communicorn96
Member
Commercial art is still art.You serious? The parks were quite literally designed and built by artists.
Themed design is art is art is art.
Commercial art is still art.You serious? The parks were quite literally designed and built by artists.
Themed design is art is art is art.
Commercial art is still art.
As far as which movie is a better fit, Avatar (the first one) vs Zootopia... it's tightI don’t love zootopia - but there’s nothing wrong with it either. It’s better than turning red that’s for sure.
And as an IP - I think it fits the park better than Avatar.
Disneyland didn't just sell antiques in 1955.That's really not accurate.
Of course there was an element of that, but the parks were also full of things completely disconnected from any Disney media IP.
What you're describing is accurate in terms of how the parks are run today, but that's not what they were like when most people fell in love with them -- unless you think things like stores selling actual antiques, or a park that didn't include any Disney media properties, were somehow promoting Disney IP.
You quoted this line from my comment in your reply.Your post very much implied that you don't view the parks as art at all. It also seemed to completely ignore 50 years of history.
Looking at everything in the world as a potential ”franchise” or “media oppurtunity” for profit is such a joyless way to look at the worldEpcot created Disney media properties. Few are still successful today like Figment.
Do you think I’m going to get a list from him?Bad news...
You quoted this line from my comment in your reply.
"A lot of talent and creativity has gone into the parks"
I believe that.
but at the end of the day they are very elaborate bubble wand strip malls.
Do you think I’m going to get a list from him?
My wife demanded that I produce a list of 5 things I did around the house this week. I don’t think she approved.
1. Sat
2. Laid
3. Napped
4. Ate
5. Relaxed
No. This is not the same thing at all. These are alien dragon-looking things FROM ANOTHER PLANET! Beastly Kingdom wasn't transporting you to another planet—it was still Earth, just the mythological side of the earthly animal spectrum. Avatar did not and DOES NOT fit, and I will die on this hill.The fantastical, dragon-filled element basically has been filled by Avatar and the banshees.
Disneyland didn't just sell antiques in 1955.
Epcot created Disney media properties. Few are still successful today like Figment.
A lot of folks posting here are rightfully critical of Disney's current managment, but at some point people have to take off the nostalgia glasses and realize it's always been this way.
No. This is not the same thing at all. These are alien dragon-looking things FROM ANOTHER PLANET! Beastly Kingdom wasn't transporting you to another planet—it was still Earth, just the mythological side of the earthly animal spectrum. Avatar did not and DOES NOT fit, and I will die on this hill.
On my list I would add -As far as which movie is a better fit, Avatar (the first one) vs Zootopia... it's tight
On my list I would add -
Zootopia is a Disney Animation Theatrical Release - so it would naturally fit in a “Disney” park better than Avatar.
When we talk about the mythical “average visitor” - quiz anybody on what movie would you expect to see represented at Disneys Animal Kingdom - Avatar, Indiana Jones, Zootopia - everyone is going to pick zootopia.
The Franchise bombed and Disney doesn't have the rights... but a ride or show stepping into Newt Scamander's briefcase and learning about all the magic creatures inside would have been awesome and actually could have fit in AK.Some people come expecting Harry Potter world.
Neither one of them fits. I agree with everything you said about Zootopia.To be Avatar fits waaaaay better into Animal Kingdom than Zootopia
Animal Kingdom is about conservation and gaining a better understanding for man's relationship with and impact on nature. To understand the habitats of animals and man's impact on those habitats
Avatar is very much about that - it is about conservation and how many impact on Pandora was ruining it but nature is now reclaiming it. It is about observing and experience the Navi and the Banshees in their natural habitat - that is where they actually live in nature (a fictional nature to be fair)
Zootopia is nothing about that - it is using animals figures as fill in for humans and dealing with what humans deal with (largely racism) - the animals presented do not really ride trains in their natural habitat or work as police officers or go through habitrails to get to their office jobs. It has nothing to do with conservation and nothing to do with observing creatures in their natural habitats
You can't just add words or meanings to the dedication... the word imagined was used... not folkloreNeither one of them fits. I agree with everything you said about Zootopia.
If Disney had bought the theme park rights to Lord of the Rings, would a Middle-Earth area be appropriate? Saruman shows a huge disregard for nature in the way he cuts down the forests surrounding Isengard to fuel his army and evil schemes. The Ents (tree-like creatures) attack in retaliation, standing up for the beauty of nature.
To me, as cool as it would be, it doesn't fit in Animal Kingdom for the SAME REASON Avatar doesn't. Animal Kingdom was meant to be focused on the animals of our dear Mother Earth: real, imagined, and extinct. The "imaginary" label is another way of describing folklore, which Expedition Everest leans into nicely. Avatar is not folklore; it's film. Middle-Earth is not folklore; it's fantasy literature. People believed in dragons and sea serpents and unicorns—they weren't real, but they BECAME part of the cultures they existed in. This hasn't happened with either Lord of the Rings or Avatar, especially since neither one of them is supposed to take place on Earth as we know it.
Welcome to a kingdom of animals… real, ancient, and imagined: a kingdom ruled by lions, dinosaurs, and dragons; a kingdom of balance, harmony, and survival; a kingdom we enter to share in the wonder, gaze at the beauty, thrill at the drama, and learn.
Better than Turning Red? Nah, won't get an agreement from me. And this is coming from someone who enjoyed Zootopia and didn't want to see Turning Red.I don’t love zootopia - but there’s nothing wrong with it either. It’s better than turning red that’s for sure.
And as an IP - I think it fits the park better than Avatar.
Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.