Bolt
Well-Known Member
So you still won't step foot in the land at all?
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
For a land most originally said they weren't interested in ................
- Thread starter mergatroid
- Start date
Atomicmickey
Well-Known Member
I wasn't interested in CarsLand until I set foot in it. I'd go back in a heartbeat.
But let's be honest. Everything . . . isn't for everyone. I anticipate years and years of people
still saying it's not for them, being "proud" that they haven't watched the film, etc. And even
a chorus of "meh" for some who visit the land. It is what it is, round and round we go.
In other news, I just booked for October, so WOOT!
But let's be honest. Everything . . . isn't for everyone. I anticipate years and years of people
still saying it's not for them, being "proud" that they haven't watched the film, etc. And even
a chorus of "meh" for some who visit the land. It is what it is, round and round we go.
In other news, I just booked for October, so WOOT!
Dad 2 M & M
Well-Known Member
Didn't see the movie...surprised there hasn't been a sequel, and if/when there is probably won't see that either. Can't wait to see the new land though and am looking forward to it.
Dad 2 M & M
Well-Known Member
What if I'm both? Naysayer and pixie duster? Or does that mean I'm neither? That was my zinger for the day! How clever was that?
I'm not sure, it would mean you hate everything Disney does whilst simultaneously liking it
Bill Cipher
Well-Known Member
- In the Parks
- Yes
Good point, a lot of people have seen it. I myself just thought the movie was ok. The plot was nothing special but the visuals were stunning. Definitely not a cultural phenomenon like Star Wars or Potter though. I'm pretty sure that reflects how most posters here feel (again, can't speak for everyone). Either way, this land looks like it will be one of the most stunning and immersive that Disney has ever built, and will be a nice addition to my favorite park at WDW.Uh....Avatar made $2,787,965,087 worldwide. I'd say that there are quite a few people who have seen it and I'm sure that there are a good number who at least enjoyed it on some level.
Dad 2 M & M
Well-Known Member
I get it...I'm not sure, it would mean you hate everything Disney does whilst simultaneously liking it
We are closer on the Pixie Dust side to liking everything. It is magical enough to accept, and sometimes not even notice a shortcoming.
An example - In an earlier post of mine the topic was Extra Magic Evening Hour, and pertinent to the non-resort guests not leaving. My post indicated how crowded Main Street was well after the Evening Extra Magic had began, and we were "forced" to ride rides with little to no wait. My point was there was another, TREMENDOUS option available and we had a great time with that option. Many of the responses to my post were "what made you think the guests would leave", sorry you had a bad time".....I thought my post was in the pixie dust arena.....it brought out plenty of naysayers.
On the naysayer side.....what brings out the naysayer in me....is the guests.....the lack of consistency in responses/actions. Love the anti-international tour group crowd. Especially when any domestic tour group possesses all of the negative attributes, and would win the Gold Medal if we created a Tour Groups Games competition.......maybe you should create another thread with Tour Group Olympics as the title.....I expect a Honorable Mention and to be on the host committee
Dad 2 M & M
Well-Known Member
I think the "most" in the comment you quoted referred the dislike camp of peeps that actually did see the movie. My take is the OP was saying "of the peeps who didn't like the movie, most were not in favor of the land". Again, his "most" was inclusive to peeps that took in, and didn't care for the movie. I had to go back and read the entire post, vs the two sentences quoted.Uh....Avatar made $2,787,965,087 worldwide. I'd say that there are quite a few people who have seen it and I'm sure that there are a good number who at least enjoyed it on some level.
And, MOST, did not see the movie. Assuming the $2,787,965,087 is correct, and making an assumption it was more than $1 spent per person, the population is estimated at over 7 billion...7,000,000,000.....so MOST didn't see it....if the price was $1, just over 1/3......being clever here
Maerj
Well-Known Member
Good point, a lot of people have seen it. I myself just thought the movie was ok. The plot was nothing special but the visuals were stunning. Definitely not a cultural phenomenon like Star Wars or Potter though. I'm pretty sure that reflects how most posters here feel (again, can't speak for everyone). Either way, this land looks like it will be one of the most stunning and immersive that Disney has ever built, and will be a nice addition to my favorite park at WDW.
I agree with you 100% on every bit of this!
Maerj
Well-Known Member
Let me clarify by saying that the 'most' refers to the general movie-going peoples of the world, not every single human in the world.
Dad 2 M & M
Well-Known Member
Heard that.....now we're on the same page...dah hee HEE.....I would agree most movie goers did see it...Let me clarify by saying that the 'most' refers to the general movie-going peoples of the world, not every single human in the world.
As long as they have a bunch of Sam Worthingtons running around the new land, it'll be fine. He's dreamy.
jmenjes
Well-Known Member
You'd have to bribe me first to even consider the possibility of changing my mind.
I won't accept anything less than a trillion dollars, though.
Bolt
Well-Known Member
I'll take a shorter line anyday on the companies newest rides!
Scott Fassett
Member
Definitely changed my mind. Thought it was really dumb, not interesting, a HORRIBLE response to potter- just
Definitely have done a 180 on the whole thing.
First I thought it was a pathetic response to potter-and now I think this is going to be pretty stinkin cool. I think the two attractions will be good, but I think the theming by itself, will be what everyone will be talking about.
