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

[No Name]

A Potter-level impact is different than Potter-level immersion. Some people don't seem to get that distinction.

This land may be just as immersive. But Potter changed many people's perception of Universal from a second-rate place to something in the same league as WDW. That's the Potter impact at its core. It was a huge rise in attendance, but moreso it was a huge rise in perception.

Since most average people still think of WDW as the top destination in Orlando, a first-rate place... I don't think there's room for Pandora to radically improve people's perception of WDW. That isn't Pandora's fault, just the different situation.

So it's not an insult or stab at Pandora to say that it will not have a Potter-level impact.

The boat ride looks pretty... pretty preachy! (Kidding...kinda.

How is the boat ride "preachy" at all?

 

[twebber55]

A Potter-level impact is different than Potter-level immersion. Some people don't seem to get that distinction.

This land may be just as immersive. But Potter changed many people's perception of Universal from a second-rate place to something in the same league as WDW. That's the Potter impact at its core. It was a huge rise in attendance, but moreso it was a huge rise in perception.

Since most average people still think of WDW as the top destination in Orlando, a first-rate place... I don't think there's room for Pandora to radically improve people's perception of WDW. That isn't Pandora's fault, just the different situation.

So it's not an insult or stab at Pandora to say that it will not have a Potter-level impact.



How is the boat ride "preachy" at all?

perfectly said

 

[Clancy Wiggum]

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

If you think it's just lights on the ground and plants that glow, it's not surprising that you're not all that thrilled by Pandora. Just like people that think Hogsmeade at IOA is some old run down buildings and a castle would likely not be impressed by what Universal did. Both definitions may be accurate to some but certainly fall far short of the intentions of the people that designed those lands.

Beginning in about a month or so, we'll begin to find out whether the group of people that see much more at Pandora is significant enough to have any kind of impact.

 

[Clancy Wiggum]

A Potter-level impact is different than Potter-level immersion. Some people don't seem to get that distinction.

This land may be just as immersive. But Potter changed many people's perception of Universal from a second-rate place to something in the same league as WDW. That's the Potter impact at its core. It was a huge rise in attendance, but moreso it was a huge rise in perception.

Since most average people still think of WDW as the top destination in Orlando, a first-rate place... I don't think there's room for Pandora to radically improve people's perception of WDW. That isn't Pandora's fault, just the different situation.

So it's not an insult or stab at Pandora to say that it will not have a Potter-level impact.

Exactly. Potter was the start of Universal 'going after' WDW. Pandora is WDW recognizing Universal's success and responding in kind. The goals are different and the metrics that define success will be different as well.

 

[rushtest4echo]

Exactly. Potter was the start of Universal 'going after' WDW. Pandora is WDW recognizing Universal's success and responding in kind. The goals are different and the metrics that define success will be different as well.

Couldn't have said it better myself. Disney's facing the same battles that all industry leaders face. They're seen as dinosaurs who are letting the little guys and even the "second rate" guys innovate right past them. The funny thing about that notion is that people have been saying that here in Orlando for 30 years. When MGM Studios was announced, people said "oh this is a reactionary step because Universal is finally serious about challenging them". When IOA was announced, people again concluded that it would alter the balance of the landscape and that Animal Kingdom was simply a lame attempt to react. IOA was supposed to dethrone the other Orlando parks. Then came Potter, which again changed the landscape and people concluded that this was yet another case of the little guy running right past Disney. Now Pandora is being diminished by some as yet another of Disney's lame attempts to try and emulate Universal. I certainly do see Pandora as a reaction to Potter (if you don't you're really kidding yourself).

I'm happy that Potter (in some minds) increased Universal's reputation. I'm also happy that we got Pandora as a response. I don't see how that should serve as a demerit. If the product is awesome, I don't really care if it's upped Disney's perceived reputation or not.

 

[Kman101]

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.

How is it being overhyped? I know some roll their eyes at the pro Disers being let in but why are we faulting them for it? Of course they want to promote their new land? Just because some don't like it ...

 

[AEfx]

Personally, I find the Na'vi boring beyond belief as characters, and that's a huge minus for me for the entire land. The boat ride looks pretty... pretty preachy! (Kidding...kinda.) As a West Coaster, I'd check out Pandora if I had time to spare if I happened to be at WDW anyway, but it wouldn't be top priority--and definitely not something I'd plan a trip around.

I know. It's hard for me to find the words. I mean, it's lovely. It's clear they spent a nice chunk on it. And we certainly are grateful for something shiny and new. But...

