An 'Airbender' Blunder? M. Night Thrashed by Critics

By John Mitchell Posted Jul 2nd 2010 02:30PM

Is 'The Last Airbender,' director M. Night Shyamalan's live-action version of the Nickelodeon cartoon 'Avatar: The Last Airbender,' the "worst movie epic ever"? Time magazine certainly thinks so and it isn't alone -- the film carries an especially rotten rating on movie review website Rotten Tomatoes, earning a paltry 9 percent fresh rating from the nation's top film critics.

This marks the latest misfire from the once lauded director of hits like 'The Sixth Sense,' 'Signs' and 'Unbreakable.'

Before its release, the film was seen as a comeback vehicle for Shyamalan, who after weak box office performances from his last two movies 'The Happening' and 'Lady in the Water,' which earned 18 and 24 percent ratings from Rotten Tomatoes, respectively, changed up his usual formula. The director is best known for supernatural thrillers set (and filmed) near his home in the suburbs of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

'Airbender,' according to its IMDB synopsis, was very different:

Air, Water, Earth, Fire. Four nations tied by destiny when the Fire Nation launches a brutal war against the others. A century has passed with no hope in sight to change the path of this destruction. Caught between combat and courage, Aang (Noah Ringer) discovers he is the lone Avatar with the power to manipulate all four elements. Aang teams with Katara (Nicola Peltz), a Waterbender, and her brother, Sokka (Jackson Rathbone), to restore balance to their war-torn world.

Despite the film's reliance on images associated with eastern and Buddhist culture, it was principally filmed in eastern Pennsylvania (like all Shyamalan movies), with some filming also done in Greenland and Vietnam. The pic is said to have cost north of $100 million to produce -- with some estimates running as high as $150 million -- and as much as $130 million to market.

For Shyamalan, a writer-director desperate to prove he can do more than PG-13 spook films, the critical trashing must be particularly hard to swallow.

In its review, Time magazine calls the film "surely the worst botch of a fantasy epic" since a 1978 animated version of 'The Lord of the Rings' and says Shyamalan's dialogue "has the stilted sagacity of a fortune-cookie dictum." The mag also responds to the controversy over Indian and Caucasian actors being cast in parts intended for Asian actors, saying, "The actors who didn't get to be in 'The Last Airbender' are like the passengers who arrived too late to catch the final flight of the Hindenburg."

But it's Roger Ebert who perhaps best sums up the reaction to the film. In his review for the Chicago Sun-Time, the beloved film critic says, "'The Last Airbender' is an agonizing experience in every category I can think of and others still waiting to be invented. The laws of chance suggest that something should have gone right. Not here." Ouch.

'Airbender' hit theaters July 1 as counterprogramming to the blockbuster third film in the 'Twilight Saga,' 'Eclipse.' Its studio, Paramount, saw an opportunity to attract young male moviegoers unlikely to be interested in whether Bella Swan (Kristen Stewart) picks Edward (Robert Pattinson) or Jacob (Taylor Lautner). Only time will tell if the reviews will hurt the film's box office, but precedent isn't on its side in the competitive summer season: The critically-slammed 'Jonah Hex,' a semi-supernatural western starring Josh Brolin and Megan Fox, earned a similarly weak 12 percent on Rotten Tomatoes and has so far grossed a disastrous $10 million since its June 18 release.

Shyamalan, a two time Oscar nominee for 'The Sixth Sense,' presently has no other films in development as a writer or director. Domestically, his seven films have grossed nearly $900 million, led by 'The Sixth Sense' and 'Signs.' The director became well known for his use of surprise twist endings after 'Sense' and 'The Village,' and has taken small roles in many of his films.

Tags: m. night shyamalan, the last airbender

Comments

(33)

Friday 02 July

By bearzfl

Highest Rank Vote down Vote up Report this

I have noticed that the critics really seem to dislike M. Night Shyamalan. This has been very apparent just after his first few films. I do not know what M. Night did but there must be something as I have not seen a director been so overly criticized even for movies that are pretty good it doesn't seem to matter, critics like to slam him regardless. Maybe they resent his quick rise to fame after Sixth Sense, or don't like him because he sometimes has roles in his movies, or maybe they don't like him because they see him as an outsider, not one of the good ole Hollywood boys. Who knows, but there seems to be animosity towards him from the critics for whatever reason.

Sunday 04 July

By Robb

Vote down Vote up Report this

They don't like him because his movies are terrible. There is no need to search for deeper meaning than that...his movies have gotten progressively more pretentious and dull and unbelievable since The Sixth Sense -- the critics are just reacting to the giant bore-fests that he keeps throwing up onto the screens, each more indulgent and wooden than the last.

Saturday 03 July

By luis q

High Rank Vote down Vote up Report this

All I can ask of all of you is just relax and think back to being a kid and how fantasy really captured your imagination and enjoy.
These critics think to much and put that stuffy prejudice attitude into there shared critiques.It's all about having fun and letting your imagination flow.It is a fun and exciting and entertaining if you just pull the stuffy blinders off.

By Mel

Getting a little sick of all these critics - It's a KIDS movie - how can it possibly appeal to an adult as much as it will to kids, and I know 2 who are dying to see it! Why don't we get kids to watch the kids movies and tell us what they think instead of the adults?

By GIA

JACKSON RATHBONE WAS BORN IN SINGAPORE AND HAS AN ASIAN LOOK TO HIM.... ALTHOUGH HIS FATHER IS MOST LIKELY WHITE. I WONDER WHAT HIS MOTHER'S NATIONALITY IS.......

By Sofia

Honestly, as an avid airbender watcher (i even purchased the first season in the collectors edition), I thought the movie was pretty damn good. In truth the cartoon is mainly east asian facial characteristics but what was great about what m. night did was that he incorporated other races. It makes the movie more believable that it's mirroring an actual world. One thing that bothered me about Ebert's review was that he claimed the movie was set in the future when in reality it's not, so that kind of tarnishes his opinion since he clearly didn't do much research on the film.
yes, it's true that the 3D effects sucked, i would like it was disappointing, but the scenery was beautiful and the lag between the action and the actual bending made me feel like the people had to reach within themselves to gain the power to do the actual bending, which seems more realistic. Furthermore, zuko's role is not one of a villain, those who have seen the show know what i'm talking about. The acting wasn't as bad as critics say either, they're kids and most kid's don't speak eloquently.
I really hope he continues doing the movies, just next time film with a 3D camera and leave the conversion at home.

Monday 05 July

By Hearts

You said it, Sofia.

By don catozza

all critics are overblown blow hards who have a elevated feeling that what they say is important and the only opinion that matters. they're critics who know how to do nothing else, do not ever listen to a critic.if you do, you're are missing out making your own choices on what are good movies and what are lousy movies.

By Nico Toscani

The animated series this movie is based on is pure, derivative, garbage to begin with. All it did was "borrow" themes from every conceivable Japanese anime series imaginable, then water them down to make them palatable for American kids.

Guess I didn't need to say "conceivable" AND "imaginable". OOPS!

Are they mad? have been a fan of the animation series and the movie was more than a fulfillment of my expectations. Shyalaman kicked butt.

By Philip

I saw the movie with my children. The reviews this movie has received are from people who obviously never watched the cartoon and have no idea of the characters or the story. It is a great story of epic proportions. It is hard for someone who never watched the cartoon to understand and appreciate this movie. These kind of reviews are malicious and an insult to thousands of fans of Avatar. One critic has written that this is a fantasy without any touch to reality. How many movies do they make in Hollywood with any touch to reality, fantasy or not ? The race of the characters do not matter since the 4 nations represent the whole world. The director has done his best to introduce the characters and story in the short frame of a movie. The critics are obviously irritated by seeing too many Indians in this one ( though they are all bad guys). The appropriate question should be whether the actor was chosen on his acting abilities. The most important character is Zuko and I have to admit that Dev Patel is too weak for this role.
Generally, this movie does not deserve these kind of reviews and it is not fair to the public.

Sunday 11 July

By Mark

I was so unimpressed by this film, i turned it off and put on the cartoon, there is way to much missing to even continue the 2nd book and the names were not pronounced correct and blah blah, killed my favorite cartoon series.

Page 2 of 2