AVATAR land coming to Disney's Animal Kingdom

[Soarin' Over Pgh]

Of course, these may be people who have some sort of issue with Avatar in the first place, or people who didn't want to be the same as everyone else so they hate it just to hate it. But I thought it might be interesting to see some opinions outside of the wdwmagic community.

Here is Avatar's Amazon.com shop. Check out the dates on the reviews..

http://www.amazon.com/b/ref=sr_tc_s...structured-results-2&qid=1361323675&sr=8-2-tc

Wow, the prices on those toys (and the movie itself) are incredibly cheap! $1.91 for an action figure? The number one seller is $2.49, marked down from ...$15.99? Geez.

... and if someone who has never been to Disney World came to this message board they would probably decide not to go.

Actually... I'm going for the first time this May. And no, this board hasn't scared me off (although to be honest I would have preferred Disneyland, but others in my party cannot handle a 8-9 hr flight) but is has opened my eyes to probably more than I'd like in terms of quality.

I almost wanna go to WDW with blinders on.

 

[djlaosc]

Excellent question. I would be fine with Pandora being ditched if the same money was going towards a high caliber replacement. I'm skeptical of that happening, even though DAK really needs it.

I still don't understand why Mysterious Island isn't the default fallback is Avatar falls through. The development costs are already done and there's no royalties, so it's theoretically more bang for the buck. And it's not like there's a significant crossover in guests between Tokyo and Orlando who are already familiar with that land from TDS.

Mysterious Island was rumoured to have been ready to be built just before the financial crisis started - I'm sure it has been said on here that land was being cleared and then the crisis happened, and then nothing...

 

[djlaosc]

i like the idea of mysterious island but what i dont want is test track, RSR, and JTTCOTE all be at WDW..same ride different theme

If you just want one of each ride system at WDW, you're going to be losing a lot of rides (maybe that would be a good thing and we would just have one park with excellent maintenance? )

 

[twebber55]

I can't imagine being one of "those below" having to explain to James Cameron why the company I work for is a Cheapie, McCheapiePants. Awkward.

i would love to hear James Cameron's take on disney and universal now that he has worked with both companies

 

[Bryner84]

I say if you choose an IP that has little relevance in pop culture, but you make a great immersive land that actually compliments the theme of the park, then fine. On the other hand, if you have a very relevant property but have to force it to fit, it's not ideal but at least you are going to get an attendance boost due to the interest in the IP. Now, if you take an IP that is becoming more irrelevant by the second, it doesn't fit the overall theme,and is unnecessarily being shoehorned into a park with so much untapped potential and a clear cohesive theme...you have Avatar. Unless they want to change the name to Conservation Kingdom, it seems the starting point for all attractions should, I don't know, have something to do with animals maybe?

 

[danlb_2000]

I say if you choose an IP that has little relevance in pop culture, but you make a great immersive land that actually compliments the theme of the park, then fine. On the other hand, if you have a very relevant property but have to force it to fit, it's not ideal but at least you are going to get an attendance boost due to the interest in the IP. Now, if you take an IP that is becoming more irrelevant by the second, it doesn't fit the overall theme,and is unnecessarily being shoehorned into a park with so much untapped potential and a clear cohesive theme...you have Avatar. Unless they want to change the name to Conservation Kingdom, it seems the starting point for all attractions should, I don't know, have something to do with animals maybe?

I have said this before but I believe Avatar does fit the overall theme and is not being shorehorned in. Here is the decication for Animal Kingdom:

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.
—Michael D. Eisner, April 22, 1998​

Avatar fits that perfectly.

I don't know, have something to do with animals maybe?

Avatar has everything to do with animals, albiet fictional ones. At the end of the movie the heroes are about to be defeated and what comes to the rescue, the animals.

 

[Magenta Panther]

I can't imagine being one of "those below" having to explain to James Cameron why the company I work for is a Cheapie, McCheapiePants. Awkward.

My guess is that the suits now realize what a dumb move Iger made buying the rights to the Blue Kitty movie. It won't be able to compete with Potter, no matter how much money they plug into it, because Avatar DOESN'T HAVE A STRONG STORY OR STRONG CHARACTERS, it's just eye candy. Period. And eye candy is being surpassed on the silver screen all the time.

I hope Cameron walks away. If he's the cinema god some here make him out to be, he would have to in order to maintain his alleged high standards.

 

[twebber55]

I say if you choose an IP that has little relevance in pop culture, but you make a great immersive land that actually compliments the theme of the park, then fine. On the other hand, if you have a very relevant property but have to force it to fit, it's not ideal but at least you are going to get an attendance boost due to the interest in the IP. Now, if you take an IP that is becoming more irrelevant by the second, it doesn't fit the overall theme,and is unnecessarily being shoehorned into a park with so much untapped potential and a clear cohesive theme...you have Avatar. Unless they want to change the name to Conservation Kingdom, it seems the starting point for all attractions should, I don't know, have something to do with animals maybe?

my view is first and foremost conservation but the movie deals with imagined animals as well..which was in the mission statement at DAK's dedication.... still think this could be incredible although its not looking so good to be built

 

[twebber55]

My guess is that the suits now realize what a dumb move Iger made buying the rights to the Blue Kitty movie. It won't be able to compete with Potter, no matter how much money they plug into it, because Avatar DOESN'T HAVE A STRONG STORY OR STRONG CHARACTERS, it's just eye candy. Period. And eye candy is being surpassed on the silver screen all the time.