It sounds too dramatic, but I don't know any other way to put it - it just feels...soulless. Or on some other wavelength. When I was on the river ride, there were moments where I got that feeling you get when you watch a video of a ride in another continent in a foreign language you don't know. Like, "wow, this is really pretty" but I have no idea what's really going on. And the thing is - I think that's almost the intention - or at least the design. But how effective it is will considerably vary based on how much one cares about the Navi.

I mean, I love little dark rides. Just for the sake of them. So it's a neat little ride. The name is silly and generic (like Avatar and Pandora in general, but especially "Flight of Passage" - I mean, really? That could be about a thousand different things...anyway). But I feel like a lot of people will get off and wonder just what the hell it was supposed to be about, LOL.

Overall, the land is, well...very AK. And I think those that already are infatuated with AK are going to love it, because it's more of what AK already was. Thing is, while it greatly pleases some - we know that AK as a theme didn't draw new visitors to WDW, and I don't see how at this time Pandora is going to change that.

I think Disney kind of knew this, which is why they are making it a different time period, so it's not so tied to the first film and could bring renewed interest with the sequels. I'm sure Disney wasn't pleased at the delays (now the first one isn't out until Dec. of 2020), considering that this would have been perfect timing to coincide with the 2017 date that it was at one point. And of course, even that is a huge gamble - the Avatar sequels could end up being The Matrix trilogy and fizzle out. I know for sure we won't see any additions to it until at least Avatar 2 is out and successful - if Disney was waiting on Episode VII to make investments, they sure as heck aren't going to bet anything more on Avatar 2 than they already have.

The real test, though, will be merchandise. Disney seems to think people are going to spend Potter-style money on expensive baubles, but don't seem to realize that Potter would still sell at least half what it does now had they opened no rides or land and just a big themed Potter shop instead. There is a hunger out there for Potter - not Avatar. I am positive we are going to hear disappointment in sluggish merch sales sooner or later.

 

[twebber55]

probably disagree with every sentence written above LOL

 

[flyerjab]

This thread is interesting. Up until now it is more or less a sound board for those who already have their minds mostly made up to reinforce their opinions/positions about this land. All I have to do is look at the poster's avatar and I already know what they will write here before even reading it. And I have not been disappointed on that front.

What I am interested in are the posts that people leave after having been to Pandora to see how it impacts their perceptions. Up until now the majority of us are basing this off of videos, vlogs, tweets and interviews from people that chances are will come out heavily in favor of this land (bloggers, cast members, etc). Right now there are those that already love it (I am admittedly one of those), those that either don't like it or can't figure it out, and those that haven't been that exposed to it or are on the fence. I will be intrigued to see if any opinions change after stepping into this world.

 

[MuteSuperstar]

The real test, though, will be merchandise. Disney seems to think people are going to spend Potter-style money on expensive baubles, but don't seem to realize that Potter would still sell at least half what it does now had they opened no rides or land and just a big themed Potter shop instead. There is a hunger out there for Potter - not Avatar. I am positive we are going to hear disappointment in sluggish merch sales sooner or later.

Totally agree...I just don't think there's a snowball's chance of moving a whole lot of merchandise in any way commensurate with Potter. Avatar doesn't resonate in that way....simple as that, even if Pandora is nicely done.

 

[twebber55]

Totally agree...I just don't think there's a snowball's chance of moving a whole lot of merchandise in any way commensurate with Potter. Avatar doesn't resonate in that way....simple as that, even if Pandora is nicely done.

no one said it would
btw quality wins out
thats why they had a queue just look at and buy the banshee puppet

 

[mergatroid]

Totally agree...I just don't think there's a snowball's chance of moving a whole lot of merchandise in any way commensurate with Potter. Avatar doesn't resonate in that way....simple as that, even if Pandora is nicely done.

To be completely fair, I'm not sure that anyone said it would ?

 

[grim-grinning_toast]

I've only seen a variety of vlogs, blogs, and other social media insights. Prior to watching those, I didn't have an opinion on Pandora. I appreciated the concept because I know that AK had once implored to create more fantastical elements. However, after watching the videos - I found myself getting upset? or angry? There was this one moment where a cast member was talking about this native plant to Pandora and how the Navi had ripped it open during the civil war so the pods could escape and regenerate and I just *hated* that in the midst of this actual animal conservation, there was so much money and so many resources going towards this education about things that don't exist. That a big ceramic plant had an entire backstory, but so much of animal kingdom is left for your own exploration without a cast member teaching you about the plants or animals you see. The ACTUAL plants and animals of our planet.

