the first place since that's the only way dumb fricks know how to market anything anymore.
My prediction is it will come out, it will be a completely bland and forgettable lifeless recreation of a handful of the most iconic moments from season 1, possibly with a few egregiously bad changes meant to stir up the fandom on purpose, and everyone will forget about it in 2 months.
You are sidestepping the anon's complaints in the post you're responding too and are trying to subtly change the argument to "live action is a different medium than an animated cartoon therefore DEI, leftists politics, and rewriting characters MUST be made as a sacrifice of changing mediums."
>DEI
Never existed.
>leftist politics
Reality has a left wing bias
>rewriting characters
They're not in a cartoon anymore.
>DEI
>Never existed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diversity,_equity,_and_inclusion
>right wing conspiracy theory
Did you even read the article?
you didn't
>we want the game of thrones audience
/co/'s final endgame: canon firecest
There have also been many movies that were huge box-office bombs because they were a poor adaptation of the source material.
John Carter
The Lone Ranger
The 13th Warrior
Mortal Engines
Dark Phoenix
Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within
Wonder Woman 1984
A Wrinkle in Time
Pan
King Arthur: Legend of the Sword
Mulan (2020)
Ben-Hur (2016)
Beloved
Fantastic Four (2015)
The BFG
Lightyear
Speed Racer
Ghost in the Shell
Around the World in 80 Days
Percy Jackson
Just because some adaptions made changes and became successful does not mean every movie that makes major changes will improve the original work.
A bunch of those didn't bomb because they were bad adaptations, because a lot of those are shit nobody had ever fricking heard of before. John Carter didn't bomb because it changed things from the books, it bombed because Disney was moronic and couldn't figure out how to tell the audience what the frick it even was.
But regardless, it's almost as though whether something is a perfect adaptation is far less important than other factors, like if it's a good movie made by competent people capable of deciding whether a change should or shouldn't be made based on how that will affect the final product instead of blindly sticking to a methodology of either preserving the source material or changing shit for the sake of changing it.
>A bunch of those didn't bomb because they were bad adaptations, because a lot of those are shit nobody had ever fricking heard of before.
That didn't stop Who Framed Roger Rabbit, Blade Runner, or Clockwork Orange. That's what marketing is for.
>John Carter didn't bomb because it changed things from the books, it bombed because Disney was moronic and couldn't figure out how to tell the audience what the frick it even was.
Many movies have had poor marketing but succeeded because critics and the audience loved them. They also didn't become the biggest box-office bomb to date.
John Carter had far bigger problems than marketing.
>it's almost as though whether something is a perfect adaptation is far less important than other factors
Fans want to see what they like. With Avatar no one will really care if the Great Divide isn't in the Netflix show since few liked it. However they will be annoyed if Katara is a powerful waterbender since Aang being better than her and her journey to improve her bending was part of her season 1 arc.
>if it's a good movie made by competent people capable of deciding whether a change should or shouldn't be made based on how that will affect the final product
The problem is that changes can often cause problems with the final product in unexpected ways. For example if you make Zuko less of a villain in season 1 it will make him more sympathetic but it will cause problems regarding why the GAAng wouldn't let him join in season 3.
>instead of blindly sticking to a methodology of either preserving the source material
Just because you don't like something doesn't mean the fans won't like it. Sometimes being campy is part of the charm of a show.
>or changing shit for the sake of changing it.
This is always bad.
>That didn't stop Who Framed Roger Rabbit, Blade Runner, or Clockwork Orange. That's what marketing is for.
Black person that was exactly my point, being an unfaithful adaptation isn't an automatic detriment to a film, and pretending shit like John Carter failed because it was unfaithful to a bunch of books most people didn't even know existed is moronic when in actuality it failed because it was a bad movie in general and was marketed by morons who thought calling it "John Carter" would somehow tell people it was about a confederate soldier who goes to Mars and fights green people.
I noticed you ignored almost all the movies I mentioned and focused only on one of them.
Also John Carter wasn't adapted well.
In the movie he had a wife and child but after their death became a rebel but eventually becomes friendly; in the book he's single, friendly, and a noble warrior. Making the protagonist less likable so he can have a character arc was a mistake.
The cruelty of the green Martians was toned down.
