AVATAR land construction progress

1023

Provocateur, Rancanteur, Plaisanter, du Jour
Advertisement
As far as I can find he was responsible for the living character initiative (Lucky and maybe the Muppet Mobile Lab) and the SSE redo. I can't find much else that he contributed to. He was swinging for an opposite field single instead of for the fences. Yes, I understand that management wasn't exactly pushing for new attractions either, but look at New Fantasyland. While I believe that was Chris Beatty's project, as head of Imagineering Vaughn also had some weight to throw around. The project had a huge budget and looks great. But as people have said, "there's not enough 'there' there".

Vaughn, Staggs, and Rasulo deserved to be let go, but unfortunately the current management is continuing some of the same poor decisions. It doesn't mean all decisions are bad, but they're certainly not all good.
Well, there were several "other swings" at things that fell flat. Bruce and Craig missed entirely on one of the most "significant projects" in a very long time. There are some very hot seats still in imagineering. Some other exits are on the horizon.

*1023*
 

PorterRedkey

Premium Member
Well, there were several "other swings" at things that fell flat. Bruce and Craig missed entirely on one of the most "significant projects" in a very long time. There are some very hot seats still in imagineering. Some other exits are on the horizon.

*1023*
Do you feel this is a good thing that will help imagineering or is it as I fear, they are firing the old-school people just to be able to push the ideas of lazy, value-engineered and IP-driven projects?

I hope Rhode can survive and that he is assigned a project that is more suitable to his talents than Marvel.
 

Mr_Incredible

Well-Known Member
Back to topic, sorry all...


Avatar is going to be beautiful, it has to be! As immersive as the neighbor down the street is creating in their parks, Disney has to bring something new and bold to the table-and I believe they will! Very much anticipating my trip back to the world next year to see it!
 

Prototype82

Well-Known Member
I'm hoping Star Wars is Disney's answer to WWOHP. Only problem is the wait!
Given the timing of the original 2011(?) press release, the partnership with Cameron, the surprising choice of IP, I am certain that Avatarland was Disney's response to Wizarding World. Like HP as a project, Avatar is going to be the ultimate challenge of making the impossible possible...I think it's going to blow the not-yet-built Star Wars land out of the water...
 

Disneyhead'71

Well-Known Member
Given the timing of the original 2011(?) press release, the partnership with Cameron, the surprising choice of IP, I am certain that Avatarland was Disney's response to Wizarding World. Like HP as a project, Avatar is going to be the ultimate challenge of making the impossible possible...I think it's going to blow the not-yet-built Star Wars land out of the water...
I, too, believe Pandora will be more impressive than TSWE (The Star Wars Experience).
 

JediMasterMatt

Well-Known Member
I, too, believe Pandora will be more impressive than TSWE (The Star Wars Experience).
From a scenic vista and grandeur scale, Pandora's only competition will be Ornament Valley and the Cadillac Range here in the States. SW is more Diagon Alley than it is to Cars Land. Overwhelming in the sense of detail and much more about tight vertical spaces than the panoramic vistas that Pandora will offer. You won't be able to get far enough back from SW to take it all in since it's designed for DL's confines.

Now, on an attraction basis... it is going to be no competition.

Can't wait for Pandora to open though. It's going to be a great experience.
 

1023

Provocateur, Rancanteur, Plaisanter, du Jour
Do you feel this is a good thing that will help imagineering or is it as I fear, they are firing the old-school people just to be able to push the ideas of lazy, value-engineered and IP-driven projects?

I hope Rhode can survive and that he is assigned a project that is more suitable to his talents than Marvel.
Based on what and who, this is not a good thing. The remaining clarion voices for the quality "we" desire will be few, despite their stature. We have some great, visually stunning work being done, but it lacks in overall substance. Avatar's area will be a decent balance. Toy Story, a waste. SWL will be dramatically different in terms of anything that has ever been done in a theme park (attractions, immersion.) SWL will be a slightly stepped up version of Avatar.

Joe will be fine. His timing will be his own. Craig, not so much. Expect more quality in the next 10 years, but a healthy dose of value engineering.

No specific to the question of "change". More often than not, having institutional memory is the key to future success. Just take off the dead wood.

*1023*
 

mickey v-neck

Active Member
Based on what and who, this is not a good thing. The remaining clarion voices for the quality "we" desire will be few, despite their stature. We have some great, visually stunning work being done, but it lacks in overall substance. Avatar's area will be a decent balance. Toy Story, a waste. SWL will be dramatically different in terms of anything that has ever been done in a theme park (attractions, immersion.) SWL will be a slightly stepped up version of Avatar.

Joe will be fine. His timing will be his own. Craig, not so much. Expect more quality in the next 10 years, but a healthy dose of value engineering.

No specific to the question of "change". More often than not, having institutional memory is the key to future success. Just take off the dead wood.

*1023*
Pleas explain the lack of overall substance comment.
 

1023

Provocateur, Rancanteur, Plaisanter, du Jour
Please explain the lack of overall substance comment.
Sorry.... Yes, let me clarify. I am speaking specifically to the elaborately themed "mini-lands" that lack the support of attractions equal to their measure. The most obvious failing being NFL (New Fantasyland). Many think this a beautiful work of concrete. It is a huge waste of valuable space that netted the area nearly nothing. There were better offerings on the table, and yet we added tables instead. I think my comments were driven by a post I was replying to that I didn't quote.

In regards to Avatar, this does not apply. The work and the offerings are equal or close. The "land" itself will be an attraction (no, this is not hyperbole). This is a function of those involved and their unwillingness to allow for compromise. The instances in which this type of "determination" or a force of personality drives a project, we end up with masterpieces that last a very long time and are praised by nearly everyone.

*1023*
 

mickey v-neck

Active Member
Sorry.... Yes, let me clarify. I am speaking specifically to the elaborately themed "mini-lands" that lack the support of attractions equal to their measure. The most obvious failing being NFL (New Fantasyland). Many think this a beautiful work of concrete. It is a huge waste of valuable space that netted the area nearly nothing. There were better offerings on the table, and yet we added tables instead. I think my comments were driven by a post I was replying to that I didn't quote.

In regards to Avatar, this does not apply. The work and the offerings are equal or close. The "land" itself will be an attraction (no, this is not hyperbole). This is a function of those involved and their unwillingness to allow for compromise. The instances in which this type of "determination" or a force of personality drives a project, we end up with masterpieces that last a very long time and are praised by nearly everyone.

*1023*
Thanks. Do you know enough to speak on the substance of Star Wars land? What makes you have so little hope for Toy Story Land?
 

PorterRedkey

Premium Member
Sorry.... Yes, let me clarify. I am speaking specifically to the elaborately themed "mini-lands" that lack the support of attractions equal to their measure. The most obvious failing being NFL (New Fantasyland). Many think this a beautiful work of concrete. It is a huge waste of valuable space that netted the area nearly nothing. There were better offerings on the table, and yet we added tables instead. I think my comments were driven by a post I was replying to that I didn't quote.

In regards to Avatar, this does not apply. The work and the offerings are equal or close. The "land" itself will be an attraction (no, this is not hyperbole). This is a function of those involved and their unwillingness to allow for compromise. The instances in which this type of "determination" or a force of personality drives a project, we end up with masterpieces that last a very long time and are praised by nearly everyone.

*1023*
I couldn't agree more!
 

Cesar R M

Well-Known Member
Thanks. Do you know enough to speak on the substance of Star Wars land? What makes you have so little hope for Toy Story Land?
The huge cuts and dumbing down of the land. Plus its going to be a simple mini area with carnie rides. Plus it also only has one big attraction (the slinky ride). Apart from that, nothing much.
 

1023

Provocateur, Rancanteur, Plaisanter, du Jour
Thanks. Do you know enough to speak on the substance of Star Wars land? What makes you have so little hope for Toy Story Land?
Speaking specifically to TSL, the theme will be underwhelming. It will achieve this by delivering the same scheming and similar set pieces to its worldwide cousins. There will be little around it to sell "the honey I shrunk the audience" feel and not enough attractions to support it.

When discussing this subject in person, I like to compare it to "a bug's land". This "mini-land" concept, that was added to "it's tough to be a bug", was probably the most effective use of this paradigm. It was well designed and makes you feel bug sized in comparison to your surroundings. (Well, better than any other iteration.) It also was properly fleshed out with 5 additional attractions (albeit one is a splash pad, ick.) The park at the time needed to add more "kid/family friendly" and this helped. So you added 5 to 1 and incorporated excellent themeing.

When comparing that execution to this (TSL), it seems a bit thin adding 2 to 1 (or possibly 3 to 1). When you get a chance to walk the area, it will still not sell you on your sudden diminutive form. Doing something new would have been better than dumping out the toy box in the backyard. Since we have examples available around the world of what it will mostly resemble in style and execution, it will be what it is, a place to put the kiddies with a step up from Gadget's Go Coaster and a Mater clone.

As for SWL, much like Avatar, you will be thrilled and completely immersed. It will just be in different ways. Kinetic actions around you will keep you involved. in ways no other park area has ever done. Avatar may really create sensory overload. SWL will rely less on the physical environment (although it will still be stunning).

*1023*
 

Marc Davis Fan

Well-Known Member
@1023 thanks as usual for your excellent analysis.

Do you have thoughts on whether FoP will be "accessible"? E.g., do you think there will be non-"bike seats" that guests using wheelchairs can slide from their chairs into? Or do you think it will require steps and/or straddling the seats?

Regarding TSL, do you think the theming will be more sparse than the current iterations of TSL? Or will it be approximately on par?
 

1023

Provocateur, Rancanteur, Plaisanter, du Jour
@1023 thanks as usual for your excellent analysis.

Do you have thoughts on whether FoP will be "accessible"? E.g., do you think there will be non-"bike seats" that guests using wheelchairs can slide from their chairs into? Or do you think it will require steps and/or straddling the seats?

Regarding TSL, do you think the theming will be more sparse than the current iterations of TSL? Or will it be approximately on par?
Regarding accessibility, as with any modern attraction, very few will be left unable to experience this attraction. From my understanding the ability to transfer will be required. The attraction is slightly more thrilling than "Soarin'" but is a relative in a sense.

TSL, I could not use a better word than yours, it will be on par, possibly a birdie with the right ego stroked at the end. It will be nice to look at. (Some involved in design are still not thrilled with the end result.)

*1023*

PS. I love your moniker.
 

Atomicmickey

Well-Known Member
Regarding accessibility, as with any modern attraction, very few will be left unable to experience this attraction. From my understanding the ability to transfer will be required. The attraction is slightly more thrilling than "Soarin'" but is a relative in a sense.

TSL, I could not use a better word than yours, it will be on par, possibly a birdie with the right ego stroked at the end. It will be nice to look at. (Some involved in design are still not thrilled with the end result.)

*1023*

PS. I love your moniker.
Thanks for sharing your insights. Great stuff.

It's sad that TSL is underbaked. It strikes me as incremental cost, not overwhelming, to add enough detail to tie
the whole thing together. Not sure how those decisions ultimately are justified . . ."it's just for the kids", or something
like that. I can see a discussion about number of attractions, but how they are all tied together . . . well, that's
what Disney does. Witness NFL, no one can argue that it's beautiful.

Is there any chance of the "land design" being plussed at all, or is it locked at this point?
 

Corey P

Well-Known Member
Thanks for sharing your insights. Great stuff.

It's sad that TSL is underbaked. It strikes me as incremental cost, not overwhelming, to add enough detail to tie
the whole thing together. Not sure how those decisions ultimately are justified . . ."it's just for the kids", or something
like that. I can see a discussion about number of attractions, but how they are all tied together . . . well, that's
what Disney does. Witness NFL, no one can argue that it's beautiful.

Is there any chance of the "land design" being plussed at all, or is it locked at this point?
I think TSL is "underbaked" on purpose because I don't think it's meant for anyone too old. DHS has never had much stuff for small children. I know from experience. WDW is meant to be for families and you have to have family areas or at least you should. There are many adults especially the grandparent crowd that Disney loves that can't handle very thrilling rides. Grandma and Grandpa can't pay for these vacations and end up doing nothing but sitting around on benches. Also they are just there to do the family thing and probably haven't spent time detailing everything in the TS movies. They just don't care that much about TSL being totally immersive.

Hopefully SWL takes over for the more thrill inclined or the crowd that wants and cares for a more immersive environment. I know people on here think a 5 year notices everything but they don't have much to compare it to. TSL will be fine. Do I wish these places were very intense all the way around? Yes I do but I'm a well traveled guy in his 40's, I takes a lot to get my attention. Is it necessary to build a park to what I would like? No. I'm not your average visitor. In fact WDW has no average visitor they have a mix and need to have something for everyone. Theme park junkies are in the same boat as I am, you're looking for top notch all the time or over the top.In my case I actually go out in the world and visit far away lands and have my own adventures taking theme parks for what they are, toned down safe versions of something in real life most of the time. Pandora, no I can't go there so I guess I'll have to see what they cooked up in AK for that.
 
Top Bottom