Flying to the border between fact and fiction

ded0c0:

zuko-and-makos-girl:

Bending Triad, Triple Threat Triad and “Lightning Bolt” Zolt

I HATE HOW GREAT THEIR CHARACTER DESIGNS ARE
I THOUGHT YOU WERE ALL GOING TO BE IMPORTANT TO THE STORY

(via fannishcodex)

fannishcodex:

cocoalover1956:

Are people seriously still mad that the equalist are portrayed as morally wrong? Why is that bad writing? They’re evil, they’re wrong, they’re dirty hypocrits, they didn’t have a good reason for what they do. Why does a villain have to be grey? Some of the best villians can be completely black, like Voldemort, the Joker or the Daleks. Hell, exactly what redeeming qualities did Ozai and Zhao have? C’mon people.

Ozai and Zhao didn’t represent the entire Fire Nation at the end of the day. Fans were impressed when AtLA didn’t demonize and categorize the entire Fire Nation as all villains. AtLA actually showed that not everyone in the Fire Nation was like Ozai and Zhao—see Zuko, Iroh, kids at one of the Fire Nation academies, Piandao, Fire Nation commoners, etc. The Fire Nation was varied, it wasn’t dominated by any one moral range. EVEN THOUGH THE FIRE NATION HAD A CONCRETE HISTORY OF GENOCIDE AGAINST THE AIR NOMADS AND STARTING A WAR. The Fire Nation historically committed horrible crimes, and yet they still received depth, the acknowledgment that the Fire Nation is not wholly evil, that it is varied, that they were human. AtLA treated every character as human. That resonated with fans, as that reflected the world—groups of people, just people, are not generalized as wholly evil or wholly good. That reflection of the world grounded AtLA in a greater realistic tone, despite the high fantasy setting.

I’m pretty sure people rather expected the spin-off sequel to AtLA to continue treating every character as human, to continue that realistic tone of not generalizing people. Instead all the Equalists are generalized as being only morally wrong, while the Fire Nation had been allowed to be varied, and was not generalized. Even though the Fire Nation had a history of genocide, WHILE THE EQUALISTS DID NOT. In comparison to the Fire Nation, the Equalists still come off as more tame—they chibock people, not burn them; removing bending was fine for Aang, it was the merciful option over execution, why is it so bad for the Equalists to have bending removed, it’s better than simply killing benders? (Bending removal is another topic entirely—but I will say that actually killing and actual genocide with people actually dying is still far worse than losing bending.) Whatever canon intended, there are still too many hints that nonbenders, the ones Equalists are trying to fight for, are mistreated. And yet despite this, despite being less violent than the Fire Nation, less damaging, the Equalists are reduced to being just morally wrong. While we got to see so many faces of the Fire Nation and taste their perspectives, we saw barely a handful of the Equalists and had little idea of their experiences.

So yeah, people will dislike that after the genocidal Fire Nation got depth and weren’t reduced to only being morally wrong and actually had multiple voices and were shown to be human, the chiblocking and non-genocidal Equalists with general grievances are all labeled as morally wrong and are never given a variety of voices and never seen as really human. It’s just this very weird dissonance between AtLA and LoK, this downgrade in who gets to be viewed as human. It’s frustrating.

And did you actually forget about Azula? Of course, she rather disproves your point about black hat villains v. grey villains, at least with regards to Ozai and Zhao, her ending up as a grey villain and ending up a stronger character/villain than Ozai and Zhao.  It seems common for people to criticize Ozai as being too flat, and Zhao may be slightly liked more than Ozai, but he didn’t necessarily have Azula’s staying power, though he did get an intriguing death scene where he refused to be saved by Zuko, so probably some grey there where Zhao actually stuck to his guns.) Still, I think it’s safe to say that in Avatarverse, Azula outstrips them in popularity with the audience, and I think that could be attributed to her having some depth, or “grey.” In Avatarverse, it seems like the grey villains are more often the better ones.

