Programmer Venesya Ko critiques the reworked characterisation of well-beloved characters in the new Netflix live-action Avatar: The Last Airbender, questioning the value it adds to the Avatar franchise.

For many of us who grew up watching cartoons, Avatar: The Last Airbender (2005-2008) – also referred to as ATLA – undoubtedly remains one of the biggest and most memorable animated series of the mid 2000s. 

ATLA is set in a fantastical world heavily influenced by Asian and Native American cultures, where some people have the ability to control one of the four elements – water, earth, fire and air – also known as ‘bending’. As a result, the world is split into four territories and cultures, each defined by one of the elements: the Water Tribe, the Earth Kingdom, the Fire Nation and the Air Temples. For centuries, these four territories lived in harmony, until one day, the Fire Lord (leader of the Fire Nation), launched an attack on the other territories. The Avatar – a divine entity with the ability to master all four elements – vanished, and without him, the Fire Nation managed to oppress the rest of the world under their tyrannical regime for the next hundred years. The series therefore begins with Katara, and her brother Sokka, who free the current Avatar and only survivor of his nation, Aang, from the iceberg he has been trapped in for the last hundred years. Together, they venture around the world so Aang can master the other elements and defeat Fire Lord Ozai, ending the reign of the Fire Nation once and for all. 

With a well-written cast of characters and an engaging storyline that covers themes rarely seen in children’s shows such as war, genocide, and imperialism, with nuance and subtlely, ATLA is widely regarded by many fans and critics as one of the best animated series of all time. In 2018, Netflix announced that they would be making a live adaptation of ATLA, with the original creators – Michael Dante DiMartino and Bryan Konietzko – being involved. The show’s massive fandom was split between excitement and skepticism, especially after the disastrous M. Night Shyamalan live action adaptation in 2010. 

Personally, I never saw a need for ATLA to be adapted as a live-action series because it works as it is, and I only grew more skeptical after the original creators left the show, citing creative differences. Fans expressed even more reservations after Netflix announced the cast in 2021. Ian Ousley, the actor casted as Sokka, was accused of faking his Cherokee heritage for the role. Currently, there are only three federally recognized Cherokee tribes in the United States — the Cherokee Nation, the United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians, and the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians – and all three have decreed the tribe Ousley claims to hail from, the Southern Cherokee Nation of Kentucky, as a false tribe. Even the CNFO (Cherokee Nation Film Office) which represents Native American talent, has stated that “he is not registered with CNFO and is not included in any of our directories, which are readily available for citizens of any federally recognized tribe to enroll in”. Neither Netflix, the production crew of Netflix’s ATLA, nor Ian Ousley, have come out to deny or clarify the allegations. This is not only strange, but also goes against NATLA’s showrunner’s alleged promise of showcasing Asian and Indigenous characters with “authenticity” both “in front of the camera and behind it”. Netflix should have been upfront about the casting issue, because if it is true that Ousley is not Native American, then he has taken away the opportunity to represent an Indigenous character from a Native American actor. The silence from the NATLA team, then shows that they were not genuine about claiming to be culturally and ethically respectful of the source material.

Despite this controversy, production continued and the show was released in February of this year. Curiosity got the best of me, and I pressed play – ended up wasting eight hours of my life – but at least I got to procrastinate my presentation.

Though the show has a lot of issues, this piece will focus on the character writing, as it is what I believe is the show’s biggest failure. I won’t be covering all the characters, only those I feel suffered most from the writing. And to make it fair, the comparisons made will mainly be between the first seasons of the original and remake – henceforth referred to as NATLA. The only exceptions are for the characters of Azula, Mai and Ty Lee, who only appear in the second season of the original but are already characters in NATLA.

Azula, Mai & Ty Lee

I want to start off by saying that the hate the actresses have been receiving for their appearance is frankly rude. Not to mention, while I agree that Azula should been portrayed more menacingly, the people calling for the actress to be replaced by someone ‘hotter’ are just plain weird. Azula is fourteen, she’s not meant to be ‘hot’. My criticism of the characters has nothing to do with the actresses’ appearance; rather, what I have issue with is how the writing lets the characters down. These three are my favorite, and it’s just disappointing to see them being disregarded.

Most people were not expecting the arrival of Azula, Mai and Ty Lee in NATLA because in the original series, they were only introduced as villains in the second season. The disappointing thing about their addition early in the show, is the missed opportunity for the writers to explore more of the complex dynamic that is Azula, Mai and Ty Lee’s friendship, expanding more on the source material; instead the show just lets them stand around. They don’t contribute to the plot at all, it feels pointless to add them in. Fanservice isn’t always bad, but when it’s so blatantly misutilized, it just becomes frustrating.

Let’s begin with Azula. The show really doesn’t want the audience to hate Azula at all, in fact, it seems absolutely terrified of presenting the idea of Azula as an antagonist. In NATLA, Azula is whiny, insecure and constantly worried about not being as good as Zuko. Which, doesn’t make her a bad character, but it’s just so weird because that is more of Zuko’s character in the original? It completely erases all of Azula’s character traits that are a result of the environment she was raised in.

In ATLA, Azula is cocky, sarcastic, incredibly manipulative and enjoys hurting people—something her father enables. When their father burns Zuko in the original, Azula can be seen smiling in the background–she takes pride in being better than her brother. 

I understand the writers’ desire to highlight that Azula, like Zuko, is also a victim of their father’s abuse, but it doesn’t work because Ozai is weirdly nicer in the remake. Rather than being cruel and manipulative, the show portrays him just as a dad who pits his kids against each other. There’s even this weirdly out of place moment at the end, where Azula defies her father and gets away with it. I honestly think instead of inserting a ‘girlboss’ moment like that, the show could have explored more of her psychology and trauma, because despite how frightening she is to everyone else, Azula could never stand up to her father, as she’s terrified of him. Her own mother “thought she was a monster,” and Azula herself thinks that “she was right of course, but it still hurt” (“The Beach” 22:58-23:02). Azula, despite being aware of her wrongdoings, cannot be abandoned by another parent–being her father’s weapon is the only way she knows how to earn familial love. Her fear of her father, and need for his acknowledgement, divulges Ozai’s emotional abuse, allowing the audience to sympathize with Azula, without disregarding what she’s done.   

While the cartoon took its time to slowly peel back the layers of her character, the live-action honestly wastes too much time in giving the female characters these random ‘girlboss’ moments that amount to nothing, instead of treating them like real people and giving them actual arcs. NATLA needs to understand that being subtle is not to be disregarded, and start trusting their audiences more. The Fire Nation is a deeply nationalistic empire with the deep-seated belief that they are superior to the rest of the world; it makes sense for Azula to be as ruthless as she was in the original when she idolizes her father and his twisted ideals. By toning down the evil of the antagonists, the remake is unable to write complex characters, and miss the opportunity to show the effect of indoctrination on children. Just because Azula was cruel does not erase the fact that she was manipulated and neglected; they do not have to be mutually exclusive.

Moving on to Mai and Ty Lee – I have no idea what they’re doing in the show. They only exist to be Azula’s yes-women. Whenever Azula complains, they’ll just go “no, Azula, you’re the best!” And then they continue standing in the background for the rest of the scene. Their characterizations (or the lack thereof) are such a disservice to both girls because Ty Lee and Mai are more than just Azula’s blind followers. Honestly, if the show really wanted to add the girls in, they could have explored how the three came to have such a layered relationship. The original show revealed that they met through the Royal Fire Academy for Girls, a highly militaristic school with a brutal environment. Building upon the already established nationalistic views of the Fire Nation, NATLA could have looked into the complicated bonds that emerge from growing up in not a propagandic nation, but also at such a school. Yes, Azula is also incredibly dangerous to her own friends, but she has also proven that she cares about them, and vice versa. The three have such a compelling dynamic, it’s really such a shame it wasn’t taken more seriously. 

Some people argue that NATLA was attempting to portraying the Fire Nation in a more sympathetic light by toning down their villainous side. However, I believe the Fire Nation kids’ complex personalities do not make them less humane or relatable, I’d argue it makes them more so. The disregard shown to the girls just goes to show that the Netflix adaptation does not care about its characters, or even the lore. The characters are reduced to fanservice bait that lures fans of the original to watch their show. 

Aang

I don’t know how it’s possible, but NATLA somehow, simultaneously never fails to emphasize that Aang is the main character of the show, yet also forgets to give him a personality outside of being serious. The endearing airbender we know from ATLA is gone; in his place is a character who somehow already knows everything! He doesn’t have to learn anything at all! HE DOESN’T EVEN LEARN WATERBENDING AND THE SEASON IS CALLED ‘BOOK ONE: WATER’. 

The original Aang is fun-loving, but beneath his carefree exterior, is also a kid struggling with the heavy burden of being the avatar. The animated series took the time to explore his fears, and portray him as a nuanced character. As the season progresses, it is revealed that the real reason Aang ended up in the iceberg was because unable to handle the pressure, he ran away from the Southern Air Temple, which is how he got stuck in the storm that forced him to freeze himself. NATLA, however, doesn’t bother fleshing out Aang’s character beyond the first episode. He gets lost in the storm by accident so there’s nothing for him to be guilty over. And even though he admits in the pilot that he’s “scared” the show completely forgets that and by episode two he’s completely accepted his situation. (“Aang” 14:39). It’s such a weird change because that night where he disappears is also the same night the Southern Air Temple genocide happens, and the root cause of the shame he feels.

In ATLA, we learn about the tragedy of the Air Temple when Aang, Katara and Sokka discover the ruins of the temples. Aang’s reaction to the loss of his people and his home allows the audience to feel the devastation and cruelty of the Fire Nation without it being spelled out for us. The event is given a lot of weight, and Aang’s pain is acknowledged by Katara, who later tells him “Sokka and I, we’re your family now” (“The Southern Air Temple” 20:43). A huge part of Aang’s journey is realizing that the world does not demand his guilt, and over time, he accepts that it is not his fault, there was nothing he could have done to save them, but he can keep trying, and he’s not alone. He has Katara and Sokka now, a family, the burden is not his alone to bear. 

The original show dedicates an entire episode to this part of Aang’s character arc, but NATLA chooses to spend more time on the attack of the Southern Air Temple itself. While I understand where the writers were trying to go with this change – showing audiences the extent of the Fire Nation’s brutality – I think what it does is actually gloss over the impact of the genocide. in the adaptation, the Southern Air Temple is just a pit stop for Aang to decide to go to Kyoshi Island and learn more about previous Avatars. Literally. I went back to count, they were there for four minutes and twenty five seconds. Within that time frame, Aang is given roughly half a minute to express his sadness before he is shut down.

The Air Nomads were murdered by the Fire nation, but they later covered it up, spending the next century portraying the Air Nomads as the aggressors instead. The Fire Nation erased Aang’s culture, and then created false narratives to justify their colonialism. This is something that human history is familiar with, and continues to happen today. I’ve always felt that the original animated series was anti-war, choosing to depict the aftermath of violence and the lasting effects of war on people, rather than glorifying conquest. However, I feel like this remake ignores the nuances of such an approach, and instead chooses to portray the story as a journey to win a war without understanding suffering, or bothering to show how devastating it is. There’s nothing wrong with depicting death scenes to highlight a point. But when you skip over Aang’s pain, and disregard what initially bonds the three main characters together for the sake of repeated scenes of gratuitous violence, it feels very much like the writers missed the whole point of the animated series. Which is honestly so sad because the adaptation could have used this crucial scene to acknowledge the prevalent destructiveness of colonialism. 

Suki

While Suki is perfectly cast in the remake, her character is unfortunately completely butchered by the writing. In the original, Suki only trains Sokka after he apologizes for insulting the Kyoshi warriors, and owns up to his sexism. He takes the time to reassess his own limited worldview and accepts everything Suki is willing to teach him. He learns the symbolism and culture of the Kyoshi Warriors, even donning the dress and makeup of the warriors. 

But NATLA decided that Sokka’s sexism would be “deliberately cut away at, as it had no place in the new remake”. And since Sokka isn’t sexist here, the training sequence is just for them to stare longingly into each other’s eyes. It’s basically just there to hint at the development of their relationship in future seasons–so fanservice. And honestly I wouldn’t be so pissed off about it, if they hadn’t reduced Suki to a lovesick girl, pining after a guy she just met like an hour ago. She stares at Sokka’s abs, stalks him through the forest, and they kiss after like one training session where nothing happens. In the original, Suki and Sokka’s relationship is built upon mutual respect, that only comes about because Sokka is willing to admit his wrongs and show Suki that he can respect her traditions. Literally everything that makes Suki a character has been erased. She only exists in the show to be Sokka’s future love interest.

The adaptation makes it seem like Suki resents life in the village, and it is Sokka who ‘teaches’ her what the outside world is like, when it’s the complete opposite in the original. Suki takes her responsibility as the leader of the Kyoshi Warriors very seriously, she doesn’t resent it, and she certainly does not need Sokka to show her life outside the village. When Sokka apologizes to Suki, telling her, “I treated you like a girl when I should’ve treated you like a warrior,” Suki replies with “I am a warrior. But I’m a girl too” reminding him that it’s not mutually exclusive, she’s a warrior and a girl, and she demands respect as both (“The Warriors of Kyoshi” 20:40-20:47). There doesn’t need to be a difference between the two. 

Suki’s character exists outside of Sokka, she’s spirited and sassy, not some manic pixie warrior girl. It’s aggravating that a show airing in 2024 is still depicting female characters like this.

Katara

Katara’s character, by far, is the one NATLA butchered the most. And I am so angry–which is how Katara should have been. Instead, she has been reduced to a shell of a character, who never stands up for herself. 

In Avatar, it is very clear to the audience that alongside Aang, Katara is also a main character. ATLA’s iconic opening is voiced by Katara, and she is the first character we are introduced to. NATLA’s opening however, is voiced by a different person off-screen. Though this is a very minor change, having the opening originally narrated by Katara establishes that she is telling the story, and her final lines “he has a lot to learn before he can save anyone, but I believe, Aang can save the world” reflects the hope and belief that is integral to her personality. It is what makes her the glue that holds everyone together. Thus, changing this small detail, still takes away from Katara’s character and agency.

Having lost her mother at such a young age, Katara has had to take on the role of the mother figure. It’s to the point where Sokka admits that when he tries to remember his mom, “Katara’s is the only face [he] can picture” because “she’s always been the one that’s there” (“The Runaway” 16:16-19 ). We get to see how much war and loss has affected her mentality, forcing her to grow up too fast. Yet, in NATLA, Katara is depicted as helpless, someone who doesn’t contribute and only gets in the way. They even make Sokka scold Katara for not pulling her weight, saying she should be “helping out more around the village” (“Aang” 23:38). This is a direct contrast to the pilot of the cartoon, where it is actually Katara who shouts, “Ever since mom died, I’ve been doing all the work around camp!” (“The Boy in The Iceberg” 3:52-55). I just don’t understand why Sokka’s character has to be built, at the expense of Katara’s. The writers could have made him not sexist, without erasing Katara’s character. It’s quite clear then, that while Sokka isn’t sexist, it seems the adaptation is very much so. 

Katara is reduced to one character trait, being good. While there is nothing wrong with being a good person, it just doesn’t make sense for it to be her entire personality. Human beings aren’t just one core emotion or attribute, but layered and flawed beings, something the original understands. In ATLA, Katara is determined, brave, and angry at the injustices of the world, but also compassionate. It’s why she is able to bond with Aang so quickly, because she can understand having the burden of your entire culture on your shoulders. And so, her reaction to Aang’s moment of vulnerability in NATLA feels so out of character and inconsiderate. When Aang expresses his sadness over losing his home and everyone he has ever known, Katara replies, “that’s how you learn how strong you really are” (“Warrior” 56:36). In a moment where Aang is being vulnerable, Katara’s only response is ‘it’s ok that everyone you care about is dead because at least you’re strong now,’ and it is such a dismissive and condescending thing to say. ATLA Katara would have never said that because she understands grief more than anyone else. She has lost so much because of the Fire Nation–her mother, her home, so despite her compassion and hopefulness, Katara is also a very angry person.

The animated series has never shied away from Katara’s anger and grieve. In fact, everything begins quite literally because of her anger. In the first episode, Katara, infuriated by her brother’s sexist comments, goes on a rant that creates a disturbance in the water, large enough to break Aang out of his iceberg. A huge part of the narrative is driven by the characters’ choices and actions, especially Katara’s. Yet, in the remake, she doesn’t really express any desires, she’s mostly just along for the ride. In many ways, Katara is the very core of the show, and to relegate her to the background, is such a disservice to her. The remake tells us Katara wants to change the world, but never shows that, instead it strips away her motivations and nuance. 

Conclusion

I never expected the show to be better than the original, but I honestly didn’t think it would be this hollow. The adaptation doesn’t really care to understand the characters or do them justice. The characters never have a conversation that’s not related to the plot, they’re never allowed to bond so the audience can understand why they stay together. The show doesn’t bother with Sokka and Aang’s friendship, it doesn’t care about Aang’s crush on Katara, it doesn’t examine the dynamics between Katara and Sokka. It doesn’t attempt to show the complicated relationship between Azula and Zuko. Nor does it take the time to explore the dynamic between Ty Lee, Mai and Azula, which is one of the most interesting ones in the series. It feels like the writers thought they could just replace quality storytelling with ‘cool’ action sequences. 

I want to make it clear that the show is not horrible. I can see why there are people who did enjoy it. The set design is incredible, and so are the costumes — except Yue’s horrendous wig which needs to be burned — you can really tell that they put a lot of resources into creating the world of Avatar and it really pays off. Despite the fact that I criticized massive amounts of their character writing choices, I acknowledge that there were some changes I liked.

For instance, I loved the way they portrayed Zuko and Iroh’s relationship, there was a lot more depth than what we were given in the first season of the animated show. It also helps that Zuko’s character was done the most justice writing wise. So I’m not saying it’s the worst thing that’s ever been done, but it’s so meh. I know it’s not as bad as the M. Night Shyamalan film, but just because I didn’t get food poisoning from a bland bowl of porridge doesn’t mean I need to praise it. The original animated series has a very special place in a lot of people’s hearts, and the Netflix live action simply does not provide a good enough justification of why it exists. 

As I’m writing this, it’s been announced that NATLA has been renewed for two more seasons, and while I am not likely to pick this show up again, it’s clear the cast was very excited about the renewal. And you know what, in this economy, I’m glad the people who worked on the show got to keep their jobs. 

Fundamentally, NATLA is not the first show that have shown themselves to be more interested in repackaging nostalgia into a visually beautiful show so it sells better, than in presenting an actual story with a message. Despite the failure of remakes such as Gossip Girl (2021) and Pretty Little Liars: Original Sin (2022), studios and streaming services continue to pump them out because they are a safety net that guarantees at least, the interest of fans of the original. The capitalization of nostalgia is prioritized above new and interesting stories that attempt to break the mold and allow for more perspectives to be told. It’s a very bleak reality, and honestly more worrying, is the fact that even after all this time, Hollywood still doesn’t know how to write female characters. I’m aware this isn’t always the case, characters such as Mizu and Akemi from Blue Eye Samurai are a recent example of well-written ones. Yet, the frequent cancellation of well-written, female-led series such as The Wilds and Warrior Nun, while shows with such surface level and sexist portrayal of female characters are renewed, brings the question of whether Hollywood truly wants to represent complex female characters, or is everything just performative writing?

notes while watching:

• The dialogue is so repetitive. 

• Why are we being told how to feel. 

• Takes series with so much nuanced subtext and replaces it with exposition, omg pls ya. 

• Cin cin stop

• Tolong who wrote this dialogue? wattpad?

• Why are we getting everything told to us, like how does this random grandma know he’s the avatar??? STOP WITH THE ENDLESS EXPOSITION

• Woahhh Suki is so pretty

• Suki what did they do to you

• She’s really pretty tho

• I’m so not invested

• Why are Sokka and Katara lowkey annoying, what has this show done to them

• Where is the waterbending, it’s been like four episodes, I swear if he only learns in the last ep I’m going to

• omg Bumi, what did they do to you

• Why is he literally more villainous than Azula and Ozai????

• Omashu pretty tho, would vacation there

• Omg Katara stand up girl, this isn’t u

• Ok whatever I guess Zuko being beat up was funny 

• Ok this is actually kinda sad

• Wait, this is so sad actually

• WHAT IS THAT WIG 

• This is giving vampire diaries veil arc, but worse 

• Maybe Netflix should remake vampire diaries 

• That makes like zero sense narratively and character wise 

• I don’t care ughhhhhhhhhhhh

• Ho liao lah

• Ok fine I guess that’s kinda cute

• MAKE IT MAKE SENSE

• Screaming in a bad way siao liao

• Omg he never learns waterbending? IT”S LITERALLY CALLED BOOK 1 WATER???????

• This better not get renewed when they literally canceled warrior nun