Is Avatar to political for a Disney park?

[tracyandalex]

How about if you forget the fact that it is based on Avatar, and just go with the concept that Disney can create an amazing attraction. So let's go with the hypothetical scenario of it being built and is DIsney's best work to date. Once word gets out on this amazing attraction, do you still think people won't visit?

That is a tough one. I know for me personally I would not go just to see that and I live 4 hours away. I actually have a real world example for this - one of my friends had never been to a theme park, but is a huge HP fan. The first and only theme park she's ever been to is IOA because of WWoHP. I think to really attract large amounts of brand new guests it has to be something with that strong of a following. I do however think that for folks that are "lighter" Disney fans than those of us on here they may visit for a well done new land.
Of course my view on this might be a little skewed because I generally visit about twice per year anyways.

 

[danlb_2000]

Tower of Terror is a great attraction. But it doesn't belong in Animal Kingdom. That is my problem with Avatarland. I agree with your sentiment that WDI just needs to spend the money and build a great attraction (I would go further and say an immersive land WITH great attractions). But it can, and should do that without Avatar. They could use Disney franchises or original concepts and have more creative leeway and better fit.

But if they just go with an existing Disney franchies, they will only be attracting people who are already Disney fans and are probably already coming to the parks. The idea with Avatar is that it could tap into an audiance that isn't already coming to the parks. This is one of the reasons Harry Potter was so successful for Universal is that it pulled in people who had never been to Universal and maybe had never been to Orlando. Now, whether or not Avatar will succeed in doing that is up for debate.

 

[wdwmagic]

That is a tough one. I know for me personally I would not go just to see that and I live 4 hours away. I actually have a real world example for this - one of my friends had never been to a theme park, but is a huge HP fan. The first and only theme park she's ever been to is IOA because of WWoHP. I think to really attract large amounts of brand new guests it has to be something with that strong of a following. I do however think that for folks that are "lighter" Disney fans than those of us on here they may visit for a well done new land.
Of course my view on this might be a little skewed because I generally visit about twice per year anyways.

You wouldn't travel 4 hours to see our hypothetical situation of WDI producing their best attraction to date?
If that's the case, you might be hanging out on the wrong forum! LOL. If WDW can't attraction someone who is just 4 hours away with an amazing new attraction they have no hope.

 

[lebeau]

Um, Pocahontas?

The only people I have talked to who saw Avatar as a political film,
have seemed to be people who see politics in everything. So, yeah.
Mickey Mouse is a giant corporate global icon of greed and capitalist
Disneyfication. "The Rat" as he is referred to by some people.

Get the RAT out of the parks, first.

On another note, I'm thinking of starting a new thread about Avatar
coming to the parks.

I would like to "like" this comment more than once.

Perhaps someone could create a thread generator to start an Avatar thread daily. Possible thread titles:

Avatar, Really?
Avatar Hurt My Feelings
Avatar - Waaaah!
No One Really Likes the Highest Grossing Movie of All Times - I Mean It
James Cameron Is a Doo-Doo Head
Pandora My @$$!
Star Wars > Avatar

Feel free to add your own contributions to the list. If we all pull together, I'm sure we can come up with a thread title per day to last us until AvLand opens.

 

[wdwmagic]

I agree with your statement. However, does WDI need the Avatar franchise in order to create a great attraction? If not, why spend the money on the franchise?

No I don't think they do. But there again, we are not privy to the details of the deal and how it is structured, or what the real inside expectations are of the franchise going forward. This is going to be case of wait and see.

 

[tracyandalex]

You wouldn't travel 4 hours to see our hypothetical situation of WDI producing their best attraction to date?
If that's the case, you might be hanging out on the wrong forum! LOL. If WDW can't attraction someone who is just 4 hours away with an amazing new attraction they have no hope.

I think my not driving for just reason is because I know I will there in a few months anyways (we generally visit once in the spring and once in the fall)! If Disney builds it we will come . . just probably not right away.

