The Last Airbender

One of the funniest big budget blockbusters – in a negative sense. There are moments when it’s saved by the relatively good effects and Howard’s music, but after something this clumsy, unoriginal and in every aspect generic, it’s a miracle that Shyalaman still got work in Hollywood. Even Zdeněk Troška in his fairytale beginnings could have done a better job, because this only looked like a more expensive and oriental version of a Czechoslovak TV fairytale. 35% (2020-01-19)

- Knock, Knock! - Who´s there? - Sense. - Sense who? - Sense you can´t see. Happening already made me burst out in laughter several times, but you could still see some of Shyamalan’s signatures, and there were moments when I wondered whether the Indian director isn’t making sophisticated fun of us, a possibility that’s unfortunately ruled out in The Last Airbender. The story is so poorly put together that it defies reason. I don’t think I’ve seen worse dialogues this year and the periodic expository monologues were lethal. In those 103 minutes there was only one interesting moment (the giant wave), which is a very sad balance. A ridiculous movie and I’m sorry for Shyamalan. (2010-11-07)

I have to say that even though the film is not very well made, I liked the mythology. Yes, it's cliché on cliché and Shyamalan may not be able to make a film without unnecessary pathos anymore, but it was a pretty relaxing sci-fi where you could root for the bald guy playing at being Gandalf. True, I don't remember much of it, but I've not forgotten the film completely. There won't be a sequel, which is a shame, as I'm quite interested to see how it develops further. (2014-01-20)

M. Night Shyamalan has indeed lowered his standards for perfectionism significantly, but he can handle a fantasy story with ease. Even so, his screenplay fatally fails in dialogue and presents an intertwined (yet not particularly complex) mythology as the most obvious reality. The essential points, however, are credited to engaging battles and, above all, the final half hour, when I was truly interested in the fates of the characters and the action left me breathless. Three stars may seem somewhat half-hearted, but this still bears the label of Shyamalan's worst film. However, in the context of his previous work, that does not imply anything fundamentally negative. (2010-09-03)

I've always genuinely liked Shyamalan, even when the world was laughing in his face. However, I’m not willing to sit through this theatre show that cost $150 million, even if I happened to like the winds and fire. It ends with divine special effects and a charismatic Dev Patel (!), but the rest of it is one giant mistake because they forgot about the set design (it has barely five locations) and any involvement in the plot. The lack of epicness in the movie theater may have been masked by the 3D, but on the TV screen you want proper characters (and there are some surges in there) and an inflated plot (and the subject matter promises it). Instead, for two hours we watch the yoga poses of a little kid and the most tragic breaks in a villain’s behavior I’ve seen all year. And "Nation of Earth" was just a cameo, right? (2010-10-20)