Aang: Pretty flat character. Goody two-shoes boy scout. Pacisfist and doesn’t even eat meat. No edge...

>Aang: Pretty flat character. Goody two-shoes boy scout. Pacisfist and doesn’t even eat meat. No edge. The ultimate kids character. Couldn’t even bring himself to kill Ozai.
>Katara: Stuck in permanent mom and waifubait mode. Always bitching about something.
>Sokka: Annoying as fuck. When’s he’s not being cringingly unfunny, he’s being self righteous about stupid shit.
>Toph: Had potential at first but her characterization stops at “lazy sarcastic bitch”
>Zuko: The only good character and even he suffers from being flat at times. After he got off “I must kill the Avatar!” kick, he became all about “muh redemption!”

I like this show but it needed a better cast.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=yjmoSucnCq8
youtube.com/watch?v=R8ef9Bj_0Ig
youtube.com/watch?v=0aDcWucKFjA
twitter.com/AnonBabble

This is literally why I downgraded ATLA to below Teen Titans. The latter show didn't have such worldbuilding, but it had better characterization.

its shit like this that makes me realize you can make ANY character sound like shit if you try hard enough.

who the fuck is that girl between toph and aang?

Yes, but OP has a valid point, user. The writers of ATLA (when they were being competent, mostly in writing Book 2) focused heavily on character development, which is great - except they "forgot" that to properly develop a character you needed to start with a strong foundation.

I put "forgot" in quotes here, because this seems to be an extremely common and damaging misunderstanding. Character development is all the rage now, even though it should only be used carefully and sparingly.

>actually trying to make Zuko sound like a bad character

>ATLA to below Teen Titans

Fucking hell.

It's just some oc with Aang's face

You're a fucking retard and an idiot and so is the OP. Avatar was not perfect but I don't even know what you fucking nerds are running your mouths about. Cite an example of something you think did "character development" properly so I can laugh at you.

That's what I thought. just being sure I didn't drift into another universe.

>except they "forgot" that to properly develop a character you needed to start with a strong foundation.
>Character development is all the rage now, even though it should only be used carefully and sparingly.

You need to calm down kid, you seem to have worked yourself into some kind of autistic frenzy. Use your fidget spinner, sounds like you need it.

>Being this mad

Vegeta from Dragon Ball(before Super). You literally cannot deny this. He’s popular because of his character development.

exactly, everytime I see shit like this, NO ONE ever puts own what they think is a GOOD example of character personality.

did you just literally ignore WHY they are the way they are...cause that matters too.

Yeah the characters have always been the weakest part of Avatar. I think Korra did that aspect better. I think all the hate Korra herself gets is because she feels like a real person you can hate and not a ball of traits like Aang.

“Why” doesn’t mean it’s good.

Vegeta more or less woke up one day and decided not to be as much of a piece of shit. There was character development in that he changed, yes, but there wasn't anything in the story or writing to mark his progress especially since DBZ is about as far from character driven as you can get.
If you actually think character work in DBZ is better than Avatar I'm afraid there's no hope for you.

this was a good show. I liked when it was on. I am shocked that people consider it to be one of the greatest animated works ever.

>Cite an example of something you think did "character development" properly so I can laugh at you.
I'm gonna get shit for this once again, but... W.I.T.C.H. did it basically flawlessly, but that show is truly one of a kind, it seems. If you'd hear me out, I could provide detailed examples.
Teen Titans actually had shakier foundations at the very beginning, but the characters were easier to make more endearing, and the writers generally did so incredibly well.

BTW Zuko is one of the characters I have the fewest complaints about, even with the horribly and obviously rewritten scripts in Book 3.
You are an idiot. LOK didn't have characters at all, it had plot devices instead. (Quite literally.)
Really all of you, but especially this moron, need to refer to pic related on a regular basis.

>Vegeta more or less woke up one day and decided not to be as much of a piece of shit.

Nigger literally have you even seen DBZ? Vegeta has a slow and steady character development throughout the show. He literally didn’t become a “good guy” until pic related and even then he still wasn’t fully onboard with it until the final fight with Kid Buu. Get the fuck outta here.

