Shyamalan's 'The Last Airbender'

Basq

720p Trailer



I've enjoyed everything of Shyamalan's bar his most recent efforts - "Lady In The Water" (slow and tired) and "The Happening" (one of the worst films I've seen the last few years) - but this doesn't look particularly great, bar some great looking effects in the trailer.

But the effects could play worthwhile in 3D.. very hard to know yet though!

I suppose at least it looks like a real departure for him..!

Duggy747

I bet the twist is that they're all dead......................or they're all on drugs. :pac:

Gerty

This is my guilty pleasure, even though the plot is probably fairly obvious.

I think its my inner child.

Nevyn

Can't wait, kids can't wait either.

johnny_ultimate

Anyone else tempted to go around calling this Avatar to annoy people

Trailer suggests the potential for some visually interesting action sequences alright, but honestly The Happening has given me such a bad impression of Shyamalan (basically confirming concerns I had with his earlier films) that I find it hard to take him seriously. Hopefully this will be decent, but of all the directors working in Hollywood today I'd put Shyamalan up there with Michael Bay and Brett Ratner as directors to be avoided! Let us see if a change of pace can change that for M. Night.

Oh, and was a little concerned this might've been the 'post-production' 3D that seems to be polluting a lot of recent releases, and wikipedia confirms those fears I'm very cynical about 3D, and while Avatar did at least show that it can be used to enhance visual storytelling (but not actual storytelling ), I'm not a fan of adding 3D to every blockbuster - it should really be designed that way in the first place.

niallon

Apart from The Happening I've enjoyed all of Shyamalan's work (and yes I realise how much of a minority that puts me in) but I have to say I really don't trust him to be able to handle a large scale production such as this. That being said, it'll be interesting to see what he does with someone else's story seeing as how The Happening proves his writing smarts have all but disappeared!

ztoical

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Anyone else tempted to go around calling this Avatar to annoy people

I keep calling it Avatar ....enjoyed the animated series alot and know a couple of the animators who worked so have been taking with them about the film and it's been really hard to stop saying Avatar.

Interested to see the film as Shyamalan is one of those directors that does seem more comfortable working on his own stuff rather then adapting. Wasn't happy he wrote the screenplay as worried he may take it too far away from the original material, granted that can also be a good thing as if it's just like the show then why make the movie at all but Shyamalan's more recent films have been a bit blah so my faith in the project is shaky.

Full_Circle_81

I want it to be good. I'm almost willing it to be good with every fibre of my being. Its such a big movie though, even if he (sadly, but necessarily) gets rid of all the sub-plots, I just cant see him reigning it all in. Maybe if someone else had written it, and he simply had directorial duties. Hopefully I'll be proven wrong when the film opens.

It does however, look visually spectacular, and if nothing else I can go and enjoy some lovely eye candy when it opens. I'll always have the box sets to fall back on if the film ends up scarring me in some fashion :P

bnt

Full_Circle_81 wrote: »

I want it to be good.

The first reviews are in, and it's not looking good. Ebert hates it:

"The Last Airbender" is an agonizing experience in every category I can think of and others still waiting to be invented.

krudler

bnt wrote: »

The first reviews are in, and it's not looking good. Ebert hates it:

Ouch, there are some fairly vicious reviews there, its probably not a movie critcs are going to like anyway, but yikes.

norrie rugger

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Anyone else tempted to go around calling this Avatar to annoy people

That is all it is in my head.
Every time I see the name, all I can think is "Oh Avatar, crap wait Cameron stole that name, for his Blockbuster"

AnonoBoy

norrie rugger wrote: »

That is all it is in my head.
Every time I see the name, all I can think is "Oh Avatar, crap wait Cameron stole that name, for his Blockbuster"

Except Cameron had it in development for years before the animation didn't he?

Anyways - the Onion AV Club review said the 3D effects are shoddy and obviously wedged in and they only serve to make it look worse.

It seems like it's a case of Avoid! Avoid! Avoid!

Duggy747

Yeesh, the reviews are really tearing this filming apart. There not even pointing out any redeeming features!

If this fails at the box office then hopefully it'll be the death of converting films into 3D in post-production.

Shyamalan's career on big budget movies could be over too.

johnny_ultimate

They seriously need to stop giving Shyamalan money. Sounds like another disaster - a shame, but alas probably a predictable one. If ever there was a fluke director, he is one. It's remarkable to see such a descent in quality from film to film.

Also, I feel obliged to post this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O1PK4qYzNkI

Basq

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Also, I feel obliged to post this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O1PK4qYzNkI

I can go one better..

TheIrishGrover

I'm a big fan of the show (And, yes, I do think of it as avatar). My main concern from the moment I heard that the film was greenlit was that it would be dumbed down to fit into 1:45 film.
The cartoon was amazing in its continuity and character development for a kid's show (It's aimed at a younger audience than, say, Batman: The animated Series). The characters and the story evolve over the entire, fully serialised 60-odd episodes.

Ironically I think this so-called "3D" movie is going to be much more two dimensional that the cartoon it's based on

Renn

Another stellar review

johnny_ultimate

Best review I've seen so far:
here

Reviewer might be being a wee bit sarcastic though.

Richard Dower

He's a dreadful diector!....he had two good movies, Unbreakable and Sixth Sense....everything else was utter sh*t!!

Sad Professor

Richard Dower wrote: »

He's a dreadful diector!....he had two good movies, Unbreakable and Sixth Sense....everything else was utter sh*t!!

A bit harsh. I thought Signs was good as well.

Basq

Yep, 'Signs' is given too harsh a criticism.

johnny_ultimate

A rough estimate (in percentages) of how good M. Night Shyamalan films have been so far:

Sixth Sense / Unbreakable - starting good, I'll be generous and say these fellows are worthy of 80%.

Signs - Interesting ideas, and some good moments such as that awesome bit where you see the alien on the TV. **** twist though. We'll say 70%.

The Village - Things start going awry. Literally half a good film, followed by a highly predictable and irritating payoff that you could probably guess from the trailer. 50%.

Lady in the Water - I haven't seen it, but I believe it's garbage. I'll give it the benefit of the doubt and say 33%.

The Happening - "What? No!". 1%, and I'm being kind.

Avatar The Last Airbender - can we safely assume we're into minus figures here?

A rough diagram I found online:

While I understand some of the hatred directed at Shyamalan, (the inevitable plot twist, clichéd characters) he's far from the worst. Looking at his CV and he has 2 superb films, 1 great film, 2 good films, 1 poor film and 1 truly abysmal film with another soon to join it. Not that bad a batting average to be fair, though with each new film his work seems to be getting sloppier and sloppier.

Perhaps like Guy Ritchie, Shyamalan should consider directing a script by someone other than himself.

Shryke

Too bad it's no good. I'll watch it at some point but I have no time, money or inclination toward the cinema lately.
I'll always give credit for Unbreakable and Signs, especially the former. A rare example of something being done just right.

pixelburp

Given how his quality level has dropped so spectacularly, I can't help wondering if there has been some external influence on the decline of Shymalan's work. When you consider the merits and quality of his first two movies, it's extraordinary to think his fall from grace has been so dramatic. By external influence by the way, I mean a co-writer, producer or mentor that ironed out the kinks in his work. Someone helping him with his first movies who is no longer around (or Shymalan jettisoned in a sudden burst of ego)

Magic Eight Ball

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

They seriously need to stop giving Shyamalan money. Sounds like another disaster - a shame, but alas probably a predictable one. If ever there was a fluke director, he is one. It's remarkable to see such a descent in quality from film to film.

I see your Shyamalan and raise you one Richard Kelly!

Basq

Magic Eight Ball wrote: »

I see your Shyamalan and raise you one Richard Kelly!

Agreed!

Magic Eight Ball

Magic Eight Ball wrote: »

I see your Shyamalan and raise you one Richard Kelly!

I actually like Kelly though recognise that he is far from a great director, the studio saved Donnie Darko, Kelly's cut is dreadful and manages to remove all hint of mystery. Southland Tales seems to be the very definition of marmite cinema, I for one love it but most despise it. As for the Box, I havent watched it yet but did drunkenly stumble into HMV and buy it the day it was released. Still havent had the courage to put it in the PS3 for fear of it putting me of drunken purchasing.

indough

i actually prefer southland tales to donnie darko but i do understand why most would think differently...no doubt it does have some very badly implemented parts but i liked the story - it borrowed heavily from 'flow my tears, the policeman said' which is one of my favourite PKD stories

really didnt think anything of the box though

Sad Professor

I wouldn't consider Shyamalan a fluke director. He made three very good to excellent films in a row. That's no fluke. But two things changed: 1) all the acclaim and Spielberg comparisons went to his head, and 2) his fanboys turned on him. As a result of the latter, there's been a lot of retrospective revaluation of Shyamalan, leading many people to declare that most/all of his films sucked, which is very unfair. I'd argue he was always overrated and that The Sixth Sense was never the mind blowing, cinematic revolution that many people thought it was. It was just a very good film. No director deserves the kind of worship Shyamalan got for it.

johnny_ultimate

One of the central problems is that Shyamalan became one of the few 'name' directors in Hollywood. Not every director has the luxury of having their name announced in the trailer. Since Signs & The Village, his films have come with "From visionary director M. Night Shyamalan" plastered all over the marketing material. His name is out there, there's only a handful of major studio directors whose name would be marketed in that way.

This increased presence has alas aligned with the steady decrease in quality. If a trailer proclaims "from Christopher Nolan" (although alas even then it's probably from the director of the Dark Knight) I'll get excited, if it's from Shyamalan I for one will be instantly weary.

"A film by M. Night Shyamalan" is a brand, just not an appealing one these days. His films are no longer special enough to warrant the label. Maybe in his early career it was, but for me it's frustrating seeing his name given prominence on posters when far more talented people are relegated to small print.

mikhail

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

A rough estimate (in percentages) of how good M. Night Shyamalan films have been so far:

Sixth Sense / Unbreakable - starting good, I'll be generous and say these fellows are worthy of 80%.

Signs - Interesting ideas, and some good moments such as that awesome bit where you see the alien on the TV. **** twist though. We'll say 70%.

The Village - Things start going awry. Literally half a good film, followed by a highly predictable and irritating payoff that you could probably guess from the trailer. 50%.

Lady in the Water - I haven't seen it, but I believe it's garbage. I'll give it the benefit of the doubt and say 33%.

The Happening - "What? No!". 1%, and I'm being kind.

Avatar The Last Airbender - can we safely assume we're into minus figures here?

A rough diagram I found online:

Or, to use a slightly more impersonal source:

I really wanted this to be good, because the original creators of the show seemed to be so heavily involved in it, but I had a sickening feeling it was going to be terrible - worse still when I saw it would be in 3D.

If anything it should be kept to just the normal animated origins - but with improved graphics - definitely no 3D! It adds nothing!

Duggy747

Holy crap, 9% on RottenTomatoes?

He is gonna get one hell of an ass kicking for spending all that money on it! (€150 million.........yikes!!)

I'm pretty sure after this he'll be reduced to low-key films anymore. He's obviously becoming a financial liability to the companies. His trademark name has now been completely soiled and worthless.

Richard Dower

^ who the hell gave him 150 million???????

Aw is it going to be in 3d only?

everdead.ie

Is this a trilogy or is the whole thing being cramed into 130 minutes?

Mickeroo

everdead.ie wrote: »

Is this a trilogy or is the whole thing being cramed into 130 minutes?

It's just season 1 crammed into 130 minutes. Word is it's shockingly bad, and it was converted to 3D not filmed that way so the visuals are supposedly ruined a la clash of the titans.

everdead.ie

Mickeroo wrote: »

It's just season 1 crammed into 130 minutes. Word is it's shockingly bad, and it was converted to 3D not filmed that way so the visuals are supposedly ruined a la clash of the titans.

