News Avatar Experience coming to Disneyland Resort

[MistaDee]

If we get something on the scale of Shanghai Pirates I'll be quite happy. If it ends up being more like Tokyo DisneySea's Frozen I'll be disappointed by the missed opportunity but still glad to be getting something new.

Just the alien environment of Pandora, even given it's questionable thematic fit, will be a compelling and distinct addition to DCA's current offerings of: desert, pier, mountain, campus, LA

I fully expect it to be among my top 3 favorite lands just to be immersed in alongside Grizzly Peak and Radiator Springs

 

[mickEblu]

If we get something on the scale of Shanghai Pirates I'll be quite happy. If it ends up being more like Tokyo DisneySea's Frozen I'll be disappointed by the missed opportunity but still glad to be getting something new.

Just the alien environment of Pandora, even given it's questionable thematic fit, will be a compelling and distinct addition to DCA's current offerings of: desert, pier, mountain, campus, LA

I fully expect it to be among my top 3 favorite lands just to be immersed in alongside Grizzly Peak and Radiator Springs

Agree with the sentiment but it doesn’t sound like it going to be a land.

 

[Phroobar]

Agree with the sentiment but it doesn’t sound like it going to be a land.

What denotes a land? Two rides, gift shop and dining?

 

[captveg]

Just say "corner" instead of land or experience and you'll never have such noun trouble.

 

[MisterPenguin]

Just say "corner" instead of land or experience and you'll never have such noun trouble.

I use 'propinquitous acreage.'

 

[mickEblu]

What denotes a land? Two rides, gift shop and dining?

Sounds about right but I meant that it seems like it's not even going to be its own land on the map. Seems like it's just going to be some sort of expansion of Hollywoodland with a narrow-ish entrance focused on the those alien rocks hiding the show building and whatever water etc. they have in front of it. Id have to imagine there will at least be a shop and QS restaurant too. So I guess for all intents n purposes it is a land even if it's not labeled as such on the map. With that said I kind of expect it to feel less like a land and more like a grand entrance to an attraction.

 

[Phroobar]

Sounds about right but I meant that it seems like it's not even going to be its own land on the map. Seems like it's just going to be some sort of expansion of Hollywoodland with a narrow-ish entrance focused on the those alien rocks hiding the show building and whatever water etc. they have in front of it. Id have to imagine there will at least be a shop and QS restaurant too. So I guess for all intents n purposes it is a land even if it's not labeled as such on the map. With that said I kind of expect it to feel less like a land and more like a grand entrance to an attraction.

They got to have a gift shop at least. It would be nice to have food in that corner again. Are we suppose to be entering a "Hot Set"?

 

[mickEblu]

They got to have a gift shop at least. It would be nice to have food in that corner again. Are we suppose to be entering a "Hot Set"?

Yeah that’s the approach I’m thinking they might take.

 

[Disney Irish]

Sounds about right but I meant that it seems like it's not even going to be its own land on the map. Seems like it's just going to be some sort of expansion of Hollywoodland with a narrow-ish entrance focused on the those alien rocks hiding the show building and whatever water etc. they have in front of it. Id have to imagine there will at least be a shop and QS restaurant too. So I guess for all intents n purposes it is a land even if it's not labeled as such on the map. With that said I kind of expect it to feel less like a land and more like a grand entrance to an attraction.

Pandora in Hollywoodland? What are we back in the 90s/00s "faux Hollywood set" again? If that is the case that would suck in my opinion. As always I'll reserve judgement until I see it, but if we're back to the fake facades and such again that would be the ultimate middle finger to all fans as that is truly going back to opening day DCA.

I honestly can't believe that is what they would do at this point.

 

[mickEblu]

Pandora in Hollywoodland? What are we back in the 90s/00s "faux Hollywood set" again? If that is the case that would suck in my opinion. As always I'll reserve judgement until I see it, but if we're back to the fake facades and such again that would be the ultimate middle finger to all fans as that is truly going back to opening day DCA.

I honestly can't believe that is what they would do at this point.

lol I don’t like the set up either. I think it would be more in the backstory (and a way to make it make sense in DCA though) and less in execution. I think if their is any reference to a hot set it’ll be small and and non existent when you are actually in the land. I can’t think of any other reason for why they refuse to call it a land. That + the “portion of the backlot” comment suggests this as well.

 

[D.Silentu]

I think Hollywoodland's future is too questionable for them to use any kind of studio or set theming for the land transition. To me it seems more likely that we'll get something simple, akin to Disney Hollywood Studio's tunnel to Galaxy's Edge. The idea being that Pandora or Marvel will likely overtake the space eventually. At that point the east end of Buena Vista Street, at the circle, would be remodeled to form a much smoother transition.

 

[mickEblu]

I think Hollywoodland's future is too questionable for them to use any kind of studio or set theming for the land transition. To me it seems more likely that we'll get something simple, akin to Disney Hollywood Studio's tunnel to Galaxy's Edge. The idea being that Pandora or Marvel will likely overtake the space eventually. At that point the east end of Buena Vista Street, at the circle, would be remodeled to form a much smoother transition.

