Avatar: The Last Airbender - live-action remake series (not the movie)

[Errorname]

easier[/I] to adapt something that already exists in the visual medium.

I don't think this holds up if you actually look at historical precedent. They're adapting an audiovisual story, which means you have baggage for everything. People get strong senses for how characters in novels are supposed to be from just the descriptions and their imaginations, but it's so much worse when you have a clear precedent for how a character is supposed to look and move and sound.

Faithful adaptations are not all that difficult to pull off and the only way this Avatar show will fail is if they pull a Cowboy Bebop and throw the existing story into the trash and opt to tell their own. Or if the viewership isn't high enough so it get cancelled after one season, I guess.

A faithful adaptation of a TV show into another TV show is very difficult for reasons that should be obvious, you kind of do need to tell your own story in this case because you need to justify why the remake even exists.

I'm insulting the writing ability of 99% of the hacks Netflix hires to **** out these lazy live action adaptations every few months.

You were kind of insulting the entire concept of adaptation. Like, that's a very reasonable interpretation of what you wrote.

It's not like this show is going to fail because it's being written by incompetent bunglers who are going to botch an easy job. They might be incompetent bunglers, I don't know and I don't particularly care, but the job is very difficult.

[Rynjin]

I


You were kind of insulting the entire concept of adaptation. Like, that's a very reasonable interpretation of what you wrote.

It's not like this show is going to fail because it's being written by incompetent bunglers who are going to botch an easy job. They might be incompetent bunglers, I don't know and I don't particularly care, but the job is very difficult.

I have slowly soured more and more on the concept specifically of adapting anime to live action. I always thought it was dumb, now I think it's even dumber.

I'll also admit that with the deluge of absolute irredeemable trash adaptations we've gotten recently I'm kinda soured on the whole idea at all. Even the ones that are kinda okay do something to completely ruin it by the end of a season (eg. Wheel of Time).

I've been told enough times that "adaptations aren't for fans of the original" that I've started to wonder who, exactly they ARE for then? People who like watered down versions of an original work?

[Batcathat]

I've been told enough times that "adaptations aren't for fans of the original" that I've started to wonder who, exactly they ARE for then? People who like watered down versions of an original work?

I think there's no single answer to that question (and some adaptations are definitely aimed at fans of the original, whether or not they are successful) but they can certainly help people discover something they otherwise wouldn't have. For example, I've never seen/read the One Piece anime/manga and it's quite likely that I never will, but I really enjoyed the live action adaptation of it and I think I'm far from the only one.

And yes, a show that's just a watered down version of the original Avatar show would be quite boring, but it's entirely possible (even if I won't take a guess at how probable) to tell a different (whether slightly or very) version of the story that's equally enjoyable.

[EggKookoo]

I've been told enough times that "adaptations aren't for fans of the original" that I've started to wonder who, exactly they ARE for then? People who like watered down versions of an original work?

They're for the people writing the remakes and for the current owners of the IP.

[Errorname]

I've been told enough times that "adaptations aren't for fans of the original" that I've started to wonder who, exactly they ARE for then? People who like watered down versions of an original work?

This is a question anyone making an adaptation should be asking themselves, and I don't think enough of the current crop are coming up with good answers.

[Trixie_One]

I'll also admit that with the deluge of absolute irredeemable trash adaptations we've gotten recently I'm kinda soured on the whole idea at all. Even the ones that are kinda okay do something to completely ruin it by the end of a season (eg. Wheel of Time).

Did you watch One Piece? Best episode that one had was the last of the season.

As for what it is for... well, it was significantly abridged so it's apparently been a good intro without asking people to dive into an excessive number episodes and/or chapters to get into it. There's a novelty factor of seeing stuff done in a different medium. Some of the casting is amazing. Shanks, Zeff, Mihawk, and Buggy especially. While they don't get all the super emotional bits totally right, getting to see Sanji's in live action managed to make it even more horrible which is pretty impressive. They do some nice punching up too for the medium like the inventive ways of showing the bounty posters.

And that's coming from someone who had previously thought that adapting any anime to live action was genuinely impossible to do with out messing it up and was just a dang stupid, pointless idea in general.