The Holy Thern's were introduced in the 1st movie, even though they weren't in the book. They also didn't have a superweapon. This was done to give Carter a final boss.
The movie doesn't include the machine that cleans the air on Mars failing.
Trying to turn John Carter from a noble among savages to a drunk among the bland didn't improve the adaptation.
I'm not going to address every individual film you mentioned in your post because my issue is with the core premise of what you're saying which is that "adaptational changes are the sole reason those movies were big failures". And I never said John Carter was adapted well you moron, I only said that whether it was adapted well or not is largely irrelevant because the project was mismanaged at every level. I am personally a big fan of the Barsoom books and hated most of the changes they made in that film, but I'm not going to pretend that the film would've been saved if they'd been as accurate as possible to the source material, because there were much deeper issues with that production.
>THEY ALL BOMBED BECAUSE THEY CHANGED STUFF
No, dear idiot child, those movies flopped due to numerous different reasons, including nobody under the age of 75 gives a shit about the Lone Ranger, Final Fantasy Spirits Within was a glorified CGI engine demo with a shitty and uninteresting story nobody cared about, Ben-Hur was a remake for a movie nobody but old people care about (please tell me what changes made people not want to see it, I beg you). Also fricking LOL at Wonder Woman 1984 flopping because “it wasn’t faithful enough adaptation”. The first one was literally one of the most profitable movies of the year and took gigantic liberties with the source material. Mother of Christ, how are you people this stupid?
>nobody under the age of 75 gives a shit about the Lone Ranger
This is why they put several movie stars in it and it failed due to the bad script.
>Ben-Hur was a remake for a movie nobody but old people care about
Something that didn't prevent the first one being a success.
>Wonder Woman 1984 flopping because “it wasn’t faithful enough adaptation”.
In the comic Wonder Woman doesn't wish for a man she knew decades ago to come back to her.
>The first one was literally one of the most profitable movies of the year and took gigantic liberties with the source material.
Such as.
These changes didn't make the movie appeal to more people. So you're still wrong.
Probably correct. No one thinks a series is better because it's live action.
>durrrrr I am a moron
got his ass.
>Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within
Not an adaptation of source material and never marketed as such.
Not an argument, when it comes to changes quantity is far less important than quality and you are purposely avoiding that simple fact.
Also, Stephen King adaptations don't count and I don't think I need to explain why detailed descriptions of children's genitalia written while on coke don't make for good PG-13 cinema.
>Clockwork orange
>Fight Club
>Fricking Frankenstein
>All better than the book
This homie straight moronic
Reading comprehension is a skill issue
Sorry I got really mad at the idea of someone thinking the Frankenstein movie is better and I missed the other half of his post. moronic posters here got me jumping at shadows I guess.
I would remind you the Resident Evil adaptation from Netflix.
Change isn't always good.
These examples are almost all novels/books. ATLA is another visual show and is animated. Turning it live action is just a genuine downgrade. Animation itself has so many techniques and has so much more potential to be entertaining and effective. Nobody fricking wanted a live action avatar series, especially not after the first dogshit one. The act of making a fricking visual medium into another kind of visual medium is just a garbage decision in the first fricking place. This is why watchmen has never had a good adaptation because the comic was just that effective.
Your memes are old. How old are you? How mentally damaged are you?
It's Zukover...
The more and more I read about this, it sucks.
I was a fool for thinking Netflix could do some good after their One Piece show.
Oda was still on that show, I think this adaption kicked the creators out.
>I think this adaption kicked the creators out.
I hope after this releases Konietzko and DiMartino reveal what all the disagreements were about.
It seems pretty obvious.
>I think this adaption kicked the creators out.
And they are just not the same people anymore. Oda is still writing One Piece, the Avatar creators made the awful comics and Korra and the Dragon Prince.
So she'll be less of a nag?
More, except she’ll be shown to be always right and stronger than the boys.
>ITT
unironically isn't it a bit sexist to take out elements of womanhood which have existed for literal millennia from a female character to make her "better" (ie: more masculine)
This was really a lightning-in-bottle series. The comics, sequel animated series, movie, books everything else was mediocre to shit.
Yea you had the right Nick executives at the time that allowed them craft it right.