Clash of the titans 3D was terrible they just tacked on a few things like the title in 3D Glad it's just season1 in 130 minutes if it was the lot it would be a joke

The whole conversion to 3D route is a joke, most directors are against it simply because they shot the film to be in honest to goodness 2D. There is a case for conversion for certain films, the new Nic Cage film will be converted to 3D after the fact but the film is being shot in such that the conversion should work.

phasers

8% on RT, ouch!

I've never understood the love for Shyamalan, I didn't even like the sixth sense that much...

adding a tweest to every film does not make you a good director.

Richard Dower

http://uk.eonline.com/uberblog/b188883_eclipse_eclipses_100_mil_last_airbender.html

Hmmm...it might make it's budget back.

elekid

This makes me sad, I really wanted to like it but it sounds terrible from the reviews. It looks like a dry action film with none of the charm or humour of the series. The film adaption should have been something really special so I wish he'd just left it alone :mad:

blue_steel

Seems I'm in the minority here but I loved Signs and The Village (as well as his first two of course). I also enjoyed the Lady in the Water. I find with Shyamalan's movies characterisation might be flat and pacing slow but its all about tone. He creates a slightly skewed version of the real world that functions perfected within it's own rules. That's the best description I can come up with. If you look at a scene from Unbreakable out of context it seems over-acted and absurd but somehow within the film as a whole it works. Now maybe he got lucky five times but I'd rather believe that this type of magical realism is what he is aiming for.

Ps: ok The Happening was one of the worst films ever made and this yoke doesn't look much better

Mark Hamill

Something that might be interesting to people wondering how Shyamalan could go from the Sixth Sense to crapping out four ****e ones: look at number five on this list on cracked.com.(basically it seems that the story to the Sixth Sense is very similar to an episode of "Are You Afraid of the Dark?", it could be that Shyamalans biggest film is not entirely an original creation of his)

constitutionus

Mickeroo wrote: »

It's just season 1 crammed into 130 minutes. Word is it's shockingly bad, and it was converted to 3D not filmed that way so the visuals are supposedly ruined a la clash of the titans.

i wouldnt be surprised.

i went to see shrek this week and despite the ad for airbender being in 3d i honestly couldnt tell what they'd done. my best guess was some of the embers from the fire casting and a bit of splash effect from the water manipulations.

i really liked clash of the titans for what it was ande expect airbender to be the same.

and like clash i'll be going to see this in the format it was MEANT to be seen in.

2d.

TheIrishGrover

Mickeroo

constitutionus wrote: »

i wouldnt be surprised.

i went to see shrek this week and despite the ad for airbender being in 3d i honestly couldnt tell what they'd done. my best guess was some of the embers from the fire casting and a bit of splash effect from the water manipulations.

i really liked clash of the titans for what it was ande expect airbender to be the same.

and like clash i'll be going to see this in the format it was MEANT to be seen in.

2d.

I think Clash of the Titans was fine for what it was too, wish I had seen it in 2D though, after that I decided to only watch 3D movies that were filmed that way and stick to 2D with everthing else. It's just a ridiculous gimmick for taking an extra couple of euro from your pocket.

Sad Professor

Shyamalan seems to think there's going to be a trilogy and has already started writing the second one.

http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1643066/20100706/story.jhtml

Sad Professor

Sad Professor wrote: »

Shyamalan seems to think there's going to be a trilogy and has already started writing the second one.

http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1643066/20100706/story.jhtml

There is going to be a second film, it's doing steady box office and is well on its way to making it's budget back before it even opens internationally. The biggest question over the sequel is whether or not Shyamalan will be back, he has taken an awful beating in the last week with not only the worst reviews of his life but actors pulling out of his next film and his name being removed from the title of a series fo films he is writing/producing.

Mickeroo

Deleted User wrote: »

There is going to be a second film, it's doing steady box office and is well on its way to making it's budget back before it even opens internationally. The biggest question over the sequel is whether or not Shyamalan will be back, he has taken an awful beating in the last week with not only the worst reviews of his life but actors pulling out of his next film and his name being removed from the title of a series fo films he is writing/producing.

Wouldn't mind them finishing the trilogy if they get rid of him tbh, there's great potential in the series, if parts 2 and 3 turn out good it might right the crimes of this one........one can dream anyway