[Ramza00]

I've been told enough times that "adaptations aren't for fans of the original" that I've started to wonder who, exactly they ARE for then? People who like watered down versions of an original work?

It is because George RR Martin’s agent, after Book 4 came out the same year, contacted the agent of the writter guy who did Troy in 2005, and thus we got HBO’s Games of Thrones.

I repeat Troy which is a silly movie and does not care about source material.

Same logic with X-Men (2000) where Fox liked the director for the Usual Suspects, and that man hated comic books. But how it was solved was someone finding some issues of 1994 and 1995 X-Men where Rogue and Bobby go on a road trip and Rogue is dressing all sexy and Bobby Drake did not care. (the subtext is Rogue is mad about Gambit and Bobby was doing his 90s plot line where Emma Frost made interior decorator jokes about Bobby has a secret.) Well those 1994 issues convinced the director he could do an X-Men and make it adult, serious, and dark. It also is why Rogue’s introduction point of view character is Bobby Drake.

=====

So much of Hollywood does not care about the source material, it is about having content, and people connections, followed by faking caring about the content in a people pleasing way that allows more people connections. Then money, then can you film the movie as fast as possible, and even if it’s not as fast as possible, do not do overtime or get stuck over budget.

The business is like McDonalds you do not make the best sandwich or the cheapest one, but a consistent product you can do fast and predictable.

[Errorname]

It is because George RR Martin’s agent, after Book 4 came out the same year, contacted the agent of the writter guy who did Troy in 2005, and thus we got HBO’s Games of Thrones.

I think this is wrong? I'm tired and sick so I don't feel like checking, but the story I heard is that D&D wanted to adapt the Red Wedding and approached Martin's people about the idea.

Same logic with X-Men (2000) where Fox liked the director for the Usual Suspects, and that man hated comic books. But how it was solved was someone finding some issues of 1994 and 1995 X-Men where Rogue and Bobby go on a road trip and Rogue is dressing all sexy and Bobby Drake did not care. (the subtext is Rogue is mad about Gambit and Bobby was doing his 90s plot line where Emma Frost made interior decorator jokes about Bobby has a secret.) Well those 1994 issues convinced the director he could do an X-Men and make it adult, serious, and dark. It also is why Rogue’s introduction point of view character is Bobby Drake.

I hate defending the Fox X-Men movies, most of them are bad and a lot of the most important creative leads were bad people even when the movies were passable, but I do think they are interesting adaptations and I think their relationship with the source material is more complex than just hate.

[LaZodiac]

I saw an article that says that they're toning down Saka's sexism which...

Look; yes it is a good idea to look at stuff like sexism and bigotry and be like "we don't want this, it's a bad thing".

But Saka's entire character arc, the entire purpose of his character, is "I am a ****ty person with ****ty beliefs who learns to become better". Toning down his (already perfectly fine for TV) sexism genuinely reduces the impact of his arc!

... but ALSO I've seen people saying this is bad for the "sexism is good actually" reason, so I'm conflicted.

[Rynjin]

I'm with you on that. The entire idea of Sokka is that he's a good person who was taught some very bad things and most importantly is repeatedly proven wrong about them and doesn't get to come into his own as a competent warrior until he gets over those hangups.

It's an important lesson for a character like that...and the intended audience. That underestimating or putting down people because of their gender (or any other prejudicial factor) just makes you look like a fool.

[Keltest]

I'm with you on that. The entire idea of Sokka is that he's a good person who was taught some very bad things and most importantly is repeatedly proven wrong about them and doesn't get to come into his own as a competent warrior until he gets over those hangups.

It's an important lesson for a character like that...and the intended audience. That underestimating or putting down people because of their gender (or any other prejudicial factor) just makes you look like a fool.

Indeed. I would say its also important for Katara's character arc in confronting the people who do believe or enforce those bad things from the position of the victim, and recognizing that it doesn't make them an irredeemably bad person either.