Yes, I'm sure everyone will be outraged that ... Katara doesn't lecture sexist old men about their beliefs.
My balls itch.
This whole thing is so dumb... It's literally crucial to Sokka's development that he used to be kind of a jerk, which includes being kinda sexist, but he grew out of it becaus he matured. That's literally his psychological character growth right there. Why do they think it's preferable to never address this sort of issue instead of showing a story of self-improvement and learning from the past? Which one do you think makes a better story and teaches more valuable lessons? I swear to god...
Sokka was "sexist" for a whopping 4 episodes, man. He got his ass handed to him by Suki incredibly early on and this changed his tune on women.
It wasn't as much of a character trait as everyone makes it out to be. Also toning something down and outright removing it are two different things.
>It's literally crucial to Sokka's development
The show has eight episodes and you want all of Sokka’s screen time of that to be focused around him being butthole and being constantly owned by women? Or he gets slapped in the face and suddenly he’s a feminist?
Sokka's sexism has no bearing on anything involving his later character development and is only there to have an unironic girl power lesson for him in Kyoshi Island.
Like at MOST you can say it makes his ill-fated romance with Yui more believable since they also put another chud water dude as her opposite suitor
Pakku's sexism and the lesson on it was much more natural and far less juvenile in tone and resolution.
Sokka's sexism was originally a character flaw, one we see in the first episode and therefore becomes something that sticks in the viewer's mind.
But when we see the Northern Water Tribe, we see it reinforced because it turns out that it is a product of the Water Tribe culture.
They're the 'good guys' but they're also flawed and chauvinistic.
Beyond that, while Sokka is less openly sexist as the show goes on, his light romantic chauvinism is a constant, and something that is part of his personality from the get-go. You're taking out that basic aspect as well, when you remove his petty sexism.
it's not advertiser friendly for your character to have actuql flaws
>OH BOY OH BOY!!! I LOVE MY GIRLBOSS SLAY KWEENS!!!!!!
The original Katara was a girlboss with all bark and no bite too. All her character focused episodes were dogshit. Western Sakura.
She won't be a groomer, hallelujah!
Maybe just wait and see how it turns out rather than having an existential panic attack every time anyone says anything that could be misconstrued as a call back to peak 2015 culture wars.
Don't get me wrong, the fact they felt the need to say this is a bit sus, but if One Piece taught us anything, it's that you can never really know for sure.
Did they kick Oda off the show before going live with the project and rewriting it?
I really think people who keep bringing up One Piece have completely ignored this piece
There's a lot of info out there that makes it very clear that One Piece only stayed anywhere close to the source material because Oda kept telling Netflix to go frick themselves and asserting control over the project when they wanted to Cowboy Bebop the thing constantly.
They wanted to make Zeff and Garp lovers until Oda put a fricking stop on it. As much as Bryke sucks, Netflix is way worse.
>but if One Piece taught us anything, it's that you can never really know for sure.
One Piece was an exception to the rule. Exceptions strengthen the rule.
One Piece had the original creator as project supervisor. Netflix Avatar the original creator left the project due to creative differences. Similar to chinese you need to keep trannies on a very tight leash because the moment you give them any creative freedom, they will deliberately frick things up and sabotage your product.
this image would be funnier without the "the other colors can fuc off"
since no packaging would ever say something like that
something like "you don't need the other colors for corn!" would be better
gratuitous cussing is what everyone loves now even if it ruins the humor
>attempting to analyze the humor of an obvious plant package and being upset they put a no-no word on it
next level autism right there
criticism... is dead
deadass
They couldn't possibly make her much more annoying than she already was
>They remove the annoying nag Katara scenes
Imagine if it somehow ended up more well liked.
It sucks because the Avatar creators aren't involved (they quit very early during the writing stage)
It would've probably also sucked if they were involved though. They are like George Lucas or Toriyama, they need a tard wrangler to keep them in check.
It's funny because even zoomers like TLA as is
The parts where she's shown to be too much of a Mother Hen and nag?
Going by them cutting Sokka's extremely obvious character arc because it was 'offensive to modern sensibilities' or whatever, I assume they're going to cut any character flaws where Katara's feminine traits were in the wrong, too?
