baymenxpac
Well-Known Member
could very well be. admittedly, i've been a little scatter shot in reading the avatar threads, since there has been little news and more than a little groaning.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
AVATAR land coming to Disney's Animal Kingdom
- Thread starter DocMcHulk
- Start date
could very well be. admittedly, i've been a little scatter shot in reading the avatar threads, since there has been little news and more than a little groaning.
CinematicFusion
Well-Known Member
By Al Lutz from his website micechat....
Something different today…
A long time ago… In a place far far away (from Florida) an executive retreat was convened.
For those unfamiliar with the term “executive retreat,” let me explain: it’s a way for people who are already somewhat removed from the day to day interaction with their customers to add the element of physical distancing from their workplaces to get even further away from them.
Many of these gatherings are held in premium priced venues, where attendees dine on poultry normally found in joke shops and swill copious quantities of adult beverages as they try to avoid contact with anyone outside of the series of cubicles they normally inhabit. In order for their employers to pay for these gatherings, a series of tasks are assigned to all attendees. Completion of said tasks allows for more meal opportunities and before they know it they are back in their cubicles again avoiding customers just as before.
For customers of such company, the assigned tasks at these gatherings usually have very little effect upon them. Ideas sketched out on napkins from left field are found to be impractical, business plans from underlings gunning for their jobs end up at the bottom of briefcases, and hopefully a few pillows cushion the fall backwards that was supposed to be cushioned by a coworker who suddenly had trust issues.
Occasionally the instigators of such events change up the schedule a bit and ask everyone involved in the “executive retreat” to come up with a creative idea. For customers of said company this almost always means trouble, as said creative ideas cause billions of dollars in profits to evaporate and Internet gadflies have a field day.
Many regular readers of this column first encountered the trouble these “executive retreats” can cause back when Disneyland in Anaheim announced the results of a “retreat” dedicated to increasing the revenues from its adjacent parking lot. A shopkeeper and a schoolteacher were inexplicably chosen to master plan a major expansion of the Disneyland property with their visions of inexpensively constructed shops and restaurants in an environment designed to look like the state of California (in the very same state).
Rides would be sprinkled into the mix sparingly, wherever possible replaced by films featuring company contract players. “Hip and Edgy” they demanded the park would be, so Mickey Mouse wasn’t going to be allowed on property, and the one live show would feature Finding Nemo fish-head hatted dancers grabbing their crotches.
After almost a decade of empty walkways and a couple of billion dollars later, the schoolteacher and shopkeeper have moved on, the parking lot ended up with a few more cars back in it, a few rides were finally built, and the once still entry turnstiles began to spin with paying customers.
So now I find myself seeing history repeat itself as Disney confirms their deal with Jim Cameron and his Avatar franchise in this interview from the Orlando Sentinel newspaper.
To be sure things have changed quite a bit within the Disney Corporation. Eisner’s departure, and Iger’s efforts to this point, along with the direction provided by Lasseter have resulted in an improved second gate for Anaheim. The executive now overseeing the parks, Staggs, for the most part seems to be on the same plate.
With success many times comes contempt though, which can shut out all reason and any constructive criticism. Iger and Staggs from what I understand may be at this stage as the project remains a mystery to anyone outside of the close executive circle they now head in dealing with it.
Tree of Life? Or Glow-necklace ODV cart?
The real problem is not in the execution of their idea, as Disney can replicate the world of Avatar convincingly and would be devoting the proper budget to do so. It’s the simply the very concept itself. Avatar is a movie defined by its technology, where character development takes a backseat. Its protagonists move the plot along in their adventures and yet audiences aren’t moved enough to remember their names. The simplistic story/concept doesn’t offer much to build on for beyond what happens in the movie. (And apparently Cameron is now dealing with that very issue in getting the sequels together.)
The merchandise sales for Avatar were unremarkable, and once it petered out of the stores, it didn’t return. For a company that makes as much as it does from merchandising I find it surprising that this one factor apparently continues to be dismissed. Also let’s not forget the royalties that must be paid to Cameron, something Disney wouldn’t have to deal with the Pixar and Lucasfilm properties since they now own them outright.
The biggest problem may be that this appears to be the only major project on the immediate horizon for a resort that desperately needs to be freshened up with more new attractions and a major investment in infrastructure. Walt Disney World over the next decade will face some formidable competition from neighboring attractions. Queue enhancements, while nice, can’t compete with new rides. The Resort’s bus transportation system is in dire need of an upgrade or reconfiguration throughout the property. Current management must stop bending over to pick up pennies as dollars fly over their heads.
Islands in the sky? Or balloons for sale?
Longtime readers know I don’t hate James Cameron. He’s a terrific filmmaker. I don’t hate Walt Disney World. It truly needs a lot of attention physically and financially right now. I think Tom Staggs and Bob Iger for the most part are on track and making good decisions for the company. John Lasseter’s contributions are to be lauded even with his continued blind spot about Cars 2.
Avatar land is the problem. Believe me, walking away from that concept now will cost a lot less than building it, then trying to fix and then ultimately replace it; which is going to happen.
I noted online a lot of you feel the same way. Don’t let Animal Kingdom become Disney’s Florida Adventure; speak up!
See you at Disneyland!
Something different today…
A long time ago… In a place far far away (from Florida) an executive retreat was convened.
For those unfamiliar with the term “executive retreat,” let me explain: it’s a way for people who are already somewhat removed from the day to day interaction with their customers to add the element of physical distancing from their workplaces to get even further away from them.
Many of these gatherings are held in premium priced venues, where attendees dine on poultry normally found in joke shops and swill copious quantities of adult beverages as they try to avoid contact with anyone outside of the series of cubicles they normally inhabit. In order for their employers to pay for these gatherings, a series of tasks are assigned to all attendees. Completion of said tasks allows for more meal opportunities and before they know it they are back in their cubicles again avoiding customers just as before.
For customers of such company, the assigned tasks at these gatherings usually have very little effect upon them. Ideas sketched out on napkins from left field are found to be impractical, business plans from underlings gunning for their jobs end up at the bottom of briefcases, and hopefully a few pillows cushion the fall backwards that was supposed to be cushioned by a coworker who suddenly had trust issues.
Occasionally the instigators of such events change up the schedule a bit and ask everyone involved in the “executive retreat” to come up with a creative idea. For customers of said company this almost always means trouble, as said creative ideas cause billions of dollars in profits to evaporate and Internet gadflies have a field day.
Many regular readers of this column first encountered the trouble these “executive retreats” can cause back when Disneyland in Anaheim announced the results of a “retreat” dedicated to increasing the revenues from its adjacent parking lot. A shopkeeper and a schoolteacher were inexplicably chosen to master plan a major expansion of the Disneyland property with their visions of inexpensively constructed shops and restaurants in an environment designed to look like the state of California (in the very same state).
Rides would be sprinkled into the mix sparingly, wherever possible replaced by films featuring company contract players. “Hip and Edgy” they demanded the park would be, so Mickey Mouse wasn’t going to be allowed on property, and the one live show would feature Finding Nemo fish-head hatted dancers grabbing their crotches.
After almost a decade of empty walkways and a couple of billion dollars later, the schoolteacher and shopkeeper have moved on, the parking lot ended up with a few more cars back in it, a few rides were finally built, and the once still entry turnstiles began to spin with paying customers.
So now I find myself seeing history repeat itself as Disney confirms their deal with Jim Cameron and his Avatar franchise in this interview from the Orlando Sentinel newspaper.
To be sure things have changed quite a bit within the Disney Corporation. Eisner’s departure, and Iger’s efforts to this point, along with the direction provided by Lasseter have resulted in an improved second gate for Anaheim. The executive now overseeing the parks, Staggs, for the most part seems to be on the same plate.
With success many times comes contempt though, which can shut out all reason and any constructive criticism. Iger and Staggs from what I understand may be at this stage as the project remains a mystery to anyone outside of the close executive circle they now head in dealing with it.
Tree of Life? Or Glow-necklace ODV cart?
The real problem is not in the execution of their idea, as Disney can replicate the world of Avatar convincingly and would be devoting the proper budget to do so. It’s the simply the very concept itself. Avatar is a movie defined by its technology, where character development takes a backseat. Its protagonists move the plot along in their adventures and yet audiences aren’t moved enough to remember their names. The simplistic story/concept doesn’t offer much to build on for beyond what happens in the movie. (And apparently Cameron is now dealing with that very issue in getting the sequels together.)
