Scott Mendelson's Blog

Open Salon's resident movie nerd and box office geek.

Scott Mendelson

Scott Mendelson
Woodland Hills, California, United States
April 02
A ten-year Salon reader, Mendelson also has a film and politics blog/column at Mendelon's Memos: located at: He is also a free lance voice over artist and occasionally contributes film reviews for

Scott Mendelson's Links

Editor’s Pick
JULY 1, 2010 2:05AM

Open Salon review - The Last Airbender 3D (2010)

Rate: 4 Flag

The Last Airbender
102 minutes
Rated PG

by Scott Mendelson

M. Night Shyamalan's The Last Airbender contains a few moments of grace and visual wonder, moments that dare to show me something I've never seen onscreen before.  It's a shame that said beats are contained within a stunningly inept story.  Apparently based on the first season of the acclaimed Nickelodeon cartoon Avatar: the Last Airbender, the film is a structural disaster, choppily bouncing from one brief expositional scene to another.  The picture has no rhythm and no pacing, feeling both heavily edited and curiously padded.  As the introductory chapter to a three-part story, it fails to inspire any reason to care about what comes next, as not a single character emerges from the haphazard narrative.  As a film from the man who once wrote and directed such films as The Sixth Sense and Unbreakable, it is a heartbreaking tragedy, a 'sign' that perhaps the once-great M. Night Shyamalan is truly 'broken'.

A token amount of plot - Well, this film is nothing but plot, arguably the most exposition-filled film since Kevin Smith's Dogma (at least the latter was filled with fine actors doing grand character turns).  Anyway, the film concerns a world which is broken up into four nations: Fire, Wind, Water, and Earth.  In the prior ages, a peace between these four worlds was maintained by one called 'the avatar', but the young boy who was next in line mysteriously disappeared 100 years ago.  Since then, the ruthless Fire Nation has embarked on a world-dominating reign of terror.  But, by happenstance, a pair of young Water Nation scavengers have discovered the frozen body of Aang.  Now alive but with no memory of how long he had been away, the young airbender must make peace with his earlier cowardice and fulfill his destiny.

The writing is putrid, filled with overtly shoe-horned voice over narration and pointless ADR-added explanations.  The dialogue often feels overwritten and delivered in a stilted manner suggesting a foreign film dubbed back into English.  I've often complained of cartoons and films that suffer from the 'we gotta find that treasure' syndrome (IE - characters explicitly explaining what the obvious goal of a given scene is).  But without said voice over and said 'we gotta find that file!' dialogue, the film would nearly be a silent picture.  Nearly every single line in this film is expositional in nature, either explicitly stating events that occurred off screen or detailing plainly visible onscreen action.  I don't know whether this was caused by post-production hack-n-slash, or whether it was simply the byproduct of cramming an entire twenty-episode season into about 95 minutes of movie, but the film never feels like a whole motion picture, but rather the cliff-notes of a much larger story.

There is no character development because no scene lasts more than a minute or two.  There is a hint of character arcs regarding the banished son of the evil leader of the Fire Nation, but Dev Patel has little to work with.  Considering all of the (understandable) outrage that came from casting four Caucasians in lead roles that were Asian in the original animated series ('racebending'), it is almost offensive that the lead actors are blank slates from beginning to end.  This is clearly not a case of Shyamalan sacrificing the racial balance of his story for the sake of casting an irreplaceable young actor (there is no Haley Joel Osment-like discovery in the mix here).  Frankly, the casting has an accidental (?) racial undertone, as the good guys of the Water Nation are all white and/or British while the villainous Fire Nation people generally all portrayed by Indian or Middle Eastern actors.  This is doubly-ironic as the villainous pose has a few decent actors in the mix (Shaun Toub, Cliff Curtis, Aasid Mandvi), so their devious skulduggery provide the rare moments of entertainment.

The film looks suitably epic in scope and in content.  Shooting in 2.35:1 for the first time since Unbreakable, M. Night Shyamalan fills the screen with impressive sights and never feels the need to linger.  The special effects are fine, and there the moments of visual wonder never feel forced into the narrative for their own sake.  As for the 3D conversion, this is a classic case of good news/bad news.  The good news is that you'll hardly ever notice that you're watching a 3D conversion.  The bad news is that you'll hardly ever notice you're watching The Last Airbender in 3D.  There are few 'eye-popping' moments that take advantage of the technology, and there is occasional blurriness during certain long pans.  Point being, there is absolutely no reason whatsoever to see the film in 3D.

The only parts of the film that truly work are the rare moments of action spectacle.  While they are few and far between, the airbending action is genuinely engaging and original in conception and construction.  Shyamalan has an eye for shooting real action, as his set-pieces are rendered in long, fluid takes that showcase the obvious skill involved.  Even when the overly-elaborate conjuring moments seem to resemble a dance, this is still something that we've never seen before.  Even if he has lost his touch with writing and  with directing actors, M. Night Shyamalan certainly has the technical  skills to make a worthwhile action picture.  But this is not that film.  While the film is rated PG, it could have easily gone out as a G.  There is no tension, no suspense, and a very low body count (the film climaxes with scenes of scores of soldiers fighting each other, but no one ever seems to strike a blow or fall down).  And since we are constantly told that Aang the last airbender will be resurrected upon his death, we're not too worried about his well being.

