My post was strictly to ask why the doubt? Any posts stating Avatar will not happen are from members who might be in the know - though this doesn't make it officical, at least not as official as the actual news releases posted on the site.
Since day one there have been things announced that never happened, "Western River Expedition" was announced in 1969, and promoted inside the Magic Kingdom until the late 70's, but that never came to be. So just because they design and announce something isn't any guarantee that it will actually be built, in fact this web site is dedicated to Disney attractions that never happened http://www.theneverlandfiles.com/tnf/
My only complaint about Avatar land is its location, it's seems to me that an attraction based on a movie should be in the park themed around the movies, and not the park themed around animals ...like? there still called "theme" parks right? and I don't mind "Bug's Life" "Lion King" and "Nemo" at AK because they are "Disney" movies, about "animals" at "Disney's Animal Kingdom" it all kind of fits together nicely
I think Avatar has a lot of potential, I'm just not 100% sure what that potential is, but if you told me 25 years ago the they were going to build an elevator ride to the Twilight Zone I would have thought you were crazy, but that worked out pretty well ...at the Hollywood movie park
But to me Avatar at Animal Kingdom is like Nemo at Epcot, "The Seas with Nemo" is very well done, but it really doesn't jive with the "Future World" theme like "Sea Base Alpha" did, and it seems really out of place to me. If they're only m.o. is to raise attendance at Animal Kingdom, than they should convince the Pixar guys to do a movie about mythological creatures, then you'll get your Beastly Kingdom and every one will be happy ...right?
I think a lot of the people on here have learned over the years that this is one of the best places to get accurate information about what is happening at WDW. Mostly thanks to the insiders who post here. A lot of news/rumors appear here way before they are officially announced. So going by what is officially being said might often not give you the most accurate picture.
Just think of how Disney claimed not to know anything about that substantial building that was beind built next to the Contemporary a few years back. Everyone here knew that it was going to be DVC units - I think even the name might have already been common knowledge here - when Disney was still claiming that they knew nothing about all the steel and concrete there.
Also, the whole Avatar doubting did get a new perspective with this thread: Say.... What if Avatarland got cancelled? If you look at the OP's posting history he appears to be someone who really knows his/her stuff. A few of the other knowledgeable posters confirmed that they were hearing similar things from their sources.
However, it has to be said that the OP came back and was being more optimistic about Avatarland happening in this post: Avatar's arrival ...
So - nothing has been proven, but I think there has been enough reason to doubt Avatarland. Remember, to doubt does not mean that the opposite has been proven true with evidence. It is after all more of an emotion.
1. One of the characters smoked in the film, this little controversy will come-up as Disney wants Avatarland to appeal to families, and the film itself doesn't promote the Disney image. Some have compared it to Song of the South underpinning Splash mountain, though Avatarland is much more specific. Disney will have an issue when nine year olds go to "Avatarland" and then demand to see the film, which the parents may not let them watch.
2. Avatar was basically a Star Wars type film with military-style violence, and strange alien creatures. Avatarland would sort of be like building "Wookieland" as the gung-ho violence will be taken out as that doesn't fit in AK, maybe in DHS, but its really a Universal type attraction if it had that.
3. Avatar is not a Disney property, advertising and building a land for James Cameron doesn't help Disney in the film business, and makes the feature film side of Disney look weak. Star Wars, was in my opinion different as Star Tours is not a whole land, and Star Wars Universe is bigger as the films go to a lot of different places in the Star Wars Universe.
I personally wouldn't mind if Avatar Land winds up not happening. I thought the movie was okay at best, especially when you take away all of its fancy and cutting-edge special effects. Without all of that, I found it to be rather boring and unusually similar to Pocahontas, minus the mass genocide of the Na'vi and all of the violence in general.
With that being said, having an entire area based on the film seems a little out-of-place in a Disney theme park, at least it does to me. I don't doubt that it would be beautiful to look at, especially if the area were to extend the park's hours. I could just imagine how beautiful everything would light up during the evening, but... I see little logic as to how it'd fit in with the general theme of the rest of the park: animals. If anything, Avatar was a word to the wise about nature. I think that sort of thing would have fit better in Epcot, if that were the case, but even if it were to relocate in Epcot, it'd still be one massive leap over the metaphorical shark. Yes, it featured a few mythical animals, but they weren't a primarily huge part of the movie, I thought (then again, I've only seen the film twice, neither of which were very recent, so I could be wrong).
Also, I'm concerned about the possibility of WDI building a replica of Hometree. I don't doubt that it'd be gorgeous, but... I don't want it to outshine the current icon of the entire park, the Tree of Life. There's also been buzz about them including a nighttime show quite similar to the other three parks, if this area were built. Wasn't the whole point of closing Animal Kingdom early was to not frighten or scare the animals with nighttime entertainment?
Berate me all you'd like, but this is the first time I've never liked something that WDI had in the works. I'm sorry if I've upset anybody because of my lack of excitement.
Rohde is largely doing the "corporate thing".I was somewhat of the same mind until I saw how happy Joe Rhode was about the project. Was he just doing the corporate thing or does he sincerely think avatar is a good fit for 'his' parkl.
Rohde is largely doing the "corporate thing".
He of course knows that DAK needs further development, and is certainly glad to see a large project get sent his way, but Avatar wasn't at the top of his wish list.
Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.