 

[GrumpyFan]

How about if you forget the fact that it is based on Avatar, and just go with the concept that Disney can create an amazing attraction. So let's go with the hypothetical scenario of it being built and is DIsney's best work to date. Once word gets out on this amazing attraction, do you still think people won't visit?

I have to agree with this. If it is a great attraction that is visually appealing and achieves the objective of immersing guests into the attractions' story, whether true to the first movie or not, it will be a hit. I know that sounds contradictory to my other statements, and it is somewhat, but I think Disney/Cameron have the ability of telling a new story in the Avatar canon that would make for a great attraction/land. I might suggest that we (myself included) are being too legalistic and sticking to just what we know about the story so far. If there are to be 3 more movies, then this story has a LOT MORE DEPTH than what we have seen thus far.

 

[twebber55]

I would like to "like" this comment more than once.

Perhaps someone could create a thread generator to start an Avatar thread daily. Possible thread titles:

Avatar, Really?
Avatar Hurt My Feelings
Avatar - Waaaah!
No One Really Likes the Highest Grossing Movie of All Times - I Mean It
James Cameron Is a Doo-Doo Head
Pandora My @$$!
Star Wars > Avatar

Feel free to add your own contributions to the list. If we all pull together, I'm sure we can come up with a thread title per day to last us until AvLand opens.

you get ....Post of the day

 

[montyz81]

What I remember is the evil American Military and evil American Corporation...(didn't look like the U.N. or united federation of planets to me) unleashing holy hell on beautiful smurf creatures...( would you have felt different if it was an infestation of ugly flesh eating cockroaches they wiped out?)
At the end of the story...evil America goes home and the smurfs win.

It is interesting... Enemy Mine told the exact same story!

 

[lebeau]

It is interesting... Enemy Mine told the exact same story!

Animatronic Lou Gossett Jr for the win!

On second thought, they could probably just get Lou Gossett Jr to hang out in the park. I don't think he's busy.

 

[danlb_2000]

Animatronic Lou Gossett Jr for the win!

On second thought, they could probably just get Lou Gossett Jr to hang out in the park. I don't think he's busy.

Actually, looking at IMDB I was surprised to see that he is keeping quite busy. Couple movies already this year and at least four more in production. Who knew!

 

[GrumpyFan]

That is a tough one. I know for me personally I would not go just to see that and I live 4 hours away.
Of course my view on this might be a little skewed because I generally visit about twice per year anyways.

Seems a bit judgmental considering NO details have been released on what the new land/attraction will be. I can't personally say that myself. I enjoyed the movie, but didn't necessarily like the tone of the story. However, I am waiting to see what they are going to build before I decide whether or not I will drive 15 hours to see it.
And, I would say you're more than a little skewed. But, so am I and many of the others posting in this thread.

 

[lebeau]

Actually, looking at IMDB I was surprised to see that he is keeping quite busy. Couple movies already this year and at least four more in production. Who knew!

The star of the Iron Eagle franchise is in high demand.

With a little luck, maybe one of those movies will get a theatrical release. Nah.

 

[Atomicmickey]

More Avatar thread titles:

Beestly Avatardomme?
Naked Blue Aliens inappropriate for a Disney Park?
Fix the Thanator!
Blue Dole Whip is gross
Lightning McQueen meet n' greet on Pandora?
Mosquito breeding ground to be DESTROYED to build Avatar world
Bob Iger to permanently tattoo his face BLUE?
New signature Avatar ride to be a clone of Primeval Whirl?
Military presence in Avatarland? With live weapons?
Avatarland to feature 50 foot tall Animatronic James Cameron head?
Disney plans to GLUE EXTRA LEGS on LIVE ANIMALS for Avatar Park!
Interactive queue to feature waterslide off the side of a floating rock?
Small bits of Unobtanium to cause strollers to FLOAT in Avatarland
Avatarland to feature deadly gas?
Nighttime Hometree destruction show to really light up the night with fire and splinters?
Bob Iger to angry Disney fans: "if the three of you don't go to Avatarland, it puts the whole thing in jeopardy."
Instead of building Avatarland, Disney announces new names for
attractions, "Na'vi Mansion, Pandora Splash, and Big Obtanium Mountain Railroad".

