Legend of Korra Book 3: Change |OT| SCHEDULEBENDING

Status
Not open for further replies.
So I thought it was a good ending, it was emotional for me. I don't like seeing Korra in that much pain, and the air bender ceremony was emotional as well. I enjoyed season 3 but I don't think it has redeemed the Legend of Korra in my eyes. Overall I don't feel that Korra's journey has added much to the Avatar universe. They really needed to focus on one storyline and carry it through three or four seasons. They throw in a lot of stuff and it doesn't really go anywhere. ATLA was really focused on one goal and it was a traditional journey, the focus towards the goal guided the seemingly extraneous elements. In Korra it feel like it works the other way around. Overall I am interested in season 4, just to see the ending to the journey and then I want them to give this world a break. Return to it when there is an important story to tell.

It seems to me like Amon could have been the villain throughout the seasons and we could have still reached the same ending to season 3. The renewal of the air nation, the political intrigues between the nations and within the nations, and the industrialization of the Avatar world are the only storylines from Korra that felt relevant to me.
 
The spirit world bleeding over into the physical world is kind of a huge deal, but they haven't done anything with it yet
 
Veelk said:
While it being a kids show probably played into why Nick accepted the way it went down, I have issue with those that say there is no reason why Ozai should have been allowed to live. Because he's a human being. Not a very good one, sure, but people presume that the killing of another human being is something they can just...do and go out for lunch afterwards, as long as the person your depriving of life is a 'bad guy'. It doesn't work that way. There are ways to desensitize yourself to murder of another human being, but none of them are a process you want to go through. One of the reasons TLA is as powerful as it is is that it makes a stand for the value of ALL human life, and what the act of taking it means not just to the person who you take it from, but the person who takes it away.

And I don't like the implication that the show is lesser, or that it would have 'obviously' had Ozai killed if it were for adults, as if that's obviously the right answer that is inaccessible merely due to the audience TLA was designed for. True, if TLA was allowed to get away with it, it'd probably have more deaths in the show, but sparing Ozai is one thing I like to believe would have been kept in, because that, if nothing else, is the core tenant of the show and it seems to me a far more mature one than going down the easy path of dehumanizing a person so you can kill him without qualms.
Click to expand...

Fantastic post, I really agree with the points you bring up. I am glad that Aang's pacifism wasn't just window dressing, it was at the core of who the character was.
 
apana said:
Fantastic post, I really agree with the points you bring up. I am glad that Aang's pacifism wasn't just window dressing, it was at the core of who the character was.
Click to expand...

Which is why the ending would have been much more interesting had it been handled otherwise.

It does not mean that Ozai had to die, but the moment should have actually been a struggle. And the decision should have had repercussions.

Finding a 'third way' was a massive copout. For a fictitious character, values ARE simple window dressing unless they are meaningfully challenged.
 
I have to agree with Marty. It was a rather easy cop out, since it didn't came out of nowhere and he didn't have to invest much in it. Of course he struggled long before how to solve his moral issues, so it's not complete bollocks.

A alternative solution would've been that he tried to fight Ozai normal and break his limbs, while taking severe damage himself, since going melee with a strong, super charged firebender isn't a good idea. It would've end with Aang having heavy burns all over the body, maybe losing a hand or something, but with an living and probably able recover Ozai on the ground.
Would've been naturally a lot more gruesome and not possible for a kids show, but I just sayn.
 
MartyStu said:
Which is why the ending would have been much more interesting had it been handled otherwise.

It does not mean that Ozai had to die, but the moment should have actually been a struggle. And the decision should have had repercussions.

Finding a 'third way' was a massive copout. For a fictitious character, values ARE simple window dressing unless they are meaningfully challenged.
Click to expand...

I sort of agree. It could have been expanded on more but it was meaningful enough for me. Correct me if I am wrong but I think Aang accepted that he had to kill Ozai and afterwards the turtle gave him energy bending. If they had a fourth season they could have gone into it but they kind of had to wrap things up. The defeat of Ozai was the end of the series so repercussions had to be post ATLA and we do see some of that in the comics.
 
MartyStu said:
Which is why the ending would have been much more interesting had it been handled otherwise.

It does not mean that Ozai had to die, but the moment should have actually been a struggle. And the decision should have had repercussions.

Finding a 'third way' was a massive copout. For a fictitious character, values ARE simple window dressing unless they are meaningfully challenged.
Click to expand...

They were meaningfully challenged and Aang struggled a ton. They just weren't defeated.

The solution, while I'll totally agree should have been foreshadowed better, is a legitimate one. It's not a cop out, because the angle that the show is coming down on the question isn't "What if there isn't any other way?", but "What if there is?"

It's a far more empowering position to take. Which is not to say it is naturally the 'better' one in terms of narrative. Don't get me wrong, the question of what happens when a character is broken by the world is an intriguing and naturally emotionally engaging one. And a relatable one too. We have all had that moment of failure where we compromise our principles and just do what we 'need' to do, whoever it hurt and however much. Perhaps we grew from that and changed our principles. Perhaps we returned to those principles and enforce them more strongly now. Perhaps we simply fail those principles more times.

But the other side of the coin is equally powerful. The 'way out' as you call it is not given to him, but he has to make that moral stand, for his soul to be unbendable, in order to make it work. In other words, he found a way that both resolved the conflict and did not violate his principles because he did not give up. That's not unrealistic or a cop out, that's how every success anyone has ever had was been achieved. They kept searching for a solution until they found one. The only time failure is a certainty is when the person searching decides it is.

