Tigger1988
Well-Known Member
I think you meant to say "those of us who enjoy other people's characters and stories purchased by Disney and then re-purposed."
Because if we only had Disney invented properties in the parks, it'd be a ghost town.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
AVATAR land coming to Disney's Animal Kingdom
- Thread starter DocMcHulk
- Start date
I think you meant to say "those of us who enjoy other people's characters and stories purchased by Disney and then re-purposed."
Because if we only had Disney invented properties in the parks, it'd be a ghost town.
DonaldDoleWhip
Well-Known Member
Based on your criteria, Disney has already brought down its own demise. Indiana Jones and Star Wars are in Disneyland Park and Disneyland Park Paris of all places! The Twilight Zone is in Disney California Adventure and Disney's Hollywood Studios!
Since Indy, Star Tours, and ToT are widely touted (and often considered "classic Disney" attractions), I believe you have a misunderstanding of "classic Disney culture." Yes, the movie is Avatar, but Disney will obviously put its stamp on the new attractions...just like the aforementioned examples. Would it make you feel better if Disney bought Avatar, so it became "in-house" just like Pixar (even though until 2006, Pixar movies weren't "in-house" yet were still invading the parks)?
menamechris
Well-Known Member
As many others have said - your comments just simply aren't true. Just because you have always known something to be Disney does not mean it was. Winnie the Pooh, Mary Poppins - just to name a couple classics. Yes, as far as you ever remember, they were Disney characters, but they actually were extremely popular even before Disney.
CaptJapan
Member
Why are so many of you so defensive of James Cameron's Avatar?
I just don't get it, again yes this may very well be a beautiful looking land, with some exciting rides, and i could care less if it isn't a Disney property.
but again the point I'm trying to make is...
Disney could do better.
I will continue to voice my complaint of Disney Park blogs in hope they might realize this, just like they realized the Fantasyland expansion was too girl oriented.
If so many of you continue to praise and support Disney, then things never change! Its the same damn thing with Lucas and his damn Star Wars films. People and moan of him changing the movies all the time, but the fans still love everything he touches. and will go out and drop him every single dime they have.
It's the same here. Stop loving Disney so damn much, they are great, but not perfect. James Cameron's Avatar is a bad idea. There's no arguing that, we're just trying to make Disney see common sense, not dollar signs. Would you all have been so supportive if Disney had build an entire land devoted to other top grossing films? How bout a Titanic land, or an Inception land? sure watching buildings fold and flip would look cool, but would we care so much about those movies ten, twenty years from now?
Or heck you wanna really support this kinda decision? What if it was a Twilight land? Cause that's how some of us fans see it. A Twilight land, a land devoted to sparkly vampires and boring girls.
I just don't get it, again yes this may very well be a beautiful looking land, with some exciting rides, and i could care less if it isn't a Disney property.
but again the point I'm trying to make is...
Disney could do better.
I will continue to voice my complaint of Disney Park blogs in hope they might realize this, just like they realized the Fantasyland expansion was too girl oriented.
If so many of you continue to praise and support Disney, then things never change! Its the same damn thing with Lucas and his damn Star Wars films. People and moan of him changing the movies all the time, but the fans still love everything he touches. and will go out and drop him every single dime they have.
It's the same here. Stop loving Disney so damn much, they are great, but not perfect. James Cameron's Avatar is a bad idea. There's no arguing that, we're just trying to make Disney see common sense, not dollar signs. Would you all have been so supportive if Disney had build an entire land devoted to other top grossing films? How bout a Titanic land, or an Inception land? sure watching buildings fold and flip would look cool, but would we care so much about those movies ten, twenty years from now?
Or heck you wanna really support this kinda decision? What if it was a Twilight land? Cause that's how some of us fans see it. A Twilight land, a land devoted to sparkly vampires and boring girls.
invader
Well-Known Member
But they aren't building a Titanic, Inception, or Twilight land. They are creating the world of Pandora in our WDW. Imagine five years ago they announced the same project just pre-Avatar movie, everyone would go crazy over it. You can't say you hate something before it's even produced. It's an equivalent of counting your chickens before they hatch, just pointless and sort of crazy.
ChrisFL
Premium Member
dxwwf3
Well-Known Member
I was riffing on the great segment from Clerks 2 that talks about how horrible the Lord of the Rings movies are and how all they really are is just people walking around. I will admit that I haven't seen Return of the King, but after suffering through the first two movies, I don't think I could make myself sit through it.
And there have been some pretty strong rumors that Disney was/is interested in the LotR franchise. And all joking aside, I do think that WDI could probably make a good attraction from the property if given the chance.
Hey, Inception would probably make a cool ride. But you're right, Disney can do better than Avatar.
I don't care, as far as theme parks go, whether or not a movie will be remembered ten to twenty years down the road. That's not the issue - let the executives worry about that. What is at issue is the entertainment value. With Avatar...I'm not so sure. The potential is definitely there with the splendor and detail of Pandora itself, but they are handicapped right off the bat with the terrible story and characters. If they can separate all of the good elements from the bad, this land could be great, if a bit misplaced. But even the question of whether the land will mesh harmoniously with the rest of DAK isn't settled at this point, even though I have strong doubts about it.
S.E.A.
Member
yeah cause you know, the merchandise for Avatar was such a huge cash cow when the movie came out.
Tigger1988
Well-Known Member
A quick Google search led me to articles stating as of June 2010 Avatar had earned $153 million in retail sales.
S.E.A.
Member
that's it? didn't cars have like 6 billion?
plus I googled Star Wars, they have 9 billion, probably more. So 153 million is hardly anything.
ChrisFL
Premium Member
Tigger1988
Well-Known Member
6 billion in the first 7 months after its release? Doubtful.
If you're going to make comparisons they better be valid ones.
Star Wars came out over THIRTY years ago. What don't you understand about drawing valid comparisons?
S.E.A.
Member
Actually I had it wrong, Star Wars has 20 billion and counting, Cars has like 10 Billion and counting.
and then Harry potter is supposedly close to about what Star Wars makes... so, again, 153 million huh?
Tigger1988
Well-Known Member
Are you trolling?
You made a statement, I provided facts stating otherwise. You countered with bogus comparisons. If you seriously expect the numbers to be the same for a movie that had 7 months of sales and a movie with over 30 years of sales...you're beyond help.
_Scar
Active Member
Cars has made 8 billion so far averaging 2 billion per year according to The Hollywood Reporter.
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/disney-cars-has-crossed-8-99438
You can't compare Star Wars to anything because you don't have a time machine to see how these movies will do in the future.
_Scar
Active Member
Tigger1988
Well-Known Member
Exactly. How one could compare Star Wars to any recent franchise is beyond me.