• Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
    Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.You can use your Twitter or Facebook account to sign up, or register directly.

Say.... What if Avatarland got cancelled?

Acolli18

Well-Known Member
If it does fall through I say Disney should take the money and actually make the beast kingdom or whatever it was called. I always am a little sad going to AK and seeing the Dragon on the sign but no dragons are in the park. I think a section dedicated to the fantasy of mystical creatures would be a better place to put your money long term than Avatar. Think about it dragons and such have been around for hundreds of year and still are as popular of a fantasy as ever.

I'm a little embarrassed to say as the Disney lover I am, I've never noticed the dragon on the sign. Guess I need to pay twice as much attention to the little things next time I'm there.
 

WDWchick

New Member
I don't think that they should have a land based off of it... but I think they should do something for the movie Hercules... a true classic with great music... would make a great ride!
 

RSoxNo1

Well-Known Member
Frankly, I don't think Disney needs Avatar or Avatarland, they have a plethora of exciting and unique material at their fingertips.... They've barely touched upon some of the Pixar stuff... or utilized it well... Laugh floor isn't as good as it could be and while Buzz's Space Ranger Spin and TSM are decent attractions there is so much more to be explored.

Once they get their animation right again (the latest Winnie movie was great), they should have more to expand upon...

Toy Story could just as easily become a land in it's own right.... what an immersive area that would create.

Personally, I'm of the opinion that all future Pixar attractions should be put in DHS. I have no problem with a large portion of that park (Backlot Tour) being devoted to Pixar, but it doesn't make much sense to put it anywhere else.

My hunch on Avatar? Disney is trying to reel it back in after realizing it was an executive hunch that shouldn't have been played.

The Avatarland thing was the ultimate Black Ops project that came out of nowhere and none of the usual insiders knew anything about. It's been reported it was cooked up last summer on only the highest levels of executive leadership, primarily in Burbank. And they didn't even have any solid ride concepts, and the WDI Blue Sky process hadn't even begun. Then they announced it and the world went... huh?

Now that it's out there, they've probably done some customer research on the idea and the concept, as well as gotten a better grasp on what WDI could do artistically. And the results are less than stellar, especially from the customer research side.

And now they are having that moment where the executives go "Uh... guys? I think we kinda made a mistake here."

It wouldn't surprise me one bit to learn they are trying to reel Avatarland back in, or at least dramatically downscale expectations for it as a megabudget Cars Land type addition. Perhaps just do a stage show or something and try and find something better for WDW's version of a Cars Land-style megabudget addition?

There are two different schools of thought here. It sounds like you have some executives that seem to believe that no mistakes were made with regards to Pleasure Island. Then you have executives that realized the original Fantasyland concepts didn't have the mass appeal needed for an expansion of this size/price.

The good thing is, Tom Staggs seems to be at the heart of the Avatar project and he also seemed to be spearheading the changes in Fantasyland as well. I've said in the past that I think best case scenario of an Avatar land in the park is that the land itself is used as a mystical environment but the land can and will include attractions that aren't linked to Avatar. It will be a mythical animals land with Avatar as the foundation, but say for example that John Carter is a surprise hit - that could get an attraction, or perhaps an original concept not tied to an existing franchise could also be the basis.
 

Captain Chaos

Well-Known Member
I don't think that they should have a land based off of it... but I think they should do something for the movie Hercules... a true classic with great music... would make a great ride!

I loved Hercules too (a sleeper favorite of mine) but I just can't see it as an attraction... I actually think a Brother Bear river raft/log flume ride in Canada would be better option... And it doesn't have to be about the movie... But then again, it may be too much like Splash Mountain...
 

Club34

Well-Known Member
First, I am indifferent to Avatarland. If I could pick I would probably choose something different. If they just give it a ride then they could probably stick it in DHS leaving a major AK expansion for beasts or australia.

If they do it, lets just hope it gets a royal WDI treatment. On that note to those who say it can't be done or how would it work: the movie ends with a silver of notion that balance with nature is to be restored which is AK-esque. The "land" would be the compound which is now friendly and a safe-zone for humans (us the guests) the attraction(s) would have us out in pandora to "see the sights". All the amenities would be in the compound so it fits. They would just have to dress the sets to the 9's which obviously they are capable of.

Regarding the unknown sequels is that Cameron has stated he wants to go into Pandora's oceans. So do the math there. I think that overall the movies will continue with the dilemma of man's resource needs vs preserving nature.

Next regarding pixar (and I admit I am a pixar freak). Pixar is not overdone in disney. its their bread and butter for proper disney films that can relate back to the parks a la the lion king and little mermaid back in the day. Pixar films have made 3 BILLION dollars to date. They have not really had a flop although cars2 was a flop perhaps by pixar standards. The problem i see is they are toy story heavy if nothing else. The properties are so rich they are holding back too much on the diversity (but they have all the time in the world to do something so...).

but to say no more pixar? there is so much: toys, oceans, french rats, cars, bugs, superheroes, monsters, robots, and soon irish or scottish people. So you are saying ALL that stuff is off the table? you're not leaving much for disney to work with. Shoot, toys, robots, and monsters is how they make their money. :hammer:

To say don't turn into Uni, I think disney (like all the parks) have to consider risk of a new original property or idea vs. the brand appeal of an established name. in the case of an avatar, they have to pay cameron right? but pixar and their movies they dont ('cause they own them) do i have that right? We know Disney can kick butt with original stuff. Most all of Disney World was original right? POTC, HM, BTMRR, etc. But clearly kids and the public know characters from movies/shows so half of the marketing and the draw is already done for you. Avatar is the best selling movie of all time right now. HP is the best selling series. That contest isn't done yet (although with 7 films I don't see HP being dethroned anytime soon as their WW gross is at almost 8 billion). Disney missed the boat there but its spilled milk. best to come up with a 5-10-20 year plan to enhance and develop what you got and see if there is room to make some new alliances or acquisitions. WDW has room to grow and to do it well. The latter part is the human variable and the risk.

Lets also remember that Disney bought and outright owns a little niche property called Marvel. That is still an untapped well for the parks sans a few tshirts and such.
 

danlb_2000

Well-Known Member
Lets also remember that Disney bought and outright owns a little niche property called Marvel. That is still an untapped well for the parks sans a few tshirts and such.

Unfortunetly (or fortunetly depending on your point of view), Universal has exclusive rights to it east of the Mississippi so Disney can't do much with Marvel at WDW.

Dan
 

Sharkreef11

Well-Known Member
First, I am indifferent to Avatarland. If I could pick I would probably choose something different. If they just give it a ride then they could probably stick it in DHS leaving a major AK expansion for beasts or australia.

If they do it, lets just hope it gets a royal WDI treatment. On that note to those who say it can't be done or how would it work: the movie ends with a silver of notion that balance with nature is to be restored which is AK-esque. The "land" would be the compound which is now friendly and a safe-zone for humans (us the guests) the attraction(s) would have us out in pandora to "see the sights". All the amenities would be in the compound so it fits. They would just have to dress the sets to the 9's which obviously they are capable of.

Regarding the unknown sequels is that Cameron has stated he wants to go into Pandora's oceans. So do the math there. I think that overall the movies will continue with the dilemma of man's resource needs vs preserving nature.

Next regarding pixar (and I admit I am a pixar freak). Pixar is not overdone in disney. its their bread and butter for proper disney films that can relate back to the parks a la the lion king and little mermaid back in the day. Pixar films have made 3 BILLION dollars to date. They have not really had a flop although cars2 was a flop perhaps by pixar standards. The problem i see is they are toy story heavy if nothing else. The properties are so rich they are holding back too much on the diversity (but they have all the time in the world to do something so...).

but to say no more pixar? there is so much: toys, oceans, french rats, cars, bugs, superheroes, monsters, robots, and soon irish or scottish people. So you are saying ALL that stuff is off the table? you're not leaving much for disney to work with. Shoot, toys, robots, and monsters is how they make their money. :hammer:

Lets also remember that Disney bought and outright owns a little niche property called Marvel. That is still an untapped well for the parks sans a few tshirts and such.

Great post. I don't understand how anyone could say that Pixar is done (or overdone). If anything it is way underdone. I completely forgot about Marvel. That was an acquisition that happened a while ago and it's been like a ghost..
 

imagineer boy

Well-Known Member
Please be true! I've had absolutly zero interest in avatar land mainly because I (as well as many other people) felt the movie was an overrated, cliche-infested bore. And there is no way in hell this would work as a "potter swatter."
 

whylightbulb

Well-Known Member
Universal's been kicking TDO's *** for the last couple years, so I think them "turning into Universal" would be the best possible scenario at this point.
Yes...while Disney is touting their amazing new mural for Be Our Guest Restaurant and their exciting Dumbo spin land, Universal is creating an ultra immersive experience with a Hogwart's Express train all decked out to look incredibly realistic on the outside and also to include luxuriously appointed cabins on the inside complete with realistic lighting, sounds and special effects for riders to experience as they travel to Diagon Alley that will include an amzing E-ticket ride that will exceed most expectations. Hmmm do you think Disney should step up their game a bit?
 

