The Last Airbender

[Jaydelart]

Originally Posted by Columbine

Well, I think most of the other points have been addressed and hands up, I haven't seen the movie, but as MMM says, I don't think age excuses poor acting. A rubbish script can bring down a good actor, but you can be young, and still be talented or have experience. Look at the kid in Australia (more convincing IMO than Kidman). Ditto Whale Rider. Ditto Empire in the Sun. Actually I don't think any of them were well-known or established actors/actresses at the time either.

I'm not saying there aren't better kid actors out there who are talented and experienced; that's not my point at all. I'm saying that there should be a realization that real people can't be cartoons. There is the human element that naturally brings forth things such as facial twitches and speech styles... that can disturb someone who is really expecting things to be just like the cartoon.

@Ronin: if people are hinting at a bad script being the cause of bad acting... does that really count as bad acting? I do agree, the script did seem flawed... which I refer back to the fast pacing. It seems the pace is the foundation for most of the criticism (save the racism issue)... and it's one even I'm not comfortable defending.

As for Lord of the Rings. From what I'm aware, LotR was not formerly a hit TV series. It was not originally widely known through picture, and that may be significant in this case.

[MMM]

Originally Posted by Jaydelart

I'm saying that there should be a realization that real people can't be cartoons. There is the human element that naturally brings forth things such as facial twitches and speech styles... that can disturb someone who is really expecting things to be just like the cartoon.

The fact that the source material is animated is really no excuse. Live actors should be MORE compelling than drawn ones.

But I can't help but think of Iron Man, Spider-Man, Superman, Batman, Battle Royale, 20th Century Boys, Death Note, Detroit Metal City, Lady Snowblood, Uzumaki, Old Boy, Lone Wolf & Cub...the list goes on and on of drawn properties that have better live-action versions than The Last Airbender,

[edelweiss]

Agreeing that bad acting is bad acting no matter what. Check out the little girl who played the title role in the French film Ponette. That's stunning stuff from a four year old!

A bad script and bad directing can honestly be improved by a great actor. A bad actor can be compelled to better acting by a great director. A bad actor and a mediocre director on top of a bad script is a no win situation. I think the decent child acting in The Sixth sense was entirely on Osment and had nothing to do with Shyamalan. Same for the acting in all of Shyamalen's other films. I think he has good concepts and ideas but the execution is only as good as he casts it. It's possible that I while I liked the concept and look of Unbreakable, surely most of my enjoyment was some fine acting from Willis and Jackson.

I don't think anyone expects people to act like the cartoon characters they portray. People expect differences. Batman has been produced in all mediums numerous times but certainly nobody expects the animated versions to be live-acted out in the same fashion. People still hate the badly done productions and cheer on the good ones.

[Ronin4hire]

Originally Posted by Jaydelart

@Ronin: if people are hinting at a bad script being the cause of bad acting... does that really count as bad acting? I do agree, the script did seem flawed... which I refer back to the fast pacing. It seems the pace is the foundation for most of the criticism (save the racism issue)... and it's one even I'm not comfortable defending.

As for Lord of the Rings. From what I'm aware, LotR was not formerly a hit TV series. It was not originally widely known through picture, and that may be significant in this case.

bad acting is bad acting... I dont know... I guess you might have a point.

But what difference does being a trilogy of novels as opposed to a TV series make? The point was both were immensely detailed and had far more to them than a 2-3 hour movie could handle at once. Lord of the Rings managed to do pull this feat off better than one might have expected.

[TalnSG]

Originally Posted by MMM

The fact that the source material is animated is really no excuse. Live actors should be MORE compelling than drawn ones.

But I can't help but think of Iron Man, Spider-Man, Superman, Batman, Battle Royale, 20th Century Boys, Death Note, Detroit Metal City, Lady Snowblood, Uzumaki, Old Boy, Lone Wolf & Cub...the list goes on and on of drawn properties that have better live-action versions than The Last Airbender,

Exactly!

In line with Jaydelart's comments about ways bad elements of a production can be overcome by the talents of the actors and/or directors, it only happens when the director allows the actors enough leeway to overcome a bad script, or the script and actors manage to overwhelm a poor director. If two of the three are bad the production is doomed, but enough worse is when all are mediocre and no one rises above the muck.

None of can judge which of these were the telling issues, but it seems to me it was the latter - unless the backers overruled a good director, who overruled even any good acting. Its been known to happen far too often.