[Ramza00]

one of the thing about Sokka’s sexism (something I am of mixed feelings if one is to write a new story, which one does)

is it … it is totally an obsessional wish done by an older brother with anxiety and he is trying to flee his own feelings of fear of doom, and via throwing himself into a roll … a mask, a wig into a box … he can think in his anxious way get out of the anxiety, but this is bad compart-mental-ization^{words should be shorter, that is one word}

Sokka was horrible to his sister, a literal bully. I am glad that the Kyoshi Warriors showed Sokka a different way. Likewise Sokka found community via others. Got to meet his dad again, plan the invasion of the fire nation, improvised on the fly, etc.

=====

all these growth moments born out of anxiety, but if you are cutting those growth moments then you had to town down the sexism for that plot point goes nowhere and is just kind of ****y

[Zevox]

I saw an article that says that they're toning down Saka's sexism which...

Look; yes it is a good idea to look at stuff like sexism and bigotry and be like "we don't want this, it's a bad thing".

But Saka's entire character arc, the entire purpose of his character, is "I am a ****ty person with ****ty beliefs who learns to become better". Toning down his (already perfectly fine for TV) sexism genuinely reduces the impact of his arc!

... but ALSO I've seen people saying this is bad for the "sexism is good actually" reason, so I'm conflicted.

I'm not; you're correct in your first reaction, I feel. No small part of Sokka's character arc is overcoming that, especially in Book 1. It's part of the basis of entire episodes, including notably where his relationship with Suki starts. And as you mentioned, it was hardly beyond the pale to begin with, he just kind of had a bog-standard young boy mindset on the matter, it's not like it was something he was doing to an intense degree in all of his scenes or anything. Even toning it down a little will negatively affect his story, almost guaranteed - and as Keltest said, possibly also Katara's, given standing up to that sort of thing was a major part of her arc in Book 1, and started right from the beginning because of Sokka having that kind of attitude.

[Ionathus]

I saw an article that says that they're toning down Saka's sexism which...

Look; yes it is a good idea to look at stuff like sexism and bigotry and be like "we don't want this, it's a bad thing".

But Saka's entire character arc, the entire purpose of his character, is "I am a ****ty person with ****ty beliefs who learns to become better". Toning down his (already perfectly fine for TV) sexism genuinely reduces the impact of his arc!

... but ALSO I've seen people saying this is bad for the "sexism is good actually" reason, so I'm conflicted.

Hot take: Sokka's sexism isn't really integral to the show. It can be excised with very little impact. And I certainly wouldn't call it his "entire character arc."

He's insufferably sexist for three and a half episodes in the first season, then the Kyoshi Warriors straight-up beat the sexism out of him, and he drops that character trait so fast I always forget it exists until I do a rewatch from the beginning. The speed with which he stops being sexist is a running joke amongst my friends.

All of Sokka's other character traits (his feelings of uselessness, his fear of losing loved ones, his obsession with being the Big Strong Warrior Guy with no fears, his wits, his badass normalcy) function perfectly well without the (overt) sexism. I'm all for characters grappling with their flaws and growing past/through them, but Sokka has plenty of other flaws that are more interesting for him to work with.

[Trixie_One]

I think this is wrong? I'm tired and sick so I don't feel like checking, but the story I heard is that D&D wanted to adapt the Red Wedding and approached Martin's people about the idea.

Spot on, you can really tell now how much they were purely there to get to the Red Wedding. There's stuff in season 1 especially written by D&D that are genuine improvements on the book. If the show had been cancelled after season 3, or if they'd not got all possessive and done the sensible thing of stepping away to hand it to someone else for season 4, they'd still be both industry and fandom darlings, likely still be attached to Star Wars, and maybe even have that what if the civil war went the other way show on the air.

[LaZodiac]

I'm not; you're correct in your first reaction, I feel. No small part of Sokka's character arc is overcoming that, especially in Book 1. It's part of the basis of entire episodes, including notably where his relationship with Suki starts. And as you mentioned, it was hardly beyond the pale to begin with, he just kind of had a bog-standard young boy mindset on the matter, it's not like it was something he was doing to an intense degree in all of his scenes or anything. Even toning it down a little will negatively affect his story, almost guaranteed - and as Keltest said, possibly also Katara's, given standing up to that sort of thing was a major part of her arc in Book 1, and started right from the beginning because of Sokka having that kind of attitude.

To be clear, I am conflicted because I think too much about things some times.