Also, Joker is a good example of an outright black hat villain, but I wouldn’t say Ozai and Zhao really compare to him. Though admittedly, I think some of Joker’s appeal are other things added to his black hat status, like his humor, occasionally philosophical bent tending toward the most cynical view of the world, and complex relationship with Batman. I don’t think Ozai and Zhao have something comparable, and that plays into them rather enduring less than the Joker.

I cannot comment on the Daleks as I know nothing about them.

I doubt Voldemort succeeds as a compelling black hat villain, as I’ve gathered that people find him ultimately too flat. Like a character can be so good, they’re boring, a character can be so evil, they’re boring. Such extremes on either moral scale can be boring, though there are exceptions (i.e. the Joker, but again, I’d argue the other nuances to him round him out into someone more compelling.) Mixes of good and evil within characters are typically more interesting—it’s that contrast that fascinates people.

And so, people are probably annoyed that the Equalists aren’t allowed to have complexity—there’s little contrast within them, no grey when they’re reduced to being just black hats.

Also, I’m just gratified that apparently a lot of people are still irritated over the Equalists being portrayed as so utterly morally wrong—rock on reasonable disappointment in poor writing, rock on.

(Source: leapingsensei, via fannishcodex)

geekinerddork:

You wanna know why Aang was fucking amazing? Because the Avatar was NOT the entirety of his identity. He knew that he was a very wise, very kind, very talented, very charming, and very knowledgable kid. Thats who he was as a person and he had that confidence without the title of Avatar at his helm, and it made him so easy to love. He didn’t even want to be the Avatar half of the time.

I now see why Korra was held in a compound for all her life instead of being given a chance to obtain a social life and begin her training at 16 like she was supposed to. Not for any actual socio-political reasons in the Avatar Universe, or because Aang thought carefully about the place of the Avatar in the world and thought she’d be better off cooped up. Why would Aang, who got so much of his world view and experience from traveling all over and making so many dear friends from each corner of the globe, come to that decision logically?

He wouldn’t. Korra was cooped up in a compound so Bryke could play out this really sick situation of taking someones identity from them. A shallow, unhealthy identity that Korra should have fought, and in return developed into her own person. But Bryke doens’t even see it as unhealthy or flawed. They rooted for it and took solace in it. Thats really…disheartening. They don’t see any issue in Korra’s actions, nor her inability to learn. They truly feel like the love you have for yourself should ultimately be decided by your abilities, and if you lose those abilities you don’t have a reason to live anymore, or to love yourself, and you’re incapable of being able to return any love you get. Even if the theme was failure, and the degredation of her heritage, she shouldn’t lose all hope out of these.

Its apparent that Bryke not only has lots of issues with general storytelling and owning up to their privileges, but have bad concepts of general relationships and they should probably take a step back and realize how destructive their being by thinking this is okay.

/incoherent rant

(Source: makos-lightningrod, via fannishcodex)

rhazade-waterbender:

demonpyromaniac:

leapingsensei:

Did a quick boring comparison between what we’re told of Bolin and what we’re shown of Bolin.

I didn’t really think of this, but then again I shouldn’t be too surprised considering all the inconsistency within the actual show. 

I’d say that it’s more like he’s sporadically naïve and his alleged immaturity is an informed flaw.  The only time I can remember him being “immature” is…well, I suppose one could count his messy crying fit and subsequent zonked rage at Mako in 5.  But he’d kinda just gotten his heart broken.

(via fannishcodex)

awakeningeden:

Something that’s been bugging me since the end of the show and sort of just morphed into a huge weight on my chest last night is the fact that Bryke committed a fatal error in introducing a theme and then never going back to it. Or they did, but in the guise that it wasn’t really there to begin with.

I’m of course talking about oppression and the plight of non-benders.

I know. I know that this has been said and done plenty since the season ended but I really just want to get this off my chest.

The thing that bugs me the most about the unresolved theme of oppression in LOK is the fact that you can’t do that. You cannot have such a big and important theme such as oppression and equality introduced in your story and not give it some kind of fitting conclusion or send-off. Especially since oppression and the call for equality is still prevalent in the modern era. It’s not something, like I believe what will happen in LOK in season 2 (because I really have low expectations), that is just going to melt away. Where non-benders are happy with the way benders have exclusive job opportunities, their council is made up of bender representatives from Four Nations, one of which is a man representing at most 50 people, and that bending gangs can extort them through the usage of their power.

People should still be mad. People should still be upset at the way things are going on in Republic City. If people now are still upset and advocating for equal rights for all ethnicties, sexualities, and genders 50 years after the Civil Rights Movement and a century after women received the right to vote, you better believe something as small as a six month time span should not stop the tide that Amon started, regardless if he eventually ended up being a manipulating dick. Amon had only stirred the pot of frustration in the non-bending community and took initiative where none had been before. To say that all vanishes because he’s a bender? That gives the non-benders of Republic City MORE incentive to fight back and advocate for their rights. A bender tried to manipulate them again for his own power trip, for his own personal vendetta against the Avatar. That is something that they should not stand for and walk away from.

But, as stated before, I don’t think any of this will be recalled or alluded to in season 2 and that is entirely and utterly irresponsible of the writers. Children are influenced by these television shows, learn from these shows. What LOK is essentially telling them is that oppression is a myth told by corrupt people in power. Oppression is only constructed by those in power, be they terrorists or politicians. They are not telling children that oppression is a system, socially constructed and embedded into a child from their very first breath, from the very first sign of their biological gender and skintone. They are not telling children that oppression is a very real thing to fear in this world. They are not telling children that equality can exist if we all stopped and listened to the plight of the oppressed and worked to achieve equality right along with them.

In short, it would have been better if they never introduced the subject of oppression at all and instead made out Amon to be a power-hungry man with a goal to best and essentially become the Avatar from the beginning. At least then it would have been the typical fight between good versus evil and would not have alluded to deeper and more complex issues that never are called back to the series in the first place.

(via fannishcodex)

leapingsensei:

“I knew a lot of people hated benders, but I’ve never seen so many in one place.”

I think that when there’s an argument relating to whether non-bender oppression was a thing that actually existed in the Avatar-verse, particularly during Korra’s era as the Avatar, a point that tends to not come up that often is the rather staggering amount of support that Amon’s movement and his goal of equality received on a public level.

Namely, how did the Equalists manage to garner the attention, interest and/or support of so many people if the people in question did not believe that the movement was making a valid point about how the power and privilege balance of the city- and perhaps of the world as a whole- was heavily in favour of benders? Why would so many members of the general populace agree to stand behind a terrorist group if they did not fully believe in their cause and have reason to believe in their cause? Not all of the Equalists’ support could have been solely derived from their leader being a charismatic individual with a sob story to reel in the listener’s sympathies after all.

Moreover it’s rather presumptuous of Mako to assume that everyone at the Equalist rally was there due to their ‘hatred of benders’. Doubtless there were people there who did not like the bending populace, but what of the people drawn in because of their dislike of bending as a concept, general amiability towards benders but belief that the Equalists had a point, or simple curiosity for the secret gathering at nightfall? Even before the entire Equalist movement was dismissed by virtue of their leader being a manipulative and lying bender (which, if anything, would only lend more credence to their cause and thus lead to a further uprising of the benders vs. non-benders dilemma) their role as an accumulation of thoughts and individual motives was being generalised- by a bender, no less. While I’m not saying that Mako should have had a complete understanding of the thought processes of every individual present at the rally, the narrative could’ve at least made a point to show us that not everybody who supported the Equalists were doing so due to a mass revulsion towards people who possessed bending abilities (perhaps by, I don’t know, showing us why some of these people deemed it necessary to follow a terrorist movement who put multiple lives in danger, blew up places of popularity and basically mind raped benders by removing an inherent part of their being? Did non-benders feel it was mandatory/were pressured into attending rallies, or did they go of their own free will for their own reasons? There wasn’t a scene or two to spare for that between gratuitous love triangle nonsense that no one asked for and an arc centering around a game that did nothing to develop the characters involved and was completely dropped halfway through the season?)

Excluding Amon and Hiroshi (the former of which was a liar and the latter of which quickly appeared to become mentally unstable by the series end) the only Equalists we ever get any insight to are the Lieutenant and the unnamed Future Industries worker in Episode 7- Lieu’s loyalty to the movement is never explained or expanded upon, while the worker was revealed to be a setup by Hiroshi to lure Korra and co. into a trap. Taking supplementary material into account we are also given a reason why the Protester from Episodes 1 and 3 stands behind the movement- because he’s an attention whore who thrives on the fact that non-benders will listen to and agree with what he says. None of the Equalists that we see are sympathetic, those that are are not focused on, and we never get any insight about the people who are not actively involved in the caused but do stand behind it.

In fact, that Mako was aware that so many people (a good couple of thousand it looks like) disliked benders by the time that the Equalists made their presence fully known and public has me curious about the state the city was in before Korra arrived and Amon accelerated his plans, and whether it had been in such a state for a while now- specifically, was it always like this or did corruption start when Aang’s time passed? Has it been common knowledge for a while that many non-benders harboured resentment towards benders, and have their been any attempts to rectify this problem in the past?

In A:TLA we were given a reason why citizens of the Fire Nation supported Ozai- out of their own desire for power, because they were fed misleading information and propoganda, and because they were taught when they were impressionable children that it was the right thing to do. Most of which was quickly and coherently shown to us in the space of one or two episodes.

With LOK we did not get the same insight into the other side of the conflict, and the supposedly ‘mature’ storytelling suffers because of it. In order to properly instigate a plot with grey morality both sides of the conflict must be shown, but instead we never get a proper insight into the faceless masses that constitute the Equalists and their supporters.

(via fannishcodex)

epimeral:

beatrixspoke:

lyndez:

avatarparallels:

“You’re…You’re just oppressing yourself!”

this cartoon is fucking awful 

#This is what happens when a couple of white guys write about oppression 

 #this is poignant #and rather powerful #this should have been addressed in the show #like more than tarrlok’s curfew though #invading personal space#harassing them in the street #relegating them to low-paying jobs #excluding them from sports #all this should have been taken into account #but no we had to use overt examples for oppression yet again #this is what happens when a couple of white guys write about oppression #nothing good obviously

well when you put it like that

(via theyoungdoyley)

birdbrainblue:

aw ye let’s do this shit

Read More

(via fannishcodex)

masterarrowhead:

You know what I would’ve loved?

Korra being the one to tell Asami that she kissed Mako and apologizing for it.

I also would’ve loved if she and Korra had to share rooms while Asami was staying over at Air Temple Island and they actually got girl time.

I want my girl time.

(via kawree)

upsettingshorts:

1. The central conflict creates a situation where the heroes are actually on the side of oppression, counter-revolution, and perpetuating inequality.  At no point is the ideological justification for opposing Amon revealed by any character, it is simply taken for granted that the status quo ought to be maintained. 
2. Instead of taking advantage of the inherent dramatic potential of the protagonists being on the wrong side - starting by acknowleding, even for a second, that the above just might be true - Amon and the Equalists are just lazily drowned-out by ominous music.  That the show is lacking in any sort of self-awareness on this front is pretty much unforgivable.
3. It portrays events that escalate the central conflict in wildly inappropriate ways.  Until the latest episode, the Equalists exclusively target Benders who abuse their power and this is seen as extreme.  The Benders/police conduct searches and seizures without evidence, launch paramilitary raids on people just learning how to defend themselves and this is seen as business as usual.
4. The show draws arbitrary standards as to what constitutes abuse of authority with Tarrlok seemingly going too far, despite his actions being much closer to things Korra, Tenzin, and Lin had already been doing than the characters in the show, and soundtrack, would lead you to believe.  
5. Arbitrary justifications, ad-hoc powers of authority, vague standards of evidence… and we’re not supposed to buy it when Amon says the Benders are oppressive?  Seriously, bring on the damn revolution.  Where can I sign up to help throw these clowns out of power?
6. It’s too late to fix any of the above.
7. Tonally, LoK tries to do too much and it is a mess.  For example the kids’ show antics of Meelo are very unsettling - in the sense that they kill the mood and destroy tension - when they are interrupting scenes that are, in context, incredibly dark.  If this problem sounds familiar, that’s because it’s something George Lucas had issues with in the Star Wars prequels.  You know, that other follow-up to a beloved IP that was a disaster of trying to appeal to too many people at once.
8. Legend of Korra has the dubious “honor” of being one of the few examples in media where the protagonist is a female action hero yet is full of episodes that routinely fail the Bechdel test.
9. Speaking of Korra, her character is all over the place. Very driven and badass when she needs to be, totally incompetent and out of her depth when the plot demands it, with motivations for doing things that can only be described as “that’s what was next in the script.”  
10. On a related note, want to get frustrated? Go watch an early episode and play the “I wonder what happened to that subplot/characterization” game.
11. Pema’s relationship advice.
12. It feels like a stretch placing Mako in the section of this post that seems to be talking about characters, since he is - as a friend aptly described - more like “a scarf with a haircut” than a believable person.  But damn is this guy a waste of screentime in every way imaginable.  If he in fact does exist simply to frustrate the audience and reduce everyone’s sympathy for himself and Korra, then mission accomplished.
13. Seriously, what are they doing with Mako?  He is a scene-killer that torpedoes characterization among his comrades and for what?  Because he can’t figure out who he wants to stick his dick in and keeps choosing “all of the above?”  Not to mention this love-triangle has the drama and sophistication of a Saturday morning cartoon to begin with.  Oh, right.
14. This excellent post on the love-triangle and how it’s ruining things.

Some reasons why Legend of Korra is a good show:

1. The animation and art style is really fantastic.
2. Avatar: The Last Airbender was great.
3. The animals in the Avatar universe continue to be cute.
4. Some characters make the most of their criminally-limited screentime (e.g. Bolin).
5. ???

(via fannishcodex)

fannishcodex:

pugletto:

But it’s just the style!

(Aang can still look like Aang in the new LOK style and have softer-set features/round eyes. Ironically enough, the eyes are the only things that don’t ever change shape/grow/shrink. Go home.)

Cept maybe I should go home ‘cos it’s early and I traced that shit. Aahhhh.

Yeah, I rather like this Aang better—because it does look more like Aang from the original series to me!  Awesome job!

fannishcodex:

ikkinthekitsune:

Let’s start with the facts as directly provided by the show:

1. Korra was discovered by the Order of the White Lotus at the age of four.
2. The OWL kept her in a compound in the Southern Water Tribe for the dual purposes of training and protection and were quite strict about keeping her under constant watch.
3. Korra’s parents lived outside of the compound, but Korra was still emotionally close to them.
4. Korra considered Naga to be her best friend; there’s no evidence that the OWL provided her with peers inside the compound or allowed her to make excursions outside to interact with anyone her age.

Now, given these facts, what kind of assumptions can be made about Korra’s background?

• Given that, as per point 2, Korra’s protection is at least as important as her training, it is quite likely that she was taken to the compound as soon as it became an option.  It can therefore be assumed that Korra was either immediately taken into the OWL’s custody after her discovery or brought in immediately following the construction of the compound.  Either way, she’s likely been raised by the OWL since the age of four (per point 1).
• Per point 3, the OWL kept Korra separate from her parents.  Given the size of the compound, there’s no reason her parents shouldn’t have been given living space inside the compound itself unless the OWL wanted to limit the amount of time they could spend with Korra.  In fact, given that Korra wasn’t completely cut off from her parents, allowing them to live outside the OWL’s protection creates a potential security risk that the OWL ought to have tried to avoid if possible (since it would be quite a problem if the Avatar’s closest family members were taken hostage).  Presumably, Korra’s parents don’t live with her because the OWL doesn’t want her to get too attached (which offers the further implication that the OWL might be averse to close non-familial attachments as well, limiting Katara’s ability to take a mothering role towards Korra).
• Point 4 directly implies that Korra was never really allowed much in the way of close peer interactions, either.  It’s quite possible that, if all of her teachers and sparring partners were adults far outside of her age range (as was implied by her firebending test), she never had any close human friends whatsoever.  

And here’s the upshot of all that:

Korra has, for all intents and purposes, been denied consistent affection since the age of four in favor of conditional praise.

Her upbringing was, therefore, emotionally neglectful if not outright abusive (and I sure hope that the OWL didn’t treat her the same when she was five as it did during her firebending test).  The OWL might have meant well, but they had no idea how to raise a child and messed it up as badly as they possibly could given a legitimate desire to do what was best for her.

It shouldn’t be any surprise that Korra has identity issues and a need for validation as the Avatar; she learned from a very young age not to count on her parents love, and ended up filling in the hole by impressing people with her bending.  This is, as can be expected, something of a recipe for disaster in terms of raising a well-adjusted individual.

To make matters worse, the majority of the praise that Korra did get would have been in the context of violence, given that her demonstrated talents are all martial in nature.  Her life was highly controlled, except insofar as she could impress the OWL by showing up her sparring partners or use force/manipulation to get what she wanted over the OWL’s objections.  Violence would have been, essentially, the only way for Korra to define herself and take charge of her own life, which inevitably caused her need for validation to become all the more dangerous.

Or, in other words, by trying to train Korra into the perfect Avatar, the OWL itself crafted her into exactly the sort of person who goes to extremes to get what she wants, doesn’t take no for an answer, and has little experience dealing with people as peers as opposed to obstacles.  Korra might be a highly flawed protagonist, but it can’t be said that she doesn’t have a good reason for being the way she is.

When you think about it Korra’s childhood was really messed up.

lets-roast-mako:

This news disturbs and angers me for that reason along with the fact that they even considered making her evil in the first place. They were actually going to make her the “bad guy” and have Korra go through the entire season without one non-bending friend while fighting against non-benders. It baffles me.

Also, you are correct. Writers should not make characters they dislike the “villains” while making the characters they like “heroes”. This actually explains why the Equalist conflict appeared so black and white. The Equalists were characters that they did not care for and, therefore, they dehumanised them.

Hiroshi Sato, once a caring father, became a killer who turned against his own daughter due to blind devotion without so much as a blink of an eye or even a proper explanation. The Lieutenant’s character is hardly explored except for a few interesting lines near the end of the finale. Noatak is hardly subscribed to his own movement as he lies to his followers and ends up running away from them once he is discovered to be a bender. There is not one Equalist that is actually revealed to be human and, just through this portrayal, it is obvious who is meant to be glorified and who is meant to be spat on.

Frankly, that is one of the worst ways to write up a story. No writer should entirely favour their heroes or else it will remove whatever depth the story might have had. Every antagonist is a human being and that human side should be revealed, not stifled by bias.

writingfail:

I have the feeling that the things you touched on in your post about Asami (good post, by the way) are part of something I noticed while watching the show — namely that Bryke didn’t seem to have any idea that he was writing about an oppressed group of people trying to fight for their rights as human beings. There are only two named Equalists, one of whom is really a bender and the other tries to kill his kid; hardly a sympathetic presentation. Korra’s reaction to meeting the protestor in the pilot episode and hearing his arguments is a confused “You’re oppressing yourself!” which he himself said didn’t make any sense, and in the very next episode she uses her bending to push him around and force him to tell her the things she wants to know. The fact that she’s behaving exactly like the triads she fought in the previous episode is never brought up; it doesn’t even warrant a dismissal like, “oh, but it’s okay when I do this because I’m trying to save my friend, while the triads just wanted money.” The writers literally do not seem to realize that there is any issue here at all.

(via fannishcodex)