AVATAR land coming to Disney's Animal Kingdom

[ChrisFL]

Where do you get that ranking? It's not even in the top 10.

What? the size of the aquarium? It was the largest indoor aquarium only passed by the Georgia Aquarium when it opened (unless I'm talking more specifics, like largest manmade ocean environment or whatever they like to call it)

 

[WDWFREAK53]

Definition of a Myth:
a traditional or legendary story, usually concerning some being or hero or event, with or without a determinable basis of fact or a natural explanation, especially one that is concerned with deities or demigods and explains some practice, rite, or phenomenon of nature.
Sure, the lesser definitions fit in with the idea of Avatar's creatures...but the main definition of "Myth" doesn't.
That being said, for me, it's not about the individual aspects of the Avatar story, its' about the entire feeling.
That being said...a dragon can be anything from Elliot, to the Reluctant one, to the ones in Reign of Fire, to Maleficent, to any of them in Harry Potter, etc.
The "IDEA" of the dragon is the myth...not any specific image.
Why can't the ones in Avatar be dragons? Just because they weren't shown to breathe fire? They have scaly skin, wings, long tail...and have just as much of the appearance of a dragon as any of the others.

 

[RSoxNo1]

The centerpiece mythical amimal of Beastly would have been a dragon. Good old, reliable, been around for a thousand years dragon.
A lava monster wouldn't have worked at DAK, at least not for me. (Fine for TDS, though.)
A creature that was thought up by Jim Cameron five years ago...nope. Not mythological. No more than a T-100 is.

So in this reality we live in that DAK needs expansion, would you not have been in favor of Mysterious Island as we know it? Believe me, I definitely agree that DAK should have a Dragon as a marquee animal in the park, but I don't think that precludes them adding other made up animals that have found their way into popular culture. The creatures of Avatar have done that to a certain extent, as has the Lava Monster in TDS.

 

[Jedeye80]

I kinda disagree here...
Cameron's creatures are...how to put it...just not the same as a Yeti or a dragon of folklore or mythology. I see a difference between Cameron's "direhorse" and a "mythological" creature that has long been the subject of stories or myths, like a dragon, giant squid, yeti or unicorn.
Some creature Jim Cameron thought up a few years ago...nah...doesn't work the same for me.

I am eager to see what WDI can come up with for Avatar, but I would really like to see it going into another park.

Because Disney did such a sterling job with the yeti lol, but I agree with what you are saying. In a ideal world avatar would go to DHS and beastly kingdom would go to DAK, creature like dragons, unicorns or such would make a great platform for a land. But seeing as we are stuck with avatar going there I say let's see what we get before judging. Who knows, it might be such a success that all the plans we dream of are dusted off and looked at again.

 

[ChrisM]

The centerpiece mythical amimal of Beastly would have been a dragon. Good old, reliable, been around for a thousand years dragon.
A lava monster wouldn't have worked at DAK, at least not for me. (Fine for TDS, though.)
A creature that was thought up by Jim Cameron five years ago...nope. Not mythological. No more than a T-100 is.

The flora and fauna of Pandora aren't simply something conjured out of Cameron's imagination. Rather, it was a collaborative effort with planetary scientists and exo-biologists to brainstorm a hypothetical alien ecosystem, somewhat similar to the Discovery Channel "Alien Planet" fictional documentaries.

Cutting edge ideas as to what alien biology could conceivably look like. And that is exactly why Pandora fits well thematically in Animal Kingdom.

 

[Lee]

So in this reality we live in that DAK needs expansion, would you not have been in favor of Mysterious Island as we know it?

Well, yeah...MI is such a marvel of Imagineering it would be impossible to turn it down.
Still....the having the lava monster would have been a slight thematic issue for me.
(That said, as I understand it, the Journey ride would have had some changes in it's DAK incarnation. Perhaps a different monster...)

 

[Jim Handy]

Except people are still willing to pay for them. The Patriots have an incredibly long waiting list for those season tickets. If you go to Green Bay, it's even longer. The Red Sox have sold out 800 consecutive games (so they say). There's demand for these things.

Disney feels that they essentially have the same waiting list that is willing to pay. If you and I aren't willing to pay anymore, they feel that they have a long waiting list of people who are. Time will tell whether they're right or not.

True. But sporting events and theaters don't have other costs along with them, as usually people attending those events are local or in the same region. Much of WDW's visitor base either has a flight or long drive between them and WDW. That's in addition to a few meals a day and a hotel room and maybe a rental car.

Charge $150 and give me a true Disney experience, ala TDR, stop nickel and dining me with cutbacks, price increases, and general stagnation.

Ps: how happy do you think TDO is that the TDR advertising blackout was inked into the contracts so many years ago?

Certainly keeps people blind to the fact that a nearly cut and paste version of MK is 100x better.

Actually, several times we've used comparative costs for vacation packages and not just ticket vs. ticket. Generally, when we've gone to WDW we're taking advantage of room discounts (i.e. 25% to 30% off rack rates, etc.). We've sat down and done price comparisons of say a week at WDW or a week skiing at a resort. Not always mind you, but when we've broken it down WDW is generally not worse and is sometimes better than ski trips. I use skiing because that is our other major destination vacation annually. When you factor in meals, lodging, etc., I've found that WDW isn't that bad. Using the theater or ball game analogy, the ancillary costs for things such as food and souvenirs usually favors WDW.

These are food price samples at Yankee Stadium (and two years old to boot, so I’m sure they’re much more today):

11 oz beer, "souvenir" cup: $9-$11-$13
"foot-long", 5" hot dog: $5
Prime Rib Sandwich: $15
$9 burgers,
$7 milkshakes,
$10 pulled pork/chicken sandwiches,
$15 deli meat sandwiches,
$10.75 cheese steaks,
$5 fries,
$9 burritos
$5.50 hot dogs
$6.50 ice cream sundaes

Some recent WDW prices and mind you the items generally include side dishes that are extra at a ballpark:

BBQ Pork Sandwich - served with fries or apple slices $9.39
Deluxe 1/3-Pound Angus Cheeseburger - topped with bacon, onion rings, and barbeque sauce served with french fries or apple slices $9.69
Chilled Chicken Wrap - served with your choice of fries or apple slices $9.39
Coke, Diet Coke, Sprite, Gold Peak Iced tea, Apple Juice, Light Lemonade $2.59, $2.89

Yeah, it's all expensive.

If WDW were really smart, they'd keep prices low but with enough room for profit. That would really show respect for their customers.

 

[fractal]

Well, yeah...MI is such a marvel of Imagineering it would be impossible to turn it down.
Still....the having the lava monster would have been a slight thematic issue for me.
(That said, as I understand it, the Journey ride would have had some changes in it's DAK incarnation. Perhaps a different monster...)

Lee, any chance the "Journey" ride could be reimagineered for Avatarland?

 

[WDW1974]

But what you see as a problem in direction and vision (Casey Jr.) others see as a nice little addition, and have absolutely no problem with it. Almost every park has a little water play area somewhere in it, and Casey Jr. is probably one of the most elaborately themed. I say they did a good job. They could've just put a couple of water jets in the concrete shooting water up like at DL or Downtown Disney.

Yep. And some people are just wrong. Their opinions are simpler and basic and they don't get or care about what set Disney apart. So long as their brats are enjoying running thru an elaborate sprinkler while they pay $100 a day, they're happy.

So, they're right, right?

No. They're not. And, no, their opinion isn't worth as much as more discerning guests and the people who made WDW to begin with. ... If you can't see a fundamental lack of creative vision and trying to do the impossible at WDW these days, then no one here can make you see that. But the fact you don't see it (or opt not to) doesn't change that it's further Walmarting of the product.

But it's OK because there are plenty of BRAND ADVOCATES around.

 

[WDW1974]

Give it a couple of years and we will be at $100

It's coming sooner than you think ...

 

[WDW1974]

Relative to other entertainment offerings the pricing makes sense. Theater tickets are more expensive or comparable, as are tickets to sporting events. Those entertainment offerings are 2-4 hours, compared to 8 hours + at a Disney park.

Bad example that gets tossed around because Disney and its consultants use it. ... Compare Disney to other theme parks and to what it used to offer and what if offers elsewhere for what you pay. But don't compare it to an NBA game or a Broadway play or concert. It's apples to grapefruit. And if you use that metric, you can then argue that a day at DAK is worth $175 a day ... maybe a day at DL should be $250? Believe me, that's a comparison you don't want to buy into and spread in the fan community because all you are doing is help back up Disney's Power Points.

 

[threeyoda]

Yep. And some people are just wrong. Their opinions are simpler and basic and they don't get or care about what set Disney apart. So long as their brats are enjoying running thru an elaborate sprinkler while they pay $100 a day, they're happy.

So, they're right, right?

No. They're not. And, no, their opinion isn't worth as much as more discerning guests and the people who made WDW to begin with. ... If you can't see a fundamental lack of creative vision and trying to do the impossible at WDW these days, then no one here can make you see that. But the fact you don't see it (or opt not to) doesn't change that it's further Walmarting of the product.

But it's OK because there are plenty of BRAND ADVOCATES around.

No one is right. No one is wrong. It's their opinion, let them have it. Just like that is your opinion. Don't go around telling other people that your own idea is right and their own idea is wrong. I have no problem with anything you say, except for that.

 

[Lee]

The flora and fauna of Pandora aren't simply something conjured out of Cameron's imagination. Rather, it was a collaborative effort with planetary scientists and exo-biologists to brainstorm a hypothetical alien ecosystem, somewhat similar to the Discovery Channel "Alien Planet" fictional documentaries.

Cutting edge ideas as to what alien biology could conceivably look like. And that is exactly why Pandora fits well thematically in Animal Kingdom.

Really? Hypothetical alien biology and ecology somehow fits into DAK's theme?
I don't see it at all. I'll go read through my DAK literature and try to see if aliens are mentioned anywhere. Sounds more like Tomorrowland to me...

I'll buy the conservation angle, but that's as far as I'm willing to go.

 

[WDW1974]

I kinda disagree here...
Cameron's creatures are...how to put it...just not the same as a Yeti or a dragon of folklore or mythology. I see a difference between Cameron's "direhorse" and a "mythological" creature that has long been the subject of stories or myths, like a dragon, giant squid, yeti or unicorn.
Some creature Jim Cameron thought up a few years ago...nah...doesn't work the same for me.

I am eager to see what WDI can come up with for Avatar, but I would really like to see it going into another park.

Yes. I don't really care about the creatures that James Cameron came up in his big scary mind. ... There is a big difference between mythical creatures that have been in our cultural consciousness for hundreds or thousands of years versus a lousy movie that came out in 2009 that no one talks about unless it's the punchline of a joke, a fanboi ing contest on a Disney fan site or in industry meetings over strong drinks wondering how in the world anyone thinks Cameron is going to make three more of these snorefests that come close to the box office of the first.

 

[WDW1974]

Is it an different than the Lava Monster though? That (or another creature made up by imagineering) would have been the centerpiece mythical animal of a mysterious island land.

Yep. Different park, different mythos ... and one that fits perfectly into the concept of Mysterious Island ...

 

[ChrisM]

Really? Hypothetical alien biology and ecology somehow fits into DAK's theme?
I don't see it at all. I'll go read through my DAK literature and try to see if aliens are mentioned anywhere. Sounds more like Tomorrowland to me...

I'll buy the conservation angle, but that's as far as I'm willing to go.

Why should the concept of the "animal kingdom" be limited solely to life on Earth? It strains to credulity to believe that life exists nowhere else in our galaxy (let alone the universe) and the term "animal kingdom" would right encompass any living creatures that remotely resembled our carbon based biology.

It's a fairly obvious, natural extension of the theme with a nice parallel as the Tomorrowland of Animal Kingdom. Frankly, mythical animals are a bigger thematic stretch in my opinion.

 

[Lee]

No one is right. No one is wrong. It's their opinion, let them have it. Just like that is your opinion. Don't go around telling other people that your own idea is right and their own idea is wrong. I have no problem with anything you say, except for that.

But, opinions can be wrong.
Especially when they are based on incomplete or wrong information.

A person that is of the opinion that the current Imagination ride is the best one ever, likely never rode the original. Therefore their opinion is wrong, and based on a lack of knowledge.

 

[invader]

But, opinions can be wrong.
Especially when they are based on incomplete or wrong information.

A person that is of the opinion that the current Imagination ride is the best one ever, likely never rode the original. Therefore their opinion is wrong, and based on a lack of knowledge.

You can degrade their opinion, but you can't deem it wrong to them. Opinion is not fact, it is what YOU believe.

 

[tirian]

Not sure about that. While attendance hasn't fall it also hasn't really grown in approximately four years. The attendance increases have been so small to the point they are almost negligible. But...you are right that price hikes haven't decreased attendance at least. But there will be a breaking point. It's simply the law of economics regarding that and has been proven time and time again. And $100/day is certainly a big number for people to wrap their heads around. It'll be huge news when (not if, but when) they do that.

This is one of those times you have to choose whether or not to believe me, because I can't reveal why I know this.

American WDW attendance has flatlined while foreign attendance has risen. Disney offers incredible discounts to other countries, a pricing strategy that has helped keep attendance where it is. But even those guests are complaining about the prices they pay, and merch sales are very low, so who knows where this is going to end up.

 

[Lee]

Why should the concept of the "animal kingdom" be limited solely to life on Earth? It strains to credulity to believe that life exists nowhere else in our galaxy (let alone the universe) and the term "animal kingdom" would right encompass any living creatures that remotely resembled our carbon based biology.

It's a fairly obvious, natural extension of the theme with a nice parallel as the Tomorrowland of Animal Kingdom. Frankly, mythical animals are a bigger thematic stretch in my opinion.

I am under the impression (and will look it up shortly) that DAK is about Man's relationship with the Earth and its animal life, including creatures of (Earth's) folklore. Not about what creatures may exist out on Betelgeuse.

Personally, I don't see a need for DAK to have a Tomorrowland...or Adventureland. It's theme is strong enough to carry a whole park.