AVATAR land coming to Disney's Animal Kingdom

[danlb_2000]

Your not catching my drift, Disney and Lucasfilm has always had a good/stable relationship for years meanwhile it seems as if that Disney and Cameron's newfound partnership isn't going as well as we thought it would, obviously because neither of them can't seem to come up with some sort of an agreement and begin building after almost 2 years of the announcement being made. That's why I feel that Disney should focus with their own large library of characters rather than depending on someone elses. Yes, WDW isn't allowed to use Marvel characters but when they're time comes, obviously the ball will be on their court but who knows really. I do know from reports and interviews that James Cameron is a very difficult and stubborn person who has a knack for getting things done his way and I don't think Disney cares for that as much, whereas George Lucas had his creative differences with Michael Eisner in the past but they were still able to create great attractions, nuff said!

One down side to focusing on Disney characters is that WDW may have already maxed out on Disney fans. The people who would be most excited about an attraction based on a classic Disney movie are the ones who are probably already coming to the parks. By going without outside properties you have the chance of attracting a new audiance that may not already be coming to Disney.

 

[twebber55]

The great thing about Facebook, twitter etc. is that there's the potential to extract analytics as regards a products "mindshare" - hate that word btw. I'd love to know if Disney has/does leverage this. Disney been slow as molasses in recent years in terms of bringing in any new attractions, but the lack of progress, announcements anything at all on Avatar screams [GOB]I've made a huge mistake[/GOB] from Bob Eisner. Even accounting for Cameron's difficult nature, the will to finalize the deal seems absent. I suspect they know the benefit/ROI isn't there.

lots of big assumptions there

 

[twebber55]

One down side to focusing on Disney characters is that WDW may have already maxed out on Disney fans. The people who would be most excited about an attraction based on a classic Disney movie are the ones who are probably already coming to the parks. By going without outside properties you have the chance of attracting a new audiance that may not already be coming to Disney.

totally agree....bringing in new tourists is a definite possibility similar (not on the same scale though) what HP did for Uni

 

[Padraig]

One down side to focusing on Disney characters is that WDW may have already maxed out on Disney fans. The people who would be most excited about an attraction based on a classic Disney movie are the ones who are probably already coming to the parks. By going without outside properties you have the chance of attracting a new audiance that may not already be coming to Disney.

There's definitely a point at which you exhaust the potential of merchandise for a particular character. Diversification in that regard is a clear benefit. How much do the characters matter to people in terms of rides/lands? I've never seen/nor have I any desire to see either of the Cars movies and would love to visit Cars Land - this point backs up Twebber's argument to extent - that a property that may not appeal can still lure.
Although, I will say that the business case for Cars land makes infinitely more sense than Avatar.

 

[George]

The great thing about Facebook, twitter etc. is that there's the potential to extract analytics as regards a products "mindshare" - hate that word btw. I'd love to know if Disney has/does leverage this. Disney been slow as molasses in recent years in terms of bringing in any new attractions, but the lack of progress, announcements anything at all on Avatar screams [GOB]I've made a huge mistake[/GOB] from Bob Eisner. Even accounting for Cameron's difficult nature, the will to finalize the deal seems absent. I suspect they know the benefit/ROI isn't there.

I really hope this isn't the thought process and it has nothing to do with Avatar and everything to do with Disney. When, Disney is at its best in the theme park milieu they make a great attraction/land and the the ip or lack thereof doesn't matter...they have faith that the quality of the theme park experience will drive visits and merch sales....I'm afraid that they don't have the will/faith to do this in Florida any more. I would love a bigger SW presence in the studios, but there is a chance they'll do a crappy job and just let the ip drive the experience if they really don't want to put forth any effort in Florida.

 

[Padraig]

I really hope this isn't the thought process and it has nothing to do with Avatar and everything to do with Disney. When, Disney is at its best in the theme park milieu they make a great attraction/land and the the ip or lack thereof doesn't matter...they have faith that the quality of the theme park experience will drive visits and merch sales....I'm afraid that they don't have the will/faith to do this in Florida any more. I would love a bigger SW presence in the studios, but there is a chance they'll do a crappy job and just let the ip drive the experience if they really don't want to put forth any effort in Florida.

I agree, outside IP has become a crutch for all the parks. It reeks of a lack of confidence in their own people.