Aang made a stand, one that he legitimately struggled with, because he knew that killing was wrong while he could not seem to find a way to avoid it. He would do something he viewed as monstrous. He was determined to end it right, in his eyes if no one elses. Both are viable options, but I like that TLA went with the one it did. For one, I just don't see that as often as the other. People not standing up for what they believe in. It's a unique lesson that should be taught more often. And it's noble. I would feel sorry for Aang, coming the end of the show, if he did that, because he'd have failed then. Instead, he's one of the most admirable characters I can think of. And there is merit to his position. How many lost opportunities, values, how many lost lives have their been because someone gave up and compromised when a real solution could have been out there?

And I think this is where the hated 'it's right for a kids' show" label comes in, but in a positive way. I think it's much better for children to have a positive, empowering story figure telling them that they should stand up for what they believe to be right than it is to tell them the opposite. That whatever values they have, the world is going to break them, and it was going to take their beliefs of goodness and destroy them beyond repair and that there was nothing they could do about it. I'd much rather have them grow up with doing what they believe is right because that is where the real people who lead the world into a better age come from.
 
Veelk said:
They were meaningfully challenged and Aang struggled a ton. They just weren't defeated.

The solution, while I'll totally agree should have been foreshadowed better, is a legitimate one. It's not a cop out, because the angle that the show is coming down on the question isn't "What if there isn't any other way?", but "What if there is?"

It's a far more empowering position to take. Which is not to say it is naturally the 'better' one in terms of narrative. Don't get me wrong, the question of what happens when a character is broken by the world is an intriguing and naturally emotionally engaging one. And a relatable one too. We have all had that moment of failure where we compromise our principles and just do what we 'need' to do, whoever it hurt and however much. Perhaps we grew from that and changed our principles. Perhaps we returned to those principles and enforce them more strongly now. Perhaps we simply fail those principles more times.

But the other side of the coin is equally powerful. The 'way out' as you call it is not given to him, but he has to make that moral stand, for his soul to be unbendable, in order to make it work. In other words, he found a way that both resolved the conflict and did not violate his principles because he did not give up. That's not unrealistic or a cop out, that's how every success anyone has ever had was been achieved. They kept searching for a solution until they found one. The only time failure is a certainty is when the person searching decides it is.

Aang made a stand, one that he legitimately struggled with, because he knew that killing was wrong while he could not seem to find a way to avoid it. He would do something he viewed as monstrous. He was determined to end it right, in his eyes if no one elses. Both are viable options, but I like that TLA went with the one it did. For one, I just don't see that as often as the other. People not standing up for what they believe in. It's a unique lesson that should be taught more often. And it's noble. I would feel sorry for Aang, coming the end of the show, if he did that, because he'd have failed then. Instead, he's one of the most admirable characters I can think of. And there is merit to his position. How many lost opportunities, values, how many lost lives have their been because someone gave up and compromised when a real solution could have been out there?

And I think this is where the hated 'it's right for a kids' show" label comes in, but in a positive way. I think it's much better for children to have a positive, empowering story figure telling them that they should stand up for what they believe to be right than it is to tell them the opposite. That whatever values they have, the world is going to break them, and it was going to take their beliefs of goodness and destroy them beyond repair and that there was nothing they could do about it. I'd much rather have them grow up with doing what they believe is right because that is where the real people who lead the world into a better age come from.
Click to expand...

I really wish I had something to add to this, but I don't. Just well said. There aren't enough empowering stories out there, the current cultural mode is for corruption to be the norm. Whether by accident or on purpose, ATLA stayed true to being a story about how taking the high ground with compassion and strength of character can lead to positive outcomes, and doing that was actually a *brave* choice that sets it apart.
 
maybe ive said this before in this thread but i never had a problem with Aang not killing Ozai since that's who he is, my problem was how it he conveniently got a solution in the final episodes without much buildup. Then they try to justify that garbage in Korra with the Wan stuff

If that section was handled better then i would have no problem with what happened.
 
I honestly didn't have a problem with anything that happened at the end of ATLA. Maybe it was because I was pretty young, but I remember being excited and thinking it was cool/surprising/epic that he got the ability to take his bending away as an alternative to killing him.
 
Veelk said:
But the other side of the coin is equally powerful. The 'way out' as you call it is not given to him, but he has to make that moral stand, for his soul to be unbendable, in order to make it work. In other words, he found a way that both resolved the conflict and did not violate his principles because he did not give up. That's not unrealistic or a cop out, that's how every success anyone has ever had was been achieved. They kept searching for a solution until they found one. The only time failure is a certainty is when the person searching decides it is.
Click to expand...

I've talked about this before, but of course Aang pulls all of this off before the light show even starts.

The end of the actual fight is handled well. Avatar State Aang trounces Ozai and Aang seems to forcibly come back to himself before the AS kills Ozai. Ozai thinks he's got an opportunity, since Aang isn't willing to go all out, and then Aang, while fully in control of himself, easily bests him and renders him sufficiently helpless that Ozai can't do a thing while Aang spends some time screwing around (there's absolutely no sense of urgency here). That's Aang finding his own way out and that's the unexpected bit. That's Aang's demonstration that Ozai can be beaten without Aang having to compromise his principles, by virtue of Aang being better than anyone thought he could be. And this is all really well done. There's something really interesting here about evil not actually being all that powerful when people are willing to stand up and face it, given how one-sided the fight is from the halfway point on.
 
