Cesar R M
Well-Known Member
not trying to be mean, but you really believe that the entire franchise health could be resumed by facebook likes?
-
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
not trying to be mean, but you really believe that the entire franchise health could be resumed by facebook likes?
of course not but that's one piece of the puzzle and that FACT means a lot more than joe schmoe saying "I don't know anyone that liked the movie"
those face book likes mean about as much as the comments on this board about not liking the movie
that's why I listed several FACTS about the movie
did you read the weather channel article? pretty interesting huh for a forgotten movie lol
to be honest I don't care if people do or do not like the movie that's their opinion but I don't see how anyone can compare the success of the land to the story of the movie when time and again people have given evidence that it really doesn't matter or people saying I wont go to DAK now because of Avatar
HatboxGhost
Well-Known Member
While recently at a friends house, they showed me some of Avatar on Blu-Ray which looked fantastic however the film itself did nothing for me. I watched a total of about 15 minutes and had no interest in continuing on. I think Disney can take the crappiest movie and make a wonderful ride out of it so I cant really say anything until the actual park opens. I would prefer them to sink their time and effort into a Star Wars land.
Cmdr_Crimson
Well-Known Member
Not if James Cameron came in and surprised The Imagineers..
my guess would be that none of the land for Pandora has anything to do with the first 15 minutes of the movie
CinematicFusion
Well-Known Member
No they don't regret it. Pandora is the perfect fit for Animal Kingdom. Pandora brings the fantasy to the park, fantasy world, fantasy animals. It completes the thought that beastly kingdom was supposed to do back in 1998.
Pandora is going to be a beautiful area to walk through and explore. I believe with Cameron's reputation on the line, he will make sure the rides are outstanding as well.
If we look at the detail Disney has put in new fantasyland and Carsland, then I think Pandora will be just as beautiful. At night, Pandora will be beautiful and will open up Animal Kingdom as an after dark park.
Expedition Everest would be fun to ride at night.
Pandora is going to be a beautiful area to walk through and explore. I believe with Cameron's reputation on the line, he will make sure the rides are outstanding as well.
If we look at the detail Disney has put in new fantasyland and Carsland, then I think Pandora will be just as beautiful. At night, Pandora will be beautiful and will open up Animal Kingdom as an after dark park.
Expedition Everest would be fun to ride at night.
DisneyFreak23
Active Member
AvatarLand reminds me of the funny SNL skit: Bad Idea Jeans
Rodan75
Well-Known Member
They jumped the gun in getting in bed with the man who has directed the two highest grossing movies in the last 30 years? While I get that Avatar isn't everyone's cup of nerd tea, let's not lose focus on the big goals. Cameron hasn't failed on a movie yet and building a relationship with him, while also building attractions in one of your least successful theme parks seems like smart business.
It could fail horribly, but it is a bet worth taking. It is pointless to try and fanboi argue Potter vs Avatar vs Star Wars...it is a fools gambit.
If I were Fox, I'd be worried. Disney is looking to profit off of three of their only franchises (FF,Xmen and now Avatar)
Rodan75
Well-Known Member
Pandora the Rides(s) will be dated within a few years, and the movies will be largely forgotten, since they're already pretty forgettable in the first place. The intelligent way to expand upon Animal Kingdom would have been to focus on the Lion King, the Jungle Book, and build that area for mythical creatures (historic, iconic mythical creatures, not Cameron's lame riffs) as was originally planned. Maybe Pandora could be re-tooled for a Fantasia area, complete with dragons, centaurs, unicorns and pegasuses (pegasi?) The merchandising alone for such an area could be fantastic. Have you guys ever noticed that the baby unicorns and pegasi (we'll go with that plural) in Fantasia look an awful lot like the My Little Pony characters? They're pastel-colored and multi-hued with big eyes and cute faces. Disney could sell a ton of plush based on them. As for Pandora...I don't think we'll see adorable plushes of the blue kitty cats anytime soon. Mostly because your average kid would consider that nightmare fuel.
