AVATAR land coming to Disney's Animal Kingdom

doctornick

Well-Known Member
In my opinion, the movies started going down after lion king because they were becoming more educational or with a history lesson in some ways rather than focusing on entertainment and fun. I liked some of them don't get me wrong I just feel like they took a different turn after the lion king. Tangled was the best movie (non-Pixar) since then by far

The more recent offerings have been quite good IMHO: PatF, Tangled and Wreck It Ralph were all entertaining and heartfelt stories. Even Winnie the Pooh was fine, though pretty short (more like a long TV show than a movie). I'm hopeful that Frozen continues the trend.
 

danlb_2000

Premium Member
Back to the subject at hand.
I really can't see why disney would be interested in AVATAR for AK.
Yes it was an ok movie,a bit too overhyped but visually stunning.
But in my opinion unless it was created by disney,albeit with a partner,ie Pixar.It has no place in a disney park,disney didn't make AVATAR.no one associates AVATAR with Disney so why build an entire land dedicated to it.
You say toy story,cars,wall-E monster inc to anyone and their mind goes straight to disney,or at least disney Pixar.
Say AVATAR and people go "oh yeah that was a good film,James Cameron did it right" see no mention of disney.

Using a non disney product just isn't how they work,or used to work,star wars has always seemed a bit out of place n not very disney.

I just think AVATARland will ruin AK.

But isn't that quote the important thing? Public recognition of the property is the key to getting people into the parks, who owns the property really isn't important to the general public. These days with aqusitions, distribution deals, joint productions, etc, I doubt the general public even knows who owns most of the IP that is used in theme parks. Also, and I have said this before, using an outside property can help bring people into the parks that might not have come otherwise. Look at Star Tours, I bet that drew in a good number of Star Wars fans that weren't Disney fans and may not have visit a Disney park before.

I have no problem with outside IP, becuase I think it has brought us some great attractions like Star Tours, and what is arguably one of the best attractions in a US Disney park, Indiana Jones and the Temple of the Fobidden Eye.
 

bassman02

Member
The more recent offerings have been quite good IMHO: PatF, Tangled and Wreck It Ralph were all entertaining and heartfelt stories. Even Winnie the Pooh was fine, though pretty short (more like a long TV show than a movie). I'm hopeful that Frozen continues the trend.
I agree, Tangled was a brilliant movie, and Wreck It Ralph was amazing, the attraction posibilities I saw with that movie made me giddy, heck they even do a small land based on Wreck It Ralph. Kind of the same idea as the old body pavillion at epcot.
Think about it, game central station, a big glass topped building with at least a couple of rides based on the games in the movie going off at their "stations", meet and greet areas with both Ralph characters and things like pacman.
Maybe even a maze in the layout of the pacman game.
The big E-ticket could even be a car ride similar to RSR but in the candy game.
Or a spiderman type ride through the psybug area or through the WiR world.
There could even be TTA style trams to places like into ralphs game.
Ive got many more ideas but il not bore everyone with them.
 

bassman02

Member
But isn't that quote the important thing? Public recognition of the property is the key to getting people into the parks, who owns the property really isn't important to the general public. These days with aqusitions, distribution deals, joint productions, etc, I doubt the general public even knows who owns most of the IP that is used in theme parks. Also, and I have said this before, using an outside property can help bring people into the parks that might not have come otherwise. Look at Star Tours, I bet that drew in a good number of Star Wars fans that weren't Disney fans and may not have visit a Disney park before.

I have no problem with outside IP, becuase I think it has brought us some great attractions like Star Tours, and what is arguably one of the best attractions in a US Disney park, Indiana Jones and the Temple of the Fobidden Eye.
That is a very valid point. And I must hold my hands up and admit I have no agument for it.:)
I just cant see how pandora will fit in at AK.
another park maybe but there are alot bit to the world of pandora and the AVATAR story that wont fit.especially with AK.
 

danlb_2000

Premium Member
That is a very valid point. And I must hold my hands up and admit I have no agument for it.:)
I just cant see how pandora will fit in at AK.
another park maybe but there are alot bit to the world of pandora and the AVATAR story that wont fit.especially with AK.

Whenever someone asks how Avatar fits in AK I always like to pull out the park dedication:

"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."
 

FigmentJedi

Well-Known Member
Whenever someone asks how Avatar fits in AK I always like to pull out the park dedication:

"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."
Avatar still seems like a weak solution when you can do something with the imaginary creatures that have stalked our imaginations for centuries rather then "What the planet spent a billion dollars watching and then making fun of about a month later"
 

bassman02

Member
Whenever someone asks how Avatar fits in AK I always like to pull out the park dedication:

"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."
That makes sense but I always took the imagined part as dragons,centours,unicorns.etc mythical beasts that once supposedly roamed earth,or creatures created through stories and tales by humans many years ago as stories for children,but they were believable because every creature was linked to earth.

not aliens.
yes they are imaginary but how do they fit? They are other world brings.it won't make sense walking from the oasis area for example,into pandora,it's another planet,you cant just walk there,there has to be that link to home,that journey to the planet or whatever.
so it just wouldn't make sense.not just because the scenery is other worldly,but theres things that are heavily mentioned in the movies,lack of breathable air on pandora for example.
unless the entrance to avatar land is something like you walk from the wild paths of AK and into a huge space ship,there's a few sounds n possibly movement and then you walk out of a loading bay door.but even that would be a pretty loose,not to mention confesting,way of creating a believable world.
I just think as a land,it wontwork,as an attraction however,that's a different story.
A good ride or attraction could be created using AVATAR,you could go from earth to pandora and back if it was as an attraction.
Look at dinosaur,it's believable because disney has created the dino institute as that bridges the gap between the present day and prehistoric times in terms of story.
 