For the most part I agree with y'all. I certainly do not want to see Aang compromise his principles to defeat Ozai. This is not that kind of show.

My issue is entirely with the Lionturtle. He mars what is an otherwise emotionally and logically consistent finale.

I did not think this was a controversial point. I mean, he and Energybending clearly encroach on Aang's agency...
 
MartyStu said:
For the most part I agree with y'all. I certainly do not want to see Aang compromise his principles to defeat Ozai. This is not that kind of show.

My issue is entirely with the Lionturtle. He mars what is an otherwise emotionally and logically consistent finale.

I did not think this was a controversial point. I suppose I may be looking too much into what I view as he and Energybending's encroachment on Aang's agency.
Click to expand...

My point of contention was against those that said it'd have been better if Aang had to compromise his principles and did not have his 'out'. As far as the turtle goes, he is a dues ex machina, I don't disagree. As I said in my original post, they totally should have foreshadowed it more. And Energybending, while it comes out of nowhere, it requires mastery of self to use. It's not 'given' to Aang, he has to stand by his principles to make it happen, which is difficult and something that the final episodes of the show had been building up to. Energybending is an expression of Aang's agency, not an encroachment. But, still, I suppose I look back on it less harshly over the years, since the shit that LoK has tried to pull since blows it out of the water in terms of BS (especially regarding energybending. THAT is a pure DEM, because Korra neither has to master herself in any way to use it).
 
Veelk said:
My point of contention was against those that said it'd have been better if Aang had to compromise his principles. As far as the turtle goes, he is a dues ex machina, I don't disagree. As I said in my original post, they totally should have foreshadowed it more. But I suppose I look back on it less harshly over the years, since the shit that LoK has tried to pull since blows it out of the water in terms of BS.
Click to expand...

Something likes this would make a lot of sense in a show like LoK, but would be wildly out of place in TLA.

I just wish that Aang found a solution acceptable to him instead of being handed one.

And yeah, S1 and S2 of Korra do a really poor job of solving the season-long issue believably.
 
MartyStu said:
Something likes this would make a lot of sense in a show like LoK, but would be wildly out of place in TLA.

I just wish that Aang found a solution acceptable to him instead of being handed one.

And yeah, S1 and S2 of Korra do a really poor job of solving the season-long issue believably.
Click to expand...

He did find it and gave my reasoning for it, but I guess we just disagree on that bit.

The fact is that the planet goes out of it's way to help the avatar by providing him the necessary tools he needs to get the job done. The most obvious example is the Swamp episode. That's what I view the lion turtle as, as well as the rock that hit Aang's body in the fight.

But Aang is the one who actually needs to work for it to happen and that's what he did. The statement of the show made it clear. He had to take that stand on his principles or otherwise the energybending wouldn't have happened. That is not being given a solution, just the tools necessary to reach that solution.

Also, Gotchaye makes a good point about how Aang was far more capable once he decided to take a stand against killing, even before the energybending bit kicked in.
 
Veelk said:
He did find it and gave my reasoning for it, but I guess we just disagree on that bit.

The fact is that the planet goes out of it's way to help the avatar by providing him the necessary tools he needs to get the job done. The most obvious example is the Swamp episode. That's what I view the lion turtle as, as well as the rock that hit Aang's body in the fight.

But Aang is the one who actually needs to work for it to happen and that's what he did. The statement of the show made it clear. He had to take that stand on his principles or otherwise the energybending wouldn't have happened. That is not being given a solution, just the tools necessary to reach that solution.

Also, Gotchaye makes a good point about how Aang was far more capable once he decided to take a stand against killing, even before the energybending bit kicked in.
Click to expand...

Yup, that was my favorite part of their entire fight.

It was the natural extension to the conversations Aang had with Roku et al. Here, the AS represents the combined will of all the previous Avatars and Aang choosing to exit it is a categoric refutation of their arguments.

It is also the first time we see Aang assert his will over this more animalistic version of the Avatar State. Beforehand, Katara had to reign him in.

If all the Energybending junk is removed, this still works. 'Ozai the Bender' was never the threat 'Ozai the Genocidal Dictator' was.
 
lok__korracademy___doomed_to_repeat_by_neodusk-d7x8lv8.jpg
 
Just finished the first season. The final episode.. I'm guessing I shouldn't try to make any sense out of it or seek out any logic behind the stuff that happened?
 
Just finished watching the last 3 episodes of Korra.

Wow haha, those were the most intense episodes out the whole show. Tenzin kicked ass, couldn't face all three at once, but showed he can take on some of the best benders out there. The fights were great all round.

Wish Korra had more opportunities to show what the avatar state could do, I think Zaheer got of light in that fight tbh. Anyway the ending was great, emotional almost ahaha. Also, I am the furthest away from those tumblr shippers, but I almost expected for a moment some Korrasami in that scene with Korra in he wheelchair :/

Jinora basically looks like Aang, I get the feeling they just want to animate aang again the whole time, because Kai also is animated exactly the same way.

I'm annoyed a bit, because it seems the next series may shift away from korra. And whilst she hasn't been a great character, I think they finally started making progress with her. Also, what the heck was up with her at the end anyway, why was she in such a state? Ahh I digress. Great season of a decent show. Best season so far, and the first time I have been emotionally involved since TLA.
 
Veelk said:
They were meaningfully challenged and Aang struggled a ton. They just weren't defeated.
Click to expand...

Gotchaye said:
I've talked about this before, but of course Aang pulls all of this off before the light show even starts.
Click to expand...

TacticalFox88 said:
Aang killed Ozai spiritually...All parties should be satisfied
Click to expand...

As an addition to the mythology, I actually like energybending. The technique makes sense and it's cool to boot.

My personal problem with how energybending was introduced and used - along with the finale in general - is how its application subverts the agency of Aang. MartyStu touched on this a bit, but going in to the final battle with Ozai, there were only two possible outcomes clearly communicated to the viewer: Aang dies, or he kills Ozai. All of the drama and tension of the fiction was centered upon whether Aang would do what was necessary, or relent in the name of his beliefs. This plot point was significantly built up in the set-up episodes, and really, across the entire show: Aang has to come to terms with his destiny and grow up quicker than he wants to. There are a few times when Aang's spirit is diminished, and he begins to shirk his responsibilities as the Avatar. But he ultimately rebounds with greater resolve to save the world. This character arc is elemental to the point of the show.

So in the finale, Aang is confronted with his greatest challenge yet, both physically and spiritually. Given that this should be the climax of his personal arc, you would hope Aang would face the issue with the reasoning of an Avatar. But he isn't given that opportunity to approach it honestly, because he is given an out in energybending. Ideally energybending would be one of the options clearly communicated to the viewer going in to the finale. It would have been introduced early in the season, and the drama would center around whether Aang is strong enough to execute the technique. Energybending would then become the gauge of Aang's personal growth across the season, and not merely a convenient answer to his moral crisis. As is, said crisis is not resolved by Aang, but by a third party.

This all underscores my issues with the final showdown at large. Aang was no match for Ozai at all. And to add insult to injury, his best chance to realistically defeat Ozai was thrown aside; this technique Aang learned organically through his journey. It's the result of his forgiveness of, and friendship with, another major character. Because of the power disparity of the two, Aang would have had to win with his intelligence and wit, which redirecting lightning would have represented.

Aang didn't defeat Ozai and save the world, the Avatar aided by the lion turtle did. As the character we've followed across the entire series, based on the decisions he made and agency he displays, Aang was soundly defeated. Only when legitimized last minute by the gods of bending, and having his chakras reopened (somehow) by a random rock outcropping, does Aang get the ending he wants. To me, that says if you want it hard enough, you'll be thrown a bone and a fortunate fluke. For a character whose largest defining arc is assuming responsibility and growing up, I would have preferred an ending where Aang forges his own path on his own terms with decisions he makes for himself. Otherwise, it comes off as convenient and disappointing.

Icyflamez96 said:
the series would be about him defining what it means to be the avatar.
Click to expand...

Wan does that.
 
So I heard a cool idea about having another avatar series about the avatar AFTER wan. Since the avatar doesn't have a real role at that point, the series would be about him defining what it means to be the avatar.
 
Trey said:
As an addition to the mythology, I actually like energybending. The technique makes sense and it's cool to boot.

My personal problem with how energybending was introduced and used - along with the finale in general - is how its application subverts the agency of Aang. MartyStu touched on this a bit, but going in to the final battle with Ozai, there were only two possible outcomes clearly communicated to the viewer: Aang dies, or he kills Ozai. All of the drama and tension of the fiction was centered upon whether Aang would do what was necessary, or relent in the name of his beliefs. This plot point was significantly built up in the set-up episodes, and really, across the entire show: Aang has to come to terms with his destiny and grow up quicker than he wants to. There are a few times when Aang's spirit is diminished, and he begins to shirk his responsibilities as the Avatar. But he ultimately rebounds with greater resolve to save the world. This character arc is elemental to the point of the show.

So in the finale, Aang is confronted with his greatest challenge yet, both physically and spiritually. Given that this should be the climax of his personal arc, you would hope Aang would face the issue with the reasoning of an Avatar. But he isn't given that opportunity to approach it honestly, because he is given an out in energybending. Ideally energybending would be one of the options clearly communicated to the viewer going in to the finale. It would have been introduced early in the season, and the drama would center around whether Aang is strong enough to execute the technique. Energybending would then become the gauge of Aang's personal growth across the season, and not merely a convenient answer to his moral crisis. As is, said crisis is not resolved by Aang, but by a third party.

This all underscores my issues with the final showdown at large. Aang was no match for Ozai at all. And to add insult to injury, his best chance to realistically defeat Ozai was thrown aside; this technique Aang learned organically through his journey. It's the result of his forgiveness of, and friendship with, another major character. Because of the power disparity of the two, Aang would have had to win with his intelligence and wit, which redirecting lightning would have represented.

Aang didn't defeat Ozai and save the world, the Avatar aided by the lion turtle did. As the character we've followed across the entire series, based on the decisions he made and agency he displays, Aang was soundly defeated. Only when legitimized last minute by the gods of bending, and having his chakras reopened (somehow) by a random rock outcropping, does Aang get the ending he wants. To me, that says if you want it hard enough, you'll be thrown a bone and a fortunate fluke. For a character whose largest defining arc is assuming responsibility and growing up, I would have preferred an ending where Aang forges his own path on his own terms with decisions he makes for himself. Otherwise, it comes off as convenient and disappointing.
Click to expand...

