AVATAR land coming to Disney's Animal Kingdom

[George]

If its Avatar or don't do anything, then I'm not dense ... naturally I'll take it. And just because I don't like a franchise doesn't mean I won't love the attraction, so there is that.

But Cameron made a lazy movie, with a tired story, undefined characters, and bad dialogue ... that I can mock before, during, and after any attraction opens.

I'm completely with you on that. He wasn't lazy with the look of the movie though, which in the long-term is the most important thing for a TP land.

 

[twebber55]

I like you a lot and not just because you look like a beautiful action movie hero in your avatar (don't tell the wife)...I do disagree with you on this though. I don't think we'll change each other's minds, but let me proffer another perspective. First, I like the fact the movie/franchise doesn't fit the typical restaurant/meet and greet Disney franchise theme park model. In fact, this is something I like about DAK as a whole. With the exception of the Nemo and LK shows, the actual rides either have no franchise tie in or are tied in to a relatively weak franchise (Bug's Life and Dinosaur don't have near the cultural presence that Avatar has)...there ain't no Wilson meet and greets. So...it leads to a bit more of an adult feel throughout the park, which is something that Disney used to do quite well. Also, the story was pretty good even if derivative and really slapped you upside the head (for better or worse) with the conservation message that appears throughout the park. Plus, it did have a lot of very cool fictional animals. Plants and animals (remember some of the animals had a bit of a night time glow) that fluoresce in the dark would be a huge draw. Finally, the appearance of Pandora (which is beautiful) would nicely compliment what is already the purtiest theme park in North America....You've got to know your strong suits and at DAK, it is the visuals. And man, if we had flying banshees that appeared of in the distance between Home Tree from time to time everyone in this thread would be standing there gawking.

Side note: I think I'm in the minority here, but I don't mind. This is more interesting than talking about the resume's of vapid bloggers.

i dont think you re in the minority at all..remember protesters are always the loudest (whacko tea partiers or whacko tree huggers are always loud)

if you go back to the beginning of this thread there was a lot of positive momentum that was lost with whats all gone on behind the scenes

 

[erasure fan1]

I'm not a big Star Wars fan, and I'm definitely not an Avatar fan...1. but to think of all the possibilities in Animal Kingdom and to think they are sitting on top of Star Wars now and can do whatever they wish and to still be considering Avatar is unreal to me.

I thought John Carter was better than Avatar...seriously (I could care less about 3D effects)

2. My thought for Animal Kingdom is to build a Prideland (from Lion King) completed with Lion King themed attractions, show (already in place), theme it with pride rock and water and house animal from the movie in various spots. This movie was/is so big and to do so little with it IN ANIMAL KINGDOM is something else that is unreal to me

1. That is my thought as well. I am not anti Avatar because I believe a AAA attraction and highly detailed land will/can transcend the IP that they came from. My only real problem is there are other IPs I would rather Disney focus on, Star Wars being tops on that list.

2. I would be all in for this as well. Lion King is my number 1 franchise that deserves a ride and its an obvious fit for the AK. I really never understood why Disney thought a show and a conservation video was acceptable for it. It deserves SOOO much more.

 

[PeterAlt]

If its Avatar or don't do anything, then I'm not dense ... naturally I'll take it. And just because I don't like a franchise doesn't mean I won't love the attraction, so there is that.

But Cameron made a lazy movie, with a tired story, undefined characters, and bad dialogue ... that I can mock before, during, and after any attraction opens.

No, he used a formula that works. It's not lazy. It's genius.

 

[Prototype82]

I'm not a big Star Wars fan, and I'm definitely not an Avatar fan... but to think of all the possibilities in Animal Kingdom and to think they are sitting on top of Star Wars now and can do whatever they wish and to still be considering Avatar is unreal to me.

I thought John Carter was better than Avatar...seriously (I could care less about 3D effects)

My thought for Animal Kingdom is to build a Prideland (from Lion King) completed with Lion King themed attractions, show (already in place), theme it with pride rock and water and house animal from the movie in various spots. This movie was/is so big and to do so little with it IN ANIMAL KINGDOM is something else that is unreal to me

I want my "Just-Around-The-Riverbend" ride first.

 

[twebber55]

1. That is my thought as well. I am not anti Avatar because I believe a AAA attraction and highly detailed land will/can transcend the IP that they came from. My only real problem is there are other IPs I would rather Disney focus on, Star Wars being tops on that list.

2. I would be all in for this as well. Lion King is my number 1 franchise that deserves a ride and its an obvious fit for the AK. I really never understood why Disney thought a show and a conservation video was acceptable for it. It deserves SOOO much more.

but they have star wars at DHS and probably more to come..so it not like star wars is being ignored

 

[twebber55]

No, he used a formula that works. It's not lazy. It's genius.

hard to argue here
2.8 Billion (with a B) gross
9 academy award nominations with 3 wins

its ok to not like the movie calling it lazy is quite questionable
heck cars has a similar theme for that matter

 

[GLaDOS]

No, he used a formula that works. It's not lazy. It's genius.

Avatar? Genius? Maybe the effects. Outside of that there's absolutely nothing above average in the film.

 

[ThemeParks4Life]

I actually liked Avatar. Not the best thing ever, but enjoyable. I feel people put too much pressure on the movie, not everything can be a Citizen Kane.

 

[|Q|]

No, he used a formula that works. It's not lazy. It's genius.

He has been writing that movie for more than 10 years... Look, i LOVE that man, but i would have preferred a thousand times that long rumored Battle Angel Alita Movie over Avatar, and now it looks like he won't be doing anything else beside the blue people for the next 10 years :-/

 

[erasure fan1]

but they have star wars at DHS and probably more to come..so it not like star wars is being ignored

Yes it isn't ignored, but if you are going to dedicate an entire land to an IP, Star Wars is MUCH more deserving in my eyes.