 

[bethymouse]

the first thing my family of a 20 year old son 13 old son and 9 year old girl was wow i cant wait that will be sweet

one dragon goes up in the air and people went crazy and totally assumed avatar...like i said i think avatar will rocket DAK to number 3 in the US for parks..of course this is one dumb guys opinion

You're not dumb at all! You have a very valid point.

 

[bethymouse]

Tower of Terror is a great attraction. But it doesn't belong in Animal Kingdom. That is my problem with Avatarland. I agree with your sentiment that WDI just needs to spend the money and build a great attraction (I would go further and say an immersive land WITH great attractions). But it can, and should do that without Avatar. They could use Disney franchises or original concepts and have more creative leeway and better fit.

Iger did a knee-jerk reaction with Avatar because he wanted to collect on merchandise and recognizability, and that seems, well, stupid, because Avatar, at least thus far, doesn't really offer those things. it did briefly, when it came out, but has now faded into a distant memory. Maybe the sequels will turn Pandora into a brand-name franchise, but as others have mentioned -- fans even, I don't recall the name of a single character (unless Sigorney Weaver counts).

The absolute worst thing, IMO, that could happen, is that Avatar comes, but stripped down. And, unfortunately, if I were a betting man, that's where I'd put my money.

Why does everyone keep saying "stripped down"? They haven't even given any specifics as to what will be in Avatarland. When Disney gives us the details, then we can give our opinions. At least that's what I think...

 

[Florida_is_hot]

I think Avatar is less "political" and more about taking care of our planet... something Animal Kingdom already focuses on. That said, even if it was entirely political, Disney hasn't shyed away from that in the past (as others have mentioned - Pocahontas etc.).

The message "taking care of our planet" is a VERY POLITICAL message.
Search for news? about Global Warming if you do not believe me.

 

[tracyandalex]

Seems a bit judgmental considering NO details have been released on what the new land/attraction will be. I can't personally say that myself. I enjoyed the movie, but didn't necessarily like the tone of the story. However, I am waiting to see what they are going to build before I decide whether or not I will drive 15 hours to see it.
And, I would say you're more than a little skewed. But, so am I and many of the others posting in this thread.

If you would drive 15 hours to see it then I believe that Avatarland may accomplish at least partially the goal of attracting more visitors. That answers one of my questions.
I was not being judgmental I was just saying that for me it would have to be something huge like a 5th gate to get me to make an extra trip to WDW.

 

[bethymouse]

True, but it's not like that message isn't already "preached" at AK on Kilimanjaro Safari and Kali River Rapids. Although, I understand of late the message has been significantly reduced on Kilimanjaro removing the harsh overtones of poaching.

I wish they hadn't done that. I liked the poaching "scene". My kids had a lot of questions about it, and they felt empathy for the animals.

 

[WDWFREAK53]

You are right, I didnt need to google pandora...it's the one thing I remember. It was a awesome world.
I'm just trying to figure out why the hesitation from some....just my opinion.

I was helping you prove your point

I think the hesitation really has nothing to do with the fact that it's political. I feel the hesitation is that DAK is all about EARTH and it's about creatures that lived, are living, or never were (mythical).

The dragon has been on the park logo since Day 1 and we never saw Beastly Kingdom come to fruition. That land would've been accepted because it's EARTHLY LORE and they are creatures that some believe really do exist, not just made up in a movie.

So, some see Avatar as the final nail in the Beastly Kingdom coffin...but in reality, when The Lost Continent opened with Islands of Adventure, the lid was shut.