As well as remove most of the sexism that she faced because that would be 'victimization'?
>GIRL BOSS BEFORE I TURNED 18 GOOD
>GIRL BOSS AFTER I TURNED 18 BAD
But in all seriousness, the show is gonna suck.
I'm not entirely sure what they mean by this. I'm trying to think of moments where Katara was too...girly, I guess? But I'm expecting this to be bad either way, so whatever.
The scenes where she is a nag or too much of a matronly annoyance, probably.
It's pretty clear that what they mean is they're going to be cutting pretty much all of the plotlines that focused on Katara and Sokka arguing about whether or not women should shut the frick up and get back in the kitchen, which of course they were going to do that because roughly 100% of those plotlines came from complete filler episodes and they're condensing a 20 episode season down to 8, so it would be moronic to keep those plotlines in and sacrifice time that could be dedicated to the actual plot of the series.
The most moronic thing here is that they felt the need to bring it up at all, because who the frick cares?
They care because they're not cutting that for pacing reasons, but because they think it is a moral imperative to purge it from existence.
They're proudly announcing it, not mentioning it off-hand.
Shut the frick up, they're talking about it because they want morons like you to get outraged about it because it's the closest they can get to anyone giving a shit about their pointless remake.
The hype was already there because the adult fanbase for Avatar and the fanbase for awful Netflix original series is almost a circle.
This is just the crew patting themselves on the back ahead of time for their Good Works.
>When adapting the 2000 hour source material to a single 90 minute film, we thought long and hard about it and decided that the scene where the main character eats toast silently for 3 hours uninterrupted would need to be cut because in the modern day it's clear that such a scene simply would not work now that we understand that BLACK LIVES MATTER
>when trying to readapt a series we decided the most important stuff to trim was anything that suggested the characters were imperfect and needed to change
homie it's filler, and for better or worse they have not afforded themselves enough runtime to include anything even slightly resembling filler. Of course it's getting cut, it was always going to get cut. What would you suggest they cut instead, the introduction of the moon and ocean spirits?
Character arcs and character flaws within the main cast are not filler.
There already are episodes that are basically filler. Like the one at the Northern Air Temple, or June's episodes, or the one with the Fortune Teller, and of course The Great Divide.
You have plenty of adventure 'fluff' to cut that doesn't call for removing any of the flawed personality traits of the main cast.
>There already are episodes that are basically filler. Like the one at the Northern Air Temple
>an episode where Aang encounters people who have taken up residence in his peoples' ancestral home and meets a character who is supplying the fire nation with advanced technology and is later important to the war effort against the fire nation is more filler than "that episode where Sokka tells Katara to shut up and fix his pants cause girls like sewing"
Yes, because a side character that has a role later on best described as fan-service, is less important than Sokka's actual personality traits and his development.
thanks for letting us know you're moronic
You're welcome gaylord
Thanks for letting me know that you don't care about the characters.
>a side character that has a role later on best described as fan-service
This is like saying introducing Jeong Jeong early on isn't important and he could just show up during the liberation of Ba Sing Se for the first time and it'd be fine.
Jeong-Jeong is part of a larger struggle for Aang dealing with being aggressive and willing to take action and be violent for the sake of peace. JJ being someone that failed to find a way to firebend without rage, that Aang fails to learn from.
He has importance and sets up a conflict that goes just about the entire length of the show.
Comparatively, the Northern Air Temple stuff is interesting in a, "life goes on", sort of way, but it doesn't provide immediately plot necessary content nor set up a struggle that Aang continually faces. He doesn't have to deal with the rest of the Air Temples being take over or turned into something new. They're basically all abandoned except for that one.
You mean "condensing" the 20 20-minute episodes "down" to 8 60-minute episodes? moron.
yes the episode runtimes are longer, but they are not going to just adapt the episodes one-to-one per-minute so that 3 of the original episodes fit nicely into one of the new ones anon. They're going to stretch out some of the content to let it fill more of the time, combine bits and pieces of different episodes while adding new content to expand on some of it or just make up their own shit, etc. The fact that the adaptation will have less than half of the total number of episodes of the original means they will drop certain plotline or episodes entirely from the adaptation, this is the way it always works every single time.
I never denied that. Pay attention to the discussion, homosexual.
