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

[LuvtheGoof]

Not sure why you are confused on this. So you tell me - what is the plot of the movie - and what part of Pandora the Animal Kingdom area tells any of that story? Joe stated that the stories there are our stories, and that they aren't telling you a story at all. That part right there distances the land from the story (plot) of the movie completely. Please enlighten me as to why you think differently.

 

[L.C. Clench]

Not sure why you are confused on this. So you tell me - what is the plot of the movie - and what part of Pandora the Animal Kingdom area tells any of that story? Joe stated that the stories there are our stories, and that they aren't telling you a story at all. That part right there distances the land from the story (plot) of the movie completely. Please enlighten me as to why you think differently.

The part where he talks about the theme of the movie goes completely against the idea that there is not desire to connect to the movie. If he'd had said we built the planet and left it alone that would be different but to specifically mention the theme means they are addressing the topic of the movie.

 

[LuvtheGoof]

The part where he talks about the theme of the movie goes completely against the idea that there is not desire to connect to the movie. If he'd had said we built the planet and left it alone that would be different but to specifically mention the theme means they are addressing the topic of the movie.

So you are just going to ignore my question? What part of Pandora tells any of the story of the movie? The theme he is talking about is the planet, not the actual movie.

 

[L.C. Clench]

So you are just going to ignore my question? What part of Pandora tells any of the story of the movie? The theme he is talking about is the planet, not the actual movie.

The planet isn't a theme it's a setting. If he meant setting he would have said that. He specifically went over three things he sees as themes of AK and said they were themes of the movie.

 

[LuvtheGoof]

The planet isn't a theme it's a setting. If he meant setting he would have said that. He specifically went over three things he sees as themes of AK and said they were themes of the movie.

Which were all about the planet. How is the "intrinsic value of nature" or "transformation through adventure" anything to do with the movie? He is talking about how we will experience the area.

I guess we are just going to have to agree to disagree on this. But remember that in 10 years, even after no more movies, this area will still be immensely popular.

 

[DDLand]

There are literally millions and millions of people that have never even heard of Avatar the movie that will love the new area. Comparing it to Star Wars, which is a franchise that has been around for 40 years with 7 major films, different series, and a whole host of other things is not the same at all. Even if there is never another Avatar movie, the LAND stands on it's own, and if the movie never existed, we would consider this an amazing land that has no IP attached. No, I do not think Disney cares one whit whether a new movie does well, as it could be several years before there even is a new movie.

Disney wants the new movies to do well. Period. It's in their business interest to make Avatar the brand as successful as possible. That's part of the synergistic effect. No one is expecting it to be Star Wars, but they're not paying licensing fees to Lightstorm for something they could have done on their own.

"To the extent that we can know this, we really believe that in the coming years, that the interest in Avatar is only going to grow as those [new] movies enter the marketplace. We can't quantify it, but we think this has big potential."

~Robert Iger

 

[LuvtheGoof]

Disney wants the new movies to do well. Period. It's in their business interest to make Avatar the brand as successful as possible. That's part of the synergistic effect. No one is expecting it to be Star Wars, but they're not paying licensing fees to Lightstorm for something they could have done on their own.

"To the extent that we can know this, we really believe that in the coming years, that the interest in Avatar is only going to grow as those [new] movies enter the marketplace. We can't quantify it, but we think this has big potential."

~Robert Iger

But my point is simple. Even if the movies don't do well, or are even ever released, the land at AK will be popular regardless. It is more about the "place" called Pandora, than the movie Avatar.

 

[L.C. Clench]

Which were all about the planet. How is the "intrinsic value of nature" or "transformation through adventure" anything to do with the movie? He is talking about how we will experience the area.

I guess we are just going to have to agree to disagree on this. But remember that in 10 years, even after no more movies, this area will still be immensely popular.

When the only change in 10 years is that things have stopped working I'm not sure how popular it will be. But I do agree people will still be coming there because it's at Disney. As I said before the use of Avatar doesn't mean as much as it being something new and it being at Disney. They probably could have bought Ferngully for less than the rights fees and kept their same themes.

 

[brb1006]

Toy Story, hands down. I like Toy Story infinitely more than Avatar.

But the land looks so bland

 

[Gabe1]

Well we aren't getting anything else right now so I guess this is the only thing to be excited about

I'm in that camp. My worst fear is it will be beautiful rockwork just like FLE and attractions be equivalent to da Dwarf and under the sea. I crave attractions as awesome as Splash was imagineered to be. Can't imagine the new land to be worthy enough to fairly compare to Potter at the Universal parks.

 

[RSoxNo1]

Toy Story, hands down. I like Toy Story infinitely more than Avatar.

That's short sighted. Toy Story doesn't lend itself to an immersive land, Avatar does. We don't know if the Avatar attractions will be good, but aside from Toy Story Mania, anything that's been in a Toy Story land has been mediocre at best. I love the Toy Story movies, but they have proven they can't make a good land around it.

