Avatar Land...think Disney regrets the idea?

Club Cooloholic

Club Cooloholic

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
Look, I think it's cool they are planning something different and I know this has been talked about before, but now a few years into when this was planned, am I the only one who thinks this idea is even worse now that when it was proposed? I mean this is not a movie where there is a lot of buzz around it, I never hear anyone mention it, it does not have a following like say Lord of the Rings or Harry Potter, backed by tons of merch and books. I wonder if Disney could do this over again(especially since they ended up buying Star Wars) would they have gotten into bed with James Cameron on this or opted for something else.
 
Gomer

Gomer

Well-Known Member
pjkdog said:
Look, I think it's cool they are planning something different and I know this has been talked about before, but now a few years into when this was planned, am I the only one who thinks this idea is even worse now that when it was proposed? I mean this is not a movie where there is a lot of buzz around it, I never hear anyone mention it, it does not have a following like say Lord of the Rings or Harry Potter, backed by tons of merch and books. I wonder if Disney could do this over again(especially since they ended up buying Star Wars) would they have gotten into bed with James Cameron on this or opted for something else.
Click to expand...

I really don't think its possible to answer this question yet. You'll need to see how the sequels invade the cultural landscape in a couple years.

I see Avatar as the CBS of blockbuster movies. It may not have as much geek cred as Star Wars, LOTR, or Potter, but it had wider appeal amongst the middle aged masses than many give it credit for. So, while it may not have the internet support, it does have mainstream familiarity amongst the casual consumer. Those people don't necessarily buy wands, or custom action figures, but they do bring their kids and grand kids to WDW. And something like Avatar might be enough of a draw for them to have them spend a day at AK during their trip.

And as many on here like to say, for better or worse, Disney is targeting that demographic through meet and greets and rides focused at the younger set. Avatar reads to me as something targeted specifically at their parents, not necessarily the same people Uni is going after with Potter, Transformers and the like.
 
5thGenTexan

5thGenTexan

Well-Known Member
Gomer said:
I really don't think its possible to answer this question yet. You'll need to see how the sequels invade the cultural landscape in a couple years.

I see Avatar as the CBS of blockbuster movies. It may not have as much geek cred as Star Wars, LOTR, or Potter, but it had wider appeal amongst the middle aged masses than many give it credit for. So, while it may not have the internet support, it does have mainstream familiarity amongst the casual consumer. Those people don't necessarily buy wands, or custom action figures, but they do bring their kids and grand kids to WDW. And something like Avatar might be enough of a draw for them to have them spend a day at AK during their trip.

And as many on here like to say, for better or worse, Disney is targeting that demographic through meet and greets and rides focused at the younger set. Avatar reads to me as something targeted specifically at their parents, not necessarily the same people Uni is going after with Potter, Transformers and the like.
Click to expand...


I will be 40 this year. I have a daughter who will be 6 this summer and a son who will be 4 this Christmas. I did not see Avatar in theaters, I tried to watch it after it was released on the cable movie channels. I couldn't do it. I don't think it was a particularly good movie and I have zero excitement for its own land. Given the choice I had rather wait to see Elsa and Anna with my kids that experience a whole land based on one movie that I don't care about.
 
sshindel

sshindel

The Epcot Manifesto
I'll speak my mantra again for good measure...

"If they build a world class land with world class attractions set in the world of Pandora, it will be good no matter what the original IP was (see Splash Mountain as an example of a movie no one can even watch anymore)
If they build a crappy land with crappy attractions, it also will not matter what the IP was because even a great IP can not make up or bad or cheap work."
 
bethymouse

bethymouse

Well-Known Member
It will be interesting to see how things develop. Strange how everything has to be based on that 1 movie Avatar that's not even Disney nor really a franchise. The movie is almost forgotten about. But, maybe it will be OK. We'll see...:cold:
 
Chef Mickey

Chef Mickey

Well-Known Member
Yes is my short answer. They wanted to do something to react to Universal HP and should have thought it through. Disney isn't chasing Universal.

That said, I still think disney will do a great job, although I'm not fond of the movie. I think Avatar would be better at DHS, not as an entire land, but as a scene in a revamped Great Movie Ride, perhaps replacing The wizard of Oz.

Any improvement to AK is welcome, but I think the build out to AK should be educational, multi-faceted, and focused on attractions with past and present animals. Not everything has to be tied to a silly movie.
 
GoofGoof

GoofGoof

Premium Member
If the rides are done right and the land is truly immersive I could give a rats a$$ how popular Avatar the movie is. I could care less if they even make a sequel. How popular is Song of the South right now? Does that mean Splash Mountain is a disappointing ride? Do you have no interest in riding Splash Mountain since the movie it is based on didn't stand the test of time? For some reason (I think maybe after Harry Potter Land opened) people decided that they only liked theme park rides if they were based off of movies they also liked. It makes no sense to me.

I know it's hard to wait and Disney certainly drags this stuff out, but 10 years from now when both AvatarLand and StarWarsLand exist simultaneously it will be better than just having StarWarsLand 5 years sooner and AK still being a half day park. It's a short term sacrifice for a long term benefit. This is my long winded way of saying yes, I still think its a good idea. If for no other reason then it's getting us a night safari and nighttime entertainment at AK and additional rides which the park desperately needs.
 
Hakunamatata

Hakunamatata

Le Meh
Premium Member
sshindel said:
I'll speak my mantra again for good measure...

"If they build a world class land with world class attractions set in the world of Pandora, it will be good no matter what the original IP was (see Splash Mountain as an example of a movie no one can even watch anymore)
If they build a crappy land with crappy attractions, it also will not matter what the IP was because even a great IP can not make up or bad or cheap work."
Click to expand...
The problem is I think way too many people who start these types of threads, deep down in dark places in their souls, hope that Disney does the latter so they can continue with their Internet forum rants of "Disney stinks, blah blah, money grab, blah blah, Disney world was better in the 50s blah blah" crap.
 
ShookieJones

ShookieJones

We need time for things to happen.
I know I regret it.

However I agree 1000 percent with what this guy from greater metropolitan Chicago area said.
I really believe that if they build this out to it's (and their) fullest potential it will take on a life of it's own it won't make a d*mn difference how the original movie or the eventual sequels fare.

sshindel said:
I'll speak my mantra again for good measure...

"If they build a world class land with world class attractions set in the world of Pandora, it will be good no matter what the original IP was (see Splash Mountain as an example of a movie no one can even watch anymore)
If they build a crappy land with crappy attractions, it also will not matter what the IP was because even a great IP can not make up or bad or cheap work."
Click to expand...
 
Hobnail Boot

Hobnail Boot

Well-Known Member
Honestly, I thought the movie was ok. It was enjoyable but not something my buddies and I talked about afterwards. It just wasn't very memorable to us. I would have no real problem with an Avatarland if it weren't going into AK. That is by far my biggest problem with this project. It drives me crazy that they are stretching this conservation theme to make it fit into the park.

That said, I think they regret the money they spent on thr IP now that they own Star Wars (not that they were doing much with it before).
 
Club Cooloholic

Club Cooloholic

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
hakunamatata said:
The problem is I think way too many people who start these types of threads, deep down in dark places in their souls, hope that Disney does the latter so they can continue with their Internet forum rants of "Disney stinks, blah blah, money grab, blah blah, Disney world was better in the 50s blah blah" crap.
Click to expand...
What flavor Kool Aid do you have today?
 
DManRightHere

DManRightHere

Well-Known Member
At least it's something. There will be a star wars land. At least avatar is something to look forward to. It could be awesomely done, but there better be more movies in the making. The whole avatar land announcement did seem like an attempted jab at harry potter land.
 
Club Cooloholic

Club Cooloholic

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
hakunamatata said:
I'm sure it's the same flavor that you have of hateorade.
Click to expand...
Hey I do not hate the mouse, I am going to Disneyland this spring, to go with 2 visits to WDW in the past year alone, so love it really. I just think backing a weak film franchise is strange. Its not one ride its a whole land! Whats next, National Treasure ville?
 

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

Back
Top Bottom