 

[FrankLapidus]

I agree, outside IP has become a crutch for all the parks. It reeks of a lack of confidence in their own people.

This I completely agree with and it's symptomatic of the company under the current leadership.

 

[Bparso87]

I'm not really talking about the PotC sequels as there may not have been sequels if Depp didn't nail it on the first one. (Much like Avatar...we have no clue how the sequels will turn out). (BTW, did you mean At World's End or On Stranger Tides?).

I will agree with you about Life of Pi. Absolutely beautiful film, well acted, great story, and, IMO, should've won for best picture. Far and away my favorite film of the year. One of those films that you keep thinking about after you leave the theater...but not because of plotholes...because it was very thought-provoking.

Both where pretty bad but I think on stranger tides was average. The other one was horrible.

 

[luv]

totally agree....bringing in new tourists is a definite possibility similar (not on the same scale though) what HP did for Uni

No way. No way anyone goes to Disney for the first time just to see Avatarland. Some people (certainly Disney fans) might make a trip over to the AK to see it, but I do not see people coming to Orlando for Avatarland, the way the do for Harry Potter.

Also...no way Disney will build something like HP. They won't spend the money, don't believe in theming things that well and don't want to have cool rides.

Until Disney decides to keep the parks clean and in good shape...unti they commit to rides (GOOD rides!), they will not be able to perform at the level Uni is.

The kicker is that they don't need franchises like Avatar and Star Wars. They are their own franchise! But that is where they toss all their money.

I try so hard to not get into Uni v. Disney because it doesn't show Disney in a favorable light. But when they continue to waste millions and billions of dollars, but can't afford to pay people to clean the bathrooms...it gets difficult. They should not have sunk any money into Avatar. And they should cut their losses.

IMO.

 

[khale1970]

Until Disney decides to keep the parks clean and in good shape...unti they commit to rides (GOOD rides!), they will not be able to perform at the level Uni is.

I try so hard to not get into Uni v. Disney because it doesn't show Disney in a favorable light. But when they continue to waste millions and billions of dollars, but can't afford to pay people to clean the bathrooms...it gets difficult. They should not have sunk any money into Avatar. And they should cut their losses.

IMO.

I've not had a bad experience with cleanliness in the WDW restrooms (at least compared to the wider world of public facilities), but the point made in this post is one I share. As an example, around 6 or 7 years ago my family went to SeaWorld Orlando and found the place beautiful, the food good, and the shows and rides entertaining. But there were two glaring problems. The pre-show movie in Wild Arctic started in the middle and looped through the beginning back to the middle where it stopped. The ride operators were talking and laughing amongst themselves and didn't care about the bad show. The ride was fine, but seeing the disinterested employees ignoring such a glaring problem took away from the experience. The second issue was the upper rows of seating in Shamu Stadium were absolutely covered with bird droppings. It didn't appear to have been cleaned for days, smelled, and forced us into the splash zone for seating. The show was great but the take away was the filth. The tickets I purchased allowed us to return any time that week for a second visit, but we threw them in the trash knowing there was no chance of that. We said then we'd never return and haven't been back since.

I now plan to go back to SeaWorld, but it took what appear to be fantastic additions to get me to reconsider. Despite the clear lower level of upkeep and show quality at WDW, I've never experienced that level of disregard for the paying customer. As much as they need great new attractions, they need to be mindful of doing everything they can to treat their paying customers with respect by providing them an experience commensurate with the price they pay for attending. They may be holding on okay at the moment, but when you start to let it slip the bottom comes faster than you expect. I'm certain no one at SeaWorld planned a day when the pre-show at a signature attraction was a joke and 1/4 of their signature animal show stadium was covered in filth. But it happened anyway...

 

[RSoxNo1]

Lucasfilm wasn't rightly owned by Disney until last year, what suddenly makes it worthy and not Avatar? If Disney were to buy the IP rights to Avatar would it suddenly be ok for them to build it? Although Universal does do a good job with outside franchises, so does Disney, just look at Star Tours and Indiana Jones and the Template of the Forbidden Eye. Since DHS already has Star Wars and Indy, Lucasfilm stuff would most likely go there, and they can't use Marvel in WDW, so that still leaves them with needing something for AK.

I'm willing to bet that there are more Star Wars themed projects in the filing cabinets at Imagineering than Avatar themed projects.

