Avatar Land...think Disney regrets the idea?

[stevehousse]

I do not think Disney regrets avatar land at all! I think it was a poor choice of marketing to announce this expansion so early on! That's the big mistake right there! They should have announced it just before construction was to begin. The lack of news on avatar since it was announced just goes to show that they were quick to announce a "potter swatter" type land, with no general plans in place. I think if they had waited it out and announced it further out, with lots of those details layed out for the general public, there wouldn't be so much questioning if this is a good or bad idea.

 

[rt06]

How can Avatar Land not fit in with AK? The inspiration for Pandora was Zhangjiajie National Forest Park, after all.

Disney has years to create the premier thrill ride in FL. 2017, is it? If I hear "Soarin through Pandora," Disney will not get my money.

 

[FettFan]

Avatar Land...think Disney regrets the idea?

No. And here's why: Avatar Land is a foot in the door to bigger and better and beastlier things. Once the Avatards lose interest in their little fad movie, Joe Rohde will have the infrastructure in place to quickly convert the land to Beastly Kingdom.

At least that's what I'm hoping.

 

[FettFan]

How can Avatar Land not fit in with AK?

1. Aliens
2. Space Marines
3. Mech suits

If anything it would belong at DHS. Avatar Movie Set Adventure or some crap.

 

[rt06]

I do not think Disney regrets avatar land at all! I think it was a poor choice of marketing to announce this expansion so early on! That's the big mistake right there! They should have announced it just before construction was to begin. The lack of news on avatar since it was announced just goes to show that they were quick to announce a "potter swatter" type land, with no general plans in place. I think if they had waited it out and announced it further out, with lots of those details layed out for the general public, there wouldn't be so much questioning if this is a good or bad idea.

A project of this scope cannot begin with 100% proof of concept. It would never get off the ground.

It's the same with FP+. People want to know why Disney doesn't work out the kinks before the public gets their hands on it.

The best laid schemes of mice and men...

 

[Club Cooloholic]

Beastly Kingdom should have been the direction, make movies based on the rides!

 

[DManRightHere]

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?

Before ranting on too much about a weak franchise, there is at least 1 more film coming and 2 others planned.

I'm not a fan about Disney taking up Avatar either, but who knows, it could be very good.

 

[FLmom]

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.

Mid 30's here with a 10 yr old and an 18 yr old never, I too never saw the movie and never even bothered to try to see the movie. No one in my family is at all interested in Avatar land, my 10 yr old was like "What is that and why is it going into Animal Kingdom?" which is her favorite park to go visit. She does however wish they would totally revamp Dinoland and has even done some amazing drawings of concepts she has thought up for the area...LOL.

 

[Tomi-Rocket]

Quite frankly, I never understood the partnership. Star Wars is a franchise and Avatar is a one movie hit so far. I know they are in the process of making movies 2 and 3 but what if they flop? It boggled my brain when I heard about Avatarland, it simply does not make any sense. Maybe Mr. Cameron has some salacious dirt on the CEO or something. Or maybe they were all super high when they made the decision. Who knows, but I doubt, years from now, kids will have any idea what movie that land is from.

 

[R W B]

I liked Avatar and plan to go watch the sequels too. But I also think if the land is built correctly and Disney doesn't cheap out like they always do then the land will speak for itself and you won't have to like the movie in order to like the land.

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."

Splash mountain is based off a movie? Didn't know that one.

 

[Disneydreamer23]

Honestly, I never seen Avatar even though my mom said I should I just don't think I will get into the movie I think they could have opened some thing else in place of avatar land truth is alot of people know STAR WARS or PRINCESSES ETC but I can name at least 20 people who have never even heard of avatar

 

[Gomer]

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.

I didn't say everyone in that demographic loved it. But it has mainstream exposure within the majority of casual film goers. 2.7 billion in tickets worldwide means many people did in fact see it.

When it came out, people who don't normally talk about movies were talking up Avatar. People like my mother who never goes to movies, my boss who sees only romantic comedies, and my father in law who never watches anything he can't get "on demand" were telling me I had to go see it and making a point to get to a theater to see it. These are people that were drawn to see Avatar because of the cultural event that it was at the time. And those people might be drawn to check out Avatarland while on vacation.

No declarations on quality here. I like the movie enough, but don't love it. But, those people I'm referring to don't care about Harry Potter, super heroes, and Star Wars, but they know what Avatar is and broke their own routine to see it in a theater. I just don't think these people frequent message boards.

 

[FettFan]

Beastly Kingdom should have been the direction, make movies based on the rides!