This reasoning is underlying the notion that I disagree with: Violence is strength, and compassion is weakness. That Aang putting aside his morals to kill Ozai would be the outcome (whether it's because he learned lightning bending from Zuko or just hulk smashed him in the avatar state) would indicate that Aang has grown. No, I reject that and it's what the show does as well. To kill someone when you don't want to kill someone does not mean you are strong.

And no one has addressed the fact that Energybending is not just something you can 'do' once given the knowledge. It requires you having to stand up for your beliefs and be resolute and unshakable in them. Aang's entire journey has been plagued with self doubt and uncertainty. He didn't want to be the avatar, and he doesn't know if he can do what needs to be done. The whole fight, he is unsure of what he should be doing. Firmly deciding not to kill Ozai is the character growth. And Aang is firmly the one who made this decision. The avatar state was all the Avatars along with Aang working in conjunction with each other, making the same decision in Aang's body. But Aang put a stop to that and he himself made the decision to do otherwise. And it is not a decision he could have made unless he was strong in his convictions.

I cannot see how that is anything but the strongest display of his agency in the series. Energybending itself could have been foreshadowed better, but whether it's an encroachment on Aang's agency depends on how it functions. The ending to Book 1 in TLA is an encroachment of Aang's agency, since he is essentially deprived of his body and conciousness while the ocean spirit uses it how it wants. What Aang wants or does not want or decides is not a factor. That's his agency being diminished. Energybending on the other hand requires Aang's agency to even work.
 
Veelk said:
This reasoning is underlying the notion that I disagree with: Violence is strength, and compassion is weakness. Aang putting aside his morals to kill Ozai would be the outcome (whether it's because he learned lightning bending from Zuko or just hulk smashed him in the avatar state) that indicated that Aang has grown. No, I reject that and it's what the show does as well. To kill someone when you don't want to kill someone does not mean you are good.

And no one has addressed the fact that Energybending is not just something you can 'do' once given the knowledge. It requires you having to stand up for your beliefs and be resolute and unshakable in them. Aang's entire journey has been plagued with self doubt and uncertainty. He didn't want to be the avatar, and he doesn't know if he can do what needs to be done. The whole fight, he is unsure of what he should be doing. Firmly deciding not to kill Ozai is the character growth. And Aang is firmly the one who made this decision. The avatar state was all the Avatars along with Aang working in conjunction with each other, making the same decision in Aang's body. But Aang put a stop to that and he himself made the decision to do otherwise. And it is not a decision he could have made unless he was strong in his convictions.

I cannot see how that is anything but the strongest display of his agency in the series. Energybending itself could have been foreshadowed better, but whether it's an encroachment on Aang's agency depends on how it functions. The ending to Book 1 in TLA is an encroachment of Aang's agency, since he is essentially deprived of his body and conciousness while the ocean spirit uses it how it wants. What Aang wants or does not want or decides is not a factor. That's his agency being diminished. Energybending on the other hand requires Aang's agency to even work.
Click to expand...

I agree that Aang deciding to not kill Ozai is a great character defining decision, but it is not carried out by Aang. That's my problem. His decision is chiefly legitimate because of the Lion Turtle. Aang believes in sparing Ozai's life, but it is the Lion turtle, and a rock outcropping which unlocks Aang's latent faucet of power, that directly empowers Aang. It is explicitly shown just how outclassed Aang is without these two elements.

If Aang came to this decision and executed it unilaterally through his own conviction and ability, that would have been fantastic. All energybending says about Aang in the context it was used in is that Aang is good and Ozai is bad, with matching colors in case some viewers didn't catch on.

Icyflamez96 said:
I can't remember his backstory that well, does he? Like the whole world knows what the avatar is about by the time of death?
Click to expand...

Yes. He basically establishes what an Avatar is, and is supposed to do, then lives the rest of his life trying to execute on that purpose. His successor would probably further entrench the idea, but the original path was set up and established by Wan.
 
Trey said:
I agree that Aang deciding to not kill Ozai is a great character defining decision, but it is not carried out by Aang. That's my problem. His decision is chiefly legitimate because of the Lion Turtle. Aang believes in sparing Ozai's life, but it is the Lion turtle, and a rock outcropping which unlocks Aang's latent faucet of power, that directly empowers Aang.

If Aang came to this decision and executed it unilaterally through his own conviction and ability, that would have been fantastic. All energybending says about Aang in the context it was used in is that Aang is good and Ozai is bad, with matching colors in case you didn't catch on.
Click to expand...
It....it is though. I cannot see how you can say it's not. Aang was the only one who even wanted it to go down that way. Zuko and Sokka and his past lives and even Ozai himself were the ones saying that he's a pussy for not wanting to do it otherwise. The lion turtle gave no opinion on the matter. And energybending, even if it was made available by the lion turtle, simply cannot be executed if Aang is not convinced enough of his morals to do it. It's no different than the lightning redirect that Zuko taught him. Aang did not convince Zuko to turn away from his father to teach him anything. Nor does Aang need to do anything except know how it works to make it function. It was merely a tool that Aang picked up along he journey from an ally and not more empowering than Energybending as far as weaponry goes. They're both tools, but the context and motivation Aang uses those tools is what reveals whether his character has grown. Lightning bending is if Aang threw away his morals killed Ozai in a split second. Avatar state is if he let his past lives decide for him and merely stand by as they used his body to slaughter Ozai. But Energybending is only if he makes a firm decision based on what he believes to be right.
 
