The sword Sokka originally wanted. pics from x cropped and edited by me
(Source: official-sokka)▲2237 | reblog
watching fans rage over canon you agree with like
cant touch this
his legs become a fucking helicopter like were they serious?!
You guys should watch this video until the end! ;D
Seriously, the very end needs to be seen
Some of the things he said ticked me off BUT PLEASE WATCH TO THE VERY END BECAUSE ITS WORTH IT
Yo the Headband was a freaking awesome episode, and so was the Waterbending Master.
But watch till the end, pls.
I would like to raise polemic regarding this reviewer’s seemingly reductionist and superficial regard for some of these episodes. Naturally I’ll agree with the more palatable of his assessments. “The Great Divide” and “Bato of The Water Tribe” are both rather disconnected from much else in the canon of Book One: Water, and they have their fair share of problems. Nonetheless, I’ll confront what I find most problematic with this review.
- The reviewer reduces much of his criticism to baseless, circumstantial, and superficial facets of the show. That “The Swamp” makes it on here for its physical setting “ew a swamp, who could have enlightenment there?!?!” upsets me to no end. While I won’t stand tall by the Foggy Swamp Tribe - two of three might be regurgitated stereotypes - they nonetheless diversify the fictionscape for characters in this universe. I found it daring that someone of such humble provenance could achieve enlightenment! The reviewer finds this to be tasteless, “gross, Duck Dynasty in Avatar ew!” Further, “The Boiling Rock, Part 1” as just too long and too slow in pacing doesn’t fly with me. Has he completely ignored the deep character discussion to which we are treated here? The “critical” approach panders to a less-informed, less-invested audience. Thus, he misses his mark.
- The reviewer betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of Avatar as it markedly departs from certain cultural tropes. As many other reviewers have, I laud “The Headband” as a creative departure from the demand in American television for “plot-oriented” writing. “Filler” has been painted red on tv: off limits, detractive, ineffectual. Avatar subverts this expectation. So many of the critic’s reviews here harp upon the “use” and “originality” of the episode, and with “The Headband” he loses. “The Headband” exemplifies the variety of effective “filler” episodes. While fans will jump at the successful fill of eps such as “Tales of Ba Sing Se” for its capacity to deepen specific characters, few will realize the filler effects of “The Headband.” Herein the creators invest much time and nuance into cultural development. That the reviewer here reduces this episode to the “plotline of Footloose” horrifies me. I never once before made this connection given how intricate the picture of the Fire Nation proved to be. Nothing harkens to the Christian midwest of the States! NOTHING! That the critic stumbles over this “overt pop cultural reference” reveals the depth of his analysis: one maybe two layers into the show’s depth if he’s lucky. The similarity of his approach to “The Cave of Two Lovers,” reduced to recombinant rom com tropes, comes as irrefragable proof of vapidity (in his thinking and) in his remarks. Keen to critique the “ickier” of physical settings with “The Swamp,” here he completely ignores the colorful and complicated aesthetic of culturally attentive appropriation and imagination, i.e. the idiomatic expression of the show. The writing of Avatar prescinds from pop culture tropes just as obviously as it emulates East Asian mythology. This is complicated and purposeful and instrumental to the success of many episodes, “The Headband” and “The Cave of Two Lovers” withstanding.
- The reviewer reveals much bias that proves to be in express contrast with the central aim of Avatar. His problems with “The Waterbending Master” and “Sokka’s Master” both land here in this category for me. With the former, he essentially whines, “Ugh why do we have to have sexism for the developing female character to overcome? It’s fiction we could have anything instead?” With the latter, “Why does one of the male character have to talk about his feelings? He’s male, he has a cool boomerang! He doesn’t need feelings!” Does the critic not recall how pointedly this show wielded the word “sexist” in the first scenes of its very first episode?!? Is he serious?!? Katara fighting against sexism is such requisite representation. The reproduction of sexism as cultural context for one of the nations (all of which are based on real human culture, in which sexism rages in almost all settings) is not only believable but also invaluable to the process of developing a strong feminist stance in the writing. Furthermore, “Katara doing her thing” wasn’t what, in the end, changed Master Pakku’s rigid position on societal expectation and cultural value. It was his past. Master Pakku’s past, in the form of Katara’s necklace, reared its head to reveal his own ugliness! To hold a mirror to his sexism and finally to illuminate his adherence to cultural and sexist stricture as the source of his unhappiness as the reason his betrothed left him jilted! This was unexpected and effective writing, and acknowledging it as such undermines the critic’s insistency on predictability as the downfall of this episode. With “Sokka’s Master,” I found the critic’s ignorance of Sokka’s internal conflict, feelings of inadequacy, and sense of defeat to be insensitive. The reviewer projects, “I don’t have a problem with Sokka, so why should he have any with himself?” Where’s the reviewer’s bias here? I’d say we see it in the devalorization of time allotted for character’s to muse on their own journey and development, to open up and share their innermost feelings. “Sokka’s Master” departs from the expected characterization for Sokka and it allows him the space to become a more well-rounded, sensitive, and open character. This is the space Sokka comes to fill! This is as important to his character as are his trademark quips! That Sokka is male opens another dimension. I see bias, on the critic’s part, against men who talk of their feelings and embrace more “feminine” characteristics. The reviewer might not realize it, but in his trite criticisms of this episode (which is the first episode during which the writer’s allowed Sokka the time to reveal his true self behind the performance of humor and wit) the reviewer polices Sokka’s character as a representation of maleness. “Sokka, you do enough as is, you’re valuable! Pull yourself up by your bootstraps and stop complaining!” The writers didn’t demoralize or undermine Sokka’s character in this episode, they liberated it.
Well just a few thoughts…so many of these episodes rank amongst the best episodes for me. I was floored.
Caught up in pop culture and his own bias, Nostalgia Critic misses the point with many of these “worst of the best” episodes.
Oh and don’t mistake this review as just another angry comment from a fan who too highly values the show. There is an aim of the show that this critic’s work seems to undermine.
To clarify the second point: I’m not suggesting the creator’s operate in a space of cultural otherness, wherein popular culture tropes don’t exist. I’m not trying to deny the Footloose trope or its influence on American media. I’m just saying that, whether or not it had any say in “The Headband,” the show casts aside the typical associations by steeping the enemy culture in much more than just repression of movement and dance.
I think it quite obvious that Aang picked one aspect of their culture upon which he could focus to show the Fire Nation kids the one kind of freedom Aang felt best-equipped to convey (based on his Fire Nation knowledge from a century ago, his martial arts, his personality, etc.)▲1364 | reblog