AVATAR land coming to Disney's Animal Kingdom

[lazyboy97o]

Mythical implies creatures such as the Yeti, who regardless of whether or not they actually exist, have built a folklore and following behind their being. Same can be said for dragons, unicorns and much of the concept of Beastly Kingdom. Then there are fantasy creatures, such as the Na'vi, who are created through pure imagination and develop their folklore through their creator. Both mythical and imaginative creatures have a place in DAK, as quoted in Eisner's statement.

Avatar has hardly reacted the status of folklore. That cultural base is what distinguishes the yeti, dragons, unicorns, etc. from the Na'vi.

 

[Fox&Hound]

So, I know there is a lot of controversy on both sides but I wonder-if, and this is a big if, the development of Avatar coming to AK meant a nighttime show, if people would be more excited. For example, if on the front lot that could be developed there was built a concrete pool/lagoon that hosted a World of Color type show themed to AK. Maybe the big tree of life thing from the movie incorporated into it. The thought that AK would have a night show and stay open longer could be a real positive (yes, they do need more rides to justify it being open longer, but that's another rant). So, would people be more excited and look past the Avatar gripe?

 

[luv]

I don't really want a night show n the AK. Don't think it needs one. The park itself is lovely at night and the joy of walking through all that is enough for me.

I would love to see World of Color. If they brought it to DHS, I'd go! But I'd rather see a NEW night show for DHS...a good one, all it's own.

 

[twebber55]

So, I know there is a lot of controversy on both sides but I wonder-if, and this is a big if, the development of Avatar coming to AK meant a nighttime show, if people would be more excited. For example, if on the front lot that could be developed there was built a concrete pool/lagoon that hosted a World of Color type show themed to AK. Maybe the big tree of life thing from the movie incorporated into it. The thought that AK would have a night show and stay open longer could be a real positive (yes, they do need more rides to justify it being open longer, but that's another rant). So, would people be more excited and look past the Avatar gripe?

would love it and i bet Disney would love it as well seeing how it would keep people in the park longer buying more stuff

put it in the front to not bother animals and no fire works

 

[twebber55]

Nope.

IYO

 

[twebber55]

just want to say to you guys who i disagree with i certainly respect your opinion and to me this is what this board is all about and why i come here to have discussions like this

 

[RandySavage]

They're still wild tangents to what is presented at the park. Alien biologies makes far more sense as part of space exploration, not our relationship with our planet.

But why must the park be exclusively about our relationship with our planet? The dedication says it all: Animals. Real, extinct and imagined. Postulated Alien biomes don't strike me as any more tangential to the central theme than Camp Minnie-Mickey.

I'm only a mild supporter of the idea of Avatar(land) (would prefer almost any original, non-toon concept over it), but I can see ways in which it can be made to work within the park.

 

[luv]

I really hope we don't get a ride like Harry Potter. Its a fantastic ride, but we already have Harry Potter.

I hope to God that if they do this, they do something original, new, creative and good...and not just something that copies Harry Potter.

 

[marni1971]

Surely if the attraction is good enough the IP comes second?

And that's a massive "if".

 

[lazyboy97o]

But why must the park be exclusively about our relationship with our planet? The dedication says it all: Animals. Real, extinct and imagined. Postulated Alien biomes don't strike me as any more tangential to the central theme than Camp Minnie-Mickey.

Focus would be the biggest reason. We've seen what happens when parks and land's start going on tangents. It's not like aliens in general are anything new. Maybe I've just missed it, but I cannot recall seeing any sort of extraterrestrial concepts for the park or postulated creatures carved into the Tree of Life.

 

[MOXOMUMD]

...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

...

 

[twebber55]

Surely if the attraction is good enough the IP comes second?

And that's a massive "if".

I would say RSR and possibly the tron light coaster at shanghai will fall into this category

 

[doctornick]

Surely if the attraction is good enough the IP comes second?

And that's a massive "if".

Which I think is the irony. A souped up Soarin type ride (3D, move vehicle movement, maybe multiple endings)would -- ignoring the content -- potentially be a very engaging and a guest favorite. I think in the efforts to condemn Avatar as a franchise for the parks, that the proposed ride is getting a bad rap that it doesn't deserve.

 

[FigmentJedi]

Rhode saw dragons and unicorns in his travels? Those creatures are imaginary.

You can make the argument that Avatar addresses how our planet needs Pandora for survival . Earth needed the unobtainium from Pandora. How can these distant worlds interact peacefully and in harmony with nature, and not resort to violence and destruction as seen in the film can be another key theme. In this James Cameron created fantasy future, Pandora can be presented as the land in DAK that possesses the key to Earth's survival and the conservation of our own planet.

Through art, local traditions, the locations where these stories were set and stuff like that. Much of the research for Expedition Everest, Rohde interacted with the locals to hear them tell their stories of the Yeti and their perceptions of the Yeti's role.

And the purpose of Unobtanium isn't a magic "Save the Earth" cure, it's apparently a cheap superconductor useful for maglev trains and stuff when clean mass transit's probably coming too late for the planet in-story or for building starship drives to better get the hell away from Earth.

 

[Soarin' Over Pgh]

Surely if the attraction is good enough the IP comes second?

And that's a massive "if".

Hypothetically speaking, if they put a Chicken Little ride into DAK, the ride was awesome but... the movie? Would the same theory apply here?

Not to say anything can be done/should be done with that movie. Hell, I still haven't seen it but from what I hear, I'm not missing anything.

 

[FigmentJedi]

Another reason why putting Avatar in Animal Kingdom is a bad idea is the message it sends. In contrast to the rest of the park's more optimistic and hopeful look at conservation and that there's still a chance that we can fix things and there's still time to fix said things, the message Avatar sends is that none of that matters because the planet's just going to die anyway and it's all our fault because of humanity's stupidity.

Yes, Avatar fits into the conservation and environmental messages of the park, but when taken within the context of the rest of the park's contemporary setting, it suggests that whatever we do to try and stop our environmental devastation, the future refuses to change.

I look at the ideas of putting Wall-E into Tomorrowland similarly because its overconsumption-based environmental apocalypse doesn't mesh with that area's optimistic look at the future at all.

 

[twebber55]

Another reason why putting Avatar in Animal Kingdom is a bad idea is the message it sends. In contrast to the rest of the park's more optimistic and hopeful look at conservation and that there's still a chance that we can fix things and there's still time to fix said things, the message Avatar sends is that none of that matters because the planet's just going to die anyway and it's all our fault because of humanity's stupidity.

Yes, Avatar fits into the conservation and environmental messages of the park, but when taken within the context of the rest of the park's contemporary setting, it suggests that whatever we do to try and stop our environmental devastation, the future refuses to change.

I look at the ideas of putting Wall-E into Tomorrowland similarly because its overconsumption-based environmental apocalypse doesn't mesh with that area's optimistic look at the future at all.

like kali

 

[spacemt354]

With all due respect to the opposers, I just don't understand the loathsome and seemingly flat-out hatred of the notion that it's going to be built in Animal Kingdom.

Members on these board preach for something new to come to the parks. Carsland gets purposes and backlash ensues now arguing for something new and unique. Pandora, an idea that fits the "new and unique" description seems to be on the verge of construction, and the backlash is even worse than Carsland.

I understand if you thought the movie had a sub-par plot and lackluster characters. However I felt the same way about Cars, and look what they did with that franchise out in DCA. And if you feel that Avatar does not fit thematically, or if components of its message are counterintuitive for DAK, we can argue till kingdom come. But neither side it seems will ever budge from their position, so it's this point where I don't really see any point to continuing to argue.

Would Beastly Kingdom have been the best option perhaps for that area of the park, probably. Im not pro or anti avatar. im pro expansion of the parks and im pro innovation of unique and new experiences. I don't see how expansion of the park with a new experience that will be unique to DAK can possibly be weighed down with so much negativity before we even see concept art

 

[lazyboy97o]

im pro expansion of the parks and im pro innovation of unique and new experiences. I don't see how expansion of the park with a new experience that will be unique to DAK can possibly be weighed down with so much negativity before we even see concept art

To me, that is the worst position that can be taken. What makes a theme park special is the park itself. Just expanding (even if each individual piece is amazing) regardless of fit just creates a cacophony of competing experiences. Editing is of great importance.

 

[spacemt354]

To me, that is the worst position that can be taken. What makes a theme park special is the park itself. Just expanding (even if each individual piece is amazing) regardless of fit just creates a cacophony of competing experiences. Editing is of great importance.

Perhaps I should have been more specific. I'm pro innovation and expansion, if the component fits in the park (I figured the last part to be understood). In my view, Avatar does fit in AK. To others, apparently not.