The merchandise sales for Avatar were unremarkable, and once it petered out of the stores, it didn’t return. For a company that makes as much as it does from merchandising I find it surprising that this one factor apparently continues to be dismissed. Also let’s not forget the royalties that must be paid to Cameron, something Disney wouldn’t have to deal with the Pixar and Lucasfilm properties since they now own them outright.
The biggest problem may be that this appears to be the only major project on the immediate horizon for a resort that desperately needs to be freshened up with more new attractions and a major investment in infrastructure. Walt Disney World over the next decade will face some formidable competition from neighboring attractions. Queue enhancements, while nice, can’t compete with new rides. The Resort’s bus transportation system is in dire need of an upgrade or reconfiguration throughout the property. Current management must stop bending over to pick up pennies as dollars fly over their heads.
Islands in the sky? Or balloons for sale?
Longtime readers know I don’t hate James Cameron. He’s a terrific filmmaker. I don’t hate Walt Disney World. It truly needs a lot of attention physically and financially right now. I think Tom Staggs and Bob Iger for the most part are on track and making good decisions for the company. John Lasseter’s contributions are to be lauded even with his continued blind spot about Cars 2.
Avatar land is the problem. Believe me, walking away from that concept now will cost a lot less than building it, then trying to fix and then ultimately replace it; which is going to happen.
I noted online a lot of you feel the same way. Don’t let Animal Kingdom become Disney’s Florida Adventure; speak up!
See you at Disneyland!
Atomicmickey
Well-Known Member
Um, ah, well.
So, the news has been out for a year and he's writing this now?
I dunno. The whole Avatar thing is such a mess. I've been against it, for it, curious,
dismayed, buoyed, disheartened, expectant, deflated. All over the map.
It's more of a symptom of everything that's wrong with our favorite East Coast park
than anything these days. Muddled, indistinct, misguided, swallowed up by budget
cuts.
No boldness of vision, no urgency. Completion anxiety or something.
Announce, dissemble, disassemble, re-announce, delay, cut, *pfft*.
The thing last week, showing a picture and saying it's in progress. They've had A YEAR.
Argh.
So, the news has been out for a year and he's writing this now?
I dunno. The whole Avatar thing is such a mess. I've been against it, for it, curious,
dismayed, buoyed, disheartened, expectant, deflated. All over the map.
It's more of a symptom of everything that's wrong with our favorite East Coast park
than anything these days. Muddled, indistinct, misguided, swallowed up by budget
cuts.
No boldness of vision, no urgency. Completion anxiety or something.
Announce, dissemble, disassemble, re-announce, delay, cut, *pfft*.
The thing last week, showing a picture and saying it's in progress. They've had A YEAR.
Argh.
djkidkaz
Well-Known Member
What if the idea is to just use the money they are getting for the deal to build the "World of Avatar" and they can keep it as such until the contract runs out. Then you remove the Avatar elements but you have all this rock work theming, etc that someone else helped pay for. Now you just turn it into Beastly Kingdom and it cost you less than footing the whole bill yourself. Soarin 2.0 can be changed from Avatar to a different movie as well. Done and done. 
Atomicmickey
Well-Known Member
Someone in the comments section of the Orlando Sentinel article said
something that struck home with me.
"Avatar lacks charm."
That's a something. As amazing as the world will/would/could be if they build
it, it doesn't have that Disney something. This is why Disney is different than
Universal. Charm. Whimsy. Flair.
I think that's it. That's what bugs me about Avatar--even if they do a great
job building it, and it's an amazing place to visit--which it could very well be.
Charmless.
(on the other hand, FLE is all charm and no meat.)
something that struck home with me.
"Avatar lacks charm."
That's a something. As amazing as the world will/would/could be if they build
it, it doesn't have that Disney something. This is why Disney is different than
Universal. Charm. Whimsy. Flair.
I think that's it. That's what bugs me about Avatar--even if they do a great
job building it, and it's an amazing place to visit--which it could very well be.
Charmless.
(on the other hand, FLE is all charm and no meat.)
I couldn't agree more with absolutely everything he said. I love that he used my "stepping over dollars to pick up dimes" line. That is absolutely TDO In a nutshell.
I'll still say that (as far as the concepts we've seen) it looks like Avatar would be built in a way so that it could be changed over to a Beastly Kingdom concept with comparatively minimal cost.
I understand the hope for name recognition with Avatar, but I wish Disney would stick with their own franchises. In the end, the compensation to Cameron will probably negate any benefits from the name recognition (over just building something like BK) anyway.
Besides, think about how much more benefit they would get from spending that money on Star Wars instead.
I'll still say that (as far as the concepts we've seen) it looks like Avatar would be built in a way so that it could be changed over to a Beastly Kingdom concept with comparatively minimal cost.
I understand the hope for name recognition with Avatar, but I wish Disney would stick with their own franchises. In the end, the compensation to Cameron will probably negate any benefits from the name recognition (over just building something like BK) anyway.
Besides, think about how much more benefit they would get from spending that money on Star Wars instead.
"Heart" would be another word for it. It doesn't have heart. People like it, but very few actually love it.
MerlinTheGoat
Well-Known Member
I was actually willing to give the Avatar expansion the benefit of the doubt that it would at least look very good. The movie is of course a very impressive visual experience. I could see potential if given a proper budget and good creativity behind it.
But unfortunately after seeing the concept model they're currently showing, it doesn't even look like they're going to get that right. I was rather forgiving of the idea but now i've lost most hope for it. The thing looks like a flat wasteland of nothing, just a few unelaborate huts and rock structures scattered around. If you'd shown me the model and I hadn't been aware it was for Avatar, I'd never have guessed that it was Avatar related. I can hardly believe it is. They're certainly not going to get very far with that budget they apparently want to give it...
rct247
Well-Known Member
I know the only thing I'm looking forward to about it would be what the land looks like at night, but in no way am I thrilled that it is Avatar. It doesn't even seem to retain it's hype or following that many older films have done. Avatar is like The Matrix. Great and created a lot of hype. There are still references and fans here and there, but for the most park it seems forgotten unlike films like Jurassic Park which was technologically amazing and still retains that today.
i just cant understand this logic..lets build something so that a few years down the road we can turn it into another theme...no way they re thinking that way.....What if the idea is to just use the money they are getting for the deal to build the "World of Avatar" and they can keep it as such until the contract runs out. Then you remove the Avatar elements but you have all this rock work theming, etc that someone else helped pay for. Now you just turn it into Beastly Kingdom and it cost you less than footing the whole bill yourself. Soarin 2.0 can be changed from Avatar to a different movie as well. Done and done.
bigeternity
Active Member
Is this the best Disney can come up with for DAK? Wake me when they change their minds....
Tinkerbell 8
Well-Known Member
I have been skeptical of Avatarland since it was announced last year, mostly because I did not like the movie. But after some time I thought "oh well, I'm sure Disney would make it great, so I guess it will be a good addition to a park that needs some more things to do". Well, a year later my opinion has changed a lot. I was extremely excited over the FLE, and I was even more excited when I got a sneak preview during my last trip in October. The details are amazing and I was so happy that Disney finally did something right after a very long drought of screwing things up and taking the cheap way out. Although I love the details in the FLE, there is something missing, and that would be more rides. I was shocked that the FLE that spanned many years only has 2 new attractions and 1 restaurant, and the 1 attraction isn't even going to be open for another 16 months! I have always said that Disney is the best and I have always been a believer in the Disney magic, however, after my last trip I have had some serious doubts. I feel like Disney is still doing things half a$$ed, and if they aren't careful, they will be hurting in the future. They really need to overhaul WDW the way they did to DCA/DL, the state of some of the rides is absolutely horrible, something I wouldn't even expect to find at my local Six Flags or the Jersey Shore, let alone the vacation kingdom of the world. They need to give people a reason to keep coming back, and that is done by opening new attractions/experiences, using new technology, keeping things running properly. I'm afraid that if they don't start doing these things, more and more people will be heading down the road to Universal, who is offering new attractions on a yearly basis now, something that WDW needs to be doing in order to keep their title of best theme park.
Sorry for my rant....
Sorry for my rant....
nothing to apologize about...maybe if more people rant something will eventually be done
yeti
Well-Known Member
Yes. Exactly. IP-loaning is UNI. That's not what Disney is about.