You can't use the argument that they're "condensing" things to cut out character development when they're just slowing things down for the unnecessary "Adult media" 60-minute episodes.
>You can't use the argument that they're "condensing" things
But they are. I don't like it or think it's a good idea, but that's what they're doing moron-kun.
>No u
Concession accepted.
Go learn some basic math.
>just slowing things down
Deeper development and substance isn’t slowing down, it’s actually depicting things with the necessary weight and pacing that is required to make it grounded and not fake cartoony
Do you not understand how fundamentally different live action acting and storytelling is from cartoons?
Stop watching things made after Avengers: Endgame. Trannies and marxists have fully taken over the entertainment industry and are using it to push their agenda
Invest in vacations for your family. Read actual books (easier to filter out subversion). Go to the gym.
It's literally just a moron giving an interview where they pat themselves on the back for cutting out clear and obvious filler when making a severely abridged version of the show, that's it.
I'm not upset about the change, but it does clearly illustrate my problems with it existing at all. What is the point of remaking something just to make a shorter more condensed version of the exact same story, but in live action? Why would I want that when one of the most important aspects of the source that made it appealing was the visual freedom that animation afforded it? Why in the frick should I care that they cast more-accurate versions of the characters to parrot the same shit we've seen already but more subdued because live action is necessarily more grounded than a cartoon?
>What is the point of remaking something just to make a shorter more condensed version of the exact same story, but in live action?
There is none, except for the fact that the american animation ghetto is alive and well,
Remember when Cinemaphile used to hate Katara for being a nag?
Cinemaphile only likes Katara when they can self-insert into Zuko fricking her. Because for some reason, holy shit do tons of people on here self-insert into Zuko.
Outside that specific instance, Katara is still the least popular female character, from the main cast.
No way she is lower than Mai.
In fact, I bet she is so unpopular you forgot about her just now.
At least say Suki, or Jin.
Mai goes right for the 'Goth Girl' thing people love on here.
The only reason she gets any static, is for cucking Zuko in the comics that people pretend to have read.
I don't think anyone dislikes Jin. Her only problem is having 5 minutes of screentime.
There are a lot of people who hate Katara and Mai.
I think all the girls appeal to at least one niche.
Also, I don't think Jin count as main cast.
She isn't a main cast character, but is the waifu of a decent number of people.
I brought her up because the claim was people would have forgotten Mai.
>holy shit do tons of people on here self-insert into Zuko
For me, its Iroh
I'd much rather insert into Ty Lee tbdesu
Cinemaphile is going to be unusable when Ty Lee shows up
>holy shit do tons of people on here self-insert into Zuko.
Aang is too young and Sokka is too brown
most zutara shippers from what I've seen are women and even managed to name a star after the pairing if I am not mistaken.
that said I do recall roleplaying a few times as Zuko because other girls digged it but I am not so sure if that counts as self inserting
>make her go from being a nagging mom-type to a girl-boss who won't shut up about being independent
Oh boy, I'm so glad they did that.
I knew people would call Avatar "woke" if it came out today...
Katara was a bit naggy and acted like the mom of the group and this is coming from someone who watched it when it originally came out. It was just part of her personality.
Yeah but the show itself makes fun of Katara being naggy, both Sokka and Toph make fun of her for acting like a mom at times. Writers are aware of that character flaw.
I'm not saying it's bad, just her character. But since they're saying her character is "problematic" thus will be changed means they're gonna make her into some preachy annoying character.
She was already a preachy annoying character, the thing they're implying that they've removed is literally the thing that you morons would say is woke propaganda. Is it exhausting to be this moronic?
>I have deliberately made up an imaginary scenario in my head pre-emptively and that scenario upsets me
Follow your own rules, hypocrite troony frick.
All they care about is being angry all the time and blame it on whatever is convenient and topical. Professional aggravated victimhood
They're just gonna gut the entire Water Tribe culture to be super equal among the sexes in general when they original weren't. It's almost like theses people didn't understand that Avatar was also about showing progressive thinking overcoming tradition.
Is it? The series revolves around an impossibly old reincarnating demigod that practices equally old martial arts.
If anything, the setting is about cycles and balance. Weak avatars create hard times, hard times create strong avatars, strong avatars create good times, good times create weak avatars.
