News Avatar Experience coming to Disneyland Resort

[Professortango1]

I was waiting for you haha. Ok so all Disney has to do is give us one lame sentence about how Avatar works and it’ll be ok?

I mean, I don't think anyone would say Mission BO is a well crafted attraction. They might find it fun, but I don't think anyone is talking about the narrative merits. It's a ride which forgets if Rocket has already broken out or if he's still imprisoned.

This is why I'm wanting Disney to rebrand the park and rethemes Grizzly Peak, so we can stop it with the awkward hamfisting of narratives to work in a California-themed park. Just get rid of the. And and Grizzly Peak and they. An do whatever they want.

And this coming from someone who loved the idea behind DCA. But Disney clearly doesn't want to fulfil that pro use of a park anymore, so let's have the park move on and change it's name/identity.

 

[Professortango1]

If this is all it takes to make people here happy I came up with one a long time ago. RDA found a portal to Pandora in DCA and use it to save in transportation costs, boom done. Disney I'll accept my check now!

If Disney was wiling to bother with creating a themed RDA building and portal to Pandora, you might have a chance. But they will just have a street corner with foliage and you walk down the other road and you're on Pandora. Which would be fine for almost every other park. DAK doesn't need a portal because the park is dedicated to wildlife of all types, including fictional. DCA is still dedicated to California, so that's where it all fells apart.

 

[chadwpalm]

Let's say for gits and shiggles that Avatar is going in the backlot.

And as a point of reference, the building at the red arrow is Stage 12. Then red box below would be portal (around 150 feet long), green box is the building at the green arrow, and the blue box a bunch of trees or a forest-y walk-thru where my red arrows show to create a transition?

 

[Disney Irish]

If Disney was wiling to bother with creating a themed RDA building and portal to Pandora, you might have a chance. But they will just have a street corner with foliage and you walk down the other road and you're on Pandora. Which would be fine for almost every other park. DAK doesn't need a portal because the park is dedicated to wildlife of all types, including fictional. DCA is still dedicated to California, so that's where it all fells apart.

At this point I wouldn't even say its dedicated to California, they just haven't made it official yet. Basically once they plop Avatar in the park its officially no longer dedicated to California.

I mean, I don't think anyone would say Mission BO is a well crafted attraction. They might find it fun, but I don't think anyone is talking about the narrative merits. It's a ride which forgets if Rocket has already broken out or if he's still imprisoned.

This is why I'm wanting Disney to rebrand the park and rethemes Grizzly Peak, so we can stop it with the awkward hamfisting of narratives to work in a California-themed park. Just get rid of the. And and Grizzly Peak and they. An do whatever they want.

And this coming from someone who loved the idea behind DCA. But Disney clearly doesn't want to fulfil that pro use of a park anymore, so let's have the park move on and change it's name/identity.

While I would like a name change I don't think it needs one to change its identity. Its now just a Disney Adventure Park in California, just not about California. Something said here by many posters, including myself, for a long time.

 

[Disney Irish]

Let's say for gits and shiggles that Avatar is going in the backlot.

View attachment 816046

And as a point of reference, the building at the red arrow is Stage 12. Then red box below would be portal (around 150 feet long), green box is the building at the green arrow, and the blue box a bunch of trees or a forest-y walk-thru where my red arrows show to create a transition?

View attachment 816048

That just seems like a lot of wasted space just for a transition, but maybe....

 

[mickEblu]

I mean, I don't think anyone would say Mission BO is a well crafted attraction. They might find it fun, but I don't think anyone is talking about the narrative merits. It's a ride which forgets if Rocket has already broken out or if he's still imprisoned.

Sure, but what does this have to do with what we’re discussing?

This is why I'm wanting Disney to rebrand the park and rethemes Grizzly Peak, so we can stop it with the awkward hamfisting of narratives to work in a California-themed park. Just get rid of the. And and Grizzly Peak and they. An do whatever they want.

I don’t want a name change as not only do I think it’s a mistake from a branding perspective but a name change would make Grizzly Peak more expendable. I’d be ok with some light IPification whether it’s Nat Geo, Humphrey the Bear, the Country Bears, or some future IP that makes sense but I’m not Ok destroying that beautiful land and all that placemaking in the name of IP consistency. Hell, turn GRR into Country Bear River Revue and use my idea to turn Soarin into Disneys Famous Flights seasonally but you can’t throw that theming away. It would be like getting rid of the Jungle Cruise Jungle to put in a Lion King show building.

 

[coffeefan]

I just want great attractions and the other lands to feel immersive like Cars Land. I think the CA theme holds the park back because of its restrictions, and expecting GCH to be the reason the CA theme or Grizzly remains is too hopeful. The more the park moves away from CA the better it becomes and the more park attendance rises.
Don't get me wrong, a California theme could've worked if done more thoughtfully, but that ship sailed a long time ago.

 

[Professortango1]

Sure, but what does this have to do with what we’re discussing?

You had said that all Disney needed was a storybeat similar to Mission BO to make Avatar fit in DCA, and I was saying that the Mission BO writing to force the attraction to work at DCA isn't something that is highly regarded, implying that Disney should be doing more than just that to make Avatar fit.

TLDR
Someone referenced how does Mission BO work in regard to the CA theme
I answered
You suggested that's all we need to do, right?
I said that Mission BO was weak in regards to writing, so that shouldn't be the litmus test.

 

[Professortango1]

At this point I wouldn't even say its dedicated to California, they just haven't made it official yet. Basically once they plop Avatar in the park its officially no longer dedicated to California.


While I would like a name change I don't think it needs one to change its identity. Its now just a Disney Adventure Park in California, just not about California. Something said here by many posters, including myself, for a long time.

I'd still say that the park is dedicated to California. It's in the name, it's in the park's design and the selection/writing of many of the major attractions.

It is pretty thin at this point, but the California ties are still there, especially when it comes to Grizzly Peak, The Grand Californian, and Buena Vista Street. Buena Vista Street can become an entry portal into a park themed around Hollywood Films, but Grizzly Peak doesn't fit that identity.

If they renamed the park Disney's Adventure Park - California, then I'd buy the final statement. But that's not the name as of right now. It is still a California Adventure Park.

And if its going for general adventure, what's with the pleasant California-themed Buena Vista Street and Hollywoodland? Buena Vista Street doesn't scream "Adventure" to me. It screams "California" and "Golden Age of Hollywood." As does the California pier. As does the Tech Campus look. As does the Rte 66-inspired land. As does Grizzly Peak. Avatar, however, doesn't scream "California" in any way, other than the film being made in Manhattan Beach. But that would only work if we were visiting the set of Avatar, which I don't think anyone wants as a Pandora concept.

 

[DavidDL]

At this point I wouldn't even say its dedicated to California, they just haven't made it official yet. Basically once they plop Avatar in the park its officially no longer dedicated to California.

I mean there's quite literally a dedication plaque at the front of the park that says it's supposed to be. In fact, it was dedicated to California twice (once by Eisner and then again by Iger).

-and despite the blunders in recent years (Avengers Campus, Pixar Pier, etc.) there is still a lot going on inside the park that has at least one foot in the preverbal pool that is "California identity" (Buena Vista St., Hollywoodland, Grizzly Peak, Little Mermaid and San Fransokyo having Bay-area inspired architecture, etc.) Even once they plop Pandora in there, unless all those other things suddenly disappear, there's another name change or it gets dedicated for a third time, I don't think it would be fair to say the park doesn't have some connection to the California theme and by extension, at least some degree of expectation that the identity of the park be upheld when considering additional lands or attractions.

It'll be a personal preference whether or not you care about the preservation of DCA's identity. Not just there, but for all of Disney's parks. You seem content with this park simply being "a Disney Adventure Park in California" and that is fine if that is the standard you want to hold them to. To each their own. But my own stance on this is that kind of thinking is dangerously close to just being cool with something like DCA and EPCOT becoming so homogenized over time that they completely lose their individuality.

Sure, they may have differing attractions within them, but at the end of the day, any deeper meaning the parks used to have and their very purpose for being there becomes lost and gets replaced with: this is generic Disney park one and generic Disney park two. Both exist solely to be where you come to consume Avatar, Star Wars, Marvel, Pixar, etc. and are encouraged to renew your Disney+ subscription.

Something like DCA 1.0 admittedly lacked the expected "Disney quality" at the time, but they were close to finding their footing around the time of DCA 2.0. Then, they slipped and fell the other direction and now it feels like the park has a bunch of squares in round holes all around it.

To summarize: while you may be perfectly fine enjoying a trip to "Disney Adventure Park in California" and "Disney Adventure Park in Florida", I would much rather visit "Disney California Adventure" and "EPCOT". I think trying to uphold the soul of these parks and what makes them what they at their core is a worthwhile endeavor, albeit likely a losing one. If that means they need to dedicate a couple extra yards to create a transition that makes Pandora make sense coming from Hollywoodland, then so be it. Of course, I'd still argue a fully fledged Avatar land has no place in DCA at all. Neither does Avengers Campus, Pixar Pier, or much of the other crap they've built in recent years, for that matter.

 

[Professortango1]

I mean there's quite literally a dedication plaque at the front of the park that says it's supposed to be. In fact, it was dedicated to California twice (once by Eisner and then again by Iger).

View attachment 816050 View attachment 816052

-and despite the blunders in recent years (Avengers Campus, Pixar Pier, etc.) there is still a lot going on inside the park that has at least one foot in the preverbal pool that is "California identity" (Buena Vista St., Hollywoodland, Grizzly Peak, Little Mermaid and San Fransokyo having Bay-area inspired architecture, etc.) Even once they plop Pandora in there, unless all those other things suddenly disappear, there's another name change or it gets dedicated for a third time, I don't think it would be fair to say the park doesn't have some connection to the California theme and by extension, at least some degree of expectation that the identity of the park be upheld when considering additional lands or attractions.

It'll be a personal preference whether or not you care about the preservation of DCA's identity. Not just there, but for all of Disney's parks. You seem content with this park simply being "a Disney Adventure Park in California" and that is fine if that is the standard you want to hold them to. To each their own. But my own stance on this is that kind of thinking is dangerously close to just being cool with something like DCA and EPCOT becoming so homogenized over time that they completely lose their individuality.

Sure, they may have differing attractions within them, but at the end of the day, any deeper meaning the parks used to have and their very purpose for being there, becomes lost and gets replaced with: this is generic Disney park one and generic Disney park two. Both exist solely to be where you come to consume Avatar, Star Wars, Marvel, Pixar, etc. and are encouraged to renew your Disney+ subscription.

Something like DCA 1.0 admittedly lacked the expected "Disney quality" at the time, but they were close to finding their footing around the time of DCA 2.0. Then, they slipped and fell the other direction and now the park has a bunch of messy areas that feel like they need to be cleaned up.

To summarize: while you may be perfectly fine enjoying a trip to "Disney Adventure Park in California" and "Disney Adventure Park in Florida", I would much rather visit "Disney California Adventure" and "EPCOT". I think trying to uphold the soul of these parks and what makes them what they at their core is a worthwhile endeavor, albeit likely a losing one.

If that means they need to dedicate a couple extra yards to create a transition that makes Pandora make sense coming from Hollywoodland, then so be it. Of course, I'd still argue it has no place in DCA at all. Neither does Avengers Campus, Pixar Pier, or much of the other crap they've built in recent years, for that matter.

 

[Disney Irish]

I'd still say that the park is dedicated to California. It's in the name, it's in the park's design and the selection/writing of many of the major attractions.

It is pretty thin at this point, but the California ties are still there, especially when it comes to Grizzly Peak, The Grand Californian, and Buena Vista Street. Buena Vista Street can become an entry portal into a park themed around Hollywood Films, but Grizzly Peak doesn't fit that identity.

