• Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
    Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.You can use your Twitter or Facebook account to sign up, or register directly.

AVATAR land coming to Disney's Animal Kingdom

epcotWSC

Well-Known Member
I think it's a cool idea. Not sure how much they can actually base off the movie considering there are fictional creatures, but I think the draw will more be the landscaping and beauty. I'm sure there will also be 3D rides and that sort of thing using the same technology as Star Tours.
 

Captain Neo

Well-Known Member
Staggs seems like an all around cool guy. Everything he has done so far I definitely approve of.

Other than his poor showing at D23 he has been a huge improvement over Rasolu. I appreciate the fact that he is in touch with what fans want and keeps up with internet chatter. He toned down the princess stuff and green lit the Snow White coaster and he saw everyone complaining about lack of new DAK announcements on the official blog, he apologized promised an announcement soon and then delivers this. Not bad.
 

DisneyFan 2000

Well-Known Member
If I was an imagineer I'm sure I'd have a better idea for you. Sadly, I'm not. I was presented a question and I gave my best stab at it. My skeptical mind can only think that it'd be much easier for the real Imagineers to place Avatar in DHS than AK, and thats a good thing. Create too much of a challenge and it becomes a reach or a shoehorn. That's what I'm thinking is going to happen here.

But what would you have in DHS instead? Things NOT associated with movies? It's already a hodgepodge of sorts. The common link I can find is movies & hollywood (which Avatar most certainly is). No need to disrupt AK's theme just for the sake of a Potter Swatter and a "challenge".
I get what you're saying, and for the record I wasn't taking a shot at your personal idea but more the thought of yet another "behind-the-scenes" excuse of an attraction. You have to admit that trying to fit a movie about becoming one with nature with a park that has whole sections devoted to that theme seems easy, regardless of the fact that the movie takes place in a distant planet. It seems kinda off-beat, I'll admit, but honestly that's mostly why I'm intrigued. This could go wayyy south, but this could also turn into Disney's best expansion idea since introducing Sunset Blvd. and ToT to DHS. And as for DHS and its' common theme of attractions? Gotta admit that place is a mess thematically, Avatar-plussed or not.
 

castevens

Member
Point of irony.....

So many people complain that Disney is always too late to the game making attractions based on IPs that are at the end of their life span. (ie American Idol, Kim Possible, etc) In this case Disney is in somewhat on the ground floor. Now people are complaining that Avatar has no track record, fan base, staying power, etc.

You can't have it both ways.

Is Disney taking a chance? Sure, but is that not what so many of you want them to do?

I'd like to agree with your comment and take it a step further:

There are plenty of rides at all Disney parks that are based on movies and/or books that I have never seen/read. So long as the ATTRACTION(S) has/have staying power, then that's all that really matters. People 30 years from now might not even remember that avatar was a movie, but when you say the word "avatar," people's minds may immediately turn to Disney.

I think that the movie is good enough to be the basis of a wonderful land, and I can't wait to see what they do with it.
 

erasure fan1

Well-Known Member
So long as the ATTRACTION(S) has/have staying power, then that's all that really matters. People 30 years from now might not even remember that avatar was a movie, but when you say the word "avatar," people's minds may immediately turn to Disney.

Thats exactly it. As Ive said earlier, Im neither for or against Avatar as an addition until all the details come out. I believe that if the land is themed beyond awesome and the rides/attractions are state of the art cutting edge fantastic, than you will have success and staying power. The only real issue to the legacy of this land could be if the next 2 movies are on the quality level of the major league sequels.:lol: I really dont see that happening.
 

Kirk88

Active Member
WOW! Didn't see this one coming but, it will be a GREAT fit in AK. Will they develop new property in AK and expand the park or would it make more sense to re-theme an existing area? If they re-theme, Rafiki's Planet Watch would make sense. That way the whole environmental tie-in could be used. Just a thought. My vote would be for expansion. Guess this answered the question from earlier in the month about what new characters Disney was acquiring.
 

Scuttle

Well-Known Member
Other than his poor showing at D23 he has been a huge improvement over Rasolu. I appreciate the fact that he is in touch with what fans want and keeps up with internet chatter. He toned down the princess stuff and green lit the Snow White coaster and he saw everyone complaining about lack of new DAK announcements on the official blog, he apologized promised an announcement soon and then delivers this. Not bad.

Not bad at all!
 

tomman710

Well-Known Member
If Cameron can convince Disney as a small add-on bonus to bring in his aliens to replace Stitch back in Tomorrowland then I'd go buy 10 copies of AVATAR on blu-ray, snatch up all the toys in the discount bins at Wal-Mart, and dress as a Naavi for every costume centric occasion.

You're welcome!
 

RandySavage

Well-Known Member
lets hope the accountants or ceo wont keep cutting the budget

One of the good things about having Cameron on board, is that, like Rowling was for Potterland, he may assure a quality take on his property.

It may be that Iger is courting Cameron because he would like to see future Cameron films (after Avatar II & III which are at Fox) to be produced/distributed by Disney. If that is the case, then Cameron/WDI will likely see a lot of money thrown towards this project.
 

menamechris

Well-Known Member
eh. i tried to delete it, but i guess that didnt work. LOL

I care, because thats what the Disney brand IS. This isnt ABC's Animal Kingdom, or ESPN's Animal Kingdom, this is DISNEY'S Animal Kingdom.

I dont think SW and IJ got a PG-13 rating because they didnt deserve it. Theres a lot of fake looking punches, fun adventure music and light sabers. theres nothing "intense" about those films.

I'm not going to say much more to that except that I'm apparently not the only one who feels that way cause Tom Staggs said he got a lot of questions about it, enough to speak directly about it on the parks blog. So, there ya go.

You don't think it warrants a PG-13 rating because you are judging it in 2011, not 1982. That's like saying the Star Wars special effects are lame. Sure, they are in 2011. On the same token, what was intense in the 1970's-1980's is not what we would judge as intense in 2011. We have become very desensitized in the last 30 years or so.

As far as the Disney brand...."Disney" is the head company of all the other subsidiaries you mentioned. Disney is all of those things. And what exactly do you think will be placed in the theme park that will not be appropriate for children? What personally offended you about the movie that you are frightful will be in Animal Kingdom? Wonders of Life in Epcot went into more adult material than this land ever will.
 

stelledelmare

New Member
This has probably already been mentioned but I'm just curious to see what will happen at night. While there were several daytime parts to the film, it really stunned during the night scenes. So I'm wondering if that means that now AK is going to be open longer and after a certain time, everything with the live animals will just be closed down.
 

menamechris

Well-Known Member
This has probably already been mentioned but I'm just curious to see what will happen at night. While there were several daytime parts to the film, it really stunned during the night scenes. So I'm wondering if that means that now AK is going to be open longer and after a certain time, everything with the live animals will just be closed down.

I am sure it could end up being necessary if they have significantly more visitors in the park any given day. They may figure out a way to close down the animal areas, but still keep Everest, Dinoland and the Avatar area open. I am sure they are having meetings regarding this as we speak...
 

MissMorrow

Active Member
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jim-hill/avatar-park_b_973615.html

I have no idea if anyone has posted this link yet, but it's an interesting article.

Interesting article, thanks for posting!

I couldn't help but scratch my head though when it talked about Tom Staggs (and I like him) thinking of creating an immersive sci-fi/fantasy land in one of the parks while surveying the Star Tours and Cars Land construction, and he comes up with Avatar :confused: Personally that wouldn't have crossed my mind having just walked past C-3PO, but then again we all think differently.
 

zooey

Well-Known Member
Ummmm...how did he not immediately think of STAR WARS!?:lol::brick:

Avatar is a good idea for a land, but Star Wars outclasses it by a mile.

I thought this too, until I realized that Avatar isn't necessarily in PLACE of Star Wars expanding at DHS. This Avatar announcement actually shows that Disney wants to use franchises, their own or otherwise to fuel the parks. If Avatar is a success, when it comes time to fix the back end of DHS, I bet you they will be looking at the long rumored Lucas land concept, being that Avatar fans and Star Wars fans are the same kind of people. If they can get people excited for the next 5 years about Avatar and then immediately get people excited for another 3- 5 for Star Wars land, they've wrapped up a successful decade at Walt Disney World.
While I'm sad that Avatar is now and Star Wars is later, it gives me hope for what I'd like to see happen down the road. The silver lining, if you will.
 

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

Top Bottom