Hot take: Sokka's sexism isn't really integral to the show. It can be excised with very little impact. And I certainly wouldn't call it his "entire character arc."

He's insufferably sexist for three and a half episodes in the first season, then the Kyoshi Warriors straight-up beat the sexism out of him, and he drops that character trait so fast I always forget it exists until I do a rewatch from the beginning. The speed with which he stops being sexist is a running joke amongst my friends.

All of Sokka's other character traits (his feelings of uselessness, his fear of losing loved ones, his obsession with being the Big Strong Warrior Guy with no fears, his wits, his badass normalcy) function perfectly well without the (overt) sexism. I'm all for characters grappling with their flaws and growing past/through them, but Sokka has plenty of other flaws that are more interesting for him to work with.

Ehh... all of his character stuff still relates back to that upbringing that made him like that. And as has been said above, his "only a Man can Do This" rhetoric is meant to hint towards what Katara will get once they hit the Southern water tribe, and reflect on how she has to deal with that sexist disrespect despite being an incredibly skilled water-bender.

[Errorname]

It's not indefensible to remove Sokka's early sexism, it's a quickly resolved plotline (but they are clearly keeping the episodes in which it was relevant), but their stated reasoning is quite bad and does not strike me as encouraging about their creative instincts.

[Prime32]

The alarming thing should be any suggestion that the writers don't understand why Sokka acts so macho before meeting the Kyoshi Warriors, just dismissing it as some dumb gag. Because "no one is perfect", "war and parental abandonment make even good people do bad things" and "wisdom gathered from a single pool is stale" are all major themes of the series.

It could also result in "Suki teaches Sokka a valuable lesson" turning into "Suki beats up Sokka for no reason".

[Ionathus]

The alarming thing should be any suggestion that the writers don't understand why Sokka acts so macho before meeting the Kyoshi Warriors, just dismissing it as some dumb gag. Because "no one is perfect", "war and parental abandonment make even good people do bad things" and "wisdom gathered from a single pool is stale" are all major themes of the series.

It could also result in "Suki teaches Sokka a valuable lesson" turning into "Suki beats up Sokka for no reason".

Agreed with all of this. Sokka’s early bluster and sexism make a lot of sense in the context of his character: being left behind to be the only defender of the entire Southern Water Tribe will do weird things to a teenage boy’s sense of responsibility and protective instinct.

I don’t *need* it to be there, and I would be fine if it was present in a less intense way. Sokka’s sexism in the first 4 episodes is SO intense that it’s kind of hard to believe how quickly he changes. I think if they made him less gleeful about it, or turned it into an “all business” kind of thing where he’s not being mean, he just thinks he’s doing what men should do…I think that would make the change of heart more believable

[CarpeGuitarrem]

I definitely remember Saph being taken aback during their Let's Watch by the early Sokka sexism because it stands out that much. I think there's plenty of room in the "overcoming toxic masculinity" arc without that. You could easily write an arc where Sokka is afraid of looking or acting "girly" and then comes to a healthier relationship with himself, without having him go into the full abrasive sexism.

We'll see. They might do that, they might fumble it completely.

[Errorname]

I definitely remember Saph being taken aback during their Let's Watch by the early Sokka sexism because it stands out that much. I think there's plenty of room in the "overcoming toxic masculinity" arc without that. You could easily write an arc where Sokka is afraid of looking or acting "girly" and then comes to a healthier relationship with himself, without having him go into the full abrasive sexism.

I think it's a reasonable choice. That being said, I still find the stated justification kind of concerning.

[Saph]

I definitely remember Saph being taken aback during their Let's Watch by the early Sokka sexism because it stands out that much. I think there's plenty of room in the "overcoming toxic masculinity" arc without that. You could easily write an arc where Sokka is afraid of looking or acting "girly" and then comes to a healthier relationship with himself, without having him go into the full abrasive sexism.

I think what I found most jarring was less Sokka's sexism (which is fairly believable for a teenage boy) but more the way in which the story tended to treat his mistakes so much more harshly than his sisters's. When Sokka did something wrong he usually got beaten up for it; when Katara did something wrong she usually got away with no consequences.

[AvatarVecna]

If ember island players isn't just the netflix gaang watching the movie, we riot.

