A place for those who "Trust the Fungus"

The sheer amount of shots and scenes cut from the original film is enough to make SMB look complete in comparison. Seriously, over 30 minutes, if not more, was removed. And how did they fix it? They hastily added voice-over narration and montages. It does not work.

hey don't disapoint us, M. Night Shyamalan!

I saw this the other day at the second-run theater for three bucks, in regular 2D. I heard all the bad things about the movie and how much worse it was in 3D.

Well...I liked it. Not a perfect film by any means--the story needed work and the kid playing Aang was really flat and unbelievable.

Still, not a bad film. I definitely enjoyed it a lot more than Shyamalan's past couple of flicks.

Well that's surprising. I myself did find certain qualities to be enjoyable, but I don't think I could ever find the whole to be good.

That said, it appears those who've never seen the source material (the cartoon series on Nick) are generally more forgiving of the movie's flaws. Have you seen the show? Blows the movie out of the water. If you've seen the cartoon you can understand why the movie is a piece of shit.

I've never seen The Last Airbender but after seeing the reviews I'm defenitley trying to avoid it. I don't care if the film's live action and in 3D, I'm sticking with the Cartoon.

Redstar wrote:Well that's surprising. I myself found qualities to be enjoyable, but I don't think I could ever find the the whole to be good.

That said, it appears those who've never seen the source material (the cartoon series on Nick) are generally more forgiving of the movie's flaws. Have you seen the show? Blows the movie out of the water. If you've seen the cartoon you can understand why the movie is a piece of shit.

Never watched the cartoon--I'm sure it's loads better. I liked the film on that sole basis that it's a Shyamalan film--that's my perspective. Like I said, looking at it from that angle, it's a much better film than his past couple.

Case in point--Batman Returns. Is it a good Batman film? Hell no. Is it a good Tim Burton film? Yes, and one of his best, by far. And it's still one of my favorite films.

And then look at the flip side of that. Batman & Robin? Is it a good Batman film? Hell no. Is it a good Joel Schumacher film? Hell no. Is it a good film? Hell no. There's always different forms of merit from different perspectives. And I guess that's one reason why I appreciate the SMB movie so much.


Anyways, on your initial comment on the Airbender cartoons' fans hating the movie:

Phlibbit wrote:Never watched the cartoon--I'm sure it's loads better. I liked the film on that sole basis that it's a Shyamalan film--that's my perspective. Like I said, looking at it from that angle, it's a much better film than his past couple.

The difference in quality is almost incomparable. The cartoon has won numerous awards for its animation, storytelling, direction, etc. while the movie is probably set to win a few Razzies. I highly recommend giving the show a chance if you can catch it on Nick or have Netflix. (Bit of forewarning: the first season is more episodic and the story doesn't truly pick-up until the first season two-part finale. After that point the show is amazing, though I don't mean to imply that the first season is bad, just not as good as the later seasons)

Phlibbit wrote:Case in point--Batman Returns. Is it a good Batman film? Hell no. Is it a good Tim Burton film? Yes, and one of his best, by far. And it's still one of my favorite films.

And then look at the flip side of that. Batman & Robin? Is it a good Batman film? Hell no. Is it a good Joel Schumacher film? Hell no. Is it a good film? Hell no. There's always different forms of merit from different perspectives. And I guess that's one reason why I appreciate the SMB movie so much.

Other than a few poorly-done scenes (the merging-of-the-worlds scene for example) and the obviously shortened scenes I think the SMB movie stands pretty well as a movie. As an adaptation? I think we can all agree it's not a particularly good adaptation, though considering the technological capabilities of the time, the source material, and the fact it was the first video game adaptation of its kind it's still rather admirable. To me, the movie works better if you consider it more of an adaptation of the cartoon series rather than the games.

Phlibbit wrote:Anyways, on your initial comment on the Airbender cartoons' fans hating the movie:

Yeah, that's pretty much the general consensus among Avatar fans. Perhaps the only redeeming quality everyone agrees on is that the majority of costumes and sets were pretty visually appealing.

However, while the quality of the movie and its faithfulness as an adaptation are both huge drawbacks, the main issue a lot of the fans (including myself) have with the movie is the whitewashing of the main characters and the casting discrimination. If you're not aware, in the cartoon series the Water Tribes were Inuit, the Air Nomads were Tibetan, and the Fire Nation were Japanese.

The casting calls for the movie specified a preference for white actors for the leads and ethnic minorities for the villains, which led to the movie casting the Northern Water Tribe with white actors as well as the Southern Water Tribe Katara, Sokka, and their grandmother (though for "some" reason the non-speaking extras of the SWT are actual Inuit). The Air Nomads were cast with a variety of races and ethnicities, yet Aang's actor was still white and none of the ethnic Air Nomads have speaking roles. And while the Fire Nation is still "Asian" due to the casting of Indian actors, it was also originally cast white, which would have made every nation in the movie white. They ended up booting the actor playing Zuko (Jesse McCartney) when this was called out and re-cast Patel to appease the protesters.

In the end, it's rather disconcerting and blatant that the heroes in the show were dark-skinned and the villains light-skinned, yet the movie switched this around because Shyamalan claimed it would be "ironic". It's also rather unfortunate that every named hero in the movie is white while every villain is ethnic.

And let's not forget that infamous name change. Its Aang dammit! Not Oong. (That's how they pronounce it.)

And Zuko's hair is supposed to be bald with a patch of hair top in the first season. But thet instead gave him his season 2 hair style.

Not to be rude cuz I haven't seen it yet, but this is like the Avatar play from the Ember Island Players episode, just with a bigger budget.

1upmushroom wrote:And let's not forget that infamous name change. Its Aang dammit! Not Oong. (That's how they pronounce it.)

Yeah. Shyamalan explained his reason for changing the pronunciation of the characters' name was to be more "authentic" to the "Asian" source. This after his constant argument that the characters are racially "ambiguous" and don't have any particular culture. It was also later proven that his pronunciations are just wrong because there is no standard "Asian" pronunciation and because people actually translated the characters' names from the Chinese script in the show and found the original pronunciations were correct.

1upmushroom wrote:And Zuko's hair is supposed to be bald with a patch of hair top in the first season. But thet instead gave him his season 2 hair style.

Zuko would have been awesome with his first-season top-knot, which actually has a cultural use in the second season when he cuts it off with a ceremonial knife. Just another detail they screwed up.

the fans must learn that the directors NEVER!, NEVER! follow the original idea, only follow their owns ideas

Phlibbit wrote:I saw this the other day at the second-run theater for three bucks, in regular 2D. I heard all the bad things about the movie and how much worse it was in 3D.

Well...I liked it. Not a perfect film by any means--the story needed work and the kid playing Aang was really flat and unbelievable.

Still, not a bad film. I definitely enjoyed it a lot more than Shyamalan's past couple of flicks.

Well, I watched the film... I agree with Phlibbit, I like it, but the only problem is that the characters weren't too comic than their cartoon counterparts (I only watched the cartoon two times)

And yes, also enjoyed The Happening

Depends on your tastes. I thought it was very good visually but other than that it wasn't very great, but I do have high standards for most films. For both of you I recommend watching the show. It should definitely demonstrate why the movie is not a good adaptation by any means.