AVATAR land coming to Disney's Animal Kingdom

Bairstow

Well-Known Member
Let's have a world showcase for Pluto (the planet, not the dog). After all, it is a world, and does every pavillion in the world showcase have to be a country on Earth? :p

Pluto's not a planet.
avatar_character-cropped.jpg
 

Figment571

Member
Then my real answer is because Disney doesn't know if their film adaptation of John Carter will be a blockbuster yet. It's a business, yet in doing so they wish to be relevant. I think this will work. It could be a lot worse after all. Take Ellen and Nemo in Epcot for instance...
Well we don't know if long term Avatar will be a success either. It certainly isn't something that has a large fan base a couple years after it came out.
 

S.E.A.

Member
I'll use DisneySea as a starting point.

Everyone praises DisneySea. It's so well-themed, it's an amazing journey, and oh the details! The unifying theme is the sea, water, rivers, oceans, underwater, etc.

And yet, Aladdin has a growing presence in the park. Aladdin has nothing to do with the sea, with the exception of the fact that it takes place in Arabia which has a coast (even if that coast is far from the Aladdin universe).

The Indiana Jones attraction has nothing to do with the sea. But hypothetically, Indiana Jones could take place near a lost river delta. There, connection made.

Toy Story has nothing to do with the sea at all, and yet TSM is being built in the park. Well that's okay, because Toy Story is American, and the attraction is based on a boardwalk midway. And American boardwalks are near the sea.

Not everything in the park fits the word "sea," yet the attractions fit the more general idea of adventure and exploring exotic ports of call.

Animal Kingdom is no different. Not every attraction has to relate to "animals that have a foundation in millennia on earth." Technically, the yeti was created at one point by people, just like the animals in Avatar. But Avatar still works well with Animal Kingdom's other ideas, such as conservation and exploring an exotic location. And yes, there are animals in Pandora.

If anything, Kali River Rapids needs to be removed from AK. It was originally supposed to include tigers, but the tigers were never included. Now, that attraction has no animals. It doesn't fit. Every single thing in AK has to directly involve and showcase animals!!!!!! :fork:

DisneySea is kind of a terrible example if you're gonna compare it to Animal Kingdom. DisneySea's theme is adventure and exploration through the seas, not a literal things involving a body of water. Animal Kingdom is a park based around our relationship with animals and how they spark our imagination. Not the other way around.
 

RSoxNo1

Well-Known Member
well to be fair, Titanic was also the highest grossing film of all time for a while but you don't see many theme park attractions dedicated to it.

Well, to be fair, a theme park attraction about a tragedy where 1,400 people died would be in poor taste.

Couldn't they put the Titanic in the Seas pavilion?

As a fan base, do WE really know what we want?

We want a major expansion.
But not FLE because that caters too much to princess & little girls.
We didn't like the fact that nothing major was mentioned at D23 back in August.
There isn't enough for older kids in the parks.
Avatar caters too much to older kids in the parks.
We need more Disney-oriented expansions.
But FLE isn't good enough.
Get rid of Stitch & Zazu from the Tiki Room. Now they're gone...but the show isn't what we wanted.
We want Cars Land...but we don't want too much Pixar!
We miss retro-Epcot. Why did they bring back Captain EO?
We want a clone of Tokyo DisneySea for WDW. But we want WDW to stay original and not spounge off other parks...

If you're a Disney exec...stay the hell away from internet forums. It's just not worth it.

This is just like Disney, not building anything for the 50th anniversary and skimping out by not making announcements at the D23 Expo. How come Star Tours only had 54 different ride configurations? I want to travel to 10 more places in the Star Wars universe before I go to Pandora. Why couldn't they put Pooh's Hunny Hunt in Animal Kingdom instead? Wait, there's a crane behind the castle I've gotta get in line at City Hall.
 

S.E.A.

Member
Let's have a world showcase pavillion for Pluto (the planet, not the dog). After all, it is a world, and does every pavillion in the world showcase have to be a country on Earth? :p

How about a Mars pavillion to tie into John Carter? A Predator land in AK would be awesome too, I mean it's an allegory for conservation and it happens in a jungle! it'll be perfect!
 

Demeter Tess

Well-Known Member
VERY unhappy about this decision. Not only was the movie curiously over-hyped, but I feel this is such a poor substitute for the "beastly kingdom" we have yearned for. On one hand I am thrilled that poor AK is being expanded, but on quite the other I am appalled that this is the form that the expansion is taking.

I also have doubts as to whether "Avatar" will have the staying power to support an entire land. Sure, it was a hit at the box office, but it's not like there won't be something "bigger and better" to come along in the near future. 100 years down the line when these parks are still in operation, will an "Avatar" land still "work?" Does it have that timeless quality and staying power that so many of Disney's creations possess? Or will folks stroll around it, asking each other, "Wow, I wonder why Disney hasn't trashed this and rebuilt with something more current?" (I get that feeling quite a bit when visiting Universal Studios.)
 

need2go2wdw

Active Member
Wow! Although I did not LOVE the movie, and was initially like "what???" when hearing the news, I get it. I understand the underlying concept and idea of the Avatar land and I KNOW it will be MIND BLOWING!!! I can only imagine what Disney and Cameron can cook up together and can't wait to see the end product!

WOO HOOO for an announcement for Animal Kingdom love!!! Well overdue :D
 

Crazy Harry

Active Member
How about a Mars pavillion to tie into John Carter? A Predator land in AK would be awesome too, I mean it's an allegory for conservation and it happens in a jungle! it'll be perfect!

I thought about Predator, but what about Pitch Black, alien animals on alien world, that counts right? :D

Vin Diesil AA
 

S.E.A.

Member
I also have doubts as to whether "Avatar" will have the staying power to support an entire land. Sure, it was a hit at the box office, but it's not like there won't be something "bigger and better" to come along in the near future. 100 years down the line when these parks are still in operation, will an "Avatar" land still "work?" Does it have that timeless quality and staying power that so many of Disney's creations possess? Or will folks stroll around it, asking each other, "Wow, I wonder why Disney hasn't trashed this and rebuilt with something more current?" (I get that feeling quite a bit when visiting Universal Studios.)

Actually, i think any property, once developed and built properly and with enough attention to detail could easily surpass its source material, just look at Splash Mountain, I have no doubt Avatar would work well on its own as a land in a theme park, i just don't think it belongs to Animal Kingdom.
 

yankspy

Well-Known Member
Sounds interesting.

There is a part of me that wonders what happened to the days when the attractions created the franchises as opposed to the other way around.
 

S.E.A.

Member
I thought about Predator, but what about Pitch Black, alien animals on alien world, that counts right? :D

Vin Diesil AA

that would be amazing, the Riddick Meet and Greet alone would be so worth it. Also that way we can bring in the ride system from Hide and Go Seek but for the Pitch Black monsters.
 

Bairstow

Well-Known Member
VERY unhappy about this decision. Not only was the movie curiously over-hyped, but I feel this is such a poor substitute for the "beastly kingdom" we have yearned for. On one hand I am thrilled that poor AK is being expanded, but on quite the other I am appalled that this is the form that the expansion is taking.

I also have doubts as to whether "Avatar" will have the staying power to support an entire land. Sure, it was a hit at the box office, but it's not like there won't be something "bigger and better" to come along in the near future. 100 years down the line when these parks are still in operation, will an "Avatar" land still "work?" Does it have that timeless quality and staying power that so many of Disney's creations possess? Or will folks stroll around it, asking each other, "Wow, I wonder why Disney hasn't trashed this and rebuilt with something more current?" (I get that feeling quite a bit when visiting Universal Studios.)

This issue of movie "staying power" is only relevant to attracting guests to the park in the first place who would not come otherwise.

When it comes to actually building a fun experience, the ball is in WDI's court, not James Cameron's. Even if the next 2 sequels bomb and everyone has forgotten about the original Ferngully remake in 10 years (Which is unlikely) the imagineers have a cool concept, tons of money, and a park in desperate need of expansion. As fans of their work, this is all we can ask for.
 

Prototype82

Well-Known Member
Wow! Although I did not LOVE the movie, and was initially like "what???" when hearing the news, I get it. I understand the underlying concept and idea of the Avatar land and I KNOW it will be MIND BLOWING!!! I can only imagine what Disney and Cameron can cook up together and can't wait to see the end product!

WOO HOOO for an announcement for Animal Kingdom love!!! Well overdue :D
Someone gets it! :sohappy:
 

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

Back
Top Bottom