News Avatar Experience coming to Disneyland Resort

[mickEblu]

Maybe you didn’t intend it to come across as saying it was a “fact”, but it read that way to me which is why I asked for clarification. Also we’re all playing semantics here, as we’re all dissecting a few words from a blog post about a silly Disney project that has no real meaning since we don’t have access to the actual project documents.

And you must be bored too since you’ve dug in your heels here for something that has no real impact on either of our lives.

Except you’re the one instigating and responding to posts that weren’t even addressed to you.

 

[Disney Irish]

Except your instigating and responding to posts that weren’t even addressed to you.

I’m sorry where is it written that I must only respond to posts addressed to me?

How about we just drop this and move on.

 

[mickEblu]

I’m sorry where is it written that I must only respond to posts addressed to me?

How about we just drop this and move on.

Nowhere. My point is that I’m someone sharing an opinion and you are doing nothing but trying to find faults in that opinion. I create content and start discussions and you spend time most of your time fixating on why an opinion is wrong and saying “we’ll see.” We’re not the same.

 

[Disney Irish]

Nowhere. My point is that I’m someone sharing an opinion and you are doing nothing but trying to find faults in that opinion. I create content and start discussions and you spend time most of your time fixating on why an opinion is wrong and saying “we’ll see.” We’re not the same.

If that is your only take away from this exchange I think you missed the point of it. So best to move on.

 

[Mr. Sullivan]

And where is the confirmation in that that the rest of the backlot is surviving as you claim as a fact?

It’s not unreasonable to assume with the wording “part of the back lot” that not all of the back lot is going to disappear. Yes it is an assumption, but that particular wording on Disney’s part is not an accident. If they were going to be getting rid of the whole back lot at once they would say that. You’re acting like this is an extreme leap of logic.

 

[Disney Irish]

It’s not unreasonable to assume with the wording “part of the back lot” that not all of the back lot is going to disappear. Yes it is an assumption, but that particular wording on Disney’s part is not an accident. If they were going to be getting rid of the whole back lot at once they would say that. You’re acting like this is an extreme leap of logic.

Never said it was unreasonable to assume, in fact I agree its probably a good assumption or at the very least a sound one until new data comes along. But that wasn't my point, and I think Mick knows it, even if he doesn't want to admit it.

 

[Vegas Disney Fan]

What is actually considered part of the backlot, is it just the “soundstage” area?

Stage 12 has sat empty for years, Monsters Inc is already announced as closing, the backlot stage, lounge, etc all seem like locks to be part of Avatar, Hyperion Theater is labeled stage 29 and that seems to be staying, stage 17 to the left of Monsters seems likely to go but is uncertain in the concept art, stage 23 (Philharmagic) seems very likely to stay.

 

[BrianLo]

What is actually considered part of the backlot, is it just the “soundstage” area?

Stage 12 has sat empty for years.

Stage 12 is the one I definitely think is up for debate. The concept art from last D23 shows it reused. But I think that concept art was quite early (18 months into the project cycle) and subject to revision. The monorail staying throws things a bit up for debate.

Though, frankly, the more I stare at it, the more I’m convincing myself the monorail is actually there. What is this path in blue if not a tunnel for the monorail and it creatively hidden from us to not give away this is blatantly the backlot. And what is up with that series of an opening visual arch in red, to the stage 12 in blue, but there are still two tunnels that you can see projecting foward? There’s a tunnel off stage 12 under the monorail and a second tunnel that would be a long land entrance.

I mean… I think that’s it. The artists just removed the overt monorail line.

 

[BrianLo]

As to why they say a portion of the backlot, theoretically the backlot stage might stay (or at least the area itself) and of course the philharmagic theatre.

I’m very open to the whole thing has changed, but I’ve now convinced myself what they are telling us actually matches what is in this art.

Long live Schmoozies

 

[TheDisneyParksfanC8]

As to why they say a portion of the backlot, theoretically the backlot stage might stay (or at least the area itself) and of course the philharmagic theatre.

I’m very open to the whole thing has changed, but I’ve now convinced myself what they are telling us actually matches what is in this art.

Long live Schmoozies

If Philharmagic stays, I hope there is some plan to eventually demo it for some sort of standalone dark ride. It never seems popular and TDA has shown that they want to move away from theater shows.

 

[mickEblu]

As to why they say a portion of the backlot, theoretically the backlot stage might stay (or at least the area itself) and of course the philharmagic theatre.

Yeah I mentioned this when it was first announced but then why even refer to the Philharmagic as part of the backlot when it is accessed through Hollywood Blvd and they will likely have to hide the side of the building with rock work and trees to make it worth with concept art above. At that point unless they go with something like Brickeys Hollywood park idea - it’ll be a jungle back there and not a backlot or Hollywood. It’s what led me to believe that whoever wrote that parks blog post is using “backlot” and Hollywoodland interchangeably. I think the blog post is referring to Hollywood Blvd, the animation building and the show-less Hyperion as the backlot.

 

[No Name]

Or maybe they'll just change the name of the park and not need to justify the California theme anymore. But does that mean once Avatar, Coco, and Avengers are done, will the park be rededicated again?

We have come a long way from 2012 DCA. Condor Flats became Grizzly Peak Airfield, Bugs Land became Avengers Campus, Paradise Pier became Pixar Pier, and now Pandora will be replacing a good area of the Hollywood Backlot. Not to mention all of the rethemed attractions. And now 4 confirmed attractions will be making their way in the next 5 years.

