Doubting Avatar

Captain Chaos

Captain Chaos

Well-Known Member
Pixiedustmaker said:
Shanghai Disneyland is supposed to open in late 2015. The company will own 43% of the resort, so in terms of financial investment it will be more like Hong Kong Disneyland, and if it opens with few rides and/or the Chinese economy takes a nosedive, then the Mouse will be scrambling to make sure it doesn't turn into a financial disaster, like EuroDisney was until relatively recently, and how Hong Kong Disneyland is getting a lot of new stuff. In other words, a couple years after it opens, the Mouse may need to shell out more $$$ to keep it afloat and/or add new attractions.

Hong Kong was supposed to do killer business as it would supposedly attract tourists by the boat load from China. I don' think that Chinese tourtists, or any type of tourists, are stupid, meaning that if they open Shanghai Disneyland with a lot of fancy landscaping, and few attractions, then it will have real problems.

Also, Iger will be stepping down in 2015 as CEO. He'll still be Chairman but he won't have a whole lot of power. It seems like an odd time to quit, right in the middle of construction of your "pet project".

If Avatar 2 isn't coming out until 2016, with Avatar 3 on the way, why not wait until 2016 to decide on making this land?

Avatar was a good film, but like E.T., where exactly would a sequel go? The paralyzed marine guy is now a blue person, I guess the military will come back and hunt him under the ocean as payback? Or maybe they'll try to rip out the mineral like before? At some point it is going to get pretty derivative. This isn't Star Wars, there isn't some nebulous emperor and a Darth Vader walking around, there isn't some big mystery like the force, its more of a Star Trek episode where a crew member sides with the local natives over Star Fleet. Not much of an ongoing story. Plus, will the man character be the blue guy the marine became? If so, its harder to relate to CG characters than humans. Though I liked Avatar, I'm not really interested in seeing a sequel as its feel that the story ended.

I still don't get why Disney is pushing a non-Disney franchise which could take business away from whatever Disney film is in theaters when Avatar 2 comes out. And like people have said, who is going to buy a plush blue-guy/girl? The characters aren't lovable like in Disney films, maybe they could make a Sigourney Weaver action figurer with a fake cigarette that lits up and spews smoke and makes crabby remarks. The Godfather was also a big franchise, but you don't see anybody talking about making a Godfather-land with Italian restaurants, drive-by shootings, and a mob-land boat ride through the underworld.

Avatar-land is dead.
Long-live Avengers-land.
Click to expand...

So the argument that Disney will pull out of Avatar and stop all construction if Avatar 2 bombs is even more silly since Avatar 2 is coming out in 2016... When, coincidentally, is the projected date of the opening of the land in DAK... Now, if someone wants to say they will hold off on construction until after Avatar 2 comes out in theaters, then it bombs, and they back out, that I can agree to.. But to say they will just stop construction when the land would be nearly done, I think, is silly...

I don't think anyone has disagreed that this was a knee jerk reaction and they should have waited until Avatar 2... But they didn't...

And who really knows what the sequel will be about... Only Cameron knows where the sequel would go... It is his creation, I'm sure he knows where he wants to go with it...
 
Taylor

Taylor

Well-Known Member
I didn't like Avatar but I'm not going to let my thoughts of the movie cloud my judgement of avatar land if it is amazing and immersive I will love it
 
PirateFrank

PirateFrank

Well-Known Member
dxer07002 said:
So the argument that Disney will pull out of Avatar and stop all construction if Avatar 2 bombs is even more silly since Avatar 2 is coming out in 2016... When, coincidentally, is the projected date of the opening of the land in DAK... Now, if someone wants to say they will hold off on construction until after Avatar 2 comes out in theaters, then it bombs, and they back out, that I can agree to.. But to say they will just stop construction when the land would be nearly done, I think, is silly...

I don't think anyone has disagreed that this was a knee jerk reaction and they should have waited until Avatar 2... But they didn't...

And who really knows what the sequel will be about... Only Cameron knows where the sequel would go... It is his creation, I'm sure he knows where he wants to go with it...
Click to expand...


You seem to conveniently forget in this whole equation, that Disney hasn't even released art for this and when pressed, this CEO clearly doesn't want to talk about the project. Moreover, you're assuming this project starts as promised, in 2013....The idea that they might not break ground until late 2014 is a very real possibility.

We know you have this cameron-love thing going on....but seriously, there's nothing but a bunch of hubris being floated by the principals, if floated at all. Until someone successfully moves the Festival of the Lion King, demos the original, clears the land, files the permits, and shows the public some art.....this is all pie in the sky.

3 months ago, this project was on deaths door. 3 months from now, it can just as easily be in a coma.
 
T

twebber55

Well-Known Member
i just get a sneaky feeling that the guy with the 2 highest grossing films of all time may be able to pull off avatar 2 making it a hit...seeing how he has now dedicated the rest of his career to the avatar experience
 
HenryMystic

HenryMystic

Well-Known Member
PirateFrank said:
You seem to conveniently forget in this whole equation, that Disney hasn't even released art for this and when pressed, this CEO clearly doesn't want to talk about the project. Moreover, you're assuming this project starts as promised, in 2013....The idea that they might not break ground until late 2014 is a very real possibility.

We know you have this cameron-love thing going on....but seriously, there's nothing but a bunch of hubris being floated by the principals, if floated at all. Until someone successfully moves the Festival of the Lion King, demos the original, clears the land, files the permits, and shows the public some art.....this is all pie in the sky.

3 months ago, this project was on deaths door. 3 months from now, it can just as easily be in a coma.
Click to expand...
The budget has allegedly ballooned to twice that of Cars Land. No way that happens.
 
Taylor

Taylor

Well-Known Member
There's alot of pros and alot of cons with Cameron being involved in anything he does. Pro you usually get a visually stunning product. The cons his budgets usually go through the roof and it takes forever for the product to be finished
 
PirateFrank

PirateFrank

Well-Known Member
HenryMystic said:
The budget has allegedly ballooned to twice that of Cars Land. No way that happens.
Click to expand...

It just makes it a bigger target for budget cuts. The bigger they are...the harder they fall.

I'll believe it all when there's blue people flying around on dragons where there used to be meet and greets. Disney has announced and sumarily canceled far too many projects with much more art and certainty....
 
Taylor

Taylor

Well-Known Member
Ok I'm a little confused are they saying the budget could be a billion or two billion which is twice then cars land. Or is this a useless rumor
 
Mike K

Mike K

Active Member
I do find it hard to believe that Disney is going to go along with an Avatar expansion that has a $1 billion price tag attached to it. I did enjoy the film and believe James Cameron is one of the greatest visionaries working in Hollywood so there's no doubt that having his involvement in the project would lend itself to an experience guests wouldn't soon forget. Although, spending $1 billion on Avatarland seems much riskier for Disney than investing that money into a park based on a film they themselves created. Since its opening in 2006, Cars has generated roughly $10 billion dollars in merchandise sales alone which certainly speaks volumes for how lucrative the franchise has been and will continue to be for Disney. Avatar, while currently still prepping two sequels, remains the highest grossing box-office film of all time but it still is a franchise that seems unproven when compared to figures like Cars. It's definitely a much stickier situation than just passively writing Avatar off simply because you may have not thought the movie was great. A land based on the film, as well as the sequels that we have no idea where Cameron will take us to visually, certainly will give guests an immersive, thrilling experience, I have no doubt about it. But, one also has to wonder about what kind of negotiations Cameron and his team must be attempting to make in regards to how much profit they will reap from things like merchandise in the park, etc? I can't imagine that Cameron is going to allow himself to get swindled out of a lower cut of sales especially when an entire land of park is based on his own creation. With the budget continuing to mount, I have to wonder if things like these will also end up being the deal breaker for Disney in the long run.
 
T

twebber55

Well-Known Member
Mike K said:
I do find it hard to believe that Disney is going to go along with an Avatar expansion that has a $1 billion price tag attached to it. I did enjoy the film and believe James Cameron is one of the greatest visionaries working in Hollywood so there's no doubt that having his involvement in the project would lend itself to an experience guests wouldn't soon forget. Although, spending $1 billion on Avatarland seems much riskier for Disney than investing that money into a park based on a film they themselves created. Since its opening in 2006, Cars has generated roughly $10 billion dollars in merchandise sales alone which certainly speaks volumes for how lucrative the franchise has been and will continue to be for Disney. Avatar, while currently still prepping two sequels, remains the highest grossing box-office film of all time but it still is a franchise that seems unproven when compared to figures like Cars. It's definitely a much stickier situation than just passively writing Avatar off simply because you may have not thought the movie was great. A land based on the film, as well as the sequels that we have no idea where Cameron will take us to visually, certainly will give guests an immersive, thrilling experience, I have no doubt about it. But, one also has to wonder about what kind of negotiations Cameron and his team must be attempting to make in regards to how much profit they will reap from things like merchandise in the park, etc? I can't imagine that Cameron is going to allow himself to get swindled out of a lower cut of sales especially when an entire land of park is based on his own creation. With the budget continuing to mount, I have to wonder if things like these will also end up being the deal breaker for Disney in the long run.
Click to expand...
I agree Mike and what i find strange is Cameron going for a reduced land...seems like he s the type of guy that wants to do things right...an example of this is the release of avatar 2 being pushed back a year (2016) to make sure he gets it right
 
Taylor

Taylor

Well-Known Member
Mike K said:
I do find it hard to believe that Disney is going to go along with an Avatar expansion that has a $1 billion price tag attached to it. I did enjoy the film and believe James Cameron is one of the greatest visionaries working in Hollywood so there's no doubt that having his involvement in the project would lend itself to an experience guests wouldn't soon forget. Although, spending $1 billion on Avatarland seems much riskier for Disney than investing that money into a park based on a film they themselves created. Since its opening in 2006, Cars has generated roughly $10 billion dollars in merchandise sales alone which certainly speaks volumes for how lucrative the franchise has been and will continue to be for Disney. Avatar, while currently still prepping two sequels, remains the highest grossing box-office film of all time but it still is a franchise that seems unproven when compared to figures like Cars. It's definitely a much stickier situation than just passively writing Avatar off simply because you may have not thought the movie was great. A land based on the film, as well as the sequels that we have no idea where Cameron will take us to visually, certainly will give guests an immersive, thrilling experience, I have no doubt about it. But, one also has to wonder about what kind of negotiations Cameron and his team must be attempting to make in regards to how much profit they will reap from things like merchandise in the park, etc? I can't imagine that Cameron is going to allow himself to get swindled out of a lower cut of sales especially when an entire land of park is based on his own creation. With the budget continuing to mount, I have to wonder if things like these will also end up being the deal breaker for Disney in the long run.
Click to expand...
I wonder if done right if avatar land could be profitable based on added attendance to the park alone. That is if the bigger budget is true
 

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

Back
Top Bottom