Avatar: The Last Airbender (Movie)

[Melathys]

that timeline indicates that aang dies when he's 60-65 years old (70 years after last series puts him at 83, and Korra would appear to be 15-20 years old)

I wonder, then, if that might make for a movie, since dieing of natural causes at that age would seem unlikely...

[Fivelives]

Avatars probably age faster than other people and die younger.

Bet that's the explanation that'll be used.

[Pallywhackr]

They'd have to change the entire timeline of the series, Roku died at about 80 and Kyoshi at 230.

If you look at http://avatar.wikia.com/wiki/Aang one of the co-creators states his early death is due to the century he spent inside the iceberg.

[Kelaan]

I recently discovered that book 2, book 3, and Sozen's Comet are all on Netflix's instant queue via the Wii. <3

[Tandors]

that timeline indicates that aang dies when he's 60-65 years old (70 years after last series puts him at 83, and Korra would appear to be 15-20 years old)

I wonder, then, if that might make for a movie, since dieing of natural causes at that age would seem unlikely...

I read in an interview with the creators that since Aang spent 100 years in ice, some of his "avatar time" as they put it was used up. In the interview, when asked what they thought of the movie, they completely disowned it.

Edit: source

http://blogs.wsj.com/speakeasy/2010/07/ ... w-spinoff/

[Vanifae]

They don't disown it, they just said they were not involved.

Nothing to disown if you were not really involved.

[Shoju]

They don't disown it, they just said they were not involved.

Nothing to disown if you were not really involved.

I think they most certainly said enough by what they said about their feelings:

What did you guys think of the live-action version of “The Last Airbender”?

Konietzko: We’re just really focused on this new show right now, and kind of taking this off in its own direction and not concerning ourselves with that right now.

The question was asking for their personal opinion. and he side stepped it completely. There are very few reasons why you would side step that question in their position. If they loved it, thought that it was fantastic, and a great adaptation, then there would be absolutely no reason to side step the question and not answer it

So you didn’t follow the casting controversy about the movie version of “The Last Airbender”?

Konietzko: We didn’t head up that film. We’re just happy to be back generating the original content in this mythology, which is what we do.

Again, Completely side stepped the question. Why would you do that? There is nothing wrong with saying: "Gee, we realize that it was REALLY hard to cast people in this amazingly elaborate world we created, and we think that MNS did the best he could at trying to make sure that he portrayed things well.

Would you like to bring a cartoon version of “Avatar: The Last Airbender” to the big screen?

Konietzko: We would love to. I think Mike and I would absolutely love to do feature animation. Either another story, or it if worked out, one in the “Avatar” world. We would be really excited.

This doesn't say a whole lot, but if they were pleased with the product, then they probably would have left out the part the I italicized, as they would have felt that it was done well enough that an animated version would be redundant.

I have heard rumblings that there has been a feud between MNS/Nickelodean/and the creators due to the way that movie was handled, filmed, cast, and what not. Nothing official, but from some of the more 'connected' sites out there, there is rumblings that the creators tried to remove MNS from the project early on because of the way he was handling it.

[Vanifae]

Perhaps but the point is it seems that Nickelodeon ultimately had the final say and their feelings are immaterial.

[mew]

I am still baffled as to why the creators of the original show weren't very involved in the making of the movie (they said they didn't head it up but I'm not sure to what degree they were involved in it). It's like Nickelodeon is completely incapable of making a decent movie. "Hey guys, we have a high budget to make a movie out of a popular TV show! We already have a huge fan base that will probably be ecstatic to see the movie, now all that's left is for us to fuck it up. Then let's make a sequel to Hotel for Dogs!"

[Shoju]

Perhaps but the point is it seems that Nickelodeon ultimately had the final say and their feelings are immaterial.

Well, I believe that is what the feud was/is about. You have people who created a show, delivered a fantastic product, and it was given over to the CEOs to ruin. While their opinion doesn't matter to Nickelodeon, or to Paramount, or to MNS (obviously), it does matter a great deal to the fans of the show who are just as flipping pissed about it.

Funny, as it seems another Nick show (iCarly) did an episode about this exact thing.... (Can you tell I have young children? I watch tons of Nickelodeon)

[Vanifae]

Perhaps but the point is it seems that Nickelodeon ultimately had the final say and their feelings are immaterial.

Well, I believe that is what the feud was/is about. You have people who created a show, delivered a fantastic product, and it was given over to the CEOs to ruin. While their opinion doesn't matter to Nickelodeon, or to Paramount, or to MNS (obviously), it does matter a great deal to the fans of the show who are just as flipping pissed about it.

Funny, as it seems another Nick show (iCarly) did an episode about this exact thing.... (Can you tell I have young children? I watch tons of Nickelodeon)

Oh I agree whole heartedly but it is pretty obvious that design decisions made early did not mesh with their vision of the show.

So for me it does not seem a huge leap to say they may have been consulted but they had no executive power in the movie. Therefore for them the only polite and professional answer they can give to the question that sparked this conversation is a non-answer answer.