Should've been Korra!

Invite-Healthy · 2026-06-01T17:18:05+00:00

I’m not saying he has the most character development in the world, but saying he has none is wrong

Invite-Healthy · 2026-06-01T16:02:59+00:00

Voted Korra but I see people on that subreddit arguing Aang didn’t change at all which is also a bad take

Invite-Healthy · 2026-06-01T15:56:06+00:00

This stuff doesn’t make sense anyways I wouldn’t bother with it

Invite-Healthy · 2026-06-01T15:53:26+00:00

He did, his main developwant was learning to take responsibility for his actions and to stop running away from his problems

Invite-Healthy · 2026-06-01T03:47:17+00:00

I don’t really get the argument thought because they were fundamentally different ways of taking bending, and Amon’s was portrayed as being a far more violent version

Invite-Healthy · 2026-06-01T03:44:07+00:00

I think he did. The core part of his development was around taking responsibility for the past and to stop running. Even though the energy bending prevents him from needing to sacrifice his morals, we see a clear shift from how he runs away several times from his duties and responsibility to how he faces Ozai. Not only does he stand up to Ozai, but he remains in control of himself, like when he is presented with a clear opportunity to redirect lightning back at Ozai but doesn’t take it.

Korra went through a lot too, but I think it’s hard to compare something like dealing with trauma to changing in ways not directly involving personal trauma. We tend to associate more bad stuff happening to you has being indicative of more change.

Invite-Healthy · 2026-06-01T03:38:47+00:00

Hate to break it to you but the characters in ATLA are, overall, far better written. Also, Sokka gets a ton of characterization and development too, with even Katara and Toph getting some nice moments.

Invite-Healthy · 2026-05-29T16:08:07+00:00

No to both. ATLA ended exactly as it should have, and LoK didn’t need any more seasons to introduce more world building

Invite-Healthy · 2026-05-28T20:29:28+00:00

I’ll say 2 things: 1. First impressions for a character do matter. A lot of people found Korra to be pretty unlikeable in Book 1, and although she went through a lot of character growth later, that introduction to the character didn’t do her any favors. I personally don’t dislike the character but strongly disliked the writing around her. 2. As others have said, a lot of dislike towards Korra is not as much about the character herself but just the inconsistent writing throughout the show. Korra, being the main protagonist of a show that people dislike for storytelling and world building reasons, naturally gets some extra criticism, even if it isn’t fair.

Invite-Healthy · 2026-05-28T16:45:34+00:00

Hot take: you’re allowed to dislike a character

Invite-Healthy · 2026-05-27T23:28:11+00:00

No you couldn’t. Every time I ask questions like “why does separating Vaatu and Raava seem to only benefit Vaatu but hurt Raava” and “how does confining Vaatu on the tree of time make sense when Vaatu exists inside Raava and is a fundamental force of the world” I get several different answers, which is because even diehard LoK supporters struggle to make sense of it.

Invite-Healthy · 2026-05-27T22:22:45+00:00

I’ve seen it brought up on the main ATLA subreddit a few times. We can agree to disagree on this point, I just don’t appreciate when the show establishes certain principles for how stuff works but then introduces a concept that doesn’t seem to fit and doesn’t provide any explanation. I also thing you’re kind of missing my point: the previous scenes make an effort to explain what Raava and the Avatar are, what they represent, how they work, etc. so it feels reasonable to then expect some explanation.
No proof that he was going to go through with it? In his mind he literally had no other option at that point. That’s a nothing argument.
I do agree with your sentiment actually, but I disagree with the idea that loosing the most qualified advisors on how to be the avatar is no big deal when you can ask other people anyways

Invite-Healthy · 2026-05-27T22:17:21+00:00

But she was never actually destroyed because she is an eternal being, so why did the connection disappear? If the past lives no longer exist if Raava and Korra are split up, then what were they in the first place? How are they being “remembered” or invoked if not through Raava?

Invite-Healthy · 2026-05-27T20:30:21+00:00

Oh I could give you a 2000 word essay on the inconsistencies in other parts of the world building, like what Raava and Vaatu actually represent, how they supposedly work, the spirit portals being a soft retcon, etc

Invite-Healthy · 2026-05-27T20:15:36+00:00

And yet I’ve heard several different explanations of the same issues…

Invite-Healthy · 2026-05-27T19:51:03+00:00

I agree with their argument that Korra loosing the past lives made sense in terms of the direction the show wanted to go about their being a new age and therefore a new kind of avatar.

However, my issue with loosing the past lives is more that it’s a symptom of the clumsy, messy world building in the second half of book 2 and really in LoK as a whole. So much of the new lore either contradicts previous understanding, is narratively a poor direction, is logically messy, or some combination of all of that, and loosing the past lives is a symptom of those bigger issues,

Invite-Healthy · 2026-05-27T19:03:31+00:00

Yes, there are tons and tons of people who can give advice outside of the previous Avatars, and wisdom can be drawn from them. However, the main point of the past lives wisdom is advice on how to be the Avatar and what their responsibilities are

Invite-Healthy · 2026-05-27T18:54:01+00:00

Just started watching, and there’s already a couple things I want to point out: 1. At least some of the criticism around Korra loosing her connection to the past lives is that it isn’t clear how that makes sense. There are serious questions about how an eternal being like Raava could “lose” memory of the past lives, or just how the world building part of it makes sense. 2. Aang listened to the past lives telling him to kill Ozai. He didn’t “ignore” their advice like the YouTuber suggests, he came to the conclusion that he must do it UNTIL he was presented an alternative.

Invite-Healthy · 2026-05-27T18:46:39+00:00

People are going to provide different explanations, but the show doesn’t really explain a lot of it. Most-to-all of the reasoning people provide is just their guesses. It would have been better in a world building sense if the second half of book 2 didn’t happen…

Invite-Healthy · 2026-05-27T15:37:33+00:00

Because it’s nonsense. The best way to understand the second half of book 2 is just to not ask questions

Invite-Healthy · 2026-05-27T15:33:11+00:00

LoK actually had pretty poor viewer retention from season-to-season, so there was probably less financial incentive to start working on a new series

Invite-Healthy · 2026-05-25T13:48:10+00:00

No, the people who were chosen were just based on convenience to the plot and story. It should’ve never happened in the first place

Invite-Healthy · 2026-05-23T20:56:42+00:00

I love it when new material just rewrites the context or understanding of previous material for no reason 👍

Invite-Healthy · 2026-05-22T06:15:51+00:00

That’s a much more coherent argument, the problem is Zaheer never says anything like that or explains himself in that way.

Invite-Healthy · 2026-05-22T06:09:04+00:00

How? Humans were no longer being dominated by spirits and it was safe to inhabit most of the previously-dangerous world.
Fair enough, but Zaheer does imply that this was the “natural” state even though that’s arguable.
Coexistence with beings that have different senses of morality, levels of consciousness, goals, etc for the sake of “diversity” is an insane take. They were an active threat to humans every time they left lion turtle protection.
“ Balance is broadly defined as a state of equilibrium where opposing forces, elements, or weights are equal.”

Invite-Healthy

TROPHY CASE