>DBZ is about as far from character driven as you can get.

Oh you’re one of those people who thinks the show is just random fights.

>Aang lacks edge
>Katara is too much of a woman
>Sokka is annoying and unfunny
>Toph is one-dimensional
>Zuko traded his one character trait for another

Pretty accurate assessment of the cast.

Both of you forgot about Suki.

Fuck off WITCHfag, no one cares about your charts.

>but the characters were easier to make more endearing
Because they are all made to fit stock character types. Then in those moments where they break out of those molds you think "Oh wow what amazing character development" even though nothing meaningful happened. Team Avatar is largely devoid of character development but they feel much more real.

>the horribly and obviously rewritten scripts in Book 3
Huh? Do you actually think scripts don't go through multiple rewrites?

>your charts
>your
Please go educate yourself. Preferably at an age-appropriate school for you.

the why is a good deal part of the foundation you fucknut.

You didn't contradict me dummy. How slow his change was has nothing to do with it. We saw external forcespressuring Zuko and him going through internal crises that eventually pushed him to change. We saw every step of his progress and its pay off was great and important.
Vegeta pretty much sticks around being slightly less dickish over time. Which is fine, like I said not a character driven show, but to comparatively refer to that as the right way to do character development is unbelievably retarded.

It's a plot based adventure show. Not character driven.

It may be part of the foundation but a shitty character is still a shitty character especially if they’re not developed.

I know why Toph is a little shit but since the writers barely made an effort to develop her into someone different, she’s a flat character. She has backstory and motivations but she’s still the same in the end as she was in the beginning. Her character isn’t fun to begin with but now I have to suffer it throughout the show.

>Because they are all made to fit stock character types. Then in those moments where they break out of those molds you think "Oh wow what amazing character development" even though nothing meaningful happened. Team Avatar is largely devoid of character development but they feel much more real.
But you have the shows backwards here. TT's characters were weak initially, yes, but not because they were written as stereotypes, more like they were undefined quantities, or not sufficiently defined yet.

Avatar came out of the gate with two stellar pilot episodes (which the fandom really seems to dislike for some reason? Fucking faggots) which gave the main cast near-perfect initial characterization... but then it was basically all downhill from there in that sense.

>Huh? Do you actually think scripts don't go through multiple rewrites?
As I've explained to this board over and over again, it's well-known elsewhere that Avatar suffered massive writer disagreements mainly stemming from shipping (but also other factors) that led to the Bryke vision being imposed over that of Ehasz, except made even worse because the original vision was still visible through the cracks, so to speak.

This severely affected Book 3, and is the main reason the finale is quite poorly received by many. In addition, the Book 2 finale was not supposed to be quite such a shocking swerve, and the fandom outrage was rather justified. (Though like many other ones that episode has its own major writing failures that seem unrelated to these particular issues, so IOW Ehasz's writing is nowhere near perfect either).

For some more info on the changes (albeit only scratching the surface really) see and .

>Still saying DBZ isn’t character driven

Why are you pretending to know anything about a show just to defend your shitty characters. I also like how you chose Zuko as an example because he’s the smallest offender of the shitty characterization in Avatar.

>yes, but not because they were written as stereotypes
The word is archetypes and yes they were. Each character was centered around their predefined moods and roles. But hey if the episode happened about them Robin might cheer up a little or Raven might talk about her feelings or Starfire might get angry. It's an incredibly simple formula.

> but then it was basically all downhill from there in that sense.
Wow that sure tells me a lot. Seriously though explain.

>”He became a good guy overnight!”
>”No it was actually built up”
>”T-That doesn’t make it good”
>*Goes on to talk about how Zuko gradually developed into a different person*

What do you think 'character driven means'?

I'm sorry you misunderstood what I meant so I tried to explain myself better. "woke up one day" as in "the audience didn't explicitly see anything".
Can you do better than snark and a reaction image?

Literally what it says on the tin.

Surprisingly nobody in the DBZ fandom ever talks about the choreography of the fights or the cool attacks. It’s always character and that is where Toriyama’s strengths as a writer lies. The show started off centering around a bunch of teens looking for mystical balls and getting into trouble.

a character doesnt have to develop to be good.