 

[Gabe1]

That's short sighted. Toy Story doesn't lend itself to an immersive land, Avatar does. We don't know if the Avatar attractions will be good, but aside from Toy Story Mania, anything that's been in a Toy Story land has been mediocre at best. I love the Toy Story movies, but they have proven they can't make a good land around it.

Not a matter of CAN'T. Won't is the more appropriate operative word. Disney is worldly and diverse enough that they can produce awesome attractions worldwide. I look at Pooh as an example. Simpleton dark ride. Yet imagineered by Disney's own imagineers they upped their game for Pooh-Tokyo only when someone else was ready, able and willing to fund a project beyond a mediocre finished product. It is more about the financial commitment. And I agree, there is very little to Toy at the Studios coming but I differ in the Whys, me it was like Circus at the MK, as cheaply and minimal funding as possible. As a guest I have to pretend and use a lot of imagination to consider that is a land. But Disney got exactly what they financially were willing to commit to.

Disney has put out many mediocre projects this century, it has little to do with the films and more to do with their overall business model in these later decades. Heck, they created Splash a totally immersive attraction coupled with being also a thrill ride around a film the vast majority of guests have never seen.

Me I will wait and see what Avatar brings. It could be a home run and a new, nobody's seen anything like this before type of attraction or an attraction like Dwarf, it is the only thing new so it is busy. One thing I can tell is it will be awesome rockwork just like FLE.

 

[Gabe1]

But the land looks so bland

If there is one thing Disney has mastered is imagineering rock. The rock takes on all sorts of shapes and colors but Holy Rock they are spot on with the rock facades. Lighting might change the Blah. Disney might miss with the lands and attractions but the rocks have always been excellent. Never saw anyone do it better until the day this opened:

First time I saw it I was in awe of someone other than Disney creating awesomeness out of imagineered rock. Now we'll just have to wait a bit longer to see if the newest attractions are worthy of what we've been able to see of the rocks. Me, I find the FLE rocks awesome especially at night, they are charming. The attractions for me are a bit meh.

 

[truecoat]

I tend to agree with your sentiment. It's hard to pin down its longterm impact without surveys or future box office data. I will say it doesn't feel like it had a profound impact culturally outside of its immediate release, but that's obviously anecdotal and not really admissible.

One more substantive indicator was from a rerelease done a couple years later, and didn't perform extremely well. Of course that was during a time when a whole bunch of releases were bombing, so once again we're left in the dark.

It is somewhat relevant from a business standpoint though. The idea behind these IP lands is partially to drive interest because of the IP. There should be people going to Disney theme parks that never would have, or wouldn't have for a greater amount of time, because of Star Wars Land. Disney expects the same to hold true for Avatar. If it doesn't, that would be problematic.

Disney didn't build this land to get billion dollar addition level of crowds. Disney built this to get Billion dollar addition level crowds and people who love Avatar.

I'm not dumb enough to bet against Cameron. Every time he makes a film it takes forever, goes over budget, and has internal problems. Every time he makes a film people call for it to flop critically and financially.

Every time he ends up making everyone look stupid.

Could the Avatar sequels be the ones to bomb? Possibly. I just wouldn't bet on it. I'm guessing these films will be the Empire and Jedi to A New Hope. Big Billion+ grosses, but not quite as big as the original. We only get films like that every so often.

The clock is ticking, filming shoud start pretty soon.

Yes, the rerelease didn't perform well but it was only 9 months later.

 

[jt04]

Pandora is a better fit than BK would have been. Other than that I don't remember having an opinion.

 

[brb1006]

Pandora is a better fit than BK would have been. Other than that I don't remember having an opinion.

Beastly Kingdom would still had been a perfect fit.

 

[jaxonp]

I'm pretty sure most people were not excited for the land originally because they disliked the movie, like you said, but I think people began to think of this like it was Animal Kingdom's Splash Mountain when concept art and the model were released. Like Splash Mountain, this will be based on a movie that most dislike or have never seen, but will probabaly be loved for years to come due to it being a great environment with great attractions. I think the most immense hype for the land came when most of the construction started to be nearly completed and the night lighting started testing. I can't speak for everyone but I think that is how most people feel about this land (including myself).

Most dislike or have never seen??? huh..

Avatar is the highest grossing film, of all time. Not even the Force Awakens is close, which is the 3rd closest film of all time. Just to put Avatar's success in perspective...

1. Avatar 2.78 B
2. Titanic 2.2 B
3. Force Awakens 2.06 B
4. Jurassic World 1.67 B
5. Avengers 1.51 B

http://www.the-numbers.com/box-office-records/worldwide/all-movies/cumulative/all-time


Avatar almost did twice as much as the number 5 grossing film of all time. Somebody saw the movie, lol. Now granted Avatar had incredible numbers, partially because of the 3d boom. If you look at ticket sales Avatar isn't nearly as impressive yet still better than almost every Disney Film that represented in the parks, except a few classics and of course Star Wars.

