The guy in charge of Netflix’s live-action Avatar addresses losing the original creators
The creators of Avatar: The Last Airbender left the Netflix remake in 2020
Aux News Netflix
Netflix, as part of its ongoing campaign to create new versions of already-popular things that it can own outright, has spent the last several years developing a live-action remake of Avatar: The Last Airbender. And, as we get closer to the release of the thing on February 22, it’s looking to be a bit more faithful to the original cartoon than the M. Night Shyamalan movie version from 2010. But it won’t be faithful enough for Bryan Konietzko and Michael Dante DiMartino, the original creators of the animated series, who left the Netflix project back in 2020 after determining that it would never be what they had “envisioned or intended to make.”
Writer Albert Kim is the remake’s showrunner, and in an interview with Entertainment Weekly, he finally addressed the departure of Avatar: The Last Airbender’s original creators. He said you’d “have to be an idiot” to not be “intimidated” by the idea of making Avatar without the guys who created Avatar, but he also said that his first reaction to the opportunity was “Hell yeah!” followed quickly by “Holy shit! Do I really want to do this? Is there a way to improve upon the original?” He evidently decided “yes,” or at least “maybe,” because he is making a new version of Avatar: The Last Airbender, so he clearly thinks there’s something to be gained from it.
We don’t know exactly what inspired Konietzko and DiMartino to leave, which is to say that we don’t know what’s so different about this version from the other version, but Kim did mention to Entertainment Weekly that the live-action show starts in a different way from the animated one and that it was a “conscious decision to show people this is not the animated series.” He also said they chose to “unravel storylines and remix them in a new way to make sense for serialized drama,” which could be the sort of thing that might rub someone the wrong way. We’ll know how it goes in February when the show premieres on Netflix.
37 Comments
Live action remakes of cartoons are garbage. Fantastical happenings always work better in animation. This is movin in the wrong direction. Instead of live action remakes, we need animated shows instead of live action for stuff like the Wheel of Time show. Would be 1 mil times better if it was animated like Castlevania style or sum’.
Wheel of Time got surprisingly better in its second season, as did the Foundation series. The latter, interestingly, got better the further it wandered from the original story
I watched both seasons and it got worse. They just took a huge, steaming shit on major plot points and character aspects. I’m done.
Foundation was good though. Didn’t really have fantastical elements like spell casting that would be better in animation.
I remember the first X-Men movie and it was like “oh I guess nobody can fly because $$$”
1) Storm flew2) MOST of the X-Men don’t fly
This is an excellent example.
it wasn’t money, it was those making it thinking that people wont understand how people have powers without an origin story to let them know they learned how to fly, unless it is Superman, and you can see that case with WonderWoman who learned how to fly in the 80’s in the 2nd film…
Toad flew.
For a little while.
Completely agree. Animation is its own art form, I’m so f**king tired of people trying to “legitimize” a story by making it live-action. Especially as you said when there is anything magical happening. Animation is so good at magic! Or anything fantastical! You can do literally anything in animation. And sure many live action properties are swimming in CGI these days, but doesn’t that just prove the point? Do we really need to see Paul Rudd stick out like a sore thumb in super busy, supposedly “realistic” CGI environments when you can create the same story in animation and have it not only look cohesive but be stylized and beautiful? I will remain baffled by the lack of respect animation gets unto my dying breath. One of the greatest art forms ever invented
“ And sure many live action properties are swimming in CGI these days, but doesn’t that just prove the point?”
Yes!
Clowns think bc a project has “real people” it somehow makes it more “believable”. Despte the fact that everything happening on screen is planned, just like any animation. It’s all fake. One Piece is more unbelievable with “real people” than the animation. They had to use CGI which is a form of animation ironically. And it’s great that you mention Paul Rudd. The concept art for Quantumania is gorgeous. Imagine if the movie was drawn and animated in that style. Instead, we get some ugly washed-out CGI Spy Kids bullshit lol.
Like I said elsewhere, I love animation (I think my avatar here is evidence of that).
For better or worse, live-action performances do legitimize a story because at the very least it means you’ve actually convinced people to spend money on people to perform, and now you have actual people who can physically promote the story. For example, Aquaman was pretty much a joke cartoon character, but then they cast Jason Momoa and he promoted it. Suddenly Aquaman is cool, giving the character and the story legitimization.
Preach. It’s bc idiots and unimaginative types think bc there are “real people” involved that somehow makes it more serious, “believable” or worthy of praise despite the fact that movies with real people are just as fake as any animation out here. Bc the new ‘One Piece’ live action bullshit got so many viewers that are obsessed to the point that they don’t care about quality; people think live action anime is a good idea all the sudden.That shit was hot garbage. Luffy powers look uncanny, any life and vibrancy the character had is stifled under overacting and ironically CGI. Animation is the superior medium when it’s about fantastical stuff and no one can change my mind. Heck in most instances animation is the more superior medium period.
The ‘Tale of Princess Kaguya’ is better than most live action shit out there.
Completely agree. Animation being stuck in the “kid’s stuff that we need to ‘legitimize’ by making it live action” world in America is so sad, as the rest of the world proves that animation is a fantastic medium for all kinds of stories for adults.