If they renamed the park Disney's Adventure Park - California, then I'd buy the final statement. But that's not the name as of right now. It is still a California Adventure Park.

And if its going for general adventure, what's with the pleasant California-themed Buena Vista Street and Hollywoodland? Buena Vista Street doesn't scream "Adventure" to me. It screams "California" and "Golden Age of Hollywood." As does the California pier. As does the Tech Campus look. As does the Rte 66-inspired land. As does Grizzly Peak. Avatar, however, doesn't scream "California" in any way, other than the film being made in Manhattan Beach. But that would only work if we were visiting the set of Avatar, which I don't think anyone wants as a Pandora concept.

My counter is just sticking strictly to the "California" theme is limiting in so many ways, even if that was what it was originally dedicated to prevoiusly. And bending over backwards and closing one eye while squinting with the other just to get something that vaguely ties something to "California" is just dumb.

I really don't care that the Park has California in the name, to me that doesn't mean it had to mean its "theme". I would say a majority of regular guest either don't know or don't care what the name meant originally either. And as I said before while I would like a rename just so this stupid argument stops I don't think it needs it just to get a different identity.

 

[mickEblu]

You had said that all Disney needed was a storybeat similar to Mission BO to make Avatar fit in DCA, and I was saying that the Mission BO writing to force the attraction to work at DCA isn't something that is highly regarded, implying that Disney should be doing more than just that to make Avatar fit.

TLDR
Someone referenced how does Mission BO work in regard to the CA theme
I answered
You suggested that's all we need to do, right?
I said that Mission BO was weak in regards to writing, so that shouldn't be the litmus test.

Oh gotcha. No it shouldn’t be the litmus test. I was just pointing that Mission BO was the nail in the coffin and that anyone giving it a pass is doing some hardcore mental gymnastics. It’s all irrelevant anyway as the park being strictly themed to California is dead and gone. I can understand the hope that they retheme Mission BO and revert to a more strict California theme. However, not only do I find that highly unrealistic but that also ignores the fact that most additions post opening 2001 minus BVS and TOT had a very weak connection to California.

 

[Professortango1]

Oh gotcha. No it shouldn’t be the litmus test. I was just pointing that Mission BO was the nail in the coffin and that anyone giving it a pass is doing some hardcore mental gymnastics. It’s all irrelevant anyway as the park being strictly themed to California is dead and gone. I can understand the hope that they retheme Mission BO and revert to a more strict California theme. However, not only do I find that highly unrealistic but that also ignores the fact that most additions post opening 2001 minus BVS and TOT had a very weak connection to California.

Oh I agree that we're not going back. Not in my lifetime. They shifted from Buena Vista Street to Mission BO with lightning speed and never looked back. That's why I am all about making the divorce final. Let's change our name and remove any traces of the former partnership.

 

[Disney Irish]

I mean there's quite literally a dedication plaque at the front of the park that says it's supposed to be. In fact, it was dedicated to California twice (once by Eisner and then again by Iger).

View attachment 816050 View attachment 816052

-and despite the blunders in recent years (Avengers Campus, Pixar Pier, etc.) there is still a lot going on inside the park that has at least one foot in the preverbal pool that is "California identity" (Buena Vista St., Hollywoodland, Grizzly Peak, Little Mermaid and San Fransokyo having Bay-area inspired architecture, etc.) Even once they plop Pandora in there, unless all those other things suddenly disappear, there's another name change or it gets dedicated for a third time, I don't think it would be fair to say the park doesn't have some connection to the California theme and by extension, at least some degree of expectation that the identity of the park be upheld when considering additional lands or attractions.

It'll be a personal preference whether or not you care about the preservation of DCA's identity. Not just there, but for all of Disney's parks. You seem content with this park simply being "a Disney Adventure Park in California" and that is fine if that is the standard you want to hold them to. To each their own. But my own stance on this is that kind of thinking is dangerously close to just being cool with something like DCA and EPCOT becoming so homogenized over time that they completely lose their individuality.