 

[twebber55]

Yes it isn't ignored, but if you are going to dedicate an entire land to an IP, Star Wars is MUCH more deserving in my eyes.

you have an entire month dedicated to it...you already have a mini land there and im sure you ll get more...to me it makes since to have both so you get more people

dont take this as im anti star wars im not love them but avatar did make more money combined than the prequels so there is obviously an audience for it

IMO disney should have maxed out star wars stuff about 20 years ago with a full size land..i bet they wait until new movies come out now

 

[FigmentJedi]

you have an entire month dedicated to it...you already have a mini land there and im sure you ll get more...to me it makes since to have both so you get more people

dont take this as im anti star wars im not love them but avatar did make more money combined than the prequels so there is obviously an audience for it

IMO disney should have maxed out star wars stuff about 20 years ago with a full size land..i bet they wait until new movies come out now

We need more then 12 days of the year for Star Wars characters if the two hour line to get your picture taken with Chewbacca is any indication.

 

[FrankLapidus]

dont take this as im anti star wars im not love them but avatar did make more money combined than the prequels so there is obviously an audience for it

People went to see it, does that mean the same amount of people will turn out for the sequels or for a theme park attraction? Avatar attracted an audience, did it build a loyal and devoted fanbase like Star Wars and Harry Potter have?

 

[WDWFREAK53]

People went to see it, does that mean the same amount of people will turn out for the sequels or for a theme park attraction? Avatar attracted an audience, did it build a loyal and devoted fanbase like Star Wars and Harry Potter have?

My feeling is "No" but it's something that is a "wait and see" type of thing.
Technology changes so fast...and Avatar was new and different due to the technology. When that same technology becomes "common" does the appeal for the actual film remain?

(Unless, James Cameron "does it again")

 

[George]

I'd love a SW land myself...I'd spend an infinite of money at the Mos Eisley Cantina if it existed...But I don't think SW is a good fit for DAK...

Avatar is the perfect visual and thematic fit for DAK. Nothing else, including the quality of the next two films matters (unless Cameron does something really weird like make the third one essentially a hard core featuring q sex...)

 

[FigmentJedi]

I'd love a SW land myself...I'd spend an infinite of money at the Mos Eisley Cantina if it existed...But I don't think SW is a good fit for DAK...

Avatar is the perfect visual and thematic fit for DAK. Nothing else, including the quality of the next two films matters (unless Cameron does something really weird like make the third one essentially a hard core featuring q sex...)

Beating a dead horse here, but if there's any outside property that would fit Animal Kingdom perfectly, it'd be Pokemon. Proven lasting appeal, a little more grounded as it's creatures are all fantastic versions of Earth animals for the most part, and with the legendaries, you can essentially plug those guys into what Beastly Kingdom was going to be. And there's always an environmental message or examination of man's relationship with animals in Pokemon even though the gameplay is basically making them battle each other.

 

[FrankLapidus]

My feeling is "No" but it's something that is a "wait and see" type of thing.
Technology changes so fast...and Avatar was new and different due to the technology. When that same technology becomes "common" does the appeal for the actual film remain?

(Unless, James Cameron "does it again")

There was no "wait and see" with Star Wars though, it became a popular culture phenomenon in 1977 and has remained that way ever since. Harry Potter was a phenomenon before the films were made. With all the hype surrounding Avatar and it supposedly heralding a new dawn of cinema, why did it not attract that fanbase straight away like Star Wars did?

I agree about the technology. Call me old-fashioned but I go to see a film for the story and characters, not fancy special-effects; they should supplement the former, not overshadow them and be what the film is marketed on.

 

[WDWFREAK53]

Beating a dead horse here, but if there's any outside property that would fit Animal Kingdom perfectly, it'd be Pokemon. Proven lasting appeal, a little more grounded as it's creatures are all fantastic versions of Earth animals for the most part, and with the legendaries, you can essentially plug those guys into what Beastly Kingdom was going to be. And there's always an environmental message or examination of man's relationship with animals in Pokemon even though the gameplay is basically making them battle each other.

While I see where you are coming from, I disagree the widespread appeal of it.
I do agree with your ideas about fitting it into DAK, but I just don't see many people "getting it."

Avatar was seen by millions...of people worldwide...whereas Pokemon really has a specific group that are interested in it (albeit a large number of fans in that specific group).

 

[Pentacat]

... but is the development time "incredibly long"? My understanding is that major attractions at Disney generally take 5 years from conception to opening with the first 2 years of that often devoted to development. Avatar is unusual in that it was announced very early before much development had been done.

That may be the way things have generally worked but since the Avatar partnership with Cameron was announced there has been no official word on just what the Avatar expansion will entail. The project was announced in September 2011 with no concept art and no real details other than a ballpark budget number of $500 million and that it was destined for AK.

Take FLE for example. The original announcement was in September of 2009, where they showed the concept art and listed attractions that would be built. Construction started in the January-February 2010 time frame and even though there were substantial changes made to the plans, FLE opened in December 2012 (yes I know the Mine Coaster is still in progress.) That's just over three years from announcement to open date, of course the project was well developed BEFORE they announced it. This is how their process normally works.

Either they jumped the gun on the announcement of the deal with Cameron (quite possible since they don't work with outside entities very often), or they are having issues agreeing on content and budget. The latter is what most of the rumors support.

I should re-prhase that has PUBLICLY loooooong development time since they didn't develop anything prior to the announcement.