Netflix: The Last Showbender

Avatar: The Last Airbender is my favourite show. This should come as no surprise to those who’ve Followed me on Twitter since 2011, but I feel it’s worth repeating. It’s not only beautifully-animated, but also excellently acted, composed, directed and written. It’s also one of the few animated shows to win an Emmy, lumping it with the likes of The Simpsons and Batman: The Animated Series. It’s so good that even my cousin fell in-love with it. Basically, it’s really all it’s been hyped up to be.

Which is why remaking it in live-action for Netflix is so bizarre. Ignoring that a live-action remake has already been unsuccessfully attempted, more on that later, it feels like this is both long-overdue and a terrible idea. But more so the latter.

To be clear, I’m not saying that a live-action adaptation of Avatar: The Last Airbender will be an automatic failure. I can’t because we don’t have a trailer yet. But that a successful animated series is being remade into a live-action show reeks of nonsense. And by nonsense, I mean disrespect. It’s true that any idea can work in any medium, so long as there’s an understanding of how to do it justice, but that an animated show is being remade to “gain larger appeal” is insulting; after all, why isn’t animation a valid art-form? Why must it be dwarfed by live-action? Like Renaissance art and surrealist art, animation and live-action need not compete. Both have their inherent strengths, and both are worthy of respect.

It also implies that animation can never be taken seriously, and nor should it try. Animation isn’t only this Saturday morning, Hanna-Barbera nonsense that adults who grew up on 60’s TV still think of it as, and I’d argue that it never was! Animation’s as much an integral part to the history of visual storytelling as live-action, tracing its roots to the same century. It only became known as silly, kid’s fluff because of budget limitations, ones that no longer exist. That people still view it as kid’s fodder is ignorance, plain and simple.

That’s why remaking Avatar: The Last Airbender is troubling: not only do executives not see the original series as the beautiful work it is, but they don’t even consider that it was animated for a reason. Whether it’s the fluidity of the fight choreography, the detail of the world itself, or even the comedy, Avatar: The Last Airbender being animated was no accident: the creators, Bryan Konietzko and Michael Dante DiMartino, wanted to tell an epic story about war and environmentalism, as well as Eastern philosophy, and felt that animation was the way to do it. What would a live-action remake add, aside from real sets, fully-visible actors and a budget that I don’t think Netflix can afford?

Which leads to my next issue: budget. Think about how detailed the world of Avatar: The Last Airbender is. Think about the craft put into each of the episodes. Now think of Netflix’s model of planning, and how everything’s constricted budget-wise. Will this actually convert?

It’s not like Netflix hasn’t made some excellent, original content. They have. But they’ve also produced a lot of stinkers. And part of the reason why is because not every story idea works on such a tight budget. Some require massive, Hollywood-level budgets, hence the issue at play. Ignoring union demands, graphics capabilities and raw talent, how would Avatar: The Last Airbender, which is basically the animated, TV-equivalent of Lord of the Rings, work in live-action without swelling its budget to unreasonable levels?

I wouldn’t be so reluctant, too, had the previous attempt at remaking this show, in the form of The Last Airbender, not been a disaster. Remember when it was announced that M. Night Shyamalan, the guy who, up to that point, hadn’t directed a great movie since The Sixth Sense, would be the director? Remember when the trailers came out, and people were claiming it’d “be better than Avatar? Remember when it came out, and everyone realized they were wrong? Good times!

That the show’s original brains are coming back doesn’t help, as it ignores three details about Konietzko and DiMartino as creators: one, Avatar: The Last Airbender, despite being their baby, wasn’t only the success of them. The show had eight directors and twenty-five writers, and I haven’t even mentioned Andrea Romano, who voice directed, and the dozens upon dozens of VAs, artists and sound designers. Basically, there was a semblance of people at the helm, it wasn’t a two-man venture.

Two, Konietzko and DiMartino’s attempt at a sister series, Avatar: The Legend of Korra, sucked. It wasn’t the worst show I’ve ever seen, and it had moments of brilliance, but it was no Avatar: The Last Airbender; in fact, it suffered from tonal imbalances, lazy writing, awful humour (where it existed), inconsistent art direction, weak world building and a canon ending that, to this day, leaves fans (myself included) divided. It had the same show-runners, as well as some of the same writers, but it fell flat.

And three, ignoring the above points, there’s no guarantee that a live-action reworking would work anyway. Not all artists can successfully transition from animation to live-action, look at Andrew Stanton and John Carter for proof. The mediums have different rules, and while some people are able to flip-flop between with ease (Brad Bird, Wes Anderson), that doesn’t mean everyone can. I’ve yet to be convinced that the show’s creators, who got their start in animation, are those individuals.

Maybe I’m being too pessimistic, and this’ll end up working out. It’s not as if there isn’t already a low bar set with The Last Airbender, and that being mildly better won’t be an improvement. It’s been 10 years since the original show ended, after all! And maybe Konietzko and DiMartino have learned from past efforts? Maybe?

Regardless, I’m cautiously optimistic, but anxious to be proven wrong.