The Disappointing Reinvention of Netflix’s Avatar: The Last Airbender

Five months ago, the live-action adaption of the beloved One Piece manga series was released on Netflix. Given the streaming giant’s previous iterations of anime series and Hollywood’s history of adapting the medium to live-action, I was sceptical given the whitewashing controversy of Ghost in the Shell and the failure and cancellation of Netflix’s Cowboy Bebop. But to my surprise, One Piece proved me wrong. The live-action adaptation was an exciting, adventurous series with ambitious storytelling and likeable characters. It doesn’t rely on new audiences to have prior knowledge of the source material; it was made for all fans entering to explore its vast stories and characters. I was convinced that One Piece finally beat the live-action curse until I saw Avatar: The Last Airbender. 

The live-action curse is real and back, folks! I take back everything I said five months ago. I am a whole new person now, and Avatar: The Last Airbender is the latest victim of the animated series to live-action adaptation pipeline. In my One Piece article, I mentioned that any project works successfully when there is a good collaborative effort between the original and new showrunners. When the writers understand and appreciate the characters and the lore behind a series, there is no doubt that they will create a successful series.

The 2005 Avatar: The Last Airbender animated series by Michael Dante DiMartino and Bryan Konietzko is one of the most beloved and successful animated series. The series follows a young Airbender named Aang who must master the four elements and defeat the Fire Lord to save the world from destruction. Along with his friends, Sokka and Katara, a Waterbender herself, with their animal friends Appa, the flying bison, and Momo, the winged lemur, they embark on many adventures and master the three remaining elements to defeat their enemies. 

When Netflix announced the Avatar: The Last Airbender live-action series, the fans of the animated series were sceptical of how this was going to play out. Avatar: The Last Airbender fans were all too familiar with the colossal mess of M. Night Shyamalan’s 2010 live-action adaptation. The problem with that adaptation is that it didn’t follow the source material. From casting the wrong actors for roles like Zuko and Katara to completely changing the lore from the source material, the movie should have never happened. Also, the movie mispronounced Aang, Sokka and Iroh’s names. It is unclear why the names were mispronounced but it is hard to ignore them when used repeatedly throughout the movie. 

So, Avatar: The Last Airbender fans weren’t far off when they voiced concerns after DiMartino and Konietzko left the Netflix series over creative differences. A blog post by DiMartino, which has now been removed, states, “Netflix said that it was committed to honouring our vision for this retelling and supporting us in creating the series. And we expressed how excited we were for the opportunity to be at the helm. Unfortunately, things didn’t go as we had hoped.” This isn’t the first time a show has had creative differences or moved forward with a different creative team.

Also, the 2010’s Percy Jackson & the Olympians: The Lightning Thief faced many issues, and Rick Riordan shared that he stepped away from the movie after seeing the script for his “own peace of mind.” After DiMartino and Konietzko exited the series that should have been the first sign that the new series would have some issues because what transpired weeks before the release date was confirmation of a storm brewing. 

In an interview with Entertainment Weekly, the cast members discussed what makes the live-action adaptation different from the animation series. Kiawentiio, who plays Katara in the adaptation, says that Sokka’s, played by Ian Ousley, sexism is removed from the series altogether. Fans from the original series were not happy about this at all. Sokka’s sexism is part of his character development. His constant criticism of Katara’s chores and his rudeness towards the women around him, especially meeting the Kyoshi Warriors and understanding that women have an integral role in society to fight and protect their community. When these elements are removed entirely to change the criticisms of the past, how does Sokka’s character grow and change from his mistakes? Sokka’s sexism is an important plot point in the original series. The decision to remove an important part of Sokka’s characteristics misses the entire point of his character development.

Furthermore, I never imagined that Katara would be another victim of her toned-down character development saga. One of the biggest criticisms of Katara in the original series is her temper and stubbornness. None of these traits are part of Katara’s characteristics in the adaptation. Katara is a multifaceted character. Her ‘flawed’ characteristics are a misunderstanding. Katara is an outspoken and gifted Waterbender who stands up for what she believes in. Instead, her quick wit and arguments with Sokka and Aang, played by Gordon Cormier, are replaced with gentle and kind dialogue. She’s more responsible compared to the fun and joyful version in the animated series. 

Also, the dynamic between Katara and Sokka is very obvious in the animated series. Sokka makes sexist remarks about Katara and her role in the tribe. Katara, in return, puts Sokka in his place by poking fun at him, while also keeping the Gaang in order. In the live-action adaptation, Katara follows Sokka’s leadership without making fun of his lack of battle experience, which is something that she constantly jokes about in the series. 

By removing or toning down the previous criticisms of the animated series, Sokka and Katara’s characteristics have no growth. The process of a character arc is for them to grow, transform and unlearn negative behaviours or traits in the story. Sokka’s meeting with the Kyoshi Warriors brings a dramatic change to his perception of a woman’s role in community and battle. His attitude towards Katara’s role as the outspoken sister with masterful Waterbending skills changes his views, too. But by removing these character flaws in the live-action adaptation, there isn’t room for Sokka to unlearn his sexist behaviour. Well, his character arc no longer exists because the writers have removed one of the important plot points.

What makes these characters’ developments integral to the plot points is missing. Sokka and Katara have no flaws. The reinvention of Sokka and Katara is a misrepresentation of their storylines because the showrunners took more interest in rethinking the previous criticisms and pandering to a new generation of audiences. 

Along with these criticisms of Sokka and Katara’s character development, Avatar: The Last Airbender had issues with its narrative structure. Several important plot points felt rushed and characters weren’t fully fleshed out in the series. Since the live-action adaptation had to fit a 20-episode worth of plot into an eight-episode series, there were so many character developments and chemistry that didn’t grow because the show didn’t have time to explore it. The friendship between Sokka, Katara and Aang is what makes the animated series so special. But because of the muddled dialogue and squeezing all of the important plot details in this series, it strips away the most essential elements of the animated series. 

For years, Netflix has tried to expand its content by taking intellectual properties that have already established the universe, with deep lore and complex characters. The reason why Netflix recreates these properties is not to curate new stories but to create nostalgia and fan service by condensing them down into a limited timeframe leaving plot holes. The streamer might be successful with its original content such as Stranger Things and Orange Is The New Black and reality series like Love is Blind, but the company makes no effort to put in work for their live-action adaptations. 

An example of this problem is Katara and Aang learning how to waterbend. In the animated series, they meet many other characters who teach them how to master the element. These episodes aren’t fillers but important plot points that warn them of the dangers of extreme bending and teach valuable lessons along the way. Audiences watch Katara and Aang learn waterbending by themselves and from the characters they meet, especially in the Northern Water Tribe. However, in the live-action series, there are barely any story developments and conflicts that show these characters the dangers of extreme bending. By the time Prince Zuko (Dallas Liu) and the Fire Nation arrive, Aang has not mastered Waterbending. 

If the purpose of reinventing a series is to strip away the essential parts of the narrative structure, why adapt this beloved series? The whole purpose of adapting a live-action series is not to tone down every element of what makes the story special. It is to find new ways to keep old and new audiences entertained while staying true to its source material. Avatar: The Last Airbender has a huge fanbase. I expected writers to understand the lore and the characters quite well. But there are far too many problems that are hard to ignore, which left me frustrated and annoyed. It’s like the showrunners were throwing crumbs at me while leaving the best parts of the beloved series!

The animated series to live-action series must be left alone, and I mean this wholeheartedly because I made the mistake of believing that the curse was beaten. Avatar: The Last Airbender could have had compelling plot points with enriching, multifaceted characters but everything is just washed down to rush to the climactic ending of the first series by eliminating the rest of the story. It’s a disappointing reinvention that doesn’t understand why neglecting important elements harms the uniqueness of the animated series.