AVATAR land - the specifics

[Beholder]

Look i get your point i really do, but when i take two years to make a decision its typically an informed decision....i think they saw the success of HP and realized DAK needed an addition and went with a very immersive environment

One day, maybe the truth about the motivation behind the Avatar decision will be known. I understand both points of view (knee jerk/thought out) but despite which one it is, it still comes off as a little desperate. Let's reach for "hottest" property we can instead of having faith in our own library of ideas.

 

[twebber55]

Yeah... Every time I go in for a physical the doctor hits my knee with his little hammer and...

Bam.... Two years later.... Knee jerk.

I don't think someone needed to quote a definition of knee jerk from an online source and exploit the omission of time.

The exact essence of the phrase knee jerk implies an immediate, almost without thought or time to process, reaction.

i actually thought that was funny that someone would take the time to look it up.. shows me you care about the topic...definitely a fire storm topic

 

[twebber55]

One day, maybe the truth about the motivation behind the Avatar decision will be known. I understand both points of view (knee jerk/thought out) but despite which one it is, it still comes off as a little desperate. Let's reach for "hottest" property we can instead of having faith in our own library of ideas.

i doubt it will come out ..ol Bob and Tom would never mention the reasons publicly

 

[bubbles1812]

Yeah... Every time I go in for a physical the doctor hits my knee with his little hammer and...

Bam.... Two years later.... Knee jerk.

I don't think someone needed to quote a definition of knee jerk from an online source and exploit the omission of time.

The exact essence of the phrase knee jerk implies an immediate, almost without thought or time to process, reaction.

Geez. I was only trying to show that what Disney did can fit the definition of a knee-jerk reaction, in my opinion. I am aware of what a knee-jerk is in the context of going to the doctor but this was not going to the doctor. This is a business. And as someone said above, Disney is a large organization and it took them a year to just start realizing there needed to be a reaction at all. Their choice of Avatar as a property makes me think of a knee-jerk reaction too... they literally went for the hottest property they could find in the here and now, without thinking really about it's long term popularity. I even like the idea of Avatar, and will be curious to see what they do with it. But I don't think it's a very strong property and certainly won't have the longetivity of Potter or heck, to go with a Disney property, Star Wars. It's strongest selling point was the technology behind the film, not the story itself, which tells me it could possibly lose steam at some point as we know technology always changes. Could that change with the second and third Avatar movies? Sure, I guess. But I'm skeptical. But Disney saw the oodles of money it made and jumped at it. If they were thinking long term, I really feel like there are other properties they could have explored that have proven their longetivity. And given that there seems to have been not a lot of movement on the project, it also speaks of knee-jerk and ill-preparedness to me. I didn't say no movement but you'd have thought a year later, we'd here of at least some concrete plans. But nope, even the people on this site in the know have said not much has gone on. Just my opinion.

At the end of the day though, I guess it doesn't matter whether it was a "knee-jerk" reaction or not. Potter was the biggest influence (even if it wasn't a knee jerk) in Disney moving forward with this decision, not that DAK needed some more stuff. And I'll just go with what Beholder summarized the move as... "a little desperate."

 

[steveford]

Being from the UK, there is a theme park here called the Eden project which is a huge series of glass houses full of plants and nature stuff and really looks as if it could fit very nicely within the concept. have a look see what you guys think.

 

[twebber55]

Geez. I was only trying to show that what Disney did can fit the definition of a knee-jerk reaction, in my opinion. I am aware of what a knee-jerk is in the context of going to the doctor but this was not going to the doctor. This is a business. And as someone said above, Disney is a large organization and it took them a year to just start realizing there needed to be a reaction at all. Their choice of Avatar as a property makes me think of a knee-jerk reaction too... they literally went for the hottest property they could find in the here and now, without thinking really about it's long term popularity. I even like the idea of Avatar, and will be curious to see what they do with it. But I don't think it's a very strong property and certainly won't have the longetivity of Potter or heck, to go with a Disney property, Star Wars. It's strongest selling point was the technology behind the film, not the story itself, which tells me it could possibly lose steam at some point as we know technology always changes. Could that change with the second and third Avatar movies? Sure, I guess. But I'm skeptical. But Disney saw the oodles of money it made and jumped at it. If they were thinking long term, I really feel like there are other properties they could have explored that have proven their longetivity. And given that there seems to have been not a lot of movement on the project, it also speaks of knee-jerk and ill-preparedness to me. I didn't say no movement but you'd have thought a year later, we'd here of at least some concrete plans. But nope, even the people on this site in the know have said not much has gone on. Just my opinion.

At the end of the day though, I guess it doesn't matter whether it was a "knee-jerk" reaction or not. Potter was the biggest influence (even if it wasn't a knee jerk) in Disney moving forward with this decision, not that DAK needed some more stuff. And I'll just go with what Beholder summarized the move as... "a little desperate."

i agree with a lot of what you re saying..you would think by now we would have an idea of whats going on

i will say this we are always on this board clamoring for expansion and new rides so when they announce something thats not a clone and possibly incredibly immersive im excited..this is the one part of that idiotic article jim hill wrote that i actually agree with...we get mad that disney is not adding anything and then they announce it and people on this board are ripping it..and im not taking jims side here because it was a ridiculous article but that point im in agreement with him

just my stupid two cents

 

[PurpleRose]

Admittedly, we do not watch a tremendous amount of TV or movies on 3D but I have found that gaming, especially first person shooters, is much more immersive in 3D. Halo Anniversary came with a 3D mode and was the first game I gave it a whirl on. I expected it to be cute and gimmicky, but I was pleasantly surprised at what it really added to the experience.

The holy grail for 3D TV and movies will be the autosteroscopic 3D that you mentioned. If they can solve the viewing angle problem and get the cost to a reasonable level, 3D will finally take off.

I'm officially jealous

 

[Beholder]

I don't think people are ripping the announcement of something new, just that the something new is Avatar. I think it's actually bigger than that, it may be that it's an epic land with cutting edge technology (?), immersive environments all in a park that really needs more, and none of it's Disney. Add to that, Avatar, in some eyes, doesn't really fit in AK. I'm sure with a massive budget, a focus on quality, Avatar would be a great experience, but building something with that budget, effort and quality into something custom made just for AK, well, I don't think it'd need a "movie tie-in" to make people want to experience it.

 

[bubbles1812]

i agree with a lot of what you re saying..you would think by now we would have an idea of whats going on

i will say this we are always on this board clamoring for expansion and new rides so when they announce something thats not a clone and possibly incredibly immersive im excited..this is the one part of that idiotic article jim hill wrote that i actually agree with...we get mad that disney is not adding anything and then they announce it and people on this board are ripping it..and im not taking jims side here because it was a ridiculous article but that point im in agreement with him

just my stupid two cents

I'm actually excited for Avatar...if they do it right that is. It's true that the strongest selling point was the technology but Cameron did create a fantastic world in Pandora even if the storyline itself was not that strong. And beyond that, I was just glad to see Disney decide to do something. But they just don't seem to be willing to spend the money (The set a 500 million dollar budget or so right? And you just know that is going to be cut tremendously) to make what I 1) know they are capable of doing and 2) what something like Avatar needs to have longetivity in the parks. It's not the strongest property so I think they need to take a "go big or go home" attitude on it. If it's a totally fantastic place with multiple rides that push boundaries (in at least some of them), and also really does create the feel of Pandora (plants animals navi' ect), it could be awesome. But that is expensive and TDO, as we know, really doesn't want to spend money...at least on things other than Data Mining technology... Sigh.

 

[LOSTllama]

Bubbles, I agree with you fully... I just hope that Disney 'corporate' steps in and doesn't allow the budget to be slashed by local TDO management...

AK really needs the love and Joe should be asking for maintenance money to deal with the Yeti and Dinosaur's broke effects instead of siphoning off of Pandora...

 

[cynic710]

timing is everything, and does it come off as despirate? a little, sure. but nonetheless, i think pros outweigh the cons in the move;

cons:
not disney
not true to animal kingdom (allegedly)
cant stand the test of time

pros:
unlike potter, there is still plenty of avatar coming to the big screen
a canvas for the newest attraction technologies
"relatable" to disney, as the story is similar to pocahantas
can be a segway to the future of the park, ie beastly kingdom
success of star wars and indiana jones in the other parks, of which neither are disney

 

[bubbles1812]

pros:
unlike potter, there is still plenty of avatar coming to the big screen
a canvas for the newest attraction technologies
"relatable" to disney, as the story is similar to pocahantas
can be a segway to the future of the park, ie beastly kingdom

Sure plenty of screen time...but how good will those movies be? This time around the stories I think will have to be stronger and I'm honestly not sure how well Cameron can do that. He is a great creator of worlds (Alien, Terminator, Titanic) but where his strength is not is in writing. I did enjoy avatar and will probably go see the next movies when they come out but I know many went and saw avatar mainly for technology. They didn't come out saying I must know what happens next to jake sully and the navi'! I guess what I'm trying to say is while I'm sure they will make money, I don't see them being as successful as the first unless there is newer technology with it. Yes potter is done book wise and movie wise...but it's going to stick around for a long long time. Fantasy series seem to be the ones with the most staying power...look at Narnia and lord of the rings. And I think potter is in that group

I will give you that it's relatable to pochahontas. Or really any stories where the "natives" educate the invaders. It was not a unique story, not a memorable story. Its been done before and woll again. Thats why its my belief they really need to go big on avatar to make it last a long time precisely because it isn't unique. It kind of makes me laugh though...why couldn't t they have just done Pocahontas since as you said, it's very similar.

I really do hope your right and they use this opportunity to utilize new technology. Cameron is all about that and I do see a lot of potential for great rides...that is, if they want to spend the money. If the instead just develop another stupid spinner... Grrr!

Last thing, sorry...but beastly kingdom is never happening. Not sure why you say that's the future of the park. Maybe someday they'll get out those old plans and build a tiny element of it. But again, it's not going to happen, not in the near future, intermediate future, or very likely far future. The plans were scrapped and when (or rather if) avatar is built, that will be the only addition to DAK for a long long time.

 

[cynic710]

Last thing, sorry...but beastly kingdom is never happening. Not sure why you say that's the future of the park. Maybe someday they'll get out those old plans and build a tiny element of it. But again, it's not going to happen, not in the near future, intermediate future, or very likely far future. The plans were scrapped and when (or rather if) avatar is built, that will be the only addition to DAK for a long long time


yeah, i should have been clearer, i too meant maybe some sort of piece to the big puzzle of what could have been. i really dont believe beastly kingdom will ever be a thing, but maybe some strong influences from the idea can stem from disney's pandora. avatarland should open up the idea of leaving the park open into the night hours, so utilizing those "adult oriented" experiences like the described back in the beastly kingdom days could happen. i generally agree with your stance, and also hope that the go HUGE with avatarland.

 

[djlaosc]

avatarland should open up the idea of leaving the park open into the night hours, so utilizing those "adult oriented" experiences like the described back in the beastly kingdom days could happen.

Just thought I would ask, but is it possible that you are getting "Night Kingdom" (Discovery Cove/Wild Africa Trek type experience) confused with "Beastly Kingdomme" (Dragon ride/Unicorn ride/Fantasia ride)?

 

[hellowonderland]

I don't think people are ripping the announcement of something new, just that the something new is Avatar. I think it's actually bigger than that, it may be that it's an epic land with cutting edge technology (?), immersive environments all in a park that really needs more, and none of it's Disney. Add to that, Avatar, in some eyes, doesn't really fit in AK. I'm sure with a massive budget, a focus on quality, Avatar would be a great experience, but building something with that budget, effort and quality into something custom made just for AK, well, I don't think it'd need a "movie tie-in" to make people want to experience it.

Agreed. I will be the broken record and say I wish they had plowed this money into Beastly Kingdom. I would much rather step into a world created by Disney Imagineers and inspired by thousands of years of myth / stories, than a world created by James Cameron - especially since I just don't think Avatar will stand the test of time.

 

[unkadug]

Disney is such a behemoth organization that it takes 2 years for a simple knee jerk reaction.

And, I too, see this as a knee jerk reaction to Potter's success. But remember, it took Disney a year to even catch on that there needs to be a reaction.

Uhh...not true. Them closing PI was a knee jerk reaction and it certainly didn't take two years!

 

[Cosmic Commando]

Part of the article linked to in the thread about the automation of the monorail system my be relevant to the discussion about Pandora coming to Animal kingdom:

Another new turn lane is planned for Osceola Parkway and Serbeth Road near Disney’s Animal Kingdom.

For those unfamiliar with this intersection, this is where resort busses turn into Animal Kingdom and is also where the stoplight is just before you enter the Animal Kingdom Lodge.

The construction has already started, and basically consists of them widening Sherberth road (the road's name is apparently misspelled in the original article). Anyone can see this going on if they're in the area, it's in a public area.

The odd thing about this is that there are no guest areas down Sherberth Road, it leads to the Maingate area of 192. So, why would Disney widen this road?

Cast members are speculating this may be to make the area easier for construction equipment to enter property, but there may be a bigger reason. The Animal Kingdom costuming building is located on Sherberth Road and it has a HUGE parking lot that only has a very tiny portion that is actually utilized (the vast majority is fenced off and is used for equipment storage and bus driver training). So, it looks like Disney may be planning on moving cast parking from Animal Kingdom's main lot to costuming. This would enable them to use the current cast parking lot as a staging area for construction and for construction crew parking. Once construction is complete, the lot could then be converted to guest parking to keep up with (hopefully) increased attendance.

As an added bonus, the cast member lot is unnamed, so they can name it "Na'vi" or "banshee" or whatever other Pandora creature they feel like naming it after.

So does this mean the CM's wouldn't have to walk that walkway in front of all of the Disney buses? It always irked me seeing everyone walking in through the un-magical parking lot in costume... seems like the kind of detail Disney is supposed to think about?

 

[themonkeyisthesultan]

That was the original cast member parking lot. They would park in the wardrobe lot, go inside wardrobe and get their costume and exit in the back and there is a bus loop there and then they would take the bus to DAK and the bus had several different stops along the perimeter road.

Thanks for this. I'd been wondering if it'd ever been used or if they'd just overbuilt assuming they'd need it some day.

So does this mean the CM's wouldn't have to walk that walkway in front of all of the Disney buses? It always irked me seeing everyone walking in through the un-magical parking lot in costume... seems like the kind of detail Disney is supposed to think about?

No cast in out of place costumes would be a great side effect if they are changing the cast parking scheme.

 

[AEfx]

It's when the framerate drops considerably below the 30 mark that there's some trouble. A low or unstable framerate actually makes me feel physically dizzy and can give me a headache or in some cases nausea. Not to mention it can make my eyes hurt.

Thing is, film has been going just fine at 24 fps for the better part of a century.

Others have noted that it will become a "bigger deal", but the only place it really has any difference is in video games, as the posts attest.

The initial bringing up of 60FPS was in response to my statement that the 3-D hook wouldn't be nearly as grabby this time, but I think just about everyone would agree that 3-D itself brought more people into the theater to experience the curiosity than will turn out in droves just to see something for the sake of it being 60fps.

 

[ChrisM]

Keep in mind that a higher framerate makes for a better 3D viewing experience.

Many people complain about headaches, eye fatique, and a dim picture when viewing 3D movies. (Frankly, most 3D films make me feel like I'm watching a movie while suffering from a concussion.) A higher framerate helps to resolve those problems (as does jacking up the lamp level on the projector) and makes for a crisper overall picture.

Trust me, if you saw "Avatar" as projected in the theater and separately at 60fps (and properly lit) the difference would be stark.

That said, I agree that the masses won't be thronging to the theater shouting "60 FRAMES PER SECOND, MY LIFE WILL BE COMPLETE, I HAVE ACHIEVED TOTAL CONCIOUSNESS!" But odds are pretty good enough folks will come out to see Cameron's latest blockbuster that, if it's half way decent, it will make a steaming hot pile of lucre.