For a land most originally said they weren't interested in ................

[disney4life2008]

But the question has never been will normal people enjoy it when they're their, it has always been will normal people plan trips to WDW specifically to experience Pandora - that's where the movies cultural footprint has always been an issue, and it still remains an open question.

That is a good question. Unlike disneyworld as a whole, i severely doubt it. But it is part of the experience so people will flock regardless. Unlike Harry Potter, i know people that specifically traveled to Universal for that land. Not anything against pandora, but i still remain it was a horrible investment

 

[twebber55]

There's no argument. These were hand picked to be pro-Disney and obedient with what they put out there.

craig williams disagrees with this post

 

[Rteetz]

craig williams disagrees with this post

Yep, he's very pro Universal for anything in Orlando and even said Universal might have to directly answer to this.

 

[Clancy Wiggum]

Forget the movie. The story and acting were below average, IMO. But it's not about Avatar and never has been. If it was about a movie, Disney could have picked any number of things they did not need to license from someone else.

It was always about Pandora, a visually stunning make-believe ecosystem that was completely unique. If done right. that was always a perfect fit for a theme park, especially so for DAK. Based on the videos I have seen from previews of the land, I think Disney did do it right. It looks like they built two new lands on one plot of ground. Nighttime Pandora and daytime Pandora look like different experiences. It that turns out to be the case, the DAK will no longer be seen as a 1/2 day park. And that will be how Disney defines success, IMO.

 

[disney4life2008]

Forget the movie. The story and acting were below average, IMO. But it's not about Avatar and never has been. If it was about a movie, Disney could have picked any number of things they did not need to license from someone else.

It was always about Pandora, a visually stunning make-believe ecosystem that was completely unique. If done right. that was always a perfect fit for a theme park, especially so for DAK. Based on the videos I have seen from previews of the land, I think Disney did do it right. It looks like they built two new lands on one plot of ground. Nighttime Pandora and daytime Pandora look like different experiences. It that turns out to be the case, the DAK will no longer be seen as a 1/2 day park. And that will be how Disney defines success, IMO.

Disagree. Lights on the ground and plants that glow is not groundbreaking. Sorry

Unfortunately, what will make ak a full day park now is the horrible ques they have built. You will easily have 120 or more wait for either attractiion.

 

[mergatroid]

Disagree. Lights on the ground and plants that glow is not groundbreaking. Sorry

Unfortunately, what will make ak a full day park now is the horrible ques they have built. You will easily have 120 or more wait for either attractiion.

So the popularity of an attraction is now being used as a negative? When Uni open rides they have the same issue, WWoHP had 5 hour queues originally. Of course you could always use fastpass+ (free at Disney) or even get to the park before it opens? I understand your point that it will be crazy initially, however back in the 70's/80's Space Mountain often had queues in excess of 120 minutes as did other attractions.

 

[Horizons1]

Pandora is being overhyped. I'm sure it's nice and will be fun, but disney is hoping for a Harry Potter style reaction. The media that was allowed in were all bloggers and lifestylers that would lick Disney's shoe no matter what they stepped in.

 

[twebber55]

Pandora is being overhyped. I'm sure it's nice and will be fun, but disney is hoping for a Harry Potter style reaction. The media that was allowed in were all bloggers and lifestylers that would lick Disney's shoe no matter what they stepped in.

for the record the Orlando Sentinel and the LA Times were there as well

 

[disney4life2008]

for the record the Orlando Sentinel and the LA Times were there as well

Lol and those aren't bias?

Point me to anything negative from this past weekend.

 

[disney4life2008]

Regardless people will flock to pandora because its a disneyworld. If you put this at sea world, doubtful. Even universal, somewhat doubtful.

 

[twebber55]

Lol and those aren't bias?

Point me to anything negative from this past weekend.

LA Times LOL no

 

[jt04]

Lol and those aren't bias?

Point me to anything negative from this past weekend.

Maybe they saw no negatives.

 

[twebber55]

Maybe they saw no negatives.

im now convinced people here a certain narrative they want to follow even though logic and facts say something else just keep plugging away
"Disney bloggers say only good things about disney"
Fact Craig williams has ripped this project for years yet was there Saturday

 

[wdisney9000]

for the record the Orlando Sentinel and the LA Times were there as well

Any major media outlet has their marching orders about how to report the "news". It is all scripted.

 

[wdisney9000]

The boys at The DIS can be scathingly critical of Disney. But they also praise a lot of stuff. They're neither haters nor pixie-dusters.

Controlled opposition. Nothing more.

 

[twebber55]

Any major media outlet has their marching orders about how to report the "news". It is all scripted.

look i think you and i agree politically if i remember
but i dont think for a second that Craig Williams at the dis or this guy at the LA Times are given marching orders to do so questions the integrity of Craig who is a good guy

 

[disney4life2008]

LA Times LOL no

Maybe they saw no negatives.

Disney had media observere in full force Saturday. If you think for a second they would allow anything negative you are mistaken. I don't care how much in the past someone has negatively reviewed something, if you have press credentials and knowing that Disney is following your every move, yoy really think they will post something bad? No!

Yes, the reviews are overwhelming positive but to me that is not saying much.

 

[mergatroid]

So let me see if I've got this correct?

If Pandora gets any good reviews it's only because those doing the reviews are 100% always behind Disney?

However if the above is challenged with examples of that been given, this is ignored and the original statement that "Those doing the reviews are 100% always behind Disney" still stands?

Failing the above, if any media outlet gives a good review of Pandora it's because the news outlet is scripted and they're told what to say?

Seems it's kind of loaded into making sure that those who don't like the new park have a way of making any positive review as being meaningless

 

[Rteetz]

Disney had media observere in full force Saturday. If you think for a second they would allow anything negative you are mistaken. I don't care how much in the past someone has negatively reviewed something, if you have press credentials and knowing that Disney is following your every move, yoy really think they will post something bad? No!

Yes, the reviews are overwhelming positive but to me that is not saying much.

Craig put this in the same realm as opening day of diagon alley and the official Disneyland 60 anniversary. He wasn't forced by Disney to say that.

 

[disney4life2008]

Craig put this in the same realm as opening day of diagon alley and the official Disneyland 60 anniversary. He wasn't forced by Disney to say that.

Still not buying it. These people will do everything they can to ensure their credentials are not cut.

I worked briefly in public relations. We specifically eliminated people that had anything bad to say about the company.