[DragonEyeSeeker]

I think this is wrong? I'm tired and sick so I don't feel like checking, but the story I heard is that D&D wanted to adapt the Red Wedding and approached Martin's people about the idea.

I saw an interview once where it was said Martin had a meeting with D&D about the latter making a GoT show. Martin was convinced that D&D could pull it off after they were able to discuss who Jon Snow's parents were (specifically R+L=J).

[Ramza00]

I saw an interview once where it was said Martin had a meeting with D&D about the latter making a GoT show. Martin was convinced that D&D could pull it off after they were able to discuss who Jon Snow's parents were (specifically R+L=J).

I dropped it for it was a segue and Errorname said they were not feeling well.

Spoiler: spoiler blocks if one wants to continue it, Game of Thrones

Show

Regardless claims I can actually make quickly^{with evidence links}in reverse order

• is that HBO picked up the show in January 2007,
• that Showtime and HBO were pitched in March 2006,
• that Martin and D&D met for a restaurant in winter of 2006 a few weeks before the March 2006 HBO meeting and D&D knew R+L=J, which delighted Martin
• Martin in other interviews said he would not sell movie or tv show rights if they do not know the shibboleth (this may be a lie on Martins part for he was broke until the year 2000 when the second book dropped, the second book being a success allowed Martin to retire from his other jobs such as teaching and tv and movie film writing. Jobs he loved but he was frustrated being forced to write to the medium and other peoples wants.)
• D. B. Weiss was the second of the two D&Ds to read the books after his friend David Benioff recommend them to him
• D. B. Weiss thought one can pitch this as a tv show after reading the Red Wedding in Book 3. His logic is that he could promise things to a tv network with at least a 3 season run , for the books are a road map a template and one is not creating a new thing from scratch but instead delivering a half made thing already. Thus the execs for a tv network can feel they are getting a consistent product already and thus their money feels more like a sure thing.
• David Benioff fell in love with the books after the 9th chapter. Bran Chapter 2 where Jamie utters the things I do for love line. This would be the 9th chapter after 1 prologue and 8 normal chapters.
• David Benioff started reading the books when there were 4 books, he ordered a boxed set.
• For the people who are unfamiliar Book 4 came out in the United Kingdom in Oct 2005, and the US in November 2005.
• Thus D&D were not familiar with the books for less than 6 months when they pitched HBO in March 2006, and they met George RR Martin at the restaurant several weeks before (it sounds like a January meeting but I can not prove that for they use vague words like weeks). It is likely the two of them had only been familiar with the books for 60 maybe 90 days when they met Martin for the first time and answered R+L=J.

all of those above things are factual claims which I can provide interview links for. (I am assuming the interview claims are accurate, something I am not sure of since people are unreliable narrators.)

I would go further and state things from memory I can not provide interview links off hand. Those are 1) Martins agent talked to Benioff’s agent , and Benioff’s agent is the inciting incident that got Benioff to read the 4 books and 2) D&D before meeting Martin were excited and nervous fans. They were afraid before the winter meeting and they did some studying via internet forums before the 5 hour meeting. The internet forums is where they learned R+L=J. I have read interviews with 1 and 2 before but I can not procure them at this time.

Yet it does not matter. This goal for after Errorname said they were not feeling alright I realised I could annoy and trigger people and that was not my intent. People put themselves into their passions, when they become fans. And defending other people’s honor becomes also about defending their own honor. (Zuko from Avatar gif goes here, also Sokka.)

I fundamentally believe^faith D&D had no ill will with the franchise, and they earnestly spent a decade trying to breathe life into it and it was their baby. They acted with honor.

I also believe^opinion D&D did not get some important themes about the franchise, snide comments about themes are for book reports from a season 3 interview, and so on. Also D&D were burned out after spending over 10 years of their life with this project and they got sloppy / inelegant due to the exhaustion. But this second part is opinion less so than faith, and honor is about where opinion and faith intersect. Thus questioning these things will trigger many fans and can activated inverted vibes with individuals but also the group aura of conversation.