24. Avatar sold 78.3 Million tickets (2.8 billion in sales)

Let's compare that to other Disney IP lands that got built.. say Cars (has been a huge success)

228. Cars sold 36 million tickets (461 mil)
nr. Cars 2 sold 23.2 million tickets (560 mil)

Avatar 78.3 vs Cars 1&2 59.2 = Avatar sold 19.1 million more tickets sold ( 1 movie vs 2 movies)

Avatar 2.8 Bil vs Cars 1&2 1.02 Bil = Avatar sold 1.78 Billion more in sales ( 1 movie vs 2 movies)

https://mrob.com/pub/film-video/topadj.html

Of course ahead of all those films in ticket sales are many Star Wars Films, Disney classics such as, Lion King, Snow White, 101 Dalmatians, Mary Poppins, Fantasia, Jungle Book, Indiana Jones all of which are grossly under represented for the most part, until SWL comes online. You'd think Disney would give Lion King some more attention.. number 10 in ticket sales and close to 1 billion in sales. Off all Disney IP, it's grossly underused.

At the end of the day, Avatar seems like a finically sound investment no mater how you look at it. If Cars, with almost a 3rd the amount of monetary value was able to be the best themed land with huge guest satisfaction ratings, then I see no reason why an equally design and funded Avatar inspired Pandora land wouldn't be just as big if not bigger. The only thing that Cars has going on for it that Avatar doesn't have is a Merchandise advantage... but that is just an assumption at this point.

 

[L.C. Clench]

Most dislike or have never seen??? huh..

Avatar is the highest grossing film, of all time. Not even the Force Awakens is close, which is the 3rd closest film of all time. Just to put Avatar's success in perspective...

1. Avatar 2.78 B
2. Titanic 2.2 B
3. Force Awakens 2.06 B
4. Jurassic World 1.67 B
5. Avengers 1.51 B

http://www.the-numbers.com/box-office-records/worldwide/all-movies/cumulative/all-time


Avatar almost did twice as much as the number 5 grossing film of all time. Somebody saw the movie, lol. Now granted Avatar had incredible numbers, partially because of the 3d boom. If you look at ticket sales Avatar isn't nearly as impressive yet still better than almost every Disney Film that represented in the parks, except a few classics and of course Star Wars.

24. Avatar sold 78.3 Million tickets (2.8 billion in sales)

Let's compare that to other Disney IP lands that got built.. say Cars (has been a huge success)

228. Cars sold 36 million tickets (461 mil)
nr. Cars 2 sold 23.2 million tickets (560 mil)

Avatar 78.3 vs Cars 1&2 59.2 = Avatar sold 19.1 million more tickets sold ( 1 movie vs 2 movies)

Avatar 2.8 Bil vs Cars 1&2 1.02 Bil = Avatar sold 1.78 Billion more in sales ( 1 movie vs 2 movies)

https://mrob.com/pub/film-video/topadj.html

Of course ahead of all those films in ticket sales are many Star Wars Films, Disney classics such as, Lion King, Snow White, 101 Dalmatians, Mary Poppins, Fantasia, Jungle Book, Indiana Jones all of which are grossly under represented for the most part, until SWL comes online. You'd think Disney would give Lion King some more attention.. number 10 in ticket sales and close to 1 billion in sales. Off all Disney IP, it's grossly underused.

At the end of the day, Avatar seems like a finically sound investment no mater how you look at it. If Cars, with almost a 3rd the amount of monetary value was able to be the best themed land with huge guest satisfaction ratings, then I see no reason why an equally design and funded Avatar inspired Pandora land wouldn't be just as big if not bigger. The only thing that Cars has going on for it that Avatar doesn't have is a Merchandise advantage... but that is just an assumption at this point.

This article is a few years old but it is still relevant especially considering the "highest grossing" piece isn't true when you adjust for inflation and the real impact on the ticket sales was the ground breaking 3-D effects which have kind of become common now.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/scottme...eaving-no-pop-culture-footprint/#43940cf1284b

 

[twebber55]

This article is a few years old but it is still relevant especially considering the "highest grossing" piece isn't true when you adjust for inflation and the real impact on the ticket sales was the ground breaking 3-D effects which have kind of become common now.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/scottme...eaving-no-pop-culture-footprint/#43940cf1284b

no its number two all time adjusted for inflation
as ive always said if it was just for the 3D how come its the top grossing Home market movie of all time

 

[ford91exploder]

It looks like Iger's vanity project will open after all, But if the guests expect what's being shown in the commericals i'd say they will be fearfully disappointed...