There's Paku but the way that's resolved is open to interpretation. It's not clear to me if he changes his mind because Katara got to him or because he wanted to smash Gran Gran. I can totally believe he taught Katara and that prodigy in the comics and then never trained a woman ever again.
Aang deliberately acts contrary to the advice of his previous incarnations multiple times, and gets better results than they did for it.
I don't think the show ever goes for that.
He follows Roku's advice almost 100% before the crappy comics and I think the advice near the finale is meant to show that Avatars need to make their own choices, rather than being a message about progress or going against the gran.
Change is not inherently progress because pretty much everyone wants the former. You can label it reactionary when you don't like it if you want to be a pedantic butthole but otherwise resistance/openness to change is a personality trait, not a belief. I imagine airbender avatars then to be more open minded regardless since that's their whole thing.
All of this doesn't change the fact that he is a reincarnation. I'm sure he could find any opinion if he dug deep enough.
You're not wrong, but there is absolutely a strong theme of breaking cycles throughout the series as well. Take Zuko's character for example, his entire arc has to do with him struggling to break from tradition and avoid the violent destructive cycle of his family/ancestors, and the parallels between his relationship with Aang and Sozin's relationship with Roku is extremely intentional.
Same think with Katara's character journey when she confronts her mother's killer, she consciously decides to break the cycle of violence and spare him. It's not all or nothing, and the fact that they both reinforce thematic cycles while choosing to break others is completely in line with the themes of balance as well.
That's true, but then it's more of a distinction between virtuous and vicious cycles rather than a critique of cycles as a whole.
I mean ending the avatar cycle is usually represented as a really bad thing.
Also, from the avatar's perspective, the Fire Nation's warmongering is a blink in time. Barely 100 years in a drop in the bucket of history.
I think you need to rewatch that scene, only the air avatar tells him outright that he should do "whatever it takes".
Also, I'm not about to pretend that Korra is well written. The cycle is literally broken just so it can start again and then the lore is that no matter what they do the cycle will start again with the spirit things.
The show time and time again shows that outdated thinking is typically the root of a problem and progressiveness is the right answer. It ends with Aang going against every previous incarnation telling him he has to accept that he must kill Ozai for the greater good despite his ethics of not killing and finds a way to defeat Ozai without killing. Even Korra takes that theme and goes even further with it.
>Even Korra takes that theme and goes even further with it.
Yeah, it's a shame their execution of it sucked so fricking badly for most of the series. It's not lost on me that the best season overall by far was the one focused on a group of radical extremists trying to intentionally disrupt the world's status quo and ultimately showing that while change just for the sake of it isn't an inherently noble pursuit, blind adherence to tradition is just as dangerous.
I hope her acting career tanks, and she's forced to do porn. I want to see her face splattered by 8 guys at once.
What is it with Cinemaphile that it has so much people wienersucking media corporations for free? Is it because it's Western media and Westoids were raised at birth to love their corporate overlords? But Cinemaphile is not infested with all these trannies.
>You’re a shill!
>You worship corporations!
>Also you’re trans!!
Wow look out, folks. We have an intellectual giant here
Glad for you to agree he's right.
Man you people really are devoid of self-awareness.
>OH BOY OH BOY!!! I LOVE MY GIRLBOSS SLAY KWEENS!!!!!!
at least the characters are faithful o the original
kek, Ozai is the only one that doesn't really match
>You're like my sister. Everything always tasty to her. She's a speed-eating protege, and everyone gorges her. My father says she was born hungry; he says I was lucky to be fed
>Live-Action Azula yeets Live-Action Mai as a projectile
>Mai then throws projectiles while being used as a projectile
>sees live action Azula
>she's fat
It's over
do we know who is playing mai yet
THEY HAVE THE SOURCE MATERIAL RIGHT THERE WHY WONT THEY JUST GO BY IT BIT BY BIT WHAT THE FRICK
You know, the trailer made me think they were going to be faithful, given how slavish they seemed about some of the designs. But everything I hear about how they want to mess with the story just makes me less and less interested. It's always a red flag when the people making an adaptation start making excuses for changing stuff before the show is even out.