Much as I love animation, and I know most live-action cartoon/anime adaptations suck, I think saying all of them are garbage is a bit harsh.
Dare I say the fantastical happenings in Peter Jackson’s LotR trilogy are superior to the animated versions. And in some (many?) ways the live-action Rurouni Kenshin movies are superior to most of the animes.
It’s just not as clear cut as you make it sound.
The Hobbit cartoon from the ‘70’s was the best. If LOTR was all in that, it would be much better.
Kenshin? Better animated.
The 4 episode Rurouni Kenshin: Trust and Betrayal was better.
The other series and movies.. I’m not so sure.
Tbf, in neither case was the animated version the original (nor One Piece for that matter).
Does that really matter? Many anime are only made if the manga is popular enough to guarantee an audience. And likewise, many live-action adaptations are of the anime if the anime was popular enough to guarantee an audience.
Similarly, many American cartoon adaptations are only made if the comic books are popular enough to guarantee an audience. And live-action versions have some or more basis in the cartoons.
To say “Live action remakes of cartoons are garbage. Fantastical happenings always work better in animation.” as the OP does is simply not as clear cut as that. Sometimes I wish it were. Would make it easier to narrow down what to watch next.
Yeah, I more or less agree with you; was just making the tangential point that a lot of so called “anime adaptations” aren’t really anyway, even if they take most of their cues from a previous animated version.Outside of the OP’s point about realising fantastical visuals (which I kind of disagree with anyway, as quality animation takes more work and money than most people realise), a given story isn’t really inherently geared towards animation as a medium.
Is there a way to improve upon the original?
Hot take(?): maybe this is the wrong question to be asking.
The cartoon came out almost 20 years ago. Just make a good live-action version of it, with enjoyable characters and a solid story, and old audiences will at least like it while new audiences won’t be comparing it to the cartoon and like it too (see One Piece).
Clearly One Piece has set a standard for Netflix’s live-action anime adaptations going forward. And I don’t think “how can we improve the original?” was the question they were asking while making it, so you’re probably right. I think they were more concerned with asking how they could condense the first few arcs, and still communicate it well. As I see it, it’s best to focus on storytelling economy. Besides that, just let the source material speak for itself.
“Improving” is a really arrogant and misguided way to look at it, but at the same time when you work on something you deserve to make it a part of your own, and if it’s an adaptation, it should become about how you saw and understood and related to the material—otherwise you’re just an automaton making a soulless copy, more content for the content mill.
I understand where you’re coming from and on one hand agree.
On the other hand, pretty sure Shyamalan tried to make this his own and look what happened. While the One Piece adaptations (both anime and live-action) have both been pretty true to the original manga author’s vision, not so much about the showrunners vision, and they’re both successful.
I think good story and characters come first. Point-of-view second.
Never meant to imply that it means it’s guaranteed to be good. M. Night was clearly the wrong person for the job.
I agree that “improving” is misguided. People act like this whole run and go wasn’t disproven by a much harder series to adapt, one piece. All the fans there said it was pointless, dont make it, I will never see it, this will fail cause you cant make it wacky and serious enough and so on. People ate crow and still cry anytime a new cartoon or game is asked to be changed to live action that it must change and adapt or why bother. But Having it in another medium even if its the same actually does work. I know plenty of non anime fans who wont touch one piece due to the length or that its too kiddy looking. Come live action and they love it. They even hopped on to watch the series. Having several ways to consume a thing isnt bad…its just more ways to see the same thing from a different perspective. Sure changing it can work but lets do it right first. We can have plenty of seasons after the first 3 books are told where we get into more plotlines. One piece live action can get filler eps. We dont have to be so stuck on doing things like in the past. AKA expecting all live action adaptations to be bad.
For fairness, here is the full quote: “You’d have to be an idiot not to be intimidated a little bit,” he says. “My first reaction after ‘Hell yeah!’ was ‘Holy s—-! Do I really want to do this? Is there a way to improve upon the original?’ Whenever you tackle something that’s already beloved by millions of fans, you have to ask yourself those questions.”He doesn’t say anywhere what the answer is, or if he thinks he can improve it.
he is making a new version of Avatar: The Last Airbender, so he clearly thinks there’s something to be gained from it.Money, dear boy.
Not just money, we’re talking Netflix money!
Based on Netflix’s track record recently, they haven’t earned the benefit of the doubt from me just yet. However, first impressions are strong. I’m really mixed on this, and really nervous. I want to be optimistic, but Bryan and Mike’s departure is not nothing.
You know that big red N on the top left corner of Netflix Original thumbnails? I love that. Lets me know which ones to avoid.
You know Netflix puts those on any show it gets distribution rights for?Outside the US, Batman stuff is classed as “Netflix Original”, not to mention anything Korean.
Noooo? Really? Ya don’t say.
Can we all agree this is not “live-action” and just a different (and imo worse) approach to animation? The still at the top of the article is ~95% CGI. It’s so silly to pretend this is live-action, the very conversation feels like theater.
So long as they don’t have earthbenders making a half hour worth of exaggerated movements to float a few pebbles.
This reminds me to go take my fiber supplements.
Honestly I was happy when I learned this lost the original creatures because they announced shortly after that they were going to start working on more animated Avatar projects for Nick and I’d rather see animated spin-offs then a live action remake.