=====

So yeah D&D are authentic fans I do not question that. Yet I will repeat the earlier statement (paraphrase not literal) all productions have midwives that are divided and not perfect-elegant. Yet they are perfect-as in completed for they came into this world. (word play here for the word perfect has multiple meanings. Love and Duty and the Divide Choice.)

so as you can see DragonEyeSeeker I dropped that segue for a reason. I hope everyone here can disagree or agree in a fun manner 🤞🙂

[DragonEyeSeeker]

I am a little worried that the Avatar show will not have enough room to breathe. They are reportedly filming 8 episodes. Even if each live action episode is twice as long as each animated show, we will still be losing 4 episodes worth of content. A lot of people assume the live action show will combine 2 animated episodes together but I am not entirely convinced. I feel like they are more likely to take the best animated episodes and adapt & expand on each of those to form a cohesive 8 episode story. Which means we will miss out on so much weird, fun, side stuff that was contained in episodes that will not make the cut. This will likely be even more noticeable in seasons 2 and 3, IMO.

Spoiler: GoT & D&D

Show

I dropped it for it was a segue and Errorname said they were not feeling well.

Spoiler: spoiler blocks if one wants to continue it, Game of Thrones

Show

Regardless claims I can actually make quickly^{with evidence links}in reverse order

• is that HBO picked up the show in January 2007,
• that Showtime and HBO were pitched in March 2006,
• that Martin and D&D met for a restaurant in winter of 2006 a few weeks before the March 2006 HBO meeting and D&D knew R+L=J, which delighted Martin
• Martin in other interviews said he would not sell movie or tv show rights if they do not know the shibboleth (this may be a lie on Martins part for he was broke until the year 2000 when the second book dropped, the second book being a success allowed Martin to retire from his other jobs such as teaching and tv and movie film writing. Jobs he loved but he was frustrated being forced to write to the medium and other peoples wants.)
• D. B. Weiss was the second of the two D&Ds to read the books after his friend David Benioff recommend them to him
• D. B. Weiss thought one can pitch this as a tv show after reading the Red Wedding in Book 3. His logic is that he could promise things to a tv network with at least a 3 season run , for the books are a road map a template and one is not creating a new thing from scratch but instead delivering a half made thing already. Thus the execs for a tv network can feel they are getting a consistent product already and thus their money feels more like a sure thing.
• David Benioff fell in love with the books after the 9th chapter. Bran Chapter 2 where Jamie utters the things I do for love line. This would be the 9th chapter after 1 prologue and 8 normal chapters.
• David Benioff started reading the books when there were 4 books, he ordered a boxed set.
• For the people who are unfamiliar Book 4 came out in the United Kingdom in Oct 2005, and the US in November 2005.
• Thus D&D were not familiar with the books for less than 6 months when they pitched HBO in March 2006, and they met George RR Martin at the restaurant several weeks before (it sounds like a January meeting but I can not prove that for they use vague words like weeks). It is likely the two of them had only been familiar with the books for 60 maybe 90 days when they met Martin for the first time and answered R+L=J.

all of those above things are factual claims which I can provide interview links for. (I am assuming the interview claims are accurate, something I am not sure of since people are unreliable narrators.)

I would go further and state things from memory I can not provide interview links off hand. Those are 1) Martins agent talked to Benioff’s agent , and Benioff’s agent is the inciting incident that got Benioff to read the 4 books and 2) D&D before meeting Martin were excited and nervous fans. They were afraid before the winter meeting and they did some studying via internet forums before the 5 hour meeting. The internet forums is where they learned R+L=J. I have read interviews with 1 and 2 before but I can not procure them at this time.

Yet it does not matter. This goal for after Errorname said they were not feeling alright I realised I could annoy and trigger people and that was not my intent. People put themselves into their passions, when they become fans. And defending other people’s honor becomes also about defending their own honor. (Zuko from Avatar gif goes here, also Sokka.)

I fundamentally believe^faith D&D had no ill will with the franchise, and they earnestly spent a decade trying to breathe life into it and it was their baby. They acted with honor.

I also believe^opinion D&D did not get some important themes about the franchise, snide comments about themes are for book reports from a season 3 interview, and so on. Also D&D were burned out after spending over 10 years of their life with this project and they got sloppy / inelegant due to the exhaustion. But this second part is opinion less so than faith, and honor is about where opinion and faith intersect. Thus questioning these things will trigger many fans and can activated inverted vibes with individuals but also the group aura of conversation.

=====

So yeah D&D are authentic fans I do not question that. Yet I will repeat the earlier statement (paraphrase not literal) all productions have midwives that are divided and not perfect-elegant. Yet they are perfect-as in completed for they came into this world. (word play here for the word perfect has multiple meanings. Love and Duty and the Divide Choice.)

so as you can see DragonEyeSeeker I dropped that segue for a reason. I hope everyone here can disagree or agree in a fun manner 🤞🙂

That is really well researched!

I did not realize they had only started reading the books a few months before they pitched the idea. It explains a lot of the design, production and narrative choices they made early on, and how that affected the overall story later in the show.

[Ionathus]

I am a little worried that the Avatar show will not have enough room to breathe. They are reportedly filming 8 episodes. Even if each live action episode is twice as long as each animated show, we will still be losing 4 episodes worth of content. A lot of people assume the live action show will combine 2 animated episodes together but I am not entirely convinced. I feel like they are more likely to take the best animated episodes and adapt & expand on each of those to form a cohesive 8 episode story. Which means we will miss out on so much weird, fun, side stuff that was contained in episodes that will not make the cut. This will likely be even more noticeable in seasons 2 and 3, IMO.

Listen, I love ATLA like almost no other show. It's an absolute masterpiece.

There is FOR SURE four episodes' worth of fluff in season 1

[Mordar]

Why would you trust someone to tell a good version of a story when they're too talentless to come up with their own and all they do is adapt someone else's work anyway?

Mostly because they are different skillsets. An expert at making television (or movie, or comic or video games) is far better positioned to adapt a written story into their specific medium. They can't create a new story as well as the author, but that isn't their job. And live-action is sufficiently different than animated to count, just as a comic book is sufficiently different than a novel or short story.

After all, you wouldn't say Rembrandt was a talentless hack because he only adapted things he saw into a painting.

I also can't think of a SINGLE good adaptation where the creator was involved at one point and then left due to creative differences. You have any counterexamples for me?

I think that happened to Stephen King a couple of times, at least insofar as his contributions were not included.

You've already proven you're kinda dumb when you decide to take a series built around the strengths of animated unreality and try to smush it into a medium that is fundamentally not built to work that way.

I think someone doing that is absolutely opening themselves up for failure and criticism, especially a priori, but I have been around long enough to see something like Lord of the Rings or Dune adapted into something that has extremely positive reception.

I've been told enough times that "adaptations aren't for fans of the original" that I've started to wonder who, exactly they ARE for then? People who like watered down versions of an original work?

While I think the answer is "people who aren't fans yet", I agree that too many times this has been taken as "let's change things important to the development of the existing fandom because we believe we know better" instead of "let's consider how to move this into a broader audience while holding to the things that made people willing to spend money on it in the first place". Respect the original fandom, but adapt to a new medium/marketplace/generation. Note to James Gunn: This doesn't mean making Jonathan Kent a suicidal obfuscationist, or Superman emo.

- M

[Ortho]

I am a little worried that the Avatar show will not have enough room to breathe. They are reportedly filming 8 episodes. Even if each live action episode is twice as long as each animated show, we will still be losing 4 episodes worth of content. A lot of people assume the live action show will combine 2 animated episodes together but I am not entirely convinced. I feel like they are more likely to take the best animated episodes and adapt & expand on each of those to form a cohesive 8 episode story. Which means we will miss out on so much weird, fun, side stuff that was contained in episodes that will not make the cut. This will likely be even more noticeable in seasons 2 and 3, IMO.

Well, we can easily cut The Great Divide and The Fortuneteller without anything of value being lost, but that still leaves 2 episodes of content to shrink down....

[Batcathat]

Counting the number of episodes that "fit" only seem relevant if they're basically doing a shot for shot remake, which they hopefully aren't (since that would be just like watching the original, with a slightly different look). Don't get me wrong, it's certainly possible that they'll try to fit too much content into too little time (though at least that's generally better than the opposite, in my experience) but I don't think we'll know that until we actually watch it.