I rarely agree with you, but I think you have a point here. It is simply a waste that DAK didn't capitalize more on Jungle Book and Lion King at DAK. But that doesn't stop nothing to do with Pandora.
Chef Mickey
Well-Known Member
Doesn't mean it will make a great themed attraction/land. It might do fine, but Avatar hasn't proven to be a lasting franchise.
My main point was that Disney doesn't NEED to get in bed with anyone or a quick movie tie in to make great lands, attractions, or both. Beastly Kingdom would be a great start.
Remember, many of the greatest attractions of all time have little or no movie tie. That's a new thing that isn't always bad, but usually seems to be the cheap or easier way out.
FrankLapidus
Well-Known Member
I couldn't care any less about Avatar but the park needs more than that anyway. Disney didn't need Avatar, they have an extensive library of stories and a history of creating brilliant and immersive original attractions, but Avatar should be the start of an extensive, long-term development of DAK; The Lion King and The Jungle Book should have a presence there (or more of a presence than a show that's been running for years), Dinoland is a mess, existing attractions at the park need attention.
The Avatar deal is symptomatic of a leadership with no creative vision, who prefer to simply buy, but in order to really start to solve the issues at DAK they will have to loosen the purse strings even further and place more trust in the creative minds they have in their employ.
The Avatar deal is symptomatic of a leadership with no creative vision, who prefer to simply buy, but in order to really start to solve the issues at DAK they will have to loosen the purse strings even further and place more trust in the creative minds they have in their employ.
GoofGoof
Premium Member
I agree with your last paragraph which completely invalidates the first one. If many great rides have little or no movie tie in then why would it matter if Avatar is a lasting franchise? If Avatar the movie fades completely from most people's memories but the rides and area in Avatarland are well done they will still be popular and it won't matter. It doesn't take a lasting franchise to make a ride great. See Splash Mountain.
Last edited:
The Disney Kid
Well-Known Member
Wait a minute! SNL did a funny skit?!? When did that happen? The 70's?
DisneyFreak23
Active Member
Close. I think it was in the 80s when the REAL guys were there (like Steve Martin).
Rodan75
Well-Known Member
I agree that they don't need to partner with Cameron to add an outside franchise to the parks, however in the bigger scheme of TWDC, this is a smart move. As long as Cameron is happy with Pandora, it will be at least moderately successful and TWDC will have partnered with one of the most successful directors of this generation. They have a bonus of putting Fox on their heals to protect the viability of one of their franchises ...again.
Under Iger TWDC has worked diligently to give content creators a positive view of TWDC, some thru purchase (Lucas, Lasseter, Perlmuter)and some thru partnership (Spielberg, Cameron) and don't forget all of the creative goodwill they have built thru the Marvel movies (Whedon, Favreau, Russo bros, etc).
Unfortunately the impact of the actual attraction is a bit of an afterthought.
Chef Mickey
Well-Known Member
My point was, Disney didn't need to jump on the avatar bandwagon to do something great. It probably won't matter bc disney does a great job regardless. I just wish they didn't feel the need to include the Avatar name especially since the lasting appeal isn't proven.
GoofGoof
Premium Member
Fair point. Disney didn't need to do an Avatar based land. They could have gone a lot of different directions or used something completely original. I think partnering with Cameron is a pretty smart move though. Before they bought Lucas Film they partnered with George Lucas to create Star Tours and the Indy attractions. Why not bring in a great creative mind to help build a new land?
Why I think the Cameron partnership is especially beneficial is his extensive knowledge and work with cutting edge film making (especially when it comes to 3D). With the exception of Soarin Disney has limited experience with screen based attractions. I think Cameron can bring his skills and experience with cutting edge digital film to create an even better ride experience than WDI could do alone. I guess Disney brought over the guy from Universal who is in charge of Star Wars projects now for WDI, but outside of him they are lacking in true screen/film based ride experts.
agree
Disney will hopefully do a great job on this (certainly on cars land level) and that will draw people, also the movie and Cameron (contrary to some on this board) will also be a draw
to me this idea of adding hours to the park makes this a home run idea, its not just about Pandora but all three new elements
well thought out