DDLand
Well-Known Member
Tonally and thematically it's still a disaster. It makes Disney's Animal Kingdom less coherent. It supplemented ideas and creativity that would have been striking and fit into Disney's Animal Kingdom.
The park is critically about the intersection of humanity with nature. Whether those are literal creatures roaming the Earth today, Dinosaurs kept alive by our fascination, or mythical beasts that are man's primitive understanding of nature.
Avatar will always be out of place, so long as Disney's Animal Kingdom is following its' ideals.
I am excited about the chance to get two true 21st Century Attractions. Walt Disney World deserves these exciting editions. The land also looks visually impressive, and I anticipate that I should have a good time there.
It's just going to be enormously frustrating that they chose the path they did. They chose a flashy (as of 2009) IP that may not age well. It also has no synergistic tie in with Walt Disney Company properties. Why on Earth would they blow 1 Billion dollars on land that doesn't even reinforce their goals? If that's the way they're going to operate, they might as well build theme appropriate rides and land from the ground up.
I assure you Joe Rohde and his team, given 1 Billion dollars, could come up with a truly breathtaking land if given the chance.
Most of people's positive reactions are seeing what a billion and Joe can do when given the chance. It has nothing to do with Avatar or anything inherently related to this awful IP.
So good work on the Imagineers for shunning the movie (ha, with such lovable characters that they had to set the land 50 years after to avoid them) and creating the best out of a truly awful set of circumstances.
The question that we'll always ask, is why settle?
This may be a Latin American play where Avatar did very well.
Edit: Obviously this is in my opinion, but built off of an understanding of Disney's Animal Kingdom and the designer's original intent. No need to start another debate about its placement, this is just my response to the question posed by the thread.
The park is critically about the intersection of humanity with nature. Whether those are literal creatures roaming the Earth today, Dinosaurs kept alive by our fascination, or mythical beasts that are man's primitive understanding of nature.
Avatar will always be out of place, so long as Disney's Animal Kingdom is following its' ideals.
I am excited about the chance to get two true 21st Century Attractions. Walt Disney World deserves these exciting editions. The land also looks visually impressive, and I anticipate that I should have a good time there.
It's just going to be enormously frustrating that they chose the path they did. They chose a flashy (as of 2009) IP that may not age well. It also has no synergistic tie in with Walt Disney Company properties. Why on Earth would they blow 1 Billion dollars on land that doesn't even reinforce their goals? If that's the way they're going to operate, they might as well build theme appropriate rides and land from the ground up.
I assure you Joe Rohde and his team, given 1 Billion dollars, could come up with a truly breathtaking land if given the chance.
Most of people's positive reactions are seeing what a billion and Joe can do when given the chance. It has nothing to do with Avatar or anything inherently related to this awful IP.
So good work on the Imagineers for shunning the movie (ha, with such lovable characters that they had to set the land 50 years after to avoid them) and creating the best out of a truly awful set of circumstances.
The question that we'll always ask, is why settle?
This may be a Latin American play where Avatar did very well.
Edit: Obviously this is in my opinion, but built off of an understanding of Disney's Animal Kingdom and the designer's original intent. No need to start another debate about its placement, this is just my response to the question posed by the thread.
csmat99
Well-Known Member
Well as far as Potter it's about 2 years too late. And no way will it compete because of the fact that you had a whole generation that grew up with Potter and loved the books and movies and when they went to Islands and Universal they did such a good job you had people crying and stood in awe of what they were seeing. Now SWL of course could do the same since you have multiple generations that grew up with SW. I don't feel Avatar has any business in AK doesn't matter now and i'm sure the rides will be great but not going to run on down there just to see this. You also have the problem of merchandise sales. There is not one character from the first movie that anyone remembers except for the drill sergeant. haha And the sequels are going to kill Cameron's career. You are going to see waterworld size level of losses. And you can thank Disney for that when they decided to move all the SW movies to December now. Avatar 2 was supposed to open in December now they pushed it to unknown date. No one cares to see these movies. So yes Disney can create this great land but they could of done that without the IP that no one cares about.
DDLand
Well-Known Member
The poster asked and people still have legitimate grievances. I still have legitimate grievances.
I've decided to mostly shut up and appreciate the artistry; I do expect the attractions to be very very impressive. In spite of the excellence in execution, I still find it very very frustrating. This is my open minded approach. The people that have so easily accepted the sacrifice of theme after viewing the eye candy are amusing to me. Nothing visually is going to make it fit better. That's simply not how it works.
Excusing the placement completely is to not truly judge the theme park by theme. I too had noticed the giddiness that started back in mid 2015 and had slowly started expanding since. Most people are just being awed by the visuals. Now anything less then total excitement is unacceptable.
So as I said in the original post I'm excited for the land and attractions, but still frustrated.
I'm expecting this land to be successful primarily because of the artistry of Imagineers, not the IP. Unless it's still big in Latin America...
I feel the much the same way, but I know better than to bet against Cameron. He's always about to fail before he pulls a major box office tsunami out of no where. This land may end up resonating in part because of the sequels.
I personally expect weaker domestic offset by super high international. Sort of the opposite of Force Awakens.
Last edited: