certainly one of the reasons good point but tons of people go there for other things besides merchandise...its not just kids...
-
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
FrankLapidus
Well-Known Member
Build a Star Wars land and how popular do you think it would be? How much merchandise do you think they could sell? In a park with rides like Tower of Terror and R&R Coaster I wouldn't expect a simulator to be the top DHS draw. Build a genuine Star Wars E-Ticket and it's a different story.
Anyway I feel like I'm repeating things I've said here before and I don't want to derail the thread so I'm going to bow out and let you get back to discussing Avatarland rather than continue Franchise Wars.
thanks me too.....
like your RG3 avatar...
FrankLapidus
Well-Known Member
I never said it was. What it is is a land based on a Disney-created and owned property, the type of thing I'd like to see a lot more of in Disney theme parks. I'd happily take more Disney and Pixar properties over Avatar and Star Wars.
Sue_Vongello
Well-Known Member
I dunno that wedding at the beginning would be totally awesome as like a streetmosphere experience!
or a cool ride through corleone, Sicily lol
also life of pi referred to it as "the next avatar" not bad for a movie nominated for best picture
Soarin' Over Pgh
Well-Known Member
The Lion King was a surprising hit for Disney. It's generated millions of dollars. It's a favorite movie for millions of kids and adults (myself included!), and the theming would fit perfectly in DAK. So why reach out of already owned property to something that is little more than eye candy?
I've asked this before, but it just needs to be brought up again. Has anyone actually seen Avatar? Do you remember the plot line? How on earth are they going to put a happy, positive "Disney" spin on that?
With all the animal characters and animal based movies Disney already owns, why Avatar? And if Avatar, ok... but why DAK?
FigmentJedi
Well-Known Member
Or as Red Letter Media would argue, crummy movies are looking more like thrill rides.
danlb_2000
Premium Member
The Lion King was a surprising hit for Disney. It's generated millions of dollars. It's a favorite movie for millions of kids and adults (myself included!), and the theming would fit perfectly in DAK. So why reach out of already owned property to something that is little more than eye candy?
I've asked this before, but it just needs to be brought up again. Has anyone actually seen Avatar? Do you remember the plot line? How on earth are they going to put a happy, positive "Disney" spin on that?
With all the animal characters and animal based movies Disney already owns, why Avatar? And if Avatar, ok... but why DAK?
Maybe the thinking is that if they build a land based on a Disney franchise they will primarily attract Disney fans, who are the ones who are already coming to the park. They may think that Avatar can attract a new group of guests who aren't already coming. Now whether is actually will or not, that is a totally different discussion.
ThemeParks4Life
Well-Known Member
Ever since Avatar, a sci fi film got nominated every year:
2010: Inception
2011: Hugo
2012: Life of Pi
This year Gravity looks like a big contendor.
i would put mummy and TOT in that category as well
I'd love to see The Godfather in The Great Movie Ride, but that's for another time
That's such an interesting statement, I don't even know my own feelings about that. Great, great, great movie, but very un-Disney like.
WDWFREAK53
Well-Known Member
Yes, 40 years later it is huge. What I'm saying is that if Star Wars was released in 2013...we would not be talking about it in 2053.
Timing was everything. Why is it still going strong? Partly due to nostalgia. When people saw it in the theaters and went nuts for it, it stuck with them...and they, in turn, turned their children onto it. On top of that, the merchandising. Back when it was released, people just HAD to have the toys...and, much like the films, those same people that turned their kids onto the movies also wanted to play with the new toys with their kids.
What made Star Wars great? Acting? NO! Dialogue? NO! Special-effects? Huge factor. Unique characters? Yes. Story? Eh. How about the fact that it was completely different from anything else people had seen? Yep.
Now look at the prequels... Acting? Heck no! Dialogue? Laughable. Special-effects...we have seen it all before. Unique characters? Basically the same characters we fell in love with. Story? It's really all one story.
Flip the script...if Avatar was shown 40 years ago, I have a feeling we'd be talking about Avatar (due to the fact that NOBODY would've seen anything like it before.) (Am I saying that Avatar is as popular as Star Wars? Nope...not even close...but they really aren't that comparable either).
Pokemon won't work at all. People out grow it. Everyone who was an adult when it came out has no affinity for it at all.
They should expand the SW presence in the Studios. The fact they have people answer survey questions about the franchise shows the current timidity that permeates the corporation.
Yep. I think both Tron movies are mediocre (and that's is the upper end of my true opinion), but I see great theme park opportunities that Disney has still never fully exploited.
Correct. As I said earlier, ip is only important if you don't have enough people coming through the front door in the first place and no Disney park is in that position yet. Heck, I bet they could even get people to come take a gander at bathrooms themed after a halfway decent kiddie movie.