Honestly the interview made me more interested. The changes they're making seem to be well considered, and necessary given the transition from a 20 min cartoon to 45 minute serialised live-action show. I wouldn't care if it was going to be an episode by episode recreation. I'm curious how they're going to expand on the story and put their own spin on it. The original still exists.
Is FMA/Brotherhood the only instance of a series relaunch being considered the better one?
No? What kind of moronic question is that? That's not even a comparable situation considering that was a second anime adaptation of a manga and this is a live action adaptation of an animated show.
Name 3
Hunter x Hunter 2011
JJBA 2012
James Gunn's Suicide Squad
Name 15
ur mums minge innit
>James Gunn's Suicide Squad
arguable
>cringe 2000s "girls can't fight" sexism and "I can do anything better than you" feminism
>complaining that this is just going to be ignored entirely
>twitter trannoids defending the reduction of nuance in film.
As expected from terminally online genderslop drones
The sexism in ATLA was hardly nuanced.
>an idea of feminism depicted in a 2005 cartoon that was about as subtle as a jackhammer is considered “nuanced” now because it’s become old enough that it’s no longer a “current new preachy thing” and instead is a “good old traditional thing”
>things can get worse
Yes
Yes. It was nuanced, you homosexual.
Katara not defeating Pakku was nuanced.
Sokka being a sexist because he's insecure about if he can be as strong a warrior as his father is nuanced.
The fact that it recognizes that tradition is still important and can't be broken easily is nuanced.
Modern-day writing would've had Sokka be a bumbling moron who gets his teeth knocked out by Suki before he even throws a punch, or had Katara beat Pakku and then lecture that ignorant old fool.
>Sokka being a sexist because he's insecure about if he can be as strong a warrior as his father is nuanced.
Those are two completely different issues Sokka has and neither interact with each other in a meaningful way.
Holy shit, I knew media literacy was dead but this is beyond the fricking pale.
Get some help.
The fact that two issues are related prima facie doesn't mean they were treated as such in the show.
Get help.
>Get help.
Something happened to you?
Both elements are still important parts of his journey as a character. He has a preset idea the world, including what being a warrior and a leader means at the start, which is why he is so stiff and agitated. Suki challenges that belief early in the show. It's important to show early on that Sokka is capable of learning and changing, because his intelligence is his most important asset on the team. Sokka also lightens up and starts acting less stiff after that point. The humility he gains also comes back when he meets Piendao.
It's weird that Sokka has that belief in the first place, considering that the Southern Water Tribe women helped defend their tribe the last time the Fire Nation attacked their home.
>Katara not defeating Pakku was nuanced.
Nuanced how? Obviously she wasn't gonna beat a master as a noob. You don't get bonus points for not writing something moronic.
Nuanced that Katara had to suck it up and ask to be his student despite the teacher being a grumpy old butthole.
Which modern shows would that happen in?
Blue Eye Samurai?
>Katara not defeating Pakku was nuanced.
Has the bar for nuance really fallen so low that simply having a self taught novice not beat a master counts as nuance
>Water Tribe
>sexist gender roles and arranged marriages
>sell off princess to jock she doesn't even like
>Fire Nation
>princess is in line to become Fire Lord
>elite girlboss assassin squad
Umm.... why are we supposed to care about the Siege of the North again??
colonialism bad
Azula is not next in line until Zuko quite literally shouts his treason in Ozai's face
and even then Ozai makes up a new tittle making the Fire Lord irrelevant
Azula is next in line for most of the series, including all of Book 1, because of Zuko's banishment. There's like 11 out of 61 episodes where his status is temporarily regained.
even banished he is still a prince you numbnut
Merely being the firstborn prince doesn't mean he's in line to inherit though. He was not in a position where Ozai would've named him successor over Azula.
Remember that Iroh "should've" been crowned, but he was dishonored and so his younger brother Ozai took the throne instead.
so is Iroh technically, if Ozai was on a critical state and about to die before the day of the black sun I am not sure his son would be considered as the crown prince.
Zuko is immediately reinstalled and completely pardoned after his return. Also Azula never gave of an impression of someone interested in the throne, part of it might be attributed to her having almost no chances in succession.