Icyflamez96 said:
So I heard a cool idea about having another avatar series about the avatar AFTER wan. Since the avatar doesn't have a real role at that point, the series would be about him defining what it means to be the avatar.
Click to expand...

That would be neat. I kind of think at this point, I would rather they go back in time rather than after Korra. I think the changing world in Korra's time (with the world modernizing) has been really interesting. It's provided a lot of complex problems with regards to the Avatar's role, and how the world is balanced (or rather, how balance fits into it). But I still don't find it as interesting as the world that Wan or Aang lived in.
 
I wouldn't mind an actually futuristic Avatar, since science fantasy stories are rare. Going back would only really give us more similar to The Last Airbender, of the relationship of benders to the actual world and being relatively important. I'd love to see a world where bending is rendered largely obsolete thanks to technology, or simply not as popular. If not a series at least like a movie length special (Batman Beyond style but with Avatar).

But regardless of what we want chances are this is the last we see of the Avatar universe animated as it doesn't seem to be as popular as Nick wanted it to be, and since they own the rights. And I doubt the creators would want to come up with a whole new universe of fantasy martial arts. Action though I could see them making another action show.
 
Admiral Woofington said:
I wouldn't mind an actually futuristic Avatar, since science fantasy stories are rare. Going back would only really give us more similar to The Last Airbender, of the relationship of benders to the actual world and being relatively important. I'd love to see a world where bending is rendered largely obsolete thanks to technology, or simply not as popular. If not a series at least like a movie length special (Batman Beyond style but with Avatar).

But regardless of what we want chances are this is the last we see of the Avatar universe animated as it doesn't seem to be as popular as Nick wanted it to be, and since they own the rights. And I doubt the creators would want to come up with a whole new universe of fantasy martial arts. Action though I could see them making another action show.
Click to expand...

It really depends on the execution. To be honest, I don't think the writers have done a very good job at making it work w/ republic city and the modernization of the world. So I would be very weary of them tackling this from a future (like modern sci-fi era). Plus, at least for me, the kind of world that is created around bending (and the mythology it stems from), feels a bit more right with a more ancient/feudal setting vs. a modern setting.

Just me though. I agree that it would be going backwards in terms of the relationship of bending and the problems of the world. But they could still make a good story out of it if they had really great characters. But I can agree it's problematic (in terms of trying to keep it fresh). I dunno. Honestly, at this point I think I'm okay with ATLA/Korra. I know there will eventually be more stuff from the Avatar universe. But I think ATLA/Korra pretty much covers what I think, is the larger context of the world (with time having progressed).
 
Veelk said:
It....it is though. I cannot see how you can say it's not. Aang was the only one who even wanted it to go down that way. Zuko and Sokka and his past lives and even Ozai himself were the ones saying that he's a pussy for not wanting to do it otherwise. The lion turtle gave no opinion on the matter. And energybending, even if it was made available by the lion turtle, simply cannot be executed if Aang is not convinced enough of his morals to do it. It's no different than the lightning redirect that Zuko taught him. Aang did not convince Zuko to turn away from his father to teach him anything. Nor does Aang need to do anything except know how it works to make it function. It was merely a tool that Aang picked up along he journey from an ally and not more empowering than Energybending, in that light.
Click to expand...

Aang does not redirect lightning without learning it from Zuko. Lightning redirection has a storied history throughout the series - it is established and explained and passed on organically from character to character. It even makes sense with respect to Aang's fighting style: using his opponent's energy against them. It was a clearly communicated tool going in to the finale - it was an option.

Aang does not energybend without learning it from the Lion Turtle. We don't even know what energybending is until Aang does it. It's explained with vague terms like "having a pure, unbendable spirit," which is code for "be the main character." It's passed on from a literal God in the mythology to Aang, who comes out of nowhere to give the latter an answer to his most fundamental moral crisis. Aang's capability to enact his pure will onto his opponent was not derived from his own spiritual enlightenment or understanding of chakras - it is done for him in the eleventh hour.

Such a capability is a capstone to Aang's character arc, but it comes from outside of Aang's autonomy. He is allowed to express his character growth because an entity which only exists in the series for a few moments decided to swing by and salvage the Avatar's conscience.

My problem is not with energybending itself (I like the idea), but how it was used in the finale, which in my opinion is poorly.
 
Futuristic avatar is my most longed for avatar universe. I love everything about the setting, time period and technology in LoK more than ATLA. Well old age type settings were always pretty low on my list of favorites though.
 
Icyflamez96 said:
Futuristic avatar is my most longed for avatar universe. I love everything about the setting, time period and technology in LoK more than ATLA. Well old age type settings were always pretty low on my list of favorites though.
Click to expand...

Hmmm. I just really have my doubts that the writers could pull it off. But I'm game for anything. I think, a big purpose of Korra is to show the struggle of bending/the avatar's relevancy in a world that is quickly changing. It's intentional. But I also find it problematic, in that I do actually think it's made it harder for the show to feel magical and stand out as being interesting (at least from a bending/mythology perspective).

So I really wonder how they could pull off a story where bending and the mythology of bending is completely made obsolete (so say in a sci-fi world where everything is tech driven and in space or some crazy shit). I dunno. I guess it's not that far off from Star Wars (the force = bending).
 
Although Korra took it to the next level, prisons that were capable of holding benders still existed in TLA. It's kinda weird that knocking Ozai out and putting him in prison is just sort of understood to be impossible. Difficult sure, but not impossible.
 
Trey said:
Aang does not redirect lightning without learning it from Zuko. Lightning redirection has a storied history throughout the series - it is established and explained and passed on organically from character to character. It even makes sense with respect to Aang's fighting style: using his opponent's energy against them. It was a clearly communicated tool going in to the finale - it was an option.

Aang does not energybend without learning it from the Lion Turtle. We don't even know what energybending is until Aang does it. It's explained with vague terms like "having a pure, unbendable spirit," which is code for "be the main character." It's passed on from a literal God in the mythology to Aang, who comes out of nowhere to give the latter an answer to his most fundamental moral crisis. Aang's capability to enact his pure will onto his opponent was not derived from his own spiritual enlightenment or understanding of chakras - it is done for him in the eleventh hour.

Such a capability is a capstone to Aang's character arc, but it comes from outside of Aang's autonomy. He is allowed to express his character growth because an entity which only exists in the series for a few moments decided to swing by and salvage the Avatar's conscience.

My problem is not with energybending itself (I like the idea), but how it was used in the finale, which in my opinion is poorly.
Click to expand...

That just means it's been around longer. That does not make it more empowering than energybending. It's still just a tool that Aang picked up from one ally whose actions he had no control over. He only got it because Zuko is his ally. It's placement in the story is irrelevent to how empowering it is. And he has the option to use this tool how he wants.

That he got it later in the story does not mean it is done for him. Sorry, but your assertion that it's a given while lightning redirect is somehow not is simply incorrect. Aang was given lightning bending from Zuko because they're on the same side, and he has the choice to employ it if he chooses to. He was given energy bending from the lion turtle because they're on the same side, and he has the choice to employ it if he chooses to. It's the same thing. Zuko's journey to being Aang's ally is better established, but it is irrelevent to how empowering the tool he gives Aang is for Aang. And you are still ignoring that energybending is something that can ONLY be done if Aang is autonomous. It is literally impossible to do unless Aang is autonomous. For your argument to work, you have to address this point and explain the paradox of how a device that can only function if the user is autonomous is evidence that the user lacks autonomy.

I agree that the placement of the energybending in the story is suspect, but that is not indication of disempowerment.
 
Azula said:
Hmmm. I just really have my doubts that the writers could pull it off. But I'm game for anything. I think, a big purpose of Korra is to show the struggle of bending/the avatar's relevancy in a world that is quickly changing. It's intentional. But I also find it problematic, in that I do actually think it's made it harder for the show to feel magical and stand out as being interesting (at least from a bending/mythology perspective).

So I really wonder how they could pull off a story where bending and the mythology of bending is completely made obsolete (so say in a sci-fi world where everything is tech driven and in space or some crazy shit). I dunno. I guess it's not that far off from Star Wars (the force = bending).
Click to expand...

That's what makes it stand out for me though. I like how the modernization of the world and politics and whatnot is becoming just as crucial as the magical stuff. Makes it seem like a more unique premise to me.
 
My problem with the ending of TLA is that Aang's dilemma is mostly superficial. Everyone says that Aang has to kill Ozai but there's no clear reason why that has to be so. Is it punishment for his crimes? An implicit assumption that Aang cannot defeat him in combat? That the Avatar is 'supposed' to kill bad guys? Aang doesn't struggle with the reality of killing so much as the abstract concept. The internal strife doesn't really go beyond "I don't want to, but people say I should", followed by a third party solution. There's no real substance behind it.

I don't need/want Aang to kill Ozai but I want him to struggle with the details of what he's debating. Aang's powers allow him to avoid more nuanced situations where he wouldn't be able to avoid the question. The Airbenders were not absolute pacifists, they killed in self-defense, but would Aang? If killing is wrong a priori, is killing in self defense okay? How far can self-defense go? Would Aang let someone else die to avoid killing? Would Aang kill to save someone else's life? Would Aang consider cutting Ozai's hands off if energy bending didn't exist? To what degree is Aang's philosophy opposed to all violence, not just killing? How far would Aang go to enforce his philosophy against others?

The problem is Aang is never put in a position where he has to grapple with these kinds of issues or make a decision with real consequence. Killing Ozai was only a problem because people said it was, he was no more forced than Zuko/Katara were with Azula. In terms of real life parallels, both Gandhi and MLK Jr. understood that their campaigns of non-violence were only possible because their opposition were democratic societies who abhorred unnecessary violence. Aang's philosophy works because he is the Avatar and has powers to make it possible to adhere to without any serious issues, that's not the same kind of struggle that Katara went through with her mother's killer.

If you're Superman, it's easy not to have to kill anyone because you're never in any real danger. It's why I liked the idea of Superman having to kill Zod in the new film, even if the actual implementation/execution/setup was completely awful. He is distraught over having to do it and mourns the action. An act of killing does not have to come with an assumption that it is good and that the enemy less than human. I mention this not because I think Aang should have killed, but because the Lion Turtle gave them an easy out which prevented a more mature and difficult conclusion.
 