But at the same time, is it too late to cut Cameron off at the knees? As much as I hate the film/property, the "just say no" approach seems...well, charmless. Bad show, and bad waste of whatever resources they've spent trying to get the project rolling on two wheels. I would take it as very bad news if, after all the
Basing theme park business around film profits is unnecessarily murky territory to begin with. What hope is there for originality when the only foreseeable expansions in the parks are based on the success of "Oz" and "Lone Ranger"? Projects are idealized, meticulously planned, and often announced only to decay and become the subject of shiny hardcover "Art of Disney" books. Why should it matter? Aren't originally crafted rides, merchandise, and environments sure to please...and sell? That's a thesis of mine that unfortunately hasn't been proven in years, and probably years to come. All I can say is that Dick Tracy's Crimestoppers probably would've been (and still would be today) the best ride in DHS.
(On the opposite end, I would also insist that you don't need to spoon feed storylines people already know in order to sell an experience, and I think that mentality even alienates a certain audience. Mark me down as not having a clue what was going on in Forbidden Journey).
My problem with Avatarland has to do with its placement itself, not the content (even if it is a franchise). They can butter it all they want in press conferences and blog updates, but there is no way it's a truly seamless fit in AK (and Bruce Vaughn saying so changes nothing).Yet I will forgive if the presentation is spectacular, as it should be. Avatar has the most boring characters of any big-budget space epic I've ever seen. But storytelling in rides works differently than it does in the movies. It's more abstract, there really is no need for pro/antagonists, and neither does it require a huge puff of melodrama. Whether you're literally part of it or not, the story is synonymous with immersion. It all starts with an exotic atmosphere, and Avatar can most certainly deliver. I defy anyone to think that it wouldn't.
I'm usually very much on the same page as Mr. Lutz. But...Just say no? Nah. Just build it.
dreamscometrue
Well-Known Member
Al Lutz: "I think Tom Staggs and Bob Iger for the most part are on track and making good decisions for the company. John Lasseter’s contributions are to be lauded even with his continued blind spot about Cars 2."
I've read more than once this past week that Bob Iger and John Lassiter are good for the company and are big on quality. Lutz reiterates this, and adds Tom Staggs name. DCA/DL got work, Paris needs work, but surely* these 3 men are aware of what WDW needs, and more money will be funneled this way in the coming years.
(*And don't call me Shirley. No? Don't remember that/ Too young? Oh well)
I've read more than once this past week that Bob Iger and John Lassiter are good for the company and are big on quality. Lutz reiterates this, and adds Tom Staggs name. DCA/DL got work, Paris needs work, but surely* these 3 men are aware of what WDW needs, and more money will be funneled this way in the coming years.
(*And don't call me Shirley. No? Don't remember that/ Too young? Oh well)
John
Well-Known Member
All this scrutiny, dissection and talk is unnecessary. Any third grader would know what is right in front of Burbanks face.....build a Star Wars land and its a slam dunk. People would line up all the way down I4 to get in. I just dont get it? The IP is free (well give or take a few billion). Its such a no brainer that it hinges on lunacy why they havnt been all over it. I have long said that there is an air of arrogance running thru this team of leadership and if this isnt symptomatic of that.....I dont know what is. Where is the Avatar fan base? The merch? It dosnt exsist! The Av idea has to have come from way up the food chain....no one wants to tell that person...its a bad idea. Sort of like the" Emporers new clothes" It dosnt exsist. You know whats killing WDW? not maintence issues, lack of new attractions.....its the culture of present Disney management.
WDWFREAK53
Well-Known Member
My problem with a Star Warsland is that it's a very risky thing. Sure, in theory it sounds like a "slam dunk" but if you really try to put ideas down on paper, how do you get a cohesive environment? Star Wars is way too big to be a single land...it really needs a full park or at least half of a park. Now, by doing THAT...you're limiting it to mainly males...
Think of the environments that you'd want to experience in a Star Warsland.
You'd want to go to the Cantina...so Tattoinne.
You want to see the AT-ATs...so Hoth
Of course you'd have to have the Ewoks (for the kids)...so Endor.
Yoda? Jedi Council?
nytimez
Well-Known Member
As with anything else, you have to pick and choose. You just have more to pick from. Done right, there's no risk at all to a single Star Wars land.
That said, if we're not getting Star Wars or Beastly Kingdom, I'm down with seeing what they can do to Avatar - done well, it could certainly be a kick-butt land too.
jdmdisney99
Well-Known Member
We should start a marketing campaign. You can buy t-shirts or bracelets that say either "Team Avatarland" or "Team I'll Hurt Myself If They Build Avatarland"...