Stop reading so much fucking bullshit that people write about the show, and go rewatch it with an open mind. You might be surprised.
Seriously though, you're literally copying and pasting shit people say about the TT characters, even though it's barely true superficially let alone more deeply. It's like nobody watched the show past mid-season 1... which is actually what often seems to happen with "popular consensus" on shows.
>Wow that sure tells me a lot. Seriously though explain.
OP and already did, probably better than I could. (Though I disagree on a couple of things, like Sokka being unfunny.)

>the audience didn't explicitly see anything

Except the audience literally did. Again, something you would know if you actually watched the show. There’s no shame in admitting you’re not a fan and have never seen it.

>Literally what it says on the tin.
So you can't. I'l just tell you. Character driven writing focuses on internal conflict as the main driving point of the story.
DBZ does not do that.

>Surprisingly nobody in the DBZ fandom ever talks about the choreography of the fights or the cool attacks. It’s always character and that is where Toriyama’s strengths as a writer lies
Goku's numbers are the biggest! Are Goku's numbers bigger than superman? The next arc he'll fight someone with even bigger numbers!

Why the fuck did you take Smug Anime Face off the chart?

>Stop reading so much fucking bullshit that people write about the show,
Why in the goddamn hell would I read something someone wrote about Teen Titans? This is all coming out of my head. Maybe if lots of people who know more than you about narrative are saying this you should take the time to consider it.

>OP and already did
>probably better than I could
That's pretty sad user.

>Character driven writing focuses on internal conflict as the main driving point of the story. DBZ does not do that.

Ahem

youtube.com/watch?v=yjmoSucnCq8 [Open]

>Goku's numbers are the biggest! Are Goku's numbers bigger than superman? The next arc he'll fight someone with even bigger numbers!

Oh so everything you know about the show came from shitty Sup Forums threads? The number thing alone exposes you because numerical power levels are the laughing stock of the fandom.

It's amazing, You might just be too edgy to appreciate this show.

Seems like Korra is right up your ally.

>Except the audience literally did
The only decent character moment I can recall was him talking shit to Goku before fighting him as Majin Vegeta.
But there was a reason I compared his development to Zuko's. We never see Vegeta's moments of doubt, deep internal turmoil asking the hard questions like "Am I an asshole?" "Why am I such an asshole?" "Should I be less of an asshole?"
It doesn't even happen implicitly since all in all the change in his character wasn't a change to his core traits and never need to be very big.

>youtube.com/watch?v=yjmoSucnCq8 [Open]
Are you going to sit here with a straight face and tell me that one scene is indicative of DBZ as a whole? Do it so I can laugh at you please.

>not choosing any of the material pre-Z

>We never see Vegeta's moments of doubt, deep internal turmoil asking the hard questions like "Am I an asshole?" "Why am I such an asshole?" "Should I be less of an asshole?"

Those moments are spread out but the biggest one came during the last fight.

youtube.com/watch?v=R8ef9Bj_0Ig

Yep it is. I can keep posting scenes all night.

youtube.com/watch?v=0aDcWucKFjA

How come Goku loved his Grandpa so much, yet was unable to love his family the same way?

Fucking saiyans.

No mention of the show's best written and most complex character?

>5 minutes of filler wanking goku
Disgusting 2bh and certainly not the ideal conclusion for a character arc but fair enough.

Having moments about characters does not make it a character driven story. Every major conflict is external. That's not even a bad thing. Its just a thing.

But he does care about them. See whenever a family member of his is murdered.

The idea of "character development" being necessary for a character to be good is idiotic. Sometimes you just get it right the first time; and they did. Toph is perfect.

Please, don't make me laugh.

Azula was barely above a caricature honestly. She might have been top tier with one or two b-plots about her though.