That’s a good point but like I said I think it would be more in backstory with no obvious signs that we’re on a set. It doesn’t take anything to remove the Fox Studios sign or “hot set” sign from next door to Award Weiners. It doesn’t necessarily have to be a “hot set.” Just something tying it to Hollywoodland / the studios. Even if it’s as simple as “this world was created by our studios but was based on a true story and now we’ve found a way for you to really go using this portal/ tech.” I mean the collectors fortress just crash landed at DCA. So why not? lol

Or what if the outdoor portion is actually themed to be part of the theme park at DCA or a recreation built at one of the studios but the magic actually happens in the show building and we are somehow transported to Pandora? I dunno. Quite frankly I don’t think any of this is necessary but this is what the tea leaves are telling me.

 

[Disney Irish]

lol I don’t like the set up either. I think it would be more in the backstory (and a way to make it make sense in DCA though) and less in execution. I think if their is any reference to a hot set it’ll be small and and non existent when you are actually in the land. I can’t think of any other reason for why they refuse to call it a land. That + the “portion of the backlot” comment suggests this as well.

We'll have to wait until more info comes out, but I'm still not convinced that the lack of calling it a "land" or the use of "portion" is anything but lack of cohesive PR messaging right now. We're still a long ways off from even getting the nitty gritty details that I can't take much of it beyond just a grain of salt at this point. I mean tomorrow they could come out and start calling it a "land" in the next blog post and it'd still be lacking in the exact same details.

All I know is that "faux Hollywood set" isn't going to go over very well, it didn't go over to well before in 2001 when DCA opened and certainly won't in 2029 or whenever this opens.

 

[D.Silentu]

I mean the collectors fortress just crash landed at DCA. So why not? lol

Yes, it does seem we are in the era of anything goes.

 

[mickEblu]

We'll have to wait until more info comes out, but I'm still not convinced that the lack of calling it a "land" or the use of "portion" is anything but lack of cohesive PR messaging right now. We're still a long ways off from even getting the nitty gritty details that I can't take much of it beyond just a grain of salt at this point. I mean tomorrow they could come out and start calling it a "land" in the next blog post and it'd still be lacking in the exact same details.

All I know is that "faux Hollywood set" isn't going to go over very well, it didn't go over to well before in 2001 when DCA opened and certainly won't in 2029 or whenever this opens.

Sure but IMO it’s a lot more boring to have every one of your posts boil down to “we don’t know” or “anything is possible” and a little more fun and a bit more of conversation starter to discuss possibilities and read the tea leaves. There is a reason they haven’t called it a land once. What do you think that reason might be?

 

[Disney Irish]

Sure but IMO it’s a lot more boring to have every one of your posts boil down to “we don’t know” or “anything is possible” and a little more fun and a bit more of conversation starter to discuss possibilities and read the tea leaves. There is a reason they haven’t called it a land once. What do you think that reason might be?

I mean if we believe the rumors over the last 2 years its because Iger surprised it on WDI and no one knew the size and scope of the thing let alone where it was going to go, that is why it hasn't been called a land.

It'll remain to be seen if that messaging remains in future updates as more details come out now that we know exactly where it'll go.

 

[mickEblu]

I mean if we believe the rumors over the last 2 years its because Iger surprised it on WDI and no one knew the size and scope of the thing let alone where it was going to go, that is why it hasn't been called a land.

It'll remain to be seen if that messaging remains in future updates as more details come out now that we know exactly where it'll go.

Ok and why are they not calling it a land now?

 

[D.Silentu]

We'll have to wait until more info comes out, but I'm still not convinced that the lack of calling it a "land" or the use of "portion" is anything but lack of cohesive PR messaging right now. We're still a long ways off from even getting the nitty gritty details that I can't take much of it beyond just a grain of salt at this point. I mean tomorrow they could come out and start calling it a "land" in the next blog post and it'd still be lacking in the exact same details.

On top of the confusing verbage, what flummoxes me is that I can't place the latest concept art within the area overview art released at D23. I may have missed it, but has anyone determined the placement of the new rendering? Or does the recent art imply a shift in design?

 

[mickEblu]

On top of the confusing verbage, what flummoxes me is that I can't place the latest concept art within the area overview art released at D23. I may have missed it, but has anyone determined the placement of the new rendering? Or does the recent art imply a shift in design?

Maybe everything moved up if/ when they decided not to reroute the monorail tracks so now it’s hidden behind the main rock work hiding the show building? Just a wild guess.

EDIT: just glanced black at the concept art and I doubt they could fit all of that in front of the current monorail track. Which means if the track has not been rerouted we as the viewer are standing right under the track or just past it in the concept art.

 

[Disney Irish]

Ok and why are they not calling it a land now?

In all fairness in the same blog post last week they called its a "Destination" and an "Experience". When before they were just calling it an "Experience". The added descriptor of "Destination" might be meaningful here, or it might also just be more PR speak. For example what if "Destination" signifies that we'll be "transported" somewhere via a "portal" and so its not a traditional land transition. This could be a reason why they wouldn't call it a land in order to keep up being transported to a different physical locale.