To be fair of Aang, his character arc was more accepting the responsibility of what he must do while not losing the person he was inside :)
1. Korra is not more interesting. Heck she never does nay of the goofs or pranks that Aang did.
2. The antagonists had ideas but not execution. Take Amon's point about equality which was resolved by just beating him up and proving he was a waterbender. With the original series it was treated more as a long war then just a glorified bar brawl.
3. The side characters in Korra are just as one dimensional as any found in the original. Like Varrick the mad scientist and Jinora the brainbox.
4. I think your missing the point of the final season in that technology is outstripping bending and spirituality. The standard mecha suits this season were tougher than all but master benders. Heck most of the series was grounded on the streets of Republic City.
5. You admit the execution is flawed, well that is an understatement. They fumbled it like a lead balloon.
A wish is never free.
I disagree with you. I thought ATLA was more fun to watch, with the lighter tone appealing more to me.
Whatever, though. That's just me.
I know it's going to be opinion, but I would definitely argue for Korra being more interesting. I'm not saying Aang was a bad character, he was a great character. But Korra is incredible. She changes so much and grows so much over the franchise and she's incredibly complex and relatable. Aang is a fun character, Korra feels like someone I know and would respect as a person. And her trauma arc was probably one of the most well handled trauma arcs in anything ever
@shinfernape:
1. That is your opinion, but cheap gags =/= good character. Also, it's extremely stupid given how her personality is.
2. Amon's point is that his methods became his unoding. Want equality but invoking hatred in order to get it? Fine,s ee your ass handed to you by your own followers. Want to lie? Fine, see that backfiring. He wasn't "beaten", he was humiliated, then murdered by his own beloved brother.
3. No, they are not. Varrick is not a mad scientist, he never actually fills the archetype even when working for Kuvira. Jinora is not a brainbox, she's smart but her true talent lies in her faith. And so forth. There is no true archetype.
4. Yes, but spirituality and nature remain extremely prevalent to the end, and ultimately co-existence prevails.
5. Now you're just being ED.
^
1. The point is Aang had more range than Korra. Yes he was a joker, but he could take things seriously too.
2. Ultimately what changed to make non-benders gain equality? They just ended it with fisticuffs which is fine with your typical autocratic types but not when addressing actual injustices. The show aims for these concepts but fails to deliver.
3. "Varrick is not a mad scientist", so he's not a bizarre inventor and Jinora isn't a know-it-all? Pull the other one.
4. They don't coexist at all. The spirits set up shop in the human world, but so far as we see humans do not actually settle in groups in the spirit world. This "harmony" is absolute crock. There is a reason Wan separated the two in the first place.
5. My name is not Ed. Use acronyms that make sense. Also, undoing is not spelt "unoding"
A wish is never free.
I don't see how Korra (or anyone else) needs to be intentionally funny to be 3-dimensional... especially since she changed from Hot-blooded to using fighting as a last resort. Also, 'mad scientist' is literally that; one who makes crazy things without heed of anything. Varrick was close to such, but he did it for the money, not just for the sake of it (and then he moved away from it in Season 4)
Also, coexist does NOT need to be fully equal to qualify for the term - there's a reason for small steps after all. Also a reason why there's more than just Black+White morality, because there's more nuance than just that (these examples included)
1. No, he didn't. Just watch both series.
2. Nice goalshifting there. Raiko was elected, for starters.
3. Varrick is not a Mad Scientist. Not only is he an opportunist more interested in money, he's also nowhere near in terms of personality and demeaneaour to the mad scientist achetype. Jinora, again, doesn't show her taletns in knowledge or even wisdom, but her spirituality.
4. Literally nothing that happened in the series follows what you've just said. There is a fast resolution to that conflict, yes, but it is still there, and both forces co-exist perfectly in the end.
5. Autist doesn't even begin to describe this.
Overall, you come across as an angry stereotype of a hater that appearently hasn't bothered to actually watch the show. Perhaps you'd like to calm down and actually watch?
^
1. Yes he did. If you actually gave examples to back the point up, it might help.
2. The Earth Kingdom royalty weren't benders either. Figureheads do not equal equality.
3. Varrick ticks so many of the boxes for mad scientist. He most certainly is no sane scientist.
4. They don't co-exist perfectly. The spirit vines were just popping up in buildings in Season 3, which Korra fails to remove. Then after Season 4 there are even more vines.
5 Stop throwing around the word "autist", that doesn't help your argument.
Think this for a second; why would I write a review after the whole show finished? Trying to infer I haven't watched the show is a petty accusation to say the least.
A wish is never free.
1. What else can I say? Aang just slightly progressed, he was throughly the same person at the end with just some post-war wisdom, and frankly there's a disconnect between his character in Book 1 and the others.
2. No, the underlying issue here is that there was a bender elite, and that elite was supplanted.
3. Again, he doesn't fit the Mad Scientist archetype. Just because a character is wacky and associated with scientific work doesn't mean he's a mad scientist. And, love it how you don't address this, just utilise circular reasoning.
4. Now it's clear that you didn't watch the series. They were caused by Vaatu.
1. Debatable. Really a "potato pot-ah-to", kind of difference. I believe Korra had a lot more character growth, because Aang really didn't "need to" grow as much.
2. Antagonists were more diverse, and sometimes more dangerous, but not necessarily "better".
3. Totally disagree here, at best some of the characters are about equal but many of them lack characterization or respect. Mako, for example, had virtually no personality outside of being defined by his jobs and his relationships. Asami is about the same as Mako, her story always felt a bit forced to me. And if the finale is interpreted "progressively" it only exacerbates her lack of purpose beyond Korra's gravitational pull.
4. Korra was more about Korra herself than world building. Much of the world building occurred off screen, and we don't get to see the Fire Nation :/
5. Debatable, A:TLA had more morals than you give it credit for.
1. Aang did progress, as we can see from taking on the mantle of the Avatar and learning to face challenges head on like and Earthbender. I will grant that Korra had a bigger change in character than Aang, but Aang still exhibited more range.
2. They weren't really supplanted. Kuvira, a metal bender, replaced the Earth Queen. Raiko was in the minority when it came to the head honchos in Republic City, between Lin, Tenzin and Korra. Ordinary non-benders did not get affirmative action.
3. I do address this by pointing out he has the same qualities as a mad scientist. You just refuse to accept this.
4. Actually Vaatu just corrupted the spirits. They pointed this out in Season 4. Stop trying to make out that others didn't watch the show. After Vaatu's defeat the spirits reverted to normal.
A wish is never free.
@son:
- I think they were objectively better. No matter the flaws, its better to have an intimidating character that is human than one that is a cackling Hate Sink.
- Totally disagree with Mako and Asami. The former is defined by his uncertainty, and ultimately goes through an extreme change himself. Asami is defenitely very complex: sweet, but pragmatic, enterpreneur but supportive, reasonable but emotional, and always with a strong sense of conviction. That's like saying Katara is only OCD or Aang only a clown.
- No, not debatable. It has morals, but they're stereotypical and shallow.
No, no, a thousand times no.
Korra is not interesting a character. She's shallow, boring, and has no arc. The villains are flat as cardboard and defined far too easily. The supporting cast are single layered vs. the multi-layering even comedy relief like Sokka got. And the morals? You mean the stereotypical "Nobody loved me!" nonsense that Haman Karn, erm, Kuvira gave at the last second? Or the twirly mustached Uunalaq who just wanted power by aligning himself with the (never before seen or mentioned) dark god of the universe? Those villains are human? They're stereotypes, and in Kuvira's case, her archetype was done far better in other shows. Does that make me a 'hater' because I find genuine flaws in the writing, the world building?
@shinfernape 1. Why is range more important for a character than anything else to you? That's similar to liking chocolate (by itself), then hating it when it's combined with peanut butter, I think... Korra is a serious character through-and-through before and after the changes, but that's just her style, and doesn't bring her down in ANY way imo (not on principle).
2. Wu was going to replace the Earth Queen, not Kuvira (she just took it from him to form the United Earth Empire, at the surprise of all of them), and he's a non-bender. And then after the series is over, the Earth Kingdom is gonna be a united republic type of thing, which is sure to get non-benders represented better.
3. Like stated, being similar to a Mad Scientist doesn't automatically make Varrick one (especially since he's only doing it for the money, which then changes in Season 4, which Mad Scientists generally don't do). It's a lot more nuanced that that
4. Yes, Vaatu corrupted the spirits, but it was his doing that they overran Republic City in the first place - and then afterward, the decision to stay kept them there.
No one said anyone was a hater Beatman1... but some of us simply don't agree with what you've said. And yes, that means some of us like Korra, thing she (and the villains) were 'at least' generally interesting and/or grew a pair, even if none of it was perfect.
It's just how it is
@Shimegi
On the support characters, Mako's "uncertainty" is centered around his relationship with Korra (and his jobs). He doesn't really "change" (if you want to call it that) much until we see him become Korra's full time boyfriend (beginning of Book 2) after they break up his personality shifts back to his regular brooding self. Asami's involvement in the plot is based on her importance to Korra. Most of their depth takes place off screen.
On the morals, it IS debatable. If it wasn't debatable they would be self-evident. With every season, the Legend of Korra solves the problems without really addressing the moral, philosophical, or logical implications of the circumstances.
@ Beatman1
Korra did have a character arc; her character development was spread out throughout the entire series, and it's in the fourth season where it's most noticeable. Korra started out as this brash hothead willing to fight at the drop of a hat to solve problems, but later she really cooled down, to the point where she only resorted to violence as a last resort.
It seems that the reason you're saying Korra had no arc is simply because you didn't like her as a character, and while disliking Korra is perfectly fine (opinions are opinions after all), you disliking a character isn't the same as said character not having an arc at all.
I'm personally really ambivalent towards Korra as a character, though. Sometimes I enjoy her, but other times she really gets on my nerves.
@Beatman1: Clearly someone needs to rewatch the show, and it isn't me. It's like you copypasted all /co/'s trolling comments, their disconnect from reality incredibly obvious.
@ Shimegi
1. Range helps flesh out characters and stops them being one-dimensional. Korra just doesn't have the full package like Aang did, I never particular liked Aang as a main character in the first place. But with Korra, it seems like a lot of the good episodes were the ones where other characters got their chance because she wasn't in them.
2. So the Earth Kingdom goes from being ruled by a line of non-benders to the possibility of having benders at the top. Some equality there.
3. Varrick because less about business as the series went on, and being a crazed inventor became his thing. He fits the bill with that description than any other.
4. So the spirits overran the city of their own volition. No Vaatu left to control them. Thus the whole harmony malarkey is junk.
A wish is never free.
At the same time, it's not exactly like everyone in real life is the complete package. Giving someone more range both makes them easier to like and fill time with, but it also stops them from being a lot of the people you'll meet in your everday life.
Korra is like a friend you have. She's not the funniest friend and doesn't crack jokes as often as the others, but she's earnest and determined. Always willing to try and help and she's learning where that doesn't help out.
It's not one-dimensional at least.
Shimegi: Your arguments kinda lose weight considering you seem to insult everybody who disagrees with you as an "autist" or an "imbecile". Just saying.
Now my personal opinion is that Korra still qualifies as a good series, way above the average cartoon. But it just doesn't measure compared to The Last Airbender. At least that's my feeling.
"Vastly superior to ATLA"- such a sweeping statement you made there.
1. Korra engaging? Oh yeah she was so engaging that she irritated me from Season 1 until the last. That's how engaging her character is - negatively engaging. I always felt that Korra was always on PMS mode. Always brash, always disobedient, rebellious and stubborn. To be honest, I felt that the change in her character in the last season was an overwhelming "blah." I could go on and on about Korra and Aang, but in the end I would still choose Aang as the better protagonist for a million of reasons inlcluding this - Aang made the audience feel grounded, optimistic, hopeful, and wiser.
2. The antagonists in LOK are good characters. I honestly like these characters more than Korra herself since the show projected much depth in the characters and stories of these antagonists.
3. The side characters in LOK are so good that I prefer them over Korra. Yes, I'm serious. However, I also love the side characters in ATLA... In fact, I find the side characters in ATLA more endearing than those in LOK. I actually feel that the side characters in Korra, except for Asami (goodness, she's so boring and flat) made the whole show bearable to watch. If it's just Korra the entire time, I think I would just feel mad at the world.
4. LOK morally better? PLEASE. LOK showed too much disobedience, selfishness, and rebellion. ATLA has so many wise and beautiful lessons to share that I would rather choose my kids to watch it over LOK.
Korra is one of the poorest protagonists. While having great potential, she's boiled down to a useless automaton, which is the only character that can be thrown out from narrative without any consequences except for mcguffin-related ones.
I eat cookies
Honestly Korra was fine as a protagonist. Not perfect, but she did evolve a lot and that's appreciable. The OTHER main protagonists, on the other hand... Mako was rather bland until the final season and Bolin, while likable at first, devolved rapidly into a Butt Monkey Plucky Comic Relief, though I'll admit he got a bit better once he got Lavabending. And Asami... Okay, Asami was great actually. Tenzin&family too. But Mako and Bolin just don't compare to the like of Toph, Zuko or Sokka.
Korra's fine in concept as a heroine. It's just that the execution was so utterly botched that it became kind of sad.
Do not start with this again, Beatman1.
First, don't give me orders.
Second, it's a perfectly valid question. Is the supporting cast part of the problem with how Korra comes off?
It wasn't an order. Just a recommendation.
No one actually alluded to that question before you. Theokai3 only made an observation. Still, how does Korra come off to you, and why?
I'm only questioning it now because of the observation Theokai3 bought up. Things like the love triangle, people being one-note comedy relief, that's not on Korra as a lead. That's on the supporting cast and their interactions with Korra, creating guilt by association.
It's never been my experience that people will dislike a character because of interaction with less-liked ones. Usually they'll hate that character more for "ruining" the first. I've also observed little dislike of Korra, especially after her character arc.
I'm more reflecting on my own complaints, and that I blamed Korra as a character when I should have blamed the supporting cast more. I feel like I need to re-examine my issues with the show as far as characterization goes.
Leave a Comment:
Vastly Superior to ATLA
Yes, I said it. LOK is ten thousand times better than it's predecessor.
Here's the basic gists:
- The protagonist is far more engaging. This is not a diss on Aang, who is himself a wonderful protagonist as well, but for all complaints he pretty much rarely evolves, his angle is mostly about accepting responsibility. Korra, on the other hand, goes a full 180º: from brash, headstrong young woman comes a wiser, peaceful, down to earth person. Admitely some of her development is too emotionally gruesome, a visceral breakdown, but in the end its worth it. Our little girl grow sup.
- The main antagonists are better, hands down. The Fire Nation isn't total morally Black, but its head, its true representatives, are, and of these only Azula ultimately has any sort of character, and just at the very end. LOK, on the other hand, has very morally complex antagonists: a tortured young man who came to see himself as a monster and wishes to cleanse the earth of all other monsters, a misguided anarchist group seeking freedom for all with no ulterior motives, a spirited woman who always felt abandoned and wanted to make sure her nation wasn't. With the exception of "HAW HAW HAW I'M EVIL" Vaatu and Unalaq, nearly all antagonists are both well-intentioned visionaries and have their own traumas, making them unambiguously human and worthy of sympathy. They work off Korra very well, and in the end she becomes a better person because of them.
- The side characters are simply better. ATLA has its advantages in turning stereotypes into fully fleshed characters, but LOK goes an extra mile and makes its side characters entirely unique individuals with no clear cut archetypes, and so are much better for it.
- The worldbuilding is phenomenal. Few shows can mix High Fantasy and Urban Fantasy without sacrificing one or the other, yet LOK never feels the need to exterminate one side for the sake of the other, except in the first season. To say nothing of the pretty landscapes and artwork.
- The show is better morally. In ATLA, we have standard things like "GURL POWAR" and spirituality = good. On LOK, we have a few examination of the ramifications of that, spirituality =/= good, and the injustices of the world are addressed, like the genetic nature of bending. Though at times the execution is flawed, kudos for the effort.