You do realize the entire reason Goku fights is because his character demands it, right? He doesn't do it to save the world or any of that bunk, he does it because his character demands he fights to see who's the strongest. That's also the entire reason he spares Vegeta and Freeza. He was done. He had proven his point that he was the strongest. Every fight in the series has been broken up at SOME point so the characters can talk to each other and get a better feel for each other's personality. In between the episodes dedicated to fighting are literal dozens of episodes that are either mostly talking, or fun adventures. The show is entirely character driven. Heck, all the fights you talk about? All character driven. None of the characters fight aimlessly, there's always some character-driven factor behind their actions. For Freeza, it was because he craved torture. For the Androids, it was because they hated Goku. For Cell, it was because he wanted to flex his muscles. For Buu, it was all a big game. No one fought for the sake of fighting. It was all to achieve a goal.

Motherfucker that is STILL not an internally focused story. Every major conflict is external. Of course all characters have their own reasons to fight/be in the story that's why they're there. But that doesn't make the story character driven.
Die Hard for example. Mclain's internal conflict is dealing with his estranged wife. External conflict is German robbers. Which conflict takes the wheel in that movie? Have a guess.
And I love Die Hard. I don't understand why this is a big deal.

How about instead we talk about how Sokka becomes a completely different character between seasons 1 and 2.

In season 1, he's older and (somewhat) more mature than the others, so he naturally takes things more seriously. He plays a straight man to Aang's goofiness and a pragmatist to Katara's idealism. In return, their energy keeps him from being a stick in the mud. It's a straightforward, reasonable dynamic, if nothing else.

Then we come around to season 2 and the other characters have grown and left him obsolete. Aang's goofiness has been dulled by the realities of the war, so he doesn't need a straight man to keep him grounded. Katara's matured a bit and takes on a maternal role that naturally keeps her idealism in check. Suddenly, Sokka has no role in the group and his character has to find something else to do. So where does he go as a character? His characterization completely inverts and he takes on Aang's old role as the goofball. Now instead of being the straight man, everyone else plays the straight man to him.

It's not necessarily bad, since he's reasonably funny, but it's pretty weird when you think about it.

I think Sup Forums gets too worked up on the little subjective arguments. Consider the basis of the argument you guys are having; whether or not these characters are relatable. Consider the possiblilty that the person taking in the story has as much or more to do with relating to the characters than how they are actually presented. Your subconcious looks for patterns and traits that relate to a part of your life; whether something you grew up with, aspire to, etc. and fill in the unspoken portion of the character with a mixture of these tid bits from your brain and assumptions about the character based on context clues. In essence, you help write the character for yourself. In that regard, you are both correct about the characters, but only in regards to how you see them.

Yeah see this I don't agree with in the slightest. If anything I could see a little bit (still a stretch) of the opposite, going from Book 1 to 2.

>whether or not these characters are relatable
That's definitely not what I'm arguing about. Just because you brought it up I'm forced to denounce it as a false god of character writing.

Or we're just fed up with the bad writing that seems inherent to or at least ubiquitous in cartoons, especially in comparison to anime.

I'm not saying Sokka didn't have any goofiness in season 1, but surely you're not trying to suggest he got LESS goofy going from season 1 to 2? I can't think of anything in season 1 that can compare to the whole detective bit he did in Avatar Day.

Well, maybe the Great Divide, but we do not speak of such things.

If that's not what you were arguing, what makes you think I was talking to you?
Read the OP post, its what the thread is about.

I made like half the posts in this thread homes. No one's talking about relatability here.

>Be a crazy evil bitch
>Try not to be a crazy evil bitch
>My life is hard because I act like a crazy evil bitch
>HOLY SHIT MOMMY AND DADDY
Azula's cool but let's not pretend the pond is deep

Not trying to be argumentative, but could you elaborate what makes the character writing better in anime, in your opinion?
In most of the anime's I've watched, characters have a higher tendency to fall back on a singular driving force to explain their characterization. (not all of course)

Don't forget
>Ozai: generic evil overlord
>Azula: annoying bitch with daddy issues

I'm comparing top-tier anime to top-tier cartoons, which Avatar very obviously is despite its flaws (mainly due to a lack of real competition though).

I was under the impression the thread was about whether or not these characters were well written. That directly correlates to how the viewer relates and understands said characters in the manner that they are presented. Its pretty much the entire basis of characterization. Otherwise, a story could be told:
character A teams up with character B to go through a plot line. Character C is an antagonist, but characters A and B win in the end.
Its lifeless, and because you have no investment in the characters, the plot ultimately won't matter either.