Sure, they may have differing attractions within them, but at the end of the day, any deeper meaning the parks used to have and their very purpose for being there becomes lost and gets replaced with: this is generic Disney park one and generic Disney park two. Both exist solely to be where you come to consume Avatar, Star Wars, Marvel, Pixar, etc. and are encouraged to renew your Disney+ subscription.

Something like DCA 1.0 admittedly lacked the expected "Disney quality" at the time, but they were close to finding their footing around the time of DCA 2.0. Then, they slipped and fell the other direction and now it feels like the park has a bunch of squares in round holes all around it.

To summarize: while you may be perfectly fine enjoying a trip to "Disney Adventure Park in California" and "Disney Adventure Park in Florida", I would much rather visit "Disney California Adventure" and "EPCOT". I think trying to uphold the soul of these parks and what makes them what they at their core is a worthwhile endeavor, albeit likely a losing one. If that means they need to dedicate a couple extra yards to create a transition that makes Pandora make sense coming from Hollywoodland, then so be it. Of course, I'd still argue a fully fledged Avatar land has no place in DCA at all. Neither does Avengers Campus, Pixar Pier, or much of the other crap they've built in recent years, for that matter.

And that dedication plaque is not written in stone, and honestly should never have been taken quite literally. As has been said here before, and recently, it was all weak connections in "California" in the first place.

I've often said, and it bears repeating now, I don't need to visit a fantasized Disneyfied version of California, especially one that was cheaply done originally. I'm a California native, born and raised, I've been to a lot (if not all) locations that were supposed to be represented in DCA, and all of the DCA versions paled in comparisons to the real thing. So yeah I rather go to a Disney Adventure Park in California because at least that means I'm seeing something that I haven't seen before and isn't a cheap knockoff of the real thing. And while 2.0 gave some better themed areas that were in the "spirit of California" it doesn't need to continue to be that going into the future in my opinion.

So if you rather visit "Disney California Adventure" with it strictly sticking to "California", more power to you. But I think you're going to need to get a Tardis because that is in the past, not the Parks future.

 

[Professortango1]

My counter is just sticking strictly to the "California" theme is limiting in so many ways, even if that was what it was originally dedicated to prevoiusly. And bending over backwards and closing one eye while squinting with the other just to get something that vaguely ties something to "California" is just dumb.

I really don't care that the Park has California in the name, to me that doesn't mean it had to mean its "theme". I would say a majority of regular guest either don't know or don't care what the name meant originally either. And as I said before while I would like a rename just so this stupid argument stops I don't think it needs it just to get a different identity.

If they treated "California" as an idea just as they did with the sea in TDS, we would have been fine. It would have likely been a park similar to EPCOT with it being free from IP's and rather than Edutainment, would have explored the themes and stories that California inspires.

El Dorado was rumored to be here. Manifest Destiny. Bigfoot, Lost City of Mu, Shasta Lights, Winchester Mystery House, vintage San Francisco. Heck, Baxter's Discovery Bay could have fit DCA had it been done right. But, as Disney Sea took a lot of money and big thinking, this too would require that commitment from Disney. And Disney doesn't do that anymore.
I wonder, in an alternate timeline, had they done DCA correctly, would that have ushered in another golden age for theme parks? Or would they still learn the wrong lesson from Potter.

 

[Disney Irish]

If they treated "California" as an idea just as they did with the sea in TDS, we would have been fine. It would have likely been a park similar to EPCOT with it being free from IP's and rather than Edutainment, would have explored the themes and stories that California inspires.

El Dorado was rumored to be here. Manifest Destiny. Bigfoot, Lost City of Mu, Shasta Lights, Winchester Mystery House, vintage San Francisco. Heck, Baxter's Discovery Bay could have fit DCA had it been done right. But, as Disney Sea took a lot of money and big thinking, this too would require that commitment from Disney. And Disney doesn't do that anymore.
I wonder, in an alternate timeline, had they done DCA correctly, would that have ushered in another golden age for theme parks? Or would they still learn the wrong lesson from Potter.

No offense but most of that stuff sounds boring to me, especially as a California native, in a theme park setting. I don't need my Park to be a fantasized history lesson about California, I was born and raised here and studied its real history in school.

Remember one of the biggest complaints heard back in the day about DCA was the lack of "Disney" in the Park, the lack of recognizable IP. So I don't see how they could have gone into that direction you're talking about long term anyways.

 

[DavidDL]

Oh gotcha. No it shouldn’t be the litmus test. I was just pointing that Mission BO was the nail in the coffin and that anyone giving it a pass is doing some hardcore mental gymnastics. It’s all irrelevant anyway as the park being strictly themed to California is dead and gone. I can understand the hope that they retheme Mission BO and revert to a more strict California theme. However, not only do I find that highly unrealistic but that also ignores the fact that most additions post opening 2001 minus BVS and TOT had a very weak connection to California.

The frustrating part for me is Disney can absolutely have it both ways. Want to incorporate Avatar and Marvel into your California-themed park in a way that makes sense? There's a way to do that: build those attractions in Hollywoodland. Have to expand or fix up Hollywoodland to do it? Go for it! I'm totally in favor of a refresh for that area. I'm not gonna sit here and pretend like the faux facades are bees knees or anything. But having a well-built, expanded Hollywood "land" gives that area the potential to hold all kinds of attractions that might have a hard time fitting in thematically with other areas.

I guess I'm also just tired of these giant, super specific lands dedicated to single IPs. We get it, Potter was popular. But I really wish they would go back to building lands that can incorporate multiple IPs that have the ability to come and go as needed instead of dedicating giant swaths of the land to a single movie or something. Then again, I also wish we'd get some original stories and attractions out of Imagineering, too. But I know that will also never happen!

 

[mickEblu]

Oh I agree that we're not going back. Not in my lifetime. They shifted from Buena Vista Street to Mission BO with lightning speed and never looked back. That's why I am all about making the divorce final. Let's change our name and remove any traces of the former partnership.

But even if you change the name you’ll still have BVS and Grizzly Peak so you’d have to retheme those lands for a full divorce… which I am vehemently opposed to as they are beautifully themed lands with great place making. I can understand why some may prefer a name change. I don’t find it necessary. I like the ring of California Adventure and I still think it makes sense. I think that viewing DCA as an Adventure park in California is a much smaller leap than saying Bugs Land, Cars Land, Mission BO, Mermaid etc have any real connection to California.

Not that I think they have to but they can just come out with a new rededication of there park with a plaque and new spiel describing that this is Disneys Adventure Park in California that celebrates some of the States natural beauty, Walt’s history here and many of the worlds and adventures created by the talented artists at the Burbank, Hollywood, Emeryville studios etc. I think there’s a little more meat there and more of a thesis than just a straightforward “these are adventures from our movies.” Much cheaper and easier than rebranding the park too. I hate the ring of Cinematic Adventure as it kind of brings my mind back to the ride the movies USH approach which IMO kind of makes it all feel less “real and organic.”

My rededication spiel would make even more sense if they put Avatar in the Simba lot as you’d have the front of the park be about the States Natural beauty and Walt’s history here and then as you move to towards the back it becomes about all of the worlds/ adventures created by the artists in the Burbank, Emeryville and Hollywood studios.

 

[D.Silentu]

If they treated "California" as an idea just as they did with the sea in TDS, we would have been fine. It would have likely been a park similar to EPCOT with it being free from IP's and rather than Edutainment, would have explored the themes and stories that California inspires.

El Dorado was rumored to be here. Manifest Destiny. Bigfoot, Lost City of Mu, Shasta Lights, Winchester Mystery House, vintage San Francisco.

My white whale of unbuilt attractions planned for DCA was their original take on Tower of Terror. Supposedly they were going to build a variation on the ride themed around the Eagles' song 'Hotel California,' with the attraction being named the same. Unfortunately, I've never been able to find much information about it save for the fact that it was to be built around the wharf area. As you've said, that kind of fantastic take on California culture and history would have lent the park a much stronger foundation.