AVATAR land coming to Disney's Animal Kingdom

twebber55

Well-Known Member
I don't really understand why people keep bringing up Cars to defend Avatar. The key difference between the two franchises is that Cars is a Disney-owned and created property. Disney and Pixar have been together pretty much since the beginning and Pixar films are ostensibly seen as Disney films, the two companies will always be linked and Pixar has always been a presence in Disney theme parks.

Therein lies one of the issues people, including myself, have with Avatar. There is a wealth of material in Disney and Pixar already without having to go outside the company to buy the rights to other properties. Doing so smacks of a leadership at Disney that has no, or at least very little, faith in their product or creative employees and who lack any kind of creative foresight themselves.
because they ve used outside properties before so its non starter for me

anyways these arguments are old
 

NoChesterHester

Well-Known Member
I see this thread pop back up every month or so. I click on it, even though I know what I will find.

There is no real news on the project, even though it was announced in September of 2011. We are now closing in quickly on two years from the initial announcement. All without any evidence or real info.

So... everyone goes through the identical cyclical argument on the popularity and appropriateness of Avatar every three months or so. Call me when they either release concept art or someone confirm it is dead.
 

FrankLapidus

Well-Known Member
because they ve used outside properties before so its non starter for me

anyways these arguments are old

So use outside properties to defend your stance then (not you specificially but in general). Comparing Avatar and Cars is kind of playing into the hands of the people who would prefer to see more Disney-created and owned properties in the parks.
 

danlb_2000

Premium Member
Seriously though,


There was a controversy with Glenn Close smoking in the live action 101 Dalmatians film. Kids shouldn't watch 101 Dalmatians!

Jeez, welcome to the 21st Century danlb where scientists have discovered that smoking causes heart disease, lung cancer, emphysema, and a host of other diseases. Yeah, having smoking characters in kid's film is "controversial", actually it is a taboo that makes sense. Can't see Disney building a land, in this century, based on a film where a major character smokes up a storm.

Aren't you the guy who said that the construction guys messed up 7DMT because they built the mountain before putting in some track? I guess you're kinda fuzzy on the whole smoking issue too.

images


Avatarland? No! Based on the smoking alone, then there is the macho-violence, part of the film, but shouldn't be part of Animal Kingdom.

Nor should they watch the animated version since there is smoking there also. They also shouldn't watch Lion King since it promotes Regicide. I am fully aware of the effects of smoking. My father would likely be dead right now if he had not quite smoking when he did. I just don't think that seeing a character smoke automatically makes kids want to smoke.
 

danlb_2000

Premium Member
The "point" from a purely fianancial aspect is that Disney can promote their own franchise/films over a James Cameron film and get the same theme park attendance bump. Remember that the park attractions also boost interest in the films, Pooh is a nice ride, but also an advertisement that is going 7 days a week, keeping Pooh releveant. It is a synergistic relationship.

Why help Cameron promote Avatar? I say go with Star Wars, or Brave, or anything else in the vault, people have forgotten Avatar anyway.

I don't think that is necessaily true since the Disney fans are the ones who are already coming to the park. Reaching out to other franchieses helps increase the chance you will grab people who aren't already planning a trip to a Disney park. Even the though Disney now owns Star Wars it's still more of an outside franchise then an inside one, but it's much more suited to DHS, so AK still needs something.

Theme park attractions might boost interest in a film, but I think that effect minimal compared to the reverse. There is much more opportunity for a movie to boost interest in a theme park attraction them the other way around. In most cases a theme park attraction won't even be open until a movie has made 90-95% of it's lifetime revenue.
 

danlb_2000

Premium Member
Aren't you the guy who said that the construction guys messed up 7DMT because they built the mountain before putting in some track? I guess you're kinda fuzzy on the whole smoking issue too.

Nope, that is something you made up that you like to drag out everytime you are loosing an argument. Everyone else on that thread understood what I was saying, you were the only one who took it that way.
 

Captain Chaos

Well-Known Member
OK, so now the argument against Avatar in DAK is the characters are shown smoking in the movie.. Really?

Well, if that is the case let's rip out anything that has to do with Alice in Wonderland... Why? Cause the caterpillar is smoking something:
tumblr_lh1myjrifZ1qe1apyo1_500.gif


Maybe we should rip out Pirates too... Why? Cause pirates rape, steal, murder, and are always drinking and drunk, the main character, Jack Sparrow, acts as if he cannot live without rum...

Let's make the theme parks PC!!!!!!! I was all for Avatar in DAK, now, because of the smoking, yea, I don't think it fits... Can we get rid of Splash Mountain (racial overtones in the movie it is based on, remember this is why Disney will not release the movie on DVD) and Tom Sawyer Island (also racial over tones in the story with use of an offensive word to describe a Native American Indian: injun)...

This Avatar argument is boring now... The haters are always going to hate... The supporters will always support... The only real fact here is: in one and a half years we have absolutely NOTHING to go on... So not one of us could say the land will suck or the land will be great... Oh and if the land is great, the haters will be there with everyone else enjoying a massive new E ticket despite their crying of HELL NO WE WON'T GO!!!
 

Jake Wilson

Active Member
Nor should they watch the animated version since there is smoking there also. They also shouldn't watch Lion King since it promotes Regicide. I am fully aware of the effects of smoking. My father would likely be dead right now if he had not quite smoking when he did. I just don't think that seeing a character smoke automatically makes kids want to smoke.

i KNOW IT IS NOT DUE TO SMOKING, BUT DOESNT THE CHARACTER DIE IN THE END OF THE MOVIE ANYWAY? wHAT KID WANTS TO BE THE DEAD CHARACTER?
 

Bparso87

Well-Known Member
Disney is also looking at a Peter's Dragon remake (without the musical numbers), and Maleficent is coming . . . seems like a dragon-based land makes more sense than ever in Animal Kingdom, instead of a sub-land based on a single very un-Disney property.
Dragons r big right now almost as big as zombies. The stuff Disney is doing, game of thrones and the game skyrim.
 

Jake Wilson

Active Member
I am not the best typer so I have to watch the key board.... For your Avatar saying Hakuna Matata, you sure dont live the life style. Lay off man, there are bigger fish to fry!
 

Hakunamatata

Le Meh
Premium Member
What ever keeps you happy I guess.... Busting the balls of a newbie is not the greatest way to support a site that is amazing. Obviously one that is great enough that you contributed. Good for you!
Not busting balls, just pointing out that you were yelling, which seems to me to be helping a newbie understand forum manners. You are the one who keeps agitating the situation. A simple thank you would have worked great.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom