The Disney Kid
Well-Known Member
You should really read the Garrett P.I. series by Glen Cook. It will be right up your alley!
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Avatar Land...think Disney regrets the idea?
- Thread starter Club Cooloholic
- Start date
You should really read the Garrett P.I. series by Glen Cook. It will be right up your alley!
dreynolds1982
Active Member
No, I don't think they regret it at all. The choice of the Avatar IP was not really about the movie itself (IMO), it was about the visuals, the innovation and most of all the highly detailed and elaborate world that Cameron and crew created. I saw Avatar in the theaters, twice, and did not go see it for the story in the least bit. I mean the story was serviceable, but cliche. The visuals were amazing however. To this day, years later, Avatar is still the best use of 3D I've seen in a movie. And I'd imagine the new avatar films planned for later this decade will be equally as visually stunning.
Look at Tower of Terror, for example. It is based on an IP (Twilight Zone) that most, if not all, young people have never seen or heard of, or if they have, know probably nothing about it. But the IP isn't what makes the ride. The incredible detail, theming, SFX and, of course, the thrills, are what make ToT one of, if not the, headliner ride at WDW. Same with RnRc. Yes, Aerosmith is big, but somehow I doubt many of today's youth connect much to them or know their music well. But the ride is awesome, so people ride it.
If they do Avatar right, it won't matter if people liked the movie, know about the movie, etc. It will stand on its own. At the end of the day, the IP isn't what makes an attraction or land a classic, it is what's put into that attraction or themed land.
Look at Tower of Terror, for example. It is based on an IP (Twilight Zone) that most, if not all, young people have never seen or heard of, or if they have, know probably nothing about it. But the IP isn't what makes the ride. The incredible detail, theming, SFX and, of course, the thrills, are what make ToT one of, if not the, headliner ride at WDW. Same with RnRc. Yes, Aerosmith is big, but somehow I doubt many of today's youth connect much to them or know their music well. But the ride is awesome, so people ride it.
If they do Avatar right, it won't matter if people liked the movie, know about the movie, etc. It will stand on its own. At the end of the day, the IP isn't what makes an attraction or land a classic, it is what's put into that attraction or themed land.
flyerjab
Well-Known Member
Wish I could like this 1000 times. I am sticking to my guns that this IP is going to offer something that guests won't be able to experience at the other Orlando parks (UNI included). This land is going to be amazing after the sun goes down. A world that comes to life with bioluminescence lighting up the night sky beneath mountains floating way up above? I think this land, with the new nighttime show on the River of Life, is just what WDW needs to help draw some people out of the MK at night.
whiterhino42
Active Member
I'm actually really excited about this land and I didn't love the movie. The story was kind of lame but the "world" of Pandora was amazing. If Disney does this right, it could be the coolest world in any theme park.
Nick Wilde
Well-Known Member
I love DA, don't get me wrong, but I think Avatarland will surpass DA, IMO. I like rides in a theme park, not shops. If this is gonna have two rides and a bio lum forest "experience," it will make DA seem dead in the water. TO ME. Maybe not to others, but I'm very excited for this.
FoozieBear
Well-Known Member
Re-bumping this thread becuase of this great article on Forbes.com about how Avatar grossed to be the biggest film of all time, but left to pop culture footprint anywhere. It speaks very much about how they failed in becoming a cultural landmark, and really just became "that movie that made a lot of money".
Full article: http://www.forbes.com/sites/scottme...-time-while-leaving-no-pop-culture-footprint/
I still think Avatar Land was a bad idea (really? There weren't any other franchises that you can pull from?) Unlike other franchises which Disney could have used (Star Wars for example) would have a built in fan base. To be honest, I have never heard of a die-hard Avatar fan, or even a fanbase for that movie. Their only hope is that audiences would be interested in returning for the three sequels if they want to draw people into the park, but seeing as it's a seven year difference between the original and the sequel, I don't think it will gross nearly that much.
Full article: http://www.forbes.com/sites/scottme...-time-while-leaving-no-pop-culture-footprint/
I still think Avatar Land was a bad idea (really? There weren't any other franchises that you can pull from?) Unlike other franchises which Disney could have used (Star Wars for example) would have a built in fan base. To be honest, I have never heard of a die-hard Avatar fan, or even a fanbase for that movie. Their only hope is that audiences would be interested in returning for the three sequels if they want to draw people into the park, but seeing as it's a seven year difference between the original and the sequel, I don't think it will gross nearly that much.
Last edited:
Mouse Trap
Well-Known Member
This is something we've been going back and fourth relentlessly for years now. Truth is we won't know at all until it actually opens. But I'll tell you one thing for sure, if the theming is executed as well as it is in the movie people will flock to this attraction. No matter where it is in Central Florida new attractions have typically always brought in a crowd.
flyerjab
Well-Known Member
Could not agree more with this statement. I think that WDW has one specific thing going for it right off the bat with this project. With Pandora, as well as the changes to the rest of DAK, it will finally allow the masses to enjoy this park at night on a regular basis. DAK is still the most immersive Orlando Park, both WDW and non-WDW, in my opinion. It is pure eye candy as you walk through it. Now imagine the entire park at night when it is dark - walking down the lit paths beneath the trees at night should be beautiful. I also am assuming that the Tree of Life might be lit up at night now as well. I think that people will go for this alone. One other thing is that it won't be nearly as hot as it typically is in this park for some reason. I definitely find this park to be the hottest of the 4 WDW theme parks.
Now add Pandora to this. A fully immersive expansion with floating mountains, a boat ride through a bioluminescent forest, and the rest of the land itself. It creates a truly unique experience within an already beautifully themed park.
I don't think Disney regrets this decision one bit.
Incomudro
Well-Known Member
Yes, I think that the proverbial lightbulb went off over the head of WDW when Avatar came out.
If you're looking for a theme to recreate in a park, what could be a better choice than one that offered the over the top visuals that Avatar offered?
It's practically tailor made for a theme park.
Yes, it's cliche'd as can be, but its enviro message suites AK perfectly - and remember - AK was going to have a fantasy animal section, just note that dragon on the sign.
Additionally, when I saw some of the movie on tv the other day Jon Landau was on the channel, being interviewed between segments.
He was happily talking up the sequels to the film, and it's inclusion in AK.
If you're looking for a theme to recreate in a park, what could be a better choice than one that offered the over the top visuals that Avatar offered?
It's practically tailor made for a theme park.
Yes, it's cliche'd as can be, but its enviro message suites AK perfectly - and remember - AK was going to have a fantasy animal section, just note that dragon on the sign.
Additionally, when I saw some of the movie on tv the other day Jon Landau was on the channel, being interviewed between segments.
He was happily talking up the sequels to the film, and it's inclusion in AK.
MousekateerAsh
New Member
It's like Disney fully admitted they were scared of Uni and they had to open advatarland to compete with. Dumb move because now Uni knows they've shaken Disney up a bit (hope that makes sense)
I also agree with those saying we don't need lands backed by movies. I'll say it again, they could've put in a beastly kingdom
I also agree with those saying we don't need lands backed by movies. I'll say it again, they could've put in a beastly kingdom
do you ever notice Disney never mentions anything about universal? yeah me neither
this expansion is not just about avatar but its about keeping people in the park at night...and this expansion is a home run in that regard
Matt_Black
Well-Known Member
McDonald's doesn't mention the Whopper, after all. When you're on top, the best way to stay on top is to not remind people you're not the only game in town.
GoofGoof
Premium Member
The execs rarely mention it. I'm sure some of the creative people would very much like to compete head to head.
Where exactly did Disney make this full admission?
s8film40
Well-Known Member
I'm still not convinced Avatar land will actually happen. It's not set to open until a year after the movie comes out. It's as simple as a small delay in the project and then if the movie comes out and doesn't perform as well as they expect they can easily scrap the whole idea. They will then have conveniently some freshly cleared land they can reimagine something else for.
danlb_2000
Premium Member
If you scenario is true then someone better tell all the workers who are currently pouring tons of concrete and putting up tons of steel. Like it or not, this project is happening, no doubt about it at this point.
GoofGoof
Premium Member
Foundations are poured and vertical construction started. Whether you like the idea or not, it's happening. There is no wishing this away. The sequels could be flat out cancelled or flop really badly and the land will still open.
Starbucks