In real life if Ozai had kicked the bucket while Zuko was in his banishment during season 1 there definitely would have been some kind of succession crisis and possibly a civil war. Zuko was banished, but if the guy who banished him died then what's stopping him from just going back? By birthright he would be firelord so the banishment is null and void. But of course Azula would definitely have tried to assert her right and would probably have had supporters, but there would definitely be a faction who refused to entertain the idea of letting a woman succeed the throne when there's a male heir. And there might even be a pro-Iroh faction who tried to reinstate his claim.
Ozai is actually that much of a dick.
Most of Book of Water genuinely fricking blows so them changing shit and potentially cutting down on the chaff of it has me more interested than I was prior. If they were doing these big fricking alterations to Earth THEN I'd be worried and pissed, but it's genuinely easier to remove/change shit from Water and improve the base than it is to make it worse.
>Long ago in a distant land, I, Pakku...
the aquatic shaping master of waterbending, unleashed an unspeakable brainfreeze,
but a foolish southern water tribe girl wielding a fricking pouty attitude stepped forth to oppose me.
>Removing the Water Tribe's sexism
>Removing Aang's constant self sabotage to avoid his responsibility for as long as he can
How are they going to frick up Iroh, Zuko, Azula and Toph?
>How are they going to frick up Azula?
Are you blind, brother?
>Being mad that Katara is gonna be a nag who goes all girl power on the guys
>Like how she was in the original
>Like how she was in the original
But don't they say she will be different? I am actually failing to see what it is that they will do to her.
i hate live action adaptions
So I'm assuming her playing Mom with Sokka is going to be cut out.
too bad, that was her best quality
>we want the show to be less sexist
>we also want to be more like game of thrones
UHM
game of thrones did irreparable damage to media
The only way the could fix her is to not make her be into Aang.
Nah Zukogay it's never happening
How are you guys interpreting this as "Katara is more of a girlboss"?
It says things she did in the show could not make it in. She would talk about gender issues in the show all the time because it was part of her teen bratty attitude that often popped up around her brother. This article sounds like they wrote that out, not added more.
Because we're not moronic and understand that the 'roles that she played' are referring to places where her femininity had negative consequences.
Like her being an annoying team mom to everyone and moralizer.
Those are 'bad', but there is a 0% chance that modern Netflix drops any aspects of her feminist empowerment.
WIMMENZ
ah yes, a modern take for modern audiences
Live action adaptations are always bad. When will you learn?
You know its not to late for you guys to switch to Japanese Media.
You mean the Japanese who are currently censoring bikinis and using Sweetbaby as a consulting firm? That Japanese media?
What the frick are you doing on Cinemaphile bikinigay?
Hey did you hear they're removing the ticking fricking clock on the series?
https://www.cbr.com/netflix-avatar-the-last-airbender-major-plot-point-animated-series
>Kim confirmed the Netflix adaptation will change a major plot point of the animated series. "The [Sozin's] comet was their ticking clock," he said. "We removed that particular ticking clock from our show for now because we couldn't know exactly how old our actors would be for the subsequent seasons." In the original Nickelodeon show, the arrival of Sozin's Comet was an ominous portent of the rise of the Fire Nation, whose firebenders also drew power from the Comet in preparation for full-scale war and invasion.
Fricking lol.
What is even the point of the show now?
The real thing that gave urgency to the plot was Sozin's Comet. It is why Aang had to defeat the Fire Nation then, and not in a decade after he became a true master and an adult.
Are they just going to make the Fire Nation even more evil, to justify the expedited plot?
this can't be real kek
why even live action shit if you dont like it in the first plac?
Lame, but the justification makes sense. It would look very silly if they said it was coming in two years and the actors looked 5 years older. Maybe they could've tried to guess it.
Entirely sensible decision.
They fricking wrecked that in the series proper anyway.
>Whole setup is that the Fire Nation will be invincible because they get a unique boost
>Aang needs to beat Ozai before it arrives!
>Wait no, because Aang is not only a Fire Bender too, but the strongest one in terms of sheer power level, so he actually gets buffed the most from the comet
It makes sense logically, but the show clearly wasn't thinking of Aang as being buffed by the comet in Season 1
I see Cinemaphile's resident gentile population is already crawling out of the dirt to defend "new thing"