sshindel

The Epcot Manifesto
That makes sense but I always took the imagined part as dragons,centours,unicorns.etc mythical beasts that once supposedly roamed earth,or creatures created through stories and tales by humans many years ago as stories for children,but they were believable because every creature was linked to earth.

not aliens.
yes they are imaginary but how do they fit? They are other world brings.it won't make sense walking from the oasis area for example,into pandora,it's another planet,you cant just walk there,there has to be that link to home,that journey to the planet or whatever.
so it just wouldn't make sense.not just because the scenery is other worldly,but theres things that are heavily mentioned in the movies,lack of breathable air on pandora for example.
unless the entrance to avatar land is something like you walk from the wild paths of AK and into a huge space ship,there's a few sounds n possibly movement and then you walk out of a loading bay door.but even that would be a pretty loose,not to mention confesting,way of creating a believable world.
I just think as a land,it wontwork,as an attraction however,that's a different story.
A good ride or attraction could be created using AVATAR,you could go from earth to pandora and back if it was as an attraction.
Look at dinosaur,it's believable because disney has created the dino institute as that bridges the gap between the present day and prehistoric times in terms of story.

I dont know, I guess I don't require a time-machine entrance to go back in time to colonial america or the western frontier in MK. I realize of course that part of that is the "magic" portion of the Magic Kingdom, while AK tends to trend towards more real-world environments, but I dont think it would be too much of a leap in people's faith for them to really buy into the idea of a Pandora-land existing in AK, as long as it was done well.
As you mentioned, there are already subtle leaps into the world of the fantasy with the stationary Yeti and time travel experiences, I dont think it would require much more of a visitor to walk through a tree-shrouded path and all of a sudden have floating mountains in the background, or bioluminescent plants, making the transition from Real to Fantasy. Really, all Avatar is science Fiction, which is another word for imagined, making it fit in with the park dedication nicely.
 

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
Whenever someone asks how Avatar fits in AK I always like to pull out the park dedication:

"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."
What this misses is that the imagined animals never before included purely fictional ones devised for fictional purposes. Dragons were once considered to be very real. Just as we learn about the cultural and historical reality of the yeti in the Himalayas.
 

sshindel

The Epcot Manifesto
What this misses is that the imagined animals never before included purely fictional ones devised for fictional purposes. Dragons were once considered to be very real. Just as we learn about the cultural and historical reality of the yeti in the Himalayas.

But never in that dedication does it say "real, ancient, and imagined-but-once-thought-to-be-real". Just imagined.
 

bassman02

Member
^ all valid points,I just think that AVATAR would be good as an attraction not a land.
I'd rather see a mythical beasts area.ala beastly kingdom.that would fit better in my eyes.

Having said that,if AVATAR land does get built,I'm sure it will good.just look a little out of place to me.
 

luv

Well-Known Member
Except for the Nature ones, I haven't watched a Disney movie since Toy Story II. None of them looked good enough to bother watching.
 

luv

Well-Known Member
No Toy Story III?!?!? No Wall*E?!??!?! You have REALLY missed out!
Nope. No interest. Didn't even love Toy Story II...there was one scene that was touching - I think a girl doll was singing or something. Other than that, I didn't like it much.

And I have yet to hear anything about them that makes me want to see them. I don't care about special effects, computer animation, etc. I don't like a movie more because it looks cool. Characters, story and great songs - that's what I want. And I have yet to hear that about any of them. "My little kids liked it" - that's what I hear.

Did love the Mermaid, BatB, Lion King and even most of Aladdin. Since then, Disney has slipped. IMO.
 

FrankLapidus

Well-Known Member
Characters, story and great songs - that's what I want. And I have yet to hear that about any of them. "My little kids liked it" - that's what I hear.

Then watch The Incredibles, WALL-E, Finding Nemo, Monsters, Inc., Ratatouille and Up, they have plenty of all of that and more. You're really missing out on some of the best animated films ever made there.
 

luv

Well-Known Member
Then watch The Incredibles, WALL-E, Finding Nemo, Monsters, Inc., Ratatouille and Up, they have plenty of all of that and more. You're really missing out on some of the best animated films ever made there.
OK, I guess I lied.

My nephew made me watch The Incredibles. I thought it sucked. (Sorry! Just MHO!)

My niece made me watch Nemo - thought that sucked, too. (Sorry, Nemo fans!).

She also had Monsters, Inc. on once, but I fell asleep quickly.

And I made it halfway through Up, which I did not care for at all...though the beginning was okay.

I guess I have seen some since Toy Story II, just not in the theater.
 

FrankLapidus

Well-Known Member
OK, I guess I lied.

My nephew made me watch The Incredibles. I thought it sucked. (Sorry! Just MHO!)

My niece made me watch Nemo - thought that sucked, too. (Sorry, Nemo fans!).

She also had Monsters, Inc. on once, but I fell asleep quickly.

And I made it halfway through Up, which I did not care for at all...though the beginning was okay.

I guess I have seen some since Toy Story II, just not in the theater.

Ok fair enough if you didn't like them. Personally I think they're all excellent films, especially The Incredibles and Up. You didn't mention it here but WALL-E is a brilliant film too.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom