AVATAR land coming to Disney's Animal Kingdom

[devoy1701]

I believe the year was 2148.

Not sure if I agree with that. While I tend to have an optimistic out look on human nature and human capacity to accept different races and religions (I'm 19, so thats probably why :shrug, you have to look at how much we blatantly ignore our history. And even if you don't look at that, the movie gives a pretty good explanation for it: the Nav'i aren't human. It's the personification of the (false) justification that we as humanity used during the relocation of the native americans, the holocaust, and slavery- since this particular group "isn't human" we can kill them/enslave them/move them.

I think that makes a little sense... :lookaroun

Thanks for the Year Evan.

@CrescentLake - My point was that by the year 2148 with humans having the ability to commence interplanetary space travel. You would think thaty humans would expect to run into other sentient beings that have evolved differently than humans. And because of that you would think they would have a basic understanding that other sentient beings they encounter would be entitled to basic rights. Especially if they were on the planet before humans! This movie makes us look entirely arrogent and close-minded again. Even today we put less sentient beings such as Polar Bears, fish, seals, etc before acquiring natural resources.

Of course then again the Colonel made reference to some confrontation in Venezuela...so maybe human society has somewhat deteriorated...

Maybe I'm just looking for more of a Star Trek type universe. But perhaps we will see more of a dive into what the Human race is like in the sequels :lol:

 

[Master Yoda]

Thanks for the Year Evan.

@CrescentLake - My point was that by the year 2148 with humans having the ability to commence interplanetary space travel. You would think thaty humans would expect to run into other sentient beings that have evolved differently than humans. And because of that you would think they would have a basic understanding that other sentient beings they encounter would be entitled to basic rights. Especially if they were on the planet before humans! This movie makes us look entirely arrogent and close-minded again. Even today we put less sentient beings such as Polar Bears, fish, seals, etc before acquiring natural resources.

Of course then again the Colonel made reference to some confrontation in Venezuela...so maybe human society has somewhat deteriorated...

Maybe I'm just looking for more of a Star Trek type universe. But perhaps we will see more of a dive into what the Human race is like in the sequels :lol:

It is brought up a little in the original cut and show a little bit more in scenes that were left on the editing room floor but earth is described as essentially being dead. I believe Sully says something to the effect that there are no more trees, they killed their mother, etc. From that I think it is safe to assume that humans have run the planet dry and are dependent on what resources they can harvest from other planets.

 

[Future Ape]

I find it funny that no where in any of the announcements, have they even mentioned the name of one of the animals in Avatar.

Disney’s Animal Kingdom is the perfect place for our first AVATAR land because at its core, the park gives guests the opportunity to experience the worlds of animals and nature – real and mythical – in whole new ways. With AVATAR, we’ve found the perfect opportunity to let our guests explore one of the most compelling mythical worlds ever conceived. Animal Kingdom also celebrates adventure, living in harmony with nature and environmental stewardship – themes that are deeply rooted in the story of AVATAR.

No animal names mentioned. It just says that we get to go to a mythical world. The animals in Avatar are not even myths. Everyone knows they were created for a movie. Animals of myth were created through many stories over many ages, and were thought to be real at some points. Just look at all the different stories and interpretations of the Yeti in the queue line for Expedition Everest.

 

[RSoxNo1]

The comparison was irrelevant to my point.

My point was who was the driving force behind the decision in Disney. From the moment the announcement was made it was clear that the driving force was either/or both of ... reaction to snatch up a property to compete with Potter and/or the bottom line watchers reacting solely to Avatar's box office intake. (Not that that shouldn't be a factor ... but ... in either case its not the creative department, it would be finance or marketing.)

I'm not saying it's doomed or even that we should hate it sight unseen but I do think it's pause for concern that the driving force behind this decision was not a "creative" mind at Disney but rather essentially a bean counter.

Sure, Cameron is creative ... although I'd argue Cameron is mostly an innovator and/or initiator than creator his most major films are technical marvels but not highly creative ... i.e. a sequel to an already existing property (Aliens), a movie about a historical event with a generic love story thrown in (Titanic), and a blatant Pocahontas, Dances with Wolves, Ferngully (with large Bulldozers!) rip off with pretty visuals (Avatar) ...

That being said The Abyss and Terminator 2 are great films and all the films mentioned above, with the obvious exception of Avatar are really good films.

The biggest thing that rightly should have Disney fans excited, moreso than his arguable creativity, is his passion/drive/initative to push technical boundaries and innovation of tech ... this could alone could make this marriage a huge win depending on ... the key question ... how much will he be invovled with the project, how passionate are the imagineers about this project ...

So again I am not saying "Death to AvatarLand" or anything overtly negative, besides my obvious distaste for the first film, but I am saying it's interesting that now its clear that in Disney the creative minds were not involved; that fact alone merits some confusion as to the intitial questions of why Avatar, why an entire land, and why now after only a little over a year of only one film?

I think this could make an amazing attractions, I do, but I think at this point there are some big and justified fan concerns and confusion.

You're joking right? Just because this was fueled by Iger and Staggs (read: non creatives) you're dooming this project? Aren't we looking for suits that allow their creative employees to do what they do best? Yes, I hate it when mandate comes from above to shoehorn an attraction like Stitch's Great Escape into an existing location. This isn't that same situation. Iger and Staggs have reached an agreement with a creative individual and have asked that creative individual to work with their creative individuals to put together something that neither Iger not Staggs could put together on their own.

This is what I want in an executive - an executive that is willing to fund projects but let their creative departments do their thing.

 

[tomman710]

You're joking right? Just because this was fueled by Iger and Staggs (read: non creatives) you're dooming this project? Aren't we looking for suits that allow their creative employees to do what they do best? Yes, I hate it when mandate comes from above to shoehorn an attraction like Stitch's Great Escape into an existing location. This isn't that same situation. Iger and Staggs have reached an agreement with a creative individual and have asked that creative individual to work with their creative individuals to put together something that neither Iger not Staggs could put together on their own.

This is what I want in an executive - an executive that is willing to fund projects but let their creative departments do their thing.

Actually if you read my post I specifically said I am NOT DOOMING the project, additionally I said it could be great ... my point was one of reflection not any specific judgment.

I said the fans are warranted in their concern and confusion because of all the ideas the imagineers are probably working on the "suits" come in and tell them forget all of those here's what you are going to do.

Again not dooming or saying the land won't be great ... just saying the confusion and concern at THIS PARTICULAR TIME is justified.

 

[allgar]

...but I think at this point there are some big and justified fan concerns and confusion.

Now I know you must just be trollin' cause you go and defend and talk up the whole Cameron partnership and extoll how you feel it's got a lot of potential and then you throw in something like that.

Sorry but there are no "justified" fan concerns or confusion. Doesn't take much to confuse some people. But all concerns and confusion are just plain ignorance. It's peanut butter and jam man... plain and simple, it works!

I look forward to the expansion and the new attractions. Bring it on. For everyone confused and concerned, just go with it, this is a good thing. So what if you don't see the fit, who cares if you didn't like the movie, trust in the Mouse that they've made another good partnership that will further elevate their brand. They know entertainment, they know their product and aside from a whole lot of nickel and diming damage, they continue to create a good show. (discussions about higher costs for lower values and show deterioration and maintenance are for another thread...) When it comes to creating new exciting experiences Disney still has it and a partner like James Cameron can only make it better.

 

[Bolna]

AK first, then likely DLP and HK. Other projects being pushed aside to make way for Avatar. Shanghai not on the front burner.

Lee, thanks for the info!

Does DLP in this context mean Disneyland Paris as a resort or Disneyland Park at DLP? Their current choice of names causes this acronym to be ambiguous...

I just hope that nobody at Disney thinks about putting this into Disneyland Park??? It must certainly only be possible in the Walt Disney Studios Paris!!

 

[tomman710]

Now I know you must just be trollin' cause you go and defend and talk up the whole Cameron partnership and extoll how you feel it's got a lot of potential and then you throw in something like that.

Sorry but there are no "justified" fan concerns or confusion. Doesn't take much to confuse some people. But all concerns and confusion are just plain ignorance. It's peanut butter and jam man... plain and simple, it works!

I look forward to the expansion and the new attractions. Bring it on. For everyone confused and concerned, just go with it, this is a good thing. So what if you don't see the fit, who cares if you didn't like the movie, trust in the Mouse that they've made another good partnership that will further elevate their brand. They know entertainment, they know their product and aside from a whole lot of nickel and diming damage, they continue to create a good show. (discussions about higher costs for lower values and show deterioration and maintenance are for another thread...) When it comes to creating new exciting experiences Disney still has it and a partner like James Cameron can only make it better.

I don't think that's fair to automatically call someone a "troll" who disagrees with your opinion.

In fact I feel like I have tried to divorce myself from my personal opinions about the film being terrible and focus on the positives, like Cameron or like the risk that Disney is taking that the sequels are good ... that is unlike alot of people on both sides of this thread who either say the attraction is doomed or those who say this is a genius move.

I think my stance is very clear, a paused concern with mild optimisim based on Cameron's involvement ... and no I do not think we should just automatically accept everything they sell us with open arms. I think in all manners of life you are allowed (and should) feel free to ask questions and voice concerns. It's not like Disney nails every attraction they throw out there.

Anyone who just accepts everything they are fed without first at least asking what it is, is, frankly, stupid.

 

[RSoxNo1]

I have concerns about this project as well but only because I'm concerned that the attractions included may not appeal to me. I have ever expectation that the land will look incredible, my concern is that to fully experience many of the attributes of Pandora - a simulator would probably be the best approach. I'm typically not a fan of simulators compared to actual movement (with Soarin' being the exception). However we don't know the attraction lineup yet so at this point my concern is based solely on my own guesses of the attraction lineup.

 

[tomman710]

I have concerns about this project as well but only because I'm concerned that the attractions included may not appeal to me. I have ever expectation that the land will look incredible, my concern is that to fully experience many of the attributes of Pandora - a simulator would probably be the best approach. I'm typically not a fan of simulators compared to actual movement (with Soarin' being the exception). However we don't know the attraction lineup yet so at this point my concern is based solely on my own guesses of the attraction lineup.

I think you and I are closer to the same page than you initially thought.

And perhaps I wasn't as eloquent in articulating my position but yes ... so much is unknown I don't think anyone can declare this a positive or a negative yet ... hence the unknown and/or the suits making the decisions and/or like or dislike Avatar ... there are some things that should make us concerned or at least ask questions without being told either yes its great or no its terrible.

 

[CrescentLake]

Thanks for the Year Evan.

@CrescentLake - My point was that by the year 2148 with humans having the ability to commence interplanetary space travel. You would think thaty humans would expect to run into other sentient beings that have evolved differently than humans. And because of that you would think they would have a basic understanding that other sentient beings they encounter would be entitled to basic rights. Especially if they were on the planet before humans! This movie makes us look entirely arrogent and close-minded again. Even today we put less sentient beings such as Polar Bears, fish, seals, etc before acquiring natural resources.

Of course then again the Colonel made reference to some confrontation in Venezuela...so maybe human society has somewhat deteriorated...

Maybe I'm just looking for more of a Star Trek type universe. But perhaps we will see more of a dive into what the Human race is like in the sequels :lol:

I think you're taking some sort of offense to the message that the movie is providing...not sure but thats what I'm reading. In any case, I have two rebuttals for that: 1) 150 years in the future is not that long. In all honesty, I don't expect humans to "evolve out of" war, genocide, and selfish violence. While I sincerely hope that we do learn from these past mistakes, all it takes is one nut job. And Avatar has the added element of a valuable resource- its in our nature and in our society to take said resource and use it. Without getting into politics too much, look at the aggression/politics involved in securing oil? Its the same thing. 2) How can you predict what the entire human psyche is going to be 150 years from now? Baring some incredible enlightenment or advancement in criminal prevention (ala minority report) there is no way one crazy human could spearhead a mission like the one to get Unobtanium in Avatar.

Again, I tend to ramble, so hope that makes sense.

 

[allgar]

My point is pretty simple, there are no "justified" concerns. This is a huge announcement, one where every Disney fan should be saying. "Wow, I wonder what they'll do?" To jump to negative concerns just seems a bit too "glass half full". I guess in the end it's the word "justified" that gets me... why should anyone feel justified in this, it's all speculation at this point.

I'm the furthest person from blind acceptance, but the math is simple here... Huge monumental announcement that will bring new attractions to a park that has long needed them... This is a win. If Disney fails on delivery then so be it, but that isn't really their track record so I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt.

RSoxfan... I'm with you, I dislike simulators too, and yeah there's likely to be a simulator of some sort, I'm hoping that at least they take it to the next level, or also have another couple cool attractions, perhaps a 3D movie or something with the Dinosaur/Indy style ride vehicle. Something about the lush forest just makes me think that there's a great dark ride just waiting to emerge, slow boat ride through it, caught up in some rapids, loads of animatronics and details. Pirates of the Carribean meets Living with the Land meets Jurassic Park. Cool!

Anyway, i'm not trying to get down on people with different opinions, but it makes no sense why people are already "concerned" that they won't like something. There is nothing here not to be excited about. Again, huge announcement for expansion. Limitless potential for a huge "fantasy" planet. It's got everything that Disney Imagineering and Disney Executives can want, and it comes with a dedicated force of innovation in James Cameron and his company. If I were a betting man, this one is going to be popular with lots of folks.

 

[209vaughn]

I wasn't a very big fan of the first Avatar movie. But now with the Disney partnering with Avatar and actually bringing a HUGE addition to AK - now im starting to get a lot more interested in the Avatar brand.

If you were to ask me before this announcement what I thought of Avatar, I would have said it was no where near the level of Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter, Indiana Jones etc.

BUT maybe the rest of the trilogy - combined with a Disney partnership that hopefully brings us the biggest single expansion of a Disney Park in years - might make Avatar more appealing in the future.

 

[devoy1701]

I think you're taking some sort of offense to the message that the movie is providing...not sure but thats what I'm reading. In any case, I have two rebuttals for that: 1) 150 years in the future is not that long. In all honesty, I don't expect humans to "evolve out of" war, genocide, and selfish violence. While I sincerely hope that we do learn from these past mistakes, all it takes is one nut job. And Avatar has the added element of a valuable resource- its in our nature and in our society to take said resource and use it. Without getting into politics too much, look at the aggression/politics involved in securing oil? Its the same thing. 2) How can you predict what the entire human psyche is going to be 150 years from now? Baring some incredible enlightenment or advancement in criminal prevention (ala minority report) there is no way one crazy human could spearhead a mission like the one to get Unobtanium in Avatar.

Again, I tend to ramble, so hope that makes sense.

Oh no, I'm not. I very much enjoyed the movie. I didn't even start looking at it at more of a subconcious level until I got on here today (just watched it for the first time this weekend). I just think it was a little weak on the development of how humans got to be where they were and on Pandora...though it was a fantasy movie so it doesn't matter too much. Just wondering how it will tie in with the rest of the movies and how it will play a part in Avatarland.

 

[FutureCEO]

I got free HBO this week and Avatar was on, so I watched it. Only part of it...I got up to the part where he was becoming an adult with the blue smurfs, Naturally curious about Disney's new land.

While visual stunning, amazing potential with the various plants and animals. I thought the sky was amazing, very Doctor Whoish. Story line could have been better. It was very predictable and the dialogue is terrible in some spots. I already guessed the end of the movie without even looking up the ending.

Its like taking a George Lucas dialogue and messing it with an amazing environment.

 

[Magenta Panther]

Robert Iger, IMO, is turning WDW into another Universal. Grab any hot property and shoehorn it into the parks. The end.

And what worries me the most is the idea that, eventually, Walt Disney World will change from being a Disney park to a park with some Disney in it, but mostly Spiderman, the Hulk, the Na'vi, Kermit the Frog, and probably Alvin and the Chipmunks eventually (I bet you guys hyped over Avatar would love THAT!) I think this costly gamble might well backfire on Iger, like the dispute with Pixar backfired on Eisner.

One can only hope...

 

[erasure fan1]

...and maybe...JUST MAYBE...once Lucas sees how incredible Avatar is (if it truly is as I'm hoping)...he'll jump at the chance to have a land for himself.

Yes, I really hope this triggers something to happen with star wars as well. The studios needs an addition as much as the AK and star wars would be perfect.

 

[KaliSplash]

This could definitely be a shot in the arm for DAK...but it doesn't really seem to fit organically into the park. Hmmm, I'll take a wait-and-see approach. I confess that I've never actually seen Avatar.

This is me, reading on Page 3 of this long, long thread. I think it will be a big success, actually, assuming Mickey is willing to spend the money to do it right. I'm guessing with James' involvement, it will be done right. I'm going to have to watch the movie.

 

[RSoxNo1]

One thing to consider is that the Theme Park Rights are partly responsible for continuing a franchise. The success of The Wizarding World of Harry Potter will benefit that franchise much in the same way Star Tours/Star Wars Weekends and Epic Stunt Spectacular/Indiana Jones Adventure benefit that franchise. When thousands of people a day are reminded of a particular franchise that can only help it's longevity.

 

[Captain Chaos]

Robert Iger, IMO, is turning WDW into another Universal. Grab any hot property and shoehorn it into the parks. The end.

And what worries me the most is the idea that, eventually, Walt Disney World will change from being a Disney park to a park with some Disney in it, but mostly Spiderman, the Hulk, the Na'vi, Kermit the Frog, and probably Alvin and the Chipmunks eventually (I bet you guys hyped over Avatar would love THAT!) I think this costly gamble might well backfire on Iger, like the dispute with Pixar backfired on Eisner.

One can only hope...

1) Avatar fits, no matter how you doom and gloom it...

2) What hot property has iger shoehorned into WDW???