The Last Airbender is a tragedy, pure and simple.  It contains terrible writing, atrocious acting, and a choppy narrative that feels far more patched together than even Jonah Hex, despite running a reasonable 102 minutes.  I don't know what happened to the M. Night Shyamalan who wrote and directed The Sixth Sense, Signs, Unbreakable, and even the flawed-but-worthwhile The Village.  I don't know what he had at Disney that he hasn't had at Warner Bros, 20th Century Fox,  and now Paramount (someone to tell him 'no'?), but he desperately needs  to find it again.  I wrote in my review of The Happening (which is a masterpiece compared to this one) that I still hadn't given up on Shyamalan.  And, frankly, I still haven't.  But that says more about me than it does about him.

Grade: D+

Your tags:


Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Recipient's email address:
Personal message (optional):

Your email address:


Type your comment below:
Oh man, this is just getting worse and worse reviews. Bummer.
my question is have any of you actually watched the TV show that this movie is based off of? for one none of the "main" characters including Aang look Asian. for another thing its a movie based off of a children's Anime cartoon.Anime's are not inclusive on where they are based so just because it is Asian doesn't necessarily mean that all the actors have to be Asian or that it is an Asian country many anime's are based in futuristic times and worlds. so i say read up on what the bases of the movie is before you give it a bad review.
I have not watched the series (I've heard nothing but good things about it), but those who have are the ones who first raised hell over the casting. Besides, the 'racebending' casting issues are the least of this film's problems.
oooof. that smarts.

I think of all the things that irritate me the most in screenplays (whether for television or cinema), it has to be expositional dialogue. Its one of the reasons I hated Law and Order: Criminal Intent. Five minutes of listening to the male detective exposit and tell the story always just drove me mad.

I cannot imagine sitting through 2 hours of "Well, if the (antagonist) has gone that way, as we can tell he must have form these foot prints, then we must follow him! Onward!"

no. f*in. way.
Scott said: "Nearly every single line in this film is expositional in nature, either explicitly stating events that occurred off screen or detailing plainly visible onscreen action. I don't know whether this was caused by post-production hack-n-slash..."

No. This could not have been caused in post. This a bad script with a director who didn't know or didn't care and didn't demand a rewrite. Post can only work with the crap they're given. If its crap from the story-level and the director won't demand fixes, then what can post do with it? How can post make an expositional script non-expositional? I;m quite confident that what we see is the absolute best of what they had to choose from.

Scary, that.
Scott said: "I don't know what he had at Disney that he hasn't had at Warner Bros, 20th Century Fox, and now Paramount (someone to tell him 'no'?), but he desperately needs to find it again."

As one who lives in Central FL and has the requisite love/hate attitude about "The Mouse", I'll tell you what he had at Disney that he doesn't have elsewhere. Exceptional and unrelenting attention to detail and perfectionism. Strong concern over every aspect of the film not just the revenues it would create. (OT It's one of the reasons Universal Studios - who I love - is not getting great reviews for its new Harry Potter attraction, BTW). As much as we all love to hate Disney, they are hard-assed and perfectionistic and unbending. Just like all exceptional creators (J. Cameron, B. Streisand, Oprah etc). People love them for it and hate them equally for it. But the product is always excellent.

THAT'S what he had at Disney that he won't find too many other places unless he develops it within himself.
M. Night Shyamalan, or so I've been told by those who've worked with him, suffers from hubris. This makes him (and, apparently, his investors) believe he is invincible. It appears his presumed assumption that he can do no wrong has, in fact, backfired on him. Most people with a strong of failures would be licking their wounds and perhaps easing back on both scale and expectation. Not, apparently, this writer, director. From an purely economic standpoint, never mind artistic, his win/loss record is abysmal. I'd say it's time to stop financing his projects simply on the strength of "The Sixth Sense" and a few scenes from "Signs" or snippets from "The Village."
"The Sixth Sense" was good enough. "Unbreakable" was passable.

"Signs?" Science fiction cannot have rudimentary scientific holes as large as the chasms riddling that film.

The rest of his track record races downhill and seems to prove the first projects were the aberrations, not the latter. I think the historic ballistics term that comes to mind here is "shot his wad."
@Kevin Lee: I just gotta say it. "Signs" earned American Classic status on the basis of the Aluminum Foil Anti-Alien Hats alone.
There's a strange thing about M. Night Shyamalan's films - I loved Sixth Sense and enjoyed Unbreakable and Signs in part, although they were quite slow and uneven. However when I hear he has a new movie out, I inevitably look forward to it quite a bit.

I think it's to do with my love of mystery and the unexplained, and Shyamalan injects a lot of both into his movies. As long as you're in the right frame of mind and ready for a slow movie, you're in for a fun mental massage for 2 hours. Having said that, Airbender was rubbish ;)

Alistair E-mobile phone deals
This is clearly not a case of Shyamalan sacrificing the racial balance of his story for the sake of casting an irreplaceable young actor (there is no Haley Joel Osment-like discovery in the mix here).

Thanks And Regards,
Online SEO Service