I hope Cameron walks away. If he's the cinema god some here make him out to be, he would have to in order to maintain his alleged high standards.

if you r definition of a new land requires it to compete with potter nothing gets build because potter is tops in the theme park world right now and its not even close

 

[Magenta Panther]

if you r definition of a new land requires it to compete with potter nothing gets build because potter is tops in the theme park world right now and its not even close

That was IGER'S definition. It's painfully obvious that's why he chose Avatar - it was a big hit with the young-male audience Iger craves, and is trying to lure by buying off-studio stuff. It was the flavor of the month and Iger made the mistake that it would have resonance and long-lasting appeal - just based on box office. Iger is a cement head. A CEO whose judgement is based on marketing and who'd be much better suited to run a Wal-mart IMO.

 

[Bryner84]

my view is first and foremost conservation but the movie deals with imagined animals as well..which was in the mission statement at DAK's dedication.... still think this could be incredible although its not looking so good to be built

I think of imagined animals as those of folklore not those of sci-fi. I am more interested in animals that have collective cultural relevance....that are well known by many rather than a plot contrivance created by James Cameron.

 

[Ignohippo]

if you r definition of a new land requires it to compete with potter nothing gets build because potter is tops in the theme park world right now and its not even close

A Star Wars land would be bigger – much bigger if done correctly. It is the only thing that could top Potter though.

 

[danlb_2000]

if you r definition of a new land requires it to compete with potter nothing gets build because potter is tops in the theme park world right now and its not even close

Yeah, there is very little at this point that could compete with Potter as a frachine. The only things I can think of are Star Wars which makes more sense to be in DHS and Marvel which can't be used in WDW.

 

[Bryner84]

I have said this before but I believe Avatar does fit the overall theme and is not being shorehorned in. Here is the decication for Animal Kingdom:

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.
—Michael D. Eisner, April 22, 1998​

Avatar fits that perfectly.



Avatar has everything to do with animals, albiet fictional ones. At the end of the movie the heroes are about to be defeated and what comes to the rescue, the animals.

Wouldn't an area themed to Scotland with a Loch Ness monster attraction have more long term relevance and fit the dedication statement more accurately? I just think there is a distinct difference in the relevance of mythical animals that are part of stories that have been passed down for generations, and fictional animals that are created for a movie made in the 2000's.

 

[Ignohippo]

That was IGER'S definition. It's painfully obvious that's why he chose Avatar - it was a big hit with the young-male audience Iger craves, and is trying to lure by buying off-studio stuff. It was the flavor of the month and Iger made the mistake that it would have resonance and long-lasting appeal - just based on box office. Iger is a cement head. A CEO who's judgement is based on marketing and who'd be much better suited to run a Wal-mart IMO.

IMO, Iger has been right many more times than he's been wrong. I applaud him for Pixar, LucasFilm and the DCA redevelopment. I don't know of many other CEOs that would have the guts that he has had.

Was Avatar a mistake? I don't like the idea, but how can anyone possibly be able to make that assumption when we have no idea what the sequels will be like or how they'll do at the box office? I imagine Iger has much more information than any of us Disney fanbois could have (and he's probably read the scripts).

 

[djlaosc]

Wouldn't an area themed to Scotland with a Loch Ness monster attraction have more long term relevance and fit the dedication statement more accurately? I just think there is a distinct difference in the relevance of mythical animals that are part of stories that have been passed down for generations, and fictional animals that are created for a movie made in the 2000's.

I've been waiting for a Loch Ness version of Jaws in a Europe area for ages!

Europe wouldn't have to be a major area, as I don't think we have that many exclusive animals, but if they had a Loch Ness ride and an animal walkthrough (and a shop that sells Duffy's with kilts, a restaurant or two and a DVC cart), that is all that they would need!

 

[Ignohippo]

Yeah, there is very little at this point that could compete with Potter as a frachine. The only things I can think of are Star Wars which makes more sense to be in DHS and Marvel which can't be used in WDW.

Exactly. Considering Marvel has already been done, even if WDW could build a Marvel land, it'd have to be absolutely spectacular to get the kind of attendance bump it would take to make it worth it. TDO certainly hasn't shown that they are willing to spend the money it would take to do it right.

If they did Star Wars, I have a feeling it would more than likely be dictated by Burbank, be done right, and bypass TDO almost completely.

 

[Bryner84]

I've been waiting for a Loch Ness version of Jaws in a Europe area for ages!

It just makes too much sense. The story is already developed, there are no outside over the top demanding directors to cater to, no IP to buy, and the scenery could be amazing. Everyone would instantly get the connection to the park and the theme would never be dated. It's time to deflate the overhead of dealing with outside properties and building up some story to make it work when there are so many stories and legends out there that already exist...put the money in to the attraction!

 

[danlb_2000]

Wouldn't an area themed to Scotland with a Loch Ness monster attraction have more long term relevance and fit the dedication statement more accurately? I just think there is a distinct difference in the relevance of mythical animals that are part of stories that have been passed down for generations, and fictional animals that are created for a movie made in the 2000's.

When looking at the long term I think the quality of the attraction becomes more important then the IP. This example comes up a lot but look at Splash Mountain. Song of the South has almost zero relevance today and I bet most people who ride it haven't seen the movie or even know it exists, yet it remains a popular ride.

Yes, there other things that would be as good or maybe even better in AK then Avatar, but I don't see a problem with choosing Avatar.

 

[Soarin' Over Pgh]

I'd love a Loch Ness. Or even Puff the Magic Dragon. I would even be OK with the pegasus (pegasi?) from Fantasia. Or Hercules.