>That directly correlates to how the viewer relates and understands said characters in the manner that they are presented. Its pretty much the entire basis of characterization.
Not him, but this part is utter bullshit.

Zuko > Iroh > Sokka > Toph > Aang > Katara

>Zuko > Iroh
>Toph > Aang
You high, man?

I'm ok with this I would tie maybe Toph and Aang

Maybe if western animation could break out of the stigma of being for children, or an adult cartoon; meaning it is even less mature.
A lot of what I consider high quality western animation, is generally mimicking anime because thats stylistically what people tend to think of when they think of serious animation.

Now let's not pretend that most anime isn't complete garbage. Low risk aversity, low production costs, and a relatively reliable return of investment mean that the studios can afford to just throw shit at the wall until something sticks. And they throw a LOT of shit. Western companies, rightfully or wrongfully, are far too chicken shit to adopt such a formula.

Anime perfected the best animated visual style over many decades, so yes, one would expect just about any quality cartoon to look a bit animesque at the very least.

Same goes for writing for animation, to a lesser extent though.

How so?
If you can't understand a character's motivations, or anything about them, what was the point of the character? A character that you can't connect with or understand on any level is just a plot device, and the result of poor writing.

t. user's dick

But how does that remotely explain why even the obviously best cartoons still seem to pale in comparison to the best anime?

Going with your theory, one would expect there to be the occasional cartoon that would be so good even anime purists would admit it's competitive with the very best, if they actually watched it anyways. But that doesn't seem to be the case (though I have to admit that W.I.T.C.H. might just be a borderline contender, still borderline mind you).

I don't mind the look of anime, but I like unique and unpredictable visuals. Anime tends to be more limited in the potential for stylistic differences and make up for it with wild attire, crazy powers, and other attributes. But when it comes down to it, you look at a screen cap of a character from any random anime and the first thing that comes to mind is "anime character".

>Iroh: Boo-hoo muh son, teafag Paulo Coelho

Is this bait or are you just a white supremacist?

You can chalk that to either writers changing their minds about Sokka's role of serious sarcastic jerk that gets in slapstick situations all the time in order to maki him the funny guy that likes being funny, or that Sokka learned to stop obsessing over the war so much and started enjoying life more.

>I think Korra did that aspect better

It objectively did not, LoK's biggest problem was tat the characters were all were either static, or any sort of progress made to their characters was reversed by the next season.

If you listen to the commentaries, it's because they let DeSena act.

A serious complaint about Iroh would be lack of clear motivations and a backstory filled with plot holes.

I like how to differentiate her from any other anime loli school girl, they gave her fox ears and a tail.
Truely the work of a creative genius.

Thank you, I know I was not the only one who hated the characterization of Avatar.

In short this this why I could never get into or even like Avatar in the first place.

Yes, clearly the Japanese don't understand the depths of the eminent white man's thoughts on character design.

Because Suki isn't a main character

>then I tried to tell my avatarfag friends that I'm not a huge fan of the show because I thought the characters are boring they all either got annoyed with me or looked at me like I was crazy

I'm trying to explain why there's good anime at all. If you take away those conditions, then you end up with Western animation. High production costs and unreliable return of investment results in low volume of production and, importantly, high risk aversity, which is the bane of creativity.

Bitch, the japs are more whitey cliche' and uptight about cultural stuff than caucasians have been in a long ass time. I'm saying when a culture has notions of what is "correct" stylistically, then there is going to be a drop in creativity in their designs.
Also, I honestly can't tell if these anime girls are from the same show with the same animators as what you posted above, because aside from eye color and a wardrobe change, they look exactly the same.

Azula did nothing wrong.

I know bait when I see it, and this isn't it. You're just retarded.

She's an official Gaang member!

Yeah, but not a main character.

Did Sokka ever go back and find his meteorite sword? That whole thing seemed anticlimactic.

not lovin' on that zuko psycho-analyzing that could go on FOREVER in the company of the correct experts