It seems that nowadays people are constantly making live-action adaptations of animated properties. From Disney revamping their classic movies into live-action versions to small groups of people making their own indie projects based on their favorite franchises, live-action adaptations are becoming more commonplace.
Netflix has been following this trend as of late by making live-action adaptations of various popular anime shows, including “Death Note,” “Yu Yu Hakusho” and “One Piece.” Their latest adaptation, “Avatar: The Last Airbender,” may not be an anime but a beloved show nonetheless. It is a Nickelodeon classic and easily one of the greatest kids’ shows ever made. A new live-action adaptation was first announced in 2018, and I was tentatively interested in how it would turn out. So when the live-action series finally released on Feb. 22, I gave it a watch.
The show is certainly a better live-action adaptation than M. Night Shyamalan’s 2010 adaptation, which was awful. Visually, it is astounding and an interesting rendition of what we see in the original show. I was very glad to see the bending done in an accurate way that feels tangible in every fight. I appreciate the fact that they were able to hit on most of the major events from season one. The team clearly wanted to please fans by delivering an honest live-action adaptation.
Despite this, the Netflix show fell flat for me compared to the Nickelodeon show. I still prefer the joke adaptation episode from the original show. If I wanted to watch “Avatar: The Last Airbender,” I would watch the original. When the original show was so good already, there was no need to make a live-action version. Live-action adaptations of animated properties as a whole are not necessary. What is wrong with letting an animated property stand on its own and remain in the world of animation?
Anytime an adaptation is made, it will inevitably be compared to the original property. This idea can be seen with the common sentiment of “the book was better.” It can create a difficult position for studios to be put in, as the eyes of many fans are on them and are looking for the adaptation to impact them the same way the source material did. Fans can set themselves up for disappointment by doing this, as there is no way to experience something for the first time again. It gets more contentious when it is called into question if the adaptation is even needed in the first place. Sure, seeing a beloved book be brought to the screen can be fun, but that changes when the original source is animated media.
Animation, especially 2D hand-drawn animation, is already an overlooked medium in the entertainment industry. It is a labor of love for all those involved, and it is impressive what stories people have been able to tell through it. Too often, animation is seen as just for kids and restricted as such by studios. This is not the case, as there are countless adult animated shows, and even when animation is made for kids, creators can still explore deep, mature themes.
When live-action adaptations are made, it says to me that studios think only live-action can tell this story “right” and that the original animated show or movie is lesser because it was animated. Certain studios take live-action more seriously than animation and see it as the better medium overall. This is disheartening and leads to bad adaptations.
It also comes across as creatively bankrupt. Instead of coming up with new stories to tell, studios are regurgitating what we already have in a lesser quality. Disney has been following this pattern lately. The majority of Disney’s live-action adaptations of their animated films have not been well received by the audience. Whenever a new live-action Disney movie gets announced, there is backlash from people saying it is not necessary. But Disney goes through with it every time and makes an inferior copy of a timeless classic.
There is also a certain whimsy that is only possible in animation. You can exaggerate and push the boundaries of reality in a way that would look absurd and campy in live-action. That is where cartoons and animation as a whole thrive. This is apparent in “Avatar: The Last Airbender.” While the original show was serious at times, the anime-style animation gave it levity and humor, a big part of the show’s success and what the live-action adaptation lacks. Live-action adaptations often miss the unique animated features like exaggerated expressions, movements, and line delivery. These elements would seem strange in live-action, resulting in a lesser experience. This is a common limitation of the medium.
I love animation. It is a creative means of telling a story. Live-action will always have its own place in the entertainment business, but it should not be used to override and replace preexisting animated properties. The sooner studios realize this, the better.