 

[twebber55]

No way. No way anyone goes to Disney for the first time just to see Avatarland. Some people (certainly Disney fans) might make a trip over to the AK to see it, but I do not see people coming to Orlando for Avatarland, the way the do for Harry Potter.

Also...no way Disney will build something like HP. They won't spend the money, don't believe in theming things that well and don't want to have cool rides.

Until Disney decides to keep the parks clean and in good shape...unti they commit to rides (GOOD rides!), they will not be able to perform at the level Uni is.

The kicker is that they don't need franchises like Avatar and Star Wars. They are their own franchise! But that is where they toss all their money.

I try so hard to not get into Uni v. Disney because it doesn't show Disney in a favorable light. But when they continue to waste millions and billions of dollars, but can't afford to pay people to clean the bathrooms...it gets difficult. They should not have sunk any money into Avatar. And they should cut their losses.

IMO.

i never said the way harry potter did i said on a smaller scale but like HP..and i absolutely believe people who havent been to WDW but love avatar will come no doubt..just go to their whacky web sites and see their nerdiness over pandora or go to some you tube videos and read the tons of comments from people wanting to live there or how this movie changed their lives

i agree they dont need franchises but franchises does bring in maybe a different guest than those who live on these boards

 

[twebber55]

I'm willing to bet that there are more Star Wars themed projects in the filing cabinets at Imagineering than Avatar themed projects.

again i never have understood the comparisons to star wars...SW has been around for 40 years avatar just starting not that it will be near as big...im sure SW will have an even stronger presence in the parks over the next 5 to 7 years so you SW people can geek out over that it lol

 

[Soarin' Over Pgh]

Since the moderators have requested that the "Avatar progress" thread be reserved for news, I'll respect their wishes and post my opinions to the latest insider info here in the designated complaining thread. From the other thread:

This.

 

[danlb_2000]

Personally I hope Avatar doesn't happen, simply because we will never hear the end of it from JT04 if it does get built.

 

[luv]

Why must they do this ridiculous thing...and to the AK, of all places? Stick it in the Studios, where there is no real theme!

I cannot believe they're going to go through with it. Nooooooooo! Indeed.

If the AK isn't my favorite park in WDW, I just don't know what will be.

 

[bubbles1812]

Since the moderators have requested that the "Avatar progress" thread be reserved for news, I'll respect their wishes and post my opinions to the latest insider info here in the designated complaining thread. From the other thread:

My absolute favorite part in that movie.... I burst out laughing in the theater. I mean come on; it is the ultimate movie cliche, and it was glorious. I got glares from those around me though. Can't imagine why...

But yeah, it's ridiculous how long it is taking to develop the darn thing considering how much has been cut from it. Guess chiseling away the cost to the level of "we cant build anything cool. we suck" takes time...

 

[Animaniac93-98]

Is it still going to be only one ride, one shop and nothing else? If so that's even more underwhelming than New Fantasyland to me.

 

[BryceM]

Please tell me I'm not the only one who hates the idea of Avatar.

The environments in the movie are just absolutely stunning, and well, DAK is also pretty much absolutely stunning. (minus a couple of key areas)

I think the lush environment of Pandora and all of the bright colors and crazy rock formations would be very fitting for DAK. Almost helping to show a different side of nature... The science fiction side. Now if they could only show the mystical side... (Beastly Kingdom)

Though, if the land has no substance (such as notable attractions), then it will be pretty underwhelming.

 

[Magenta Panther]

Please tell me I'm not the only one who hates the idea of Avatar.

The environments in the movie are just absolutely stunning, and well, DAK is also pretty much absolutely stunning. (minus a couple of key areas)

I think the lush environment of Pandora and all of the bright colors and crazy rock formations would be very fitting for DAK. Almost helping to show a different side of nature... The science fiction side. Now if they could only show the mystical side... (Beastly Kingdom)

Though, if the land has no substance (such as notable attractions), then it will be pretty underwhelming.

You seem to contradict yourself a bit here...but I LOATHE the idea of Avatar in AK. Who the hell needs it? Avatar is a flash-in-the-pan piece of eye candy, nothing more. Yeah, it's made a lot of money initially. But will it stand the test of time? HELL NO. There are no memorable characters, the storyline is preachy and already trite, and who cares anyway? I don't go to the AK much now as it is. If Avatar is built there, I'll avoid it like the plague, because if anything new should be built there it should be Beastly Kingdomme!