Brawndo Addict said:
My problem with the ending of TLA is that Aang's dilemma is mostly superficial. Everyone says that Aang has to kill Ozai but there's no clear reason why that has to be so. Is it punishment for his crimes? An implicit assumption that Aang cannot defeat him in combat? That the Avatar is 'supposed' to kill bad guys? Aang doesn't struggle with the reality of killing so much as the abstract concept. The internal strife doesn't really go beyond "I don't want to, but people say I should", followed by a third party solution. There's no real substance behind it.

I don't need/want Aang to kill Ozai but I want him to struggle with the details of what he's debating. Aang's powers allow him to avoid more nuanced situations where he wouldn't be able to avoid the question. The Airbenders were not absolute pacifists, they killed in self-defense, but would Aang? If killing is wrong a priori, is killing in self defense okay? How far can self-defense go? Would Aang let someone else die to avoid killing? Would Aang kill to save someone else's life? Would Aang consider cutting Ozai's hands off if energy bending didn't exist? To what degree is Aang's philosophy opposed to all violence, not just killing? How far would Aang go to enforce his philosophy against others?

The problem is Aang is never put in a position where he has to grapple with these kinds of issues or make a decision with real consequence. Killing Ozai was only a problem because people said it was, he was no more forced than Zuko/Katara were with Azula. In terms of real life parallels, both Gandhi and MLK Jr. understood that their campaigns of non-violence were only possible because their opposition were democratic societies who abhorred unnecessary violence. Aang's philosophy works because he is the Avatar and has powers to make it possible to adhere to without any serious issues, that's not the same kind of struggle that Katara went through with her mother's killer.

If you're Superman, it's easy not to have to kill anyone because you're never in any real danger. It's why I liked the idea of Superman having to kill Zod in the new film, even if the actual implementation/execution/setup was completely awful. He is distraught over having to do it and mourns the action. An act of killing does not have to come with an assumption that it is good and that the enemy less than human. I mention this not because I think Aang should have killed, but because the Lion Turtle gave them an easy out which prevented a more mature and difficult conclusion.
Click to expand...

I won't get into the debate about the quality of the ending and the solution to the problem, but everybody wanted to kill Ozai because they knew they would never end the war if he was left alive (of course, they never thought they could remove his bending).

Ozai was never going to surrender to Aang, no matter how much Aang beat him to a pulp or tired Ozai out. With the power of the comet, Ozai literally could burn part of the Earth Kingdom by himself. Before he met the Lion Turtle, there was no other way for Ozai to consider himself defeated besides killing him. His bending gave him both symbolic and physical power, so removing it would be enough to end it.
 
The reason it is necessary is mostly a symbolic gesture. Iroh pointed out that he could defeat the fire lord, but people would view it as power going from one overlord to another. The avatar, whose duty is to bring peace and balance to all nations, is the one who needs to defeat him, and I suppose that's why they thought killing him was the solution. They viewed that hte conflict needs to end permanently to end it at all. Most characters just interpretted that as killing Ozai. Capturing him leaves the old fire nation idealogy alive, to whatever extent, even if they could keep him imprisoned forever.

I agree that the conflict may be superficial to some extent, but this may be where the kids label comes in again. Again, I feel there is some merit to not having children seriously considering whether fucking mutilation is a morally good choice.

But I still feel people miss the point of the finale. I don't think TLA was trying to say "Killing is bad" so much as "Do what you believe is right no matter how much the world pressures you to do otherwise." The pacifist moral that Aang sticks to is a vehicle for the higher message (though a good one).
 
given that this whole "worry about Ozai" thing appeared near the end then what the fuck was Aang thinking during the Day of the Black Sun campaign? Capture him when he lost his powers? Why wasn't it a worry then, especially since he didn't have the Avatar state to help and Ozai might have gotten his powers back?
 
Infinite Justice said:
given that this whole "worry about Ozai appeared" near the end then what the fuck was Aang thinking during the Day of the Black Sun campaign? Capture him when he lost his powers? Why wasn't it a worry then, especially since he didn't have the Avatar state to help?
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's what I was assuming, with the intention of figuring out what to do with him afterwards.

That or Aang just hadn't throught ahead that far. Much of the conflict in Aang's head was just figuring out how to defeat Ozai. Once that became a real possibility, it was only then that Aang realized "Oh, shit, wtf am I going to do once I have beaten him?"
 
Veelk said:
Yeah, that's what I was assuming, with the intention of figuring out what to do with him afterwards.

That or Aang just hadn't throught ahead that far. Much of the conflict in Aang's head was just figuring out how to defeat Ozai. Once that became a real possibility, it was only then that Aang realized "Oh, shit, wtf am I going to do once I have beaten him?"
Click to expand...

he did thought ahead enough to plant that kiss though :P

but seriously it was like the whole plan was a "run before you walk" type of plan
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

‘Avatar’ Sequel Series ‘Seven Havens’ Ordered at Nickelodeon, Set After ‘Legend of Korra’
News 
33
1K
Lambogenie replied
Richard Chamberlain dies, there goeth a LEGEND.
21
1K
ClanOfNone replied
Oscars 2025 |OT|
2
75
4K
Zathalus replied
House of the Dragon S2 |OT| Blood for Blood, Fire to Fire (no book discussion)
6 7 8 9 10
458
27K
EverydayBeast replied
Tim Apple announces Season 3 of Severance
36
3K
kapshin replied
Top Bottom