DCA 3.0 has been in the making since 2017.

Or they’ll just leave the name of the park as is, since it’s still a perfectly solid name with a strong brand recognition. I’m not sure anyone goes to Six Flags Over Texas and wonders what Batman is doing down there.

 

[BrianLo]

If Philharmagic stays, I hope there is some plan to eventually demo it for some sort of standalone dark ride. It never seems popular and TDA has shown that they want to move away from theater shows.

I think that entire quadrant (Hyperion, animation) could and should be subject to a rethink. That’s not an unreasonable pad to work with. A lobby and a better facade for Hyperion, for starters.

 

[TheDisneyParksfanC8]

I think that entire quadrant (Hyperion, animation) could and should be subject to a rethink. That’s not an unreasonable pad to work with. A lobby and a better facade for Hyperion, for starters.

To me I think the Hyperion is as good as gone for a 5th Avengers Campus attraction.

 

[BrianLo]

Yeah I mentioned this when it was first announced but then why even refer to the Philharmagic as part of the backlot when it is accessed through Hollywood Blvd and they will likely have to hide the side of the building with rock work and trees to make it worth with concept art above. At that point unless they go with something like Brickeys Hollywood park idea - it’ll be a jungle back there and not a backlot. It’s what led me to believe that whoever wrote that parks blog post is using “backlot” and Hollywoodland interchangeably. I think the blog post is referring to Hollywood Blvd, the animation building and the show-less Hyperion as the backlot.

If I’m reading the concept art correctly, this entire yellow area is not being redeveloped. That’s all the forested area. There’s the two blue tunnels leading to the monorail and the entrance building in red.

If how I’m interpreting it is correct, I think that’s why it’s appropriate to say a portion of the backlot. Can you also enter the tunnel from the yellow? Yes perhaps, though hard to gauge. They’ve been very sneaky with the concept art.

Edit - and I made the monorail straight. But it actually curves there and that weird thing on the other side is the tunnel. They’ve just smudged it.

 

[mickEblu]

If I’m reading the concept art correctly, this entire yellow area is not being redeveloped. That’s all the forested area. There’s the two blue tunnels leading to the monorail and the entrance building in red.

View attachment 865185

If how I’m interpreting it is correct, I think that’s why it’s appropriate to say a portion of the backlot. Can you also enter the tunnel from the yellow? Yes perhaps.

In the concept art you shared above I’m seeing lush jungle at the bottom of the image which would be in front of the monorail tracks in the current backlot. Would it not?

 

[BrianLo]

In the concept art you shared above I’m seeing lush jungle at the bottom of the image which would be in front of the monorail tracks in the current backlot. Would it not?

Yes.

Lush jungle in concept art is “we obscured things to trick you” in concept art speak. The actual overhead is probably less inspiring.

I’m sure the monorail structure will provide the visual barrier from either side.

 

[mickEblu]

Yes.

Lush jungle in concept art is “we obscured things to trick you” in concept art speak. The actual overhead is probably less inspiring.

I’m sure the monorail structure will provide the visual barrier from either side.

Yeah I get that could be artistic liberty especially at its location at the outer edge of the art work but I wouldn’t say it inspires any confidence in me that entire backlot in front of Monsters Inc is sticking around. I mean you could be right but if Monsters Inc and two unused buildings are the only things going away, the comment that some of the backlot will remain seems unnecessary as they already mentioned Monsters Inc will be going away. I’m getting flashbacks from studying for the LSATS two decades ago for some reason. Never went to law school though.

 

[BrianLo]

Yeah I get that could be artistic liberty especially at its location at the outer edge of the art work but I wouldn’t say it inspires any confidence in me that entire backlot in front of Monsters Inc is sticking around. I mean you could be right but if Monsters Inc and two unused buildings are the only things going away, the comment that some of the backlot will remain seems unnecessary as they already mentioned Monsters Inc will be going away. I’m getting flashbacks from studying for the LSATS two decades ago for some reason. Never went to law school though.

If that entire back courtyard with the backlot stage stayed as is, would that not fulfill the description accurately? That’s a large chunk of the actual guest accessible outdoor on stage area. Some of the backlot is being redeveloped and some is not.

I’m 90% confident I’ve cracked it. When you take it from the lens of the monorail is there, they were trying to trick us. You can start to make sense of a lot of the weird elements. Particularly the long tunnel off stage 12.

 

[mickEblu]

If that entire back courtyard with the backlot stage stayed as is, would that not fulfill the description accurately? That’s a large chunk of the actual guest accessible outdoor on stage area. Some of the backlot is being redeveloped and some is not.

I’m 90% confident I’ve cracked it. When you take it from the lens of the monorail is there, they were trying to trick us. You can start to make sense of a lot of the weird elements. Particularly the long tunnel off stage 12.

Yes it would but mentioning it in a parks blog seems odd because why would anyone care that some of the cement in front of the monorail track at part of ugliest land at DLR is sticking around? But it would be the simplest explanation as much as mentioning it in that context doesn’t make sense to me. But I suppose we should put more stock into concept art than what could be a throw away line in that parks blog. So you think nothing changed in the new art work other than the vantage point and having the monorail track above or behind us instead of in front of us? I guess it’s possible.