I think the timing was off--Universal built Harry Potter faster than TDO could approve Beastly Kingdom.

And while the Uber-Mousenerds like us wdwmagic users would know that BK concepts existed since the mid-90s, Joe Q. Public who only visits Orlando every few years would think that Disney was actually trying to copy Potters success.

So TDO went another way completely, which in essence means they accidentally copied Universal anyway, by bringing in a blockbuster movie to a park it only loosely fits in.
(The Harry Potter films are owned by Warner Brothers....so really HP should have been built at Six Flags...)

EDIT -- wait no. Just googled. Warner Bros sold Six Flags to Premeire Parks. Six Flags maintains theme park rights to properties before the sale (DC Comics and Looney Tunes)
Harry Potter was fair game since he came along after the sale. Uni snatched him up in partnership with WB.

 

[Club Cooloholic]

I think the timing was off--Universal built Harry Potter faster than TDO could approve Beastly Kingdom.

And while the Uber-Mousenerds like us wdwmagic users would know that BK concepts existed since the mid-90s, Joe Q. Public who only visits Orlando every few years would think that Disney was actually trying to copy Potters success.

So TDO went another way completely, which in essence means they accidentally copied Universal anyway, by bringing in a blockbuster movie to a park it only loosely fits in.
(The Harry Potter films are owned by Warner Brothers....so really HP should have been built at Six Flags...)

EDIT -- wait no. Just googled. Warner Bros sold Six Flags to Premeire Parks. Six Flags maintains theme park rights to properties before the sale (DC Comics and Looney Tunes)
Harry Potter was fair game since he came along after the sale. Uni snatched him up in partnership with WB.

I wonder why Lord of The Rings has not been snatched up?

 

[Mouse Trap]

I see a lot of people stating they can't stand the movie, didn't think it was that great, etc...

This land has nothing to do with the plot or story of the movie and 100% to do with the world James Cameron created. The movie was a masterpiece to the eyes and it was to the tune of more than 2 billion.

Anyways, anyone ever notice the dragon on the Animal Kingdom logo? Anyone ever encounter anything magical, whimsical and fantastical like a dragon at AK? Not really... The Avatar addition is going to bring something fun, exciting and magical to AK thay it was lacking before and make it a park worth staying for a day, rather than one people skip over, or cram into a day they split with something else. Wether the movie was good or not, it'll bring in a crowd because it is exciting and different, as well as familiar.

 

[wdwfan4ver]

I wonder why Lord of The Rings has not been snatched up?

I think it has to do with the Tolkien family.

I know that J.R.R. Tolkien didn't want to work with Disney back when he was alive and his heirs are respecting that request. I also read Christopher Tolkien doesn't like Peter Jackson's films on his dad's works. The last I heard is the Tolkien family doesn't want lord of the Rings to be turned into a theme park attraction.

 

[Mouse Trap]

I wonder why Lord of The Rings has not been snatched up?

The ownership around LOTR is very complicated and very uptight from what I understand. The rights aren't signed off very easily as opposed to most other franchises.

That being said LOTR and Star Wars have stood the test of time, something Potter has not yet proven, which make them major franchises to be put into a theme park. If Disney were somehow to acquire the rights to LOTR and incorporate both into their parks, I wouldnt be able to visit for years due to crowds.

 

[cw1982]

To my way of thinking, Star Wars would fit better at HS... heck, they already do SW weekends there, so it would make sense. I think Avatar is a good fit for AK. The only other theme I can think of right now that might work would be something oceanic... maybe a Nemo-themed land? I know they already have a Nemo ride at Epcot, but The Little Mermaid is represented at more than one park and no one complains about that.

 

[Mouse Trap]

I think it has to do with the Tolkien family.

I know that J.R.R. Tolkien didn't want to work with Disney back when he was alive and his heirs are respecting that request. I also read Christopher Tolkien doesn't like Peter Jackson's films on his dad's works. The last I heard is the Tolkien family doesn't want lord of the Rings to be turned into a theme park attraction.

Chris Tolkien accused Peter Jackson of skinning LOTR for all its worth. Very odd given the fact that he contributed a fair amount to commentarys and extras for the original trilogy. I do not really understand his comments as they were made around the time the original trilogy was released. Now for The Hobbit I totally understand...

Disney would have to make a MASSIVE offer for LOTR, and frankily it may not be worth their time and money given how the parks account for their total revenues compared to everything else.

 

[FettFan]

I wonder why Lord of The Rings has not been snatched up?

Tolkein's kids hate Peter Jackson.