I don't mean to sound like a debbie downer, and maybe if I were a big fan of the films I would actually be excited - but AK just seems like a totally inappropriate placement for this land. I look forward to this level of immersion for Star Wars, and I think it fits in a land like Hollywood Studios where the entire point is to feel like you're part of ~the movies,~ but AK never had that feelings to me. It always felt more organic.

 

[disney4life2008]

Totally agree...I just don't think there's a snowball's chance of moving a whole lot of merchandise in any way commensurate with Potter. Avatar doesn't resonate in that way....simple as that, even if Pandora is nicely done.

Be careful, one of the fanboys will say a bird that sells for $40 is going to the hottest item this summer.

 

[LuvtheGoof]

I've only seen a variety of vlogs, blogs, and other social media insights. Prior to watching those, I didn't have an opinion on Pandora. I appreciated the concept because I know that AK had once implored to create more fantastical elements. However, after watching the videos - I found myself getting upset? or angry? There was this one moment where a cast member was talking about this native plant to Pandora and how the Navi had ripped it open during the civil war so the pods could escape and regenerate and I just *hated* that in the midst of this actual animal conservation, there was so much money and so many resources going towards this education about things that don't exist. That a big ceramic plant had an entire backstory, but so much of animal kingdom is left for your own exploration without a cast member teaching you about the plants or animals you see. The ACTUAL plants and animals of our planet.

I don't mean to sound like a debbie downer, and maybe if I were a big fan of the films I would actually be excited - but AK just seems like a totally inappropriate placement for this land. I look forward to this level of immersion for Star Wars, and I think it fits in a land like Hollywood Studios where the entire point is to feel like you're part of ~the movies,~ but AK never had that feelings to me. It always felt more organic.

Well, I'm going to get slammed for this, but I don't think you should have an opinion until you've actually experienced the land and rides in person. And that's my opinion.

 

[grim-grinning_toast]

Well, I'm going to get slammed for this, but I don't think you should have an opinion until you've actually experienced the land and rides in person. And that's my opinion.

I think that's a totally valid point! I'm just speaking about my reaction to my first introduction to the land via social media.

 

[LuvtheGoof]

I think that's a totally valid point! I'm just speaking about my reaction to my first introduction to the land via social media.

I guess my big thing is - stay away from anything to do with ride videos or land videos until you've seen it yourself. Not hard to do. Just don't click on them.

 

[grim-grinning_toast]

I guess my big thing is - stay away from anything to do with ride videos or land videos until you've seen it yourself. Not hard to do. Just don't click on them.

Well that's a little hard to do when you're in love with a theme park and are excited by its additions, but don't have the means to visit for a few years hahaha. But like I said, you've made a totally valid point - I can't judge it until I've experienced it myself.

 

[disneygeek90]

I've only seen a variety of vlogs, blogs, and other social media insights. Prior to watching those, I didn't have an opinion on Pandora. I appreciated the concept because I know that AK had once implored to create more fantastical elements. However, after watching the videos - I found myself getting upset? or angry? There was this one moment where a cast member was talking about this native plant to Pandora and how the Navi had ripped it open during the civil war so the pods could escape and regenerate and I just *hated* that in the midst of this actual animal conservation, there was so much money and so many resources going towards this education about things that don't exist. That a big ceramic plant had an entire backstory, but so much of animal kingdom is left for your own exploration without a cast member teaching you about the plants or animals you see. The ACTUAL plants and animals of our planet.

I don't mean to sound like a debbie downer, and maybe if I were a big fan of the films I would actually be excited - but AK just seems like a totally inappropriate placement for this land. I look forward to this level of immersion for Star Wars, and I think it fits in a land like Hollywood Studios where the entire point is to feel like you're part of ~the movies,~ but AK never had that feelings to me. It always felt more organic.

The land, it's foliage and it's massive waterfalls/mountains absolutely fit into AK, imo. It was amazing walking around the corner and seeing the vast landscape. While they're not *real*, I don't think it's anything to get up in arms about. DAK already does a wonderful job educating and teaching about wildlife, from the shows to the walking trails. I don't think one *added* land takes away from any of the other areas.

Once I was there, I had no issues assimilating into their own species of plants and the habitat, and it was cool to see something different. It's a gorgeous land that works its way nicely into an already beautiful park, as the nature of Pandora is heavily the focus.

 

[LuvtheGoof]

Well that's a little hard to do when you're in love with a theme park and are excited by its additions, but don't have the means to visit for a few years hahaha. But like I said, you've made a totally valid point - I can't judge it until I've experienced it myself.

It's not hard at all. We love the Disney parks, and have since we started going 40 years ago. Still love them, but, we have patience and can wait to experience all of it in person.