Avatar Land...think Disney regrets the idea?

[DVCOwner]

question, do you guys think disney regrets shanghai?

No, there is so much more to the Shanghai deal then just the park. The Shanghai Disneyland Resort is just the first step in Disney getting into the largest movie market outside the US and also sales of all other Disney related products.

 

[danlb_2000]

and it seems Universal is going no IP for Volcano Bay as well

It's interesting that Universal is very IP centered in the parks, but not outside. The hotels, most of City Walk, even the miniature gold course in City Walk are not IP based.

 

[twebber55]

It's interesting that Universal is very IP centered in the parks, but not outside. The hotels, most of City Walk, even the miniature gold course in City Walk are not IP based.

great way of looking at it i havent thought of that....

 

[Mike S]

It's interesting that Universal is very IP centered in the parks, but not outside. The hotels, most of City Walk, even the miniature gold course in City Walk are not IP based.

Time to go prospecting

 

[Matt_Black]

That's probably true with some, I can think of one poster its definitely true of

I think I know EXACTLY who you're thinking of.

 

[Cesar R M]

ok i really think that the minority of people who disliked the movie are trying to control the conversation about avatar land and are using this thread (and SO MANY others) to try to manipulate others and make them believe it that "most people hated the movie", that the "land will be a failure", and that "disney regrets the decision to create the land". This was the most successful movie of all time. If you're concerned that the movie lacks enough fan base, keep in mind that 3 additional sequels are coming almost immediately after the land opens, which give it's storyline and fanbase a chance to grow larger. It's so unfair for the few people who didn't like the film to ruin the excitement of the clear majority by assuming any kind of failure.

As much I agree with you... I do not agree on using the money as a metric.
There are many movies that are mediocre, but they are attractive based on certain combinations and broad appeal.
See Michael Bay's transformers franchise. Most are obvious turds, yet they earn millions.

 

[Cesar R M]

And if Disney had picked up the rights to Potter...

"UGH! Another outside IP? Where's the imagination to come up with original IPs? Where's the love for the classic IP's? Is Bob Iger that ashamed of the proud Disney tradition?!?"

nah, because Disney would only have offered a crappy overlay, a dance party, a sing along and cup cakes.
Not whole themed areas

 

[Matt_Black]

As much I agree with you... I do not agree on using the money as a metric.
There are many movies that are mediocre, but they are attractive based on certain combinations and broad appeal.
See Michael Bay's transformers franchise. Most are obvious turds, yet they earn millions.

At least with Transformers, the franchise already had a solid reputation and a built-in fanbase before Bay came along.

 

[GoofGoof]

ok i really think that the minority of people who disliked the movie are trying to control the conversation about avatar land and are using this thread (and SO MANY others) to try to manipulate others and make them believe it that "most people hated the movie", that the "land will be a failure", and that "disney regrets the decision to create the land". This was the most successful movie of all time. If you're concerned that the movie lacks enough fan base, keep in mind that 3 additional sequels are coming almost immediately after the land opens, which give it's storyline and fanbase a chance to grow larger. It's so unfair for the few people who didn't like the film to ruin the excitement of the clear majority by assuming any kind of failure.

Nonsense.

Its a simple difference of opinion that has existed from the day this was announced, it does equate to an attempt to manipulate or control the viewpoint of others and it is not "so unfair" for such a difference of opinion to exist. Some people don't like the film and aren't interested in the land; what's wrong with that?

I agree with Frank on this. It's just a difference of opinion. With a few pure doom and gloom posters who most people already know to ignore I don't think people are looking to manipulate anything. Just expressing an opinion.

I actually think the majority of the people who were opposed to Avatarland or at least skeptical of fit when it was first announced will actually come around assuming it turns out to be as good as it seems right now. Obviously the e-ticket ride is still mostly unknown, but the rest of the land looks pretty solid to me right now. Then the doom and gloom crowd will just shift all of their criticism to the amount of time it took to build

 

[WhatJaneSays]

and it seems Universal is going no IP for Volcano Bay as well

No it's totally IP based: Joe vs. the Volcano.

 

[DVCOwner]

nah, because Disney would only have offered a crappy overlay, a dance party, a sing along and cup cakes.
Not whole themed areas

If they would not have done something big for Harry Potter; why did they do something big for Avatar?

 

[Mike S]

If they would not have done something big for Harry Potter; why did they do something big for Avatar?

Because of Harry Potter's success at Universal. Avatar announcement came after. Quite curious, don't you think?

 

[Peter Pano]

Because of Harry Potter's success at Universal. Avatar announcement came after. Quite curious, don't you think?

I cannot thank Uni's Potter enough. It seems that it almost singlehandedly pushed theme park design on another level. Disney fans in particular benefit so much from this kick.

 

[Mike S]

I cannot thank Uni's Potter enough. It seems that it almost singlehandedly pushed theme park design on another level. Disney fans in particular benefit so much from this kick.

Too bad it took so long for the kick to take effect.

 

[epeterson]

No it's totally IP based: Joe vs. the Volcano.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Universal does not make entire parks based off of one IP, so I don't think Volcano Bay would ever have been based off an IP. However, Volcano Bay will probably have IP themed lands inside it.

And I wanted to agree with earlier posters, it really doesn't matter if Avatar is an amazing movie. I didn't even know that Splash Mountain was based on a movie until I read it on these boards, yet I still love the ride.

However, I think Avatar is a brilliant idea. Disney is known (incorrectly in my opinion) for its immersive lands, and Avatar the movie arguably made as much as it did because of how immersive and beautiful the land of Pandora was. If Disney can actually make the land look like that purple fluorescent scene from Avatar, I will spend a ton of time there. Add in a couple of fun rides, which are fun because they are actually thrilling/interesting, not just themed after a movie (Looking at you Stitch's Escape), then it will be a hit.

 

[RSoxNo1]

I cannot thank Uni's Potter enough. It seems that it almost singlehandedly pushed theme park design on another level. Disney fans in particular benefit so much from this kick.

Design was there at Disney. What Potter did was tell Disney that they weren't the only ones that could build a themed area and that a proper intellectual property could inspire an entire land. The problem is that Disney now operates as if that's the only way to make additions. Intellectual property driven lands are now the only options.

 

[doctornick]

Design was there at Disney. What Potter did was tell Disney that they weren't the only ones that could build a themed area and that a proper intellectual property could inspire an entire land. The problem is that Disney now operates as if that's the only way to make additions. Intellectual property driven lands are now the only options.

Not quite a land, but RoL will be an interesting test case. It would certainly be very easy for Disney to load it up with IPs from various franchises, but I've seen no indication that this is happening and it seems it will be just based on just actual nature. If so, it does suggest at least some willingness from Disney to do projects based on more generic themes rather than specific IPs.

 

[Figment2005]

Just a general comment, but on the topic of Volcano Bay not being IP based. As far as I know none of the Disney water parks are IP based either. Blizzard Beach is not an IP and Typhoon Lagoon is not an IP. So I believe that this is a moot point for discussion.

 

[RSoxNo1]

Not quite a land, but RoL will be an interesting test case. It would certainly be very easy for Disney to load it up with IPs from various franchises, but I've seen no indication that this is happening and it seems it will be just based on just actual nature. If so, it does suggest at least some willingness from Disney to do projects based on more generic themes rather than specific IPs.

It's going to use Disney Nature footage.

 

[George]

Too bad it took so long for the kick to take effect.

I just noticed that you had the most awesomest avatar in history.