The legend of Korra

[MLai]

So let's continue

Yeah this isn't as contentious a point as say, Zutara. We're not really in disagreement; just a discussion of the fine points.

Sorry but that is a terribly poor point. If we were talking Star Wars and Jedi this might be an appropriate comparison but neither is the Avatar the bender god or something nor are they trained with any codex in mind. Benders are just any normal kind of people and imagining my neighbor might be a giant jerk with super powers is possibly frightening

It's different.

(1) Bending really is tied in with their global mythology. Humans received the gift of bending from the moon goddess, from divine dragons, from sacred animals. There are myths and lore attached to each element. The spirit world is real. The avatar is very real.
Therefore, bending can never be truly demonized. You won't have ppl running around saying bending is witchcraft, for example.
Even when Amon turned against bending, he had to invoke the blessing of the spirits in order to lend himself legitimacy.

(2) Bending isn't random mutant powers associated with modern urban teenage isolation and marginalization. They're well-defined disciplines which take the form of martial arts schools, with all the trappings. That is, discipline, tradition, honour, the works. Again, positive connotations.

It all comes back to rapid industrialization of society, which eroded the cultural value of the above 2 things, that made possible the loss of respect for bending.

Because homophob people never turn away from their children when they happen to be homosexual...

But that's because that has negative cultural and religious connotations in our contemporary Western society. In Avatar-verse, the bender trait wouldn't have those negative reinforcers. You would be happy your child is a bender, even if you were jealous of benders before. Now you got your own!

Next thing you'll be telling me is Attack of the Clones is the best Star Wars film.

Now you just gave me a mental image of Mako stroking Korra's back, and talking about how sand is rough....
I feel nauseous....

[Dr.Epic]

Now you just gave me a mental image of Mako stroking Korra's back, and talking about how sand is rough....
I feel nauseous....

That must be why Mako and Bolin don't always get along! Bolin is an earthbender, and sand is technically earth! It all makes so much sense now!

[Lord Seth]

Okay, I didn't read the books - something I do plan to do just to be able to properly argue on it - but from all I can gather a poorly written love story is still way better than the thinly veiled tale of an abusive relationship turned into a heart breaking romance.

Legend of Korra wasn't a poorly written love story. Harry Potter had poorly written love stories. Legend of Korra went beyond that into what may be the single worst love triangle I have seen in my life.

Next thing you'll be telling me is Attack of the Clones is the best Star Wars film.

I'm not sure how that's even marginally relevant.

However, I stand by my statement. Twilight had a better romance than Legend of Korra.

Ignoring the fact that obviously enough worked about Twilight's romance to make it really popular whereas I rarely if ever see a more positive reaction than apathy to Legend of Korra's romance, the fact is that in Twilight, I felt like I understood why Edward and Bella were so totally into each other. There wasn't in Legend of Korra. Korra and Mako get together because the script says so. That's it. The big "I love you scene" just made me wonder "uh...why are they in love?" Maybe this would have been allowable if they hadn't thrown in the love triangle, but by doing so they make it as bad as it was. There's simply no reason for Mako to leave Asami for Korra other than, well, the script says so.

Not only that, the romance in Twilight, while not particularly impressive to me, was at least integral to the story. There was a purpose to it. What purpose did it serve in Legend of Korra other than to take time away from far more important matters?

And honestly? I'll make another statement that I'm sure will be contentious but I will stand by strongly. Edward is a better character than Mako. He's more complex, better developed, and more interesting as a love interest. Which again just goes to show how badly Korra managed to bungle every aspect of the romance.

Now you just gave me a mental image of Mako stroking Korra's back, and talking about how sand is rough....
I feel nauseous....

And yet, somehow, that infamous sand scene was still better at developing the romance in Episode II than anything I can remember in Legend of Korra.

[Kato]

Therefore, bending can never be truly demonized. You won't have ppl running around saying bending is witchcraft, for example.
Even when Amon turned against bending, he had to invoke the blessing of the spirits in order to lend himself legitimacy.

While I can't entirely disagree and while trying to not get too touchy with rl religions I wonder if people can't still disregard all the spiritual truth, especially in a more and more modern society and consider bending not a gift from the gods but... well, just a special power given to some and some not.

(2) Bending isn't random mutant powers associated with modern urban teenage isolation and marginalization. They're well-defined disciplines which take the form of martial arts schools, with all the trappings. That is, discipline, tradition, honour, the works. Again, positive connotations.

We don't know enough. Yes, we have seen Martial Art schools teaching bending but it's not the exclusive way to learn bending. We haven't seen many people learn bending apart from the main characters but quite possibly not everyone was taught in a dojo along with the discipline etc.

But that's because that has negative cultural and religious connotations in our contemporary Western society. In Avatar-verse, the bender trait wouldn't have those negative reinforcers. You would be happy your child is a bender, even if you were jealous of benders before. Now you got your own!

Still, that only boils down to the good parts. Yes, from what we were told, there never was any tendency to demonize benders before but if there was among people for some reason and we just didn't learn of it, it is still a definite fact that it would not end because people have a bender child.

Legend of Korra wasn't a poorly written love story. Harry Potter had poorly written love stories. Legend of Korra went beyond that into what may be the single worst love triangle I have seen in my life.I'm not sure how that's even marginally relevant.

Then you really haven't read enough triangle love stories.

Okay, I'll cut short on the further quote. Long story short: Korra is not a love story. But teenagers do fall in love. It wasn't the big focus of the plot because it didn't need to be. There are more important things in (Korra's) life than getting someone to bang you, which is why there wasn't much emphasis on it. Then again, I guess they could have entirely skipped it. But still, this doesn't make it a worse love story than Twilight, from all I can gather, while I'll admit people's taste in love stories differs. If you like Twilight, good for you, I guess. Though, I think we had a Twilight thread once to discuss the series.

[endoperez]

Still, that only boils down to the good parts. Yes, from what we were told, there never was any tendency to demonize benders before but if there was among people for some reason and we just didn't learn of it, it is still a definite fact that it would not end because people have a bender child.

The world only exists in what was shown to us.

Saying that "it wasn't shown but X is true" is a personal theory, or a fan-theory, but not something you can really use in a logical argument. Not, at least, without starting it off without some sort of a disclaimer.

"Obviously people don't demonize the benders because the benders drove out the demons with pitchworks during the time of the first avatar, so they are anti-demonic. We just didn't learn of it yet. "

That's also why I didn't like MLai's "Amon is Batman" thing - he presented it as an argument other should take into account when arguing the show's failings, but since it's a fan-theory and not part of the show, it shouldn't affect any arguments made for or against the show.

It is kind of a cool fan-theory, but not part of the actual show.

[MLai]

That's also why I didn't like MLai's "Amon is Batman" thing - he presented it as an argument other should take into account when arguing the show's failings, but since it's a fan-theory and not part of the show, it shouldn't affect any arguments made for or against the show.

It's not a fan-theory. It's an analogy on ONE aspect of Amon's character, i.e. a childhood traumatic experience involving his parent(s) which caused him to go on a pilgrimage and then return as an intense individual driven by one singular dark goal. I used "Batman" as an adjective.

You may be referring to the point that I shouldn't equate Amon with V or an anti-establishment rebel with a cause, because the show's writers didn't intend for him to be such. I've already answered that in previous pages.

[endoperez]

It's not a fan-theory. It's an analogy on ONE aspect of Amon's character, i.e. a childhood traumatic experience involving his parent(s) which caused him to go on a pilgrimage and then return as an intense individual driven by one singular dark goal. I used "Batman" as an adjective.

You may be referring to the point that I shouldn't equate Amon with V or an anti-establishment rebel with a cause, because the show's writers didn't intend for him to be such. I've already answered that in previous pages.

I apologize if I misinterpreted you. You compared him to Batman, and him waterbending under stress into Batman using a gun under stress, and I guess I misunderstood the implications or something.

The equating Amon with V thing is exactly what I meant.

[Kato]

The world only exists in what was shown to us.

Saying that "it wasn't shown but X is true" is a personal theory, or a fan-theory, but not something you can really use in a logical argument. Not, at least, without starting it off without some sort of a disclaimer.

In my defence, I said "if". But I guess I should have made it clearer it was merely a possibility. (I would further argue on the matter about how only things we are shown are part of the setting... even if we never saw anyone use the toilet we are free to assume they have to but this is a more general point which has little to do with my argument )

[Dr.Epic]

However, I stand by my statement. Twilight had a better romance than Legend of Korra.

They're both superficial love stories where all people involved in the romance have no reason to love each other other than superficial attraction. Difference is in Twilight, a global war with mythical creatures hundreds of years old is start because two boys develop the same puppy love crush on a vapid, shy, emotion girl. I stand by my statement.

Not only that, the romance in Twilight, while not particularly impressive to me, was at least integral to the story. There was a purpose to it. What purpose did it serve in Legend of Korra other than to take time away from far more important matters?

That's because Twilight was nothing more than a love story. That's like saying a film that is nothing more than a guy drinking a cup of coffee for two hours has the best coffee scene because it's integral to the plot. Just because something is the sole focus of the story, doesn't make it good/better than something else.

And honestly? I'll make another statement that I'm sure will be contentious but I will stand by strongly. Edward is a better character than Mako. He's more complex, better developed, and more interesting as a love interest. Which again just goes to show how badly Korra managed to bungle every aspect of the romance.And yet, somehow, that infamous sand scene was still better at developing the romance in Episode II than anything I can remember in Legend of Korra.

It's he a borderline psychopath that stalks Bella through most of the film?

[zimmerwald1915]

It's he a borderline psychopath that stalks Bella through most of the film?

Borderline psycopathy is at least a character trait, and a consistent one at that.

[Dr.Epic]

Borderline psycopathy is at least a character trait, and a consistent one at that.

Oh boy, that totally makes it a much better love story.

[John Cribati]

To be fair, the Edward/Bella and Mako/Korra had one thing in common: The relationship was decidedly less than healthy and yet was being portrayed as if it was. Of course, Mako never went as far as to be classified as an abusive partner, no matter what those fanfics may say, and he and Korra actually have some things in common (age, interest, goals, probably), and they both exist outside of their desire for romance, so... yeah, so he beats Edward by a fair margin.

As for the Equalists and whether they were right?

Maybe.

Maybe there was some s**t going down behind the scenes. But the problem was that that s**t was going down... behind the scenes.

It's like if you were in the woods and a tree falls, but you don't see it fall. Maybe it was old. Maybe lightning struck it years ago and it was dying. Maybe a logger cut it down. But you are nowhere near where the tree fell, and thus can find no evidence of what happened to make it fall. You just know that it fell. You can't say "Oh, a logger cut this tree down," or "Oh, it's just old," and say the statement was a fact.

[Math_Mage]

As for the Equalists and whether they were right?

Maybe.

Maybe there was some s**t going down behind the scenes. But the problem was that that s**t was going down... behind the scenes.

And maybe there wasn't any s*** going down behind the scenes. But since we never get any sense for what was actually going on before Amon and Tarrlok pulled the whole thing off kilter, it's irritatingly ambiguous.

[John Cribati]

And maybe there wasn't any s*** going down behind the scenes. But since we never get any sense for what was actually going on before Amon and Tarrlok pulled the whole thing off kilter, it's irritatingly ambiguous.

Which is more or less the point I make with the rest of the post. Or, at least try to, given that an "until" somehow found its way in there.

[Lord Seth]

To be fair, the Edward/Bella and Mako/Korra had one thing in common: The relationship was decidedly less than healthy and yet was being portrayed as if it was. Of course, Mako never went as far as to be classified as an abusive partner, no matter what those fanfics may say, and he and Korra actually have some things in common (age, interest, goals, probably), and they both exist outside of their desire for romance, so... yeah, so he beats Edward by a fair margin.

I'm still going to disagree with that. And here's why.

Edward has more characterization than Mako.

I seriously look at Mako, try to think of some characteristics for him, and keep drawing a blank. He's a nothing of a character. He's just...there.

For whatever problems there were with Edward's character, at least I feel he had one. Stuff like being torn between being totally into Bella but also being scared he might lose control and kill her was at least something potentially interesting, for example. And that by itself makes him more interesting than Mako.

Twilight may have had problems with its romance and, well, practically every part of the book. And Edward may have not been that great a character. But in both of those cases, there was enough of an attempt at romance for there to be so many problems with it. And there was enough of a character for Edward to have as many problems as he did.

I look at Legend of Korra and just see a big nothing in Mako and a big nothing in the romance. And to me, at least, that's worse than one that's merely poorly written.

Still, that honestly is a bit off topic. Whether or not it's better or worse than the incredibly stupid romance in Twilight, the fact remains, it's still bad as heck in Korra.

[Kato]

I look at Legend of Korra and just see a big nothing in Mako and a big nothing in the romance. And to me, at least, that's worse than one that's merely poorly written.

Still, that honestly is a bit off topic. Whether or not it's better or worse than the incredibly stupid romance in Twilight, the fact remains, it's still bad as heck in Korra.

Just two short remarks: 1) While Mako was pretty bland I can still imagine much blander characters. He was no Zuko but if he was that would have caused all kinds of other critique. (And yes, I know, there surely could have been other ways to make him a good character apart from making him a new Zuko)
2) You really think a story that has NO Message is better than a story with a message that might ruin the life of thousands of young girls? Because praising an abusive relationship is that kind of story to me.

[MLai]

Would Mako get so much heat if he didn't bounce around between two girls he barely knew? Let's say if season one ended with Mako still solidly attached to Asami, and neither Mako nor Korra mentioned anything about relationships after they both decided to drop it at that time.

[Morty]

My biggest problem with LoK remains the very fact that Amon turned out to be a bender. The other problems with the finale and the whole show made it even worse, obviously, but that revelation in itself was enough to really ruin the character for me.

[MLai]

My biggest problem with LoK remains the very fact that Amon turned out to be a bender. The other problems with the finale and the whole show made it even worse, obviously, but that revelation in itself was enough to really ruin the character for me.

Yeah, I agree with you. But that goes back to fan expectation vs writer intention. The defense is that the writers didn't intend for Amon to be legitimately sympathetic, and we're bringing in our own biases by believing in his rhetoric and latching onto him in that way.

However, my counter is the same as Math Mage's: Regardless of what the writers intended, the story and the character would have worked better if Amon is written to have some legitimacy even if his methods are extreme. Turning him into the usual villain trope robs the show of depth; the writers aren't giving their teenage demographic enough credit.

[BRC]

My biggest problem with LoK remains the very fact that Amon turned out to be a bender. The other problems with the finale and the whole show made it even worse, obviously, but that revelation in itself was enough to really ruin the character for me.

I have less problem with him being a bender, and more problem with him BENDING.

If he was a Bender who did not use his Bending, that would be perfectly in line with his character. It would be the ultimate manifestation of his philosophy.

The issue is that he's an anti-bending Bender who, considering his willingness at the end, is just subtle about using his powers, turning him from a true believer in his own cause into just another power-hungry villain.

[MLai]

The issue is that he's an anti-bending Bender who, considering his willingness at the end, is just subtle about using his powers, turning him from a true believer in his own cause into just another power-hungry villain.

Right. If you go by the canon interpretation, Amon has never been shy about using all of his hated bending to accomplish his goals.

Which begs the question, if you don't really hate bending anyways, then why didn't you start a bending revolution rather than handicap yourself with a nonbending revolution? With all the A. Firebender action in Republic City, I think Amon would have had a real shot at grabbing power if he scapegoated just Firebenders, rather than all benders. Hell even Sato would still be backing him. Ppl might have even embraced his bloodbending.

[Morty]

Yeah, I agree with you. But that goes back to fan expectation vs writer intention. The defense is that the writers didn't intend for Amon to be legitimately sympathetic, and we're bringing in our own biases by believing in his rhetoric and latching onto him in that way.

However, my counter is the same as Math Mage's: Regardless of what the writers intended, the story and the character would have worked better if Amon is written to have some legitimacy even if his methods are extreme. Turning him into the usual villain trope robs the show of depth; the writers aren't giving their teenage demographic enough credit.

Quite. The Equalists are set up to be at least somewhat sympathetic, but nothing is ever done with it and Amon turns out to be yet another power-hungry bending hypocrite.

I have less problem with him being a bender, and more problem with him BENDING.

If he was a Bender who did not use his Bending, that would be perfectly in line with his character. It would be the ultimate manifestation of his philosophy.

The issue is that he's an anti-bending Bender who, considering his willingness at the end, is just subtle about using his powers, turning him from a true believer in his own cause into just another power-hungry villain.

Fair enough. Although it can't be forgotten that the super-bloodbending powers capable of stripping someone of their bending forever without an intervention from the Avatar were really stupid. Part of the appeal of The Last Airbender was that the bending arts were internally consistent. We knew what they can and can't do; whenever something new appeared - like metalbending or bloodbending - it was given a proper grounding in the show's lore. In LoK, we get bloodbending that can be performed without a full moon, during the day, with hardly any movement and remove people's bending. And there's no explanation whatsoever as to just why Yakone and his sons are different from other bloodbenders and how Amon's de-bending trick works.

That's on top of the fact that they had a perfect opportunity to introduce a villain who's simply a badsss normal and they squandered it, because apparently you need to have at least X Zukos in bending power to matter.

[Lord Seth]

2) You really think a story that has NO Message is better than a story with a message that might ruin the life of thousands of young girls? Because praising an abusive relationship is that kind of story to me.

Just like how reading Harry Potter will make people disobey authorities and end up in prison, right? Ignoring the fact that I don't see Twilight as having any more of a "message" than Legend of Korra does, this is a claim sometimes stated but I've never seen it actually backed up.

Still, this is rather off topic.

Fair enough. Although it can't be forgotten that the super-bloodbending powers capable of stripping someone of their bending forever without an intervention from the Avatar were really stupid. Part of the appeal of The Last Airbender was that the bending arts were internally consistent. We knew what they can and can't do; whenever something new appeared - like metalbending or bloodbending - it was given a proper grounding in the show's lore. In LoK, we get bloodbending that can be performed without a full moon, during the day, with hardly any movement and remove people's bending. And there's no explanation whatsoever as to just why Yakone and his sons are different from other bloodbenders and how Amon's de-bending trick works.

It always bugged me they never explained how bloodbending was able to remove bending abilities. Even if said explanation was just the fantasy equivalent of technobabble, some kind of explanation seemed necessary.

[John Cribati]

It always bugged me they never explained how bloodbending was able to remove bending abilities. Even if said explanation was just the fantasy equivalent of technobabble, some kind of explanation seemed necessary.

Chi Blocking. From the Inside.

Really, that's all.

Amon knows Chi-Blocking.

Amon trains chi-blockers. It's never explained how exactly a chi-blocker does their thing to temporarily remove bending, but whatever it is, Amon does that same thing from the inside with bloodbending, but severing the connection instead of just blocking it.

Though to be fair, it wouldn't have been too hard to say "he's been using Bloodbending to chi-block them from the inside" at some point.

[MLai]

I particularly liked the idea that Amon really knew energybending/spiritbending, because
(1) it was a new and spiritual bending technique that (according to Amon) normals could learn, and
(2) if you're familiar with wushia (kung fu) tropes, bad guys who know "good/light/pure" kung fu techniques (such as say secret shaolin chi) are especially scary. Kind of analogous to how Superman works so well as a villain. You kind of see this trope pop up in anime media, such as the final form of Kefka.

[Morty]

Chi Blocking. From the Inside.

Really, that's all.

Amon knows Chi-Blocking.

Amon trains chi-blockers. It's never explained how exactly a chi-blocker does their thing to temporarily remove bending, but whatever it is, Amon does that same thing from the inside with bloodbending, but severing the connection instead of just blocking it.

Though to be fair, it wouldn't have been too hard to say "he's been using Bloodbending to chi-block them from the inside" at some point.

It is a reasonable guess. My problem is that it's just a guess, and we shouldn't be left to speculate about something something so important. If we'd got an explanation... I still wouldn't have liked the fact that he's a bloodbender, but it would have been better.

[John Cribati]

It is a reasonable guess. My problem is that it's just a guess, and we shouldn't be left to speculate about something something so important. If we'd got an explanation... I still wouldn't have liked the fact that he's a bloodbender, but it would have been better.

It's less of a "Reasonable guess" and more of a "Logical Conclusion," but I agree that a small explanation would have sufficed.

[Math_Mage]

I think a solid story can be developed where Amon is a power-hungry villain. Rather than making him a morally ambiguous idealist non-bender crusader, making him genuinely terrifyingly evil is still good characterization--just look at Xykon. Or *cough* break Godwin's Law. But in that case, there needs to be a clear presentation of the social forces that give Amon an audience, let alone a horde of fanatic devotees. Whether it was genuine bender-nonbender tensions (hinted at with the composition of the Council, the metalbender police forces, the bender rather than non-bender as unit of industrial labor, all of which can generate resentment among non-benders), or economic tension-***-class struggle, or whatever else, it had to be there. Amon can't just rise up out of nowhere and have a Night of Long Knives. Either way, Korra is surrounded with people who could have told or shown us that context, but don't. That's one big reason why the show feels shallow.

EDIT: Oh, right, that Latin word means something different in English. Shrug.

[Morty]

It's less of a "Reasonable guess" and more of a "Logical Conclusion," but I agree that a small explanation would have sufficed.

I don't think we get enough evidence to make it a logical conclusion rather than a well-founded guess. But I guess it depends on how you look at it.

I think a solid story can be developed where Amon is a power-hungry villain. Rather than making him a morally ambiguous idealist non-bender crusader, making him genuinely terrifyingly evil is still good characterization--just look at Xykon. Or *cough* break Godwin's Law. But in that case, there needs to be a clear presentation of the social forces that give Amon an audience, let alone a horde of fanatic devotees. Whether it was genuine bender-nonbender tensions (hinted at with the composition of the Council, the metalbender police forces, the bender rather than non-bender as unit of industrial labor, all of which can generate resentment among non-benders), or economic tension-***-class struggle, or whatever else, it had to be there. Amon can't just rise up out of nowhere and have a Night of Long Knives. Either way, Korra is surrounded with people who could have told or shown us that context, but don't. That's one big reason why the show feels shallow.

EDIT: Oh, right, that Latin word means something different in English. Shrug.

I still think he should have been a non-bender, though. A power-hungry, immoral non-bender, but a non-bender all the same.

[John Cribati]

I don't think we get enough evidence to make it a logical conclusion rather than a well-founded guess. But I guess it depends on how you look at it.

Chi-blocking centers around targeting certain parts of the body cause paralysis and/or remove the ability to bend.

This means that there are certain points of the body that are connected to the realm of bending.

Amon is stated to be a master chi-blocker.

Amon is also a Bloodbender.

Along with moving a person's body any way they please, bloodbenders have the ability to f**k around inside the body. This is stated in written canon (crushing internal organs) as well as demonstrated in-show, with both Yakone and Tarrlok knocking people unconscious through bloodbending alone.

Amon is stated to use Bloodbending to remove bending (Getting Equalized feels exactly the same same as getting bloodbent, according to Tarrlok).

There are no outward signs of damage after this process, but an inward look, via Katara, reveals that he severs the victim's connection to the elements.

So basically, when Amon removes someone's bending, he's f**king around inside the person's body to do it.

I'm pretty sure that's more than enough evidence.

In fact, Chi-blocking is the only thing other than energybending (and, well, celestial bodies, but he doesn't seem to be doing anything in the name of the stars) that has been shown to have any effect on a person's base ability to bend. If he is not energybending, then Chi-Blocking is the only other thing he could be doing.