ChrisM

Well-Known Member
Good grief.

If James Cameron presents James Cameron's World of Avatar by James Cameron does not actually come to fruition, it will be yet another example of Disney proving it is run by imbeciles.

A company that makes big announcement after big announcement and doesn't follow through on them (wholesale post-announcement changes to FLE, Hyperion Wharf, Avatar) is a company that doesn't know what it wants to be. Or simply a company that's running a business it doesn't really want to be involved in any longer.

Successful businesses are wholly focused on their products and core competencies. Disney, as a whole, is focused on its media products; Parks and Resorts are largely a hobby business to the main power brokers, and possibly one they would rather divest themselves of. In the meantime, those in charge are happy to invest the bare minimum in the theme parks, leverage generational nostaliga while they still can, and fatten the balance sheet with their time share business.

That this is so readily apparent to someone who is hardly paying attention, namely me, is really quite damning.

I enjoy the parks for what they are, and fall into Disney's greedy hands by indulging in my own nostagia laden trips every few (sometimes 10) years, but P&R would clearly be better served if spun off entirely or sold to investors who actually saw the P&R themselves as the core business and not everything but.
 

tman2000

Member
Avatar just isn't 'hot' enough - especially if you want to think about enduring appeal. People don't just know and love 'Pandora'.

It was an exciting announcement, and it's not 'my money', so I was pleased, but this is probably a bad idea.

If they want to compete with Harry Potter, they need to make Star Wars land. I say expand DHS to be 1.5 times as big, add a Star Wars Hotel, leaving room for a Pixar-land.

I know they want to expand Animal Kingdom, but DHS needs love. I LOVE Animal Kingdom and its very existence makes Disney vacations more appealing to me - even though I spend half days there.

Star Wars has enduring appeal, this is unquestioned. It's such a no-brainer.

They should move Star Tours (expensive, but at least all the pieces are already there) and expand an empty lot of property for a brand new area up where Cars/Motors/Action is. Keep the Indiana Jones stunt show, no need for 'lucas land'.

I don't like the idea of converting the one eatery to be a star wars 'cantina' and adding MAYBE one attraction for a mini Star Wars land. They need 1 more intense E ticket (in addition to Tours) and 1 less intense D ticket, plus a couple of eateries, and a show, with a C ticket AT LEAST. Star Wars has HUNDREDS of locales to choose from, and at least 10 that most people can recognize (Naboo, Coruscant, Death Star, Tatooine, Hoth, Endor, Bespin, Geonosis, Dagobah). Having even two or three would make a whole mini-park.

I say make half the park "Dark Side" and half "Light Side". Make Dark side an enclosed space with a 'shuttle ride' to the 'Death Star' which is decorated all imperial like and they play the scary emperor music and imperial march.

Make Light side foresty (Endor, Yavin, and for those who know: Dantooine etc.). Have Tatooine in between as a hub area.

So, three areas in a 'land' which is a mini park.

Forget Avatar land!
 

misterID

Well-Known Member
they could use all that money to build some original attractions!

They won't.

If AvatarLand isn't built, that money is staying in the bank. And you won't get anything the least bit meaningful for at least the next decade.

But you will get to keep the empty plots you guys have been crying about losing because of avatarland. Have fun with that.
 

njDizFan

Well-Known Member
Yes...while Disney is touting their amazing new mural for Be Our Guest Restaurant and their exciting Dumbo spin land, Universal is creating an ultra immersive experience with a Hogwart's Express train all decked out to look incredibly realistic on the outside and also to include luxuriously appointed cabins on the inside complete with realistic lighting, sounds and special effects for riders to experience as they travel to Diagon Alley that will include an amzing E-ticket ride that will exceed most expectations. Hmmm do you think Disney should step up their game a bit?
ahhh it's an Universal it can't be as good because it's not disney :lookaroun
 

lebeau

Well-Known Member
They won't.

If AvatarLand isn't built, that money is staying in the bank. And you won't get anything the least bit meaningful for at least the next decade.

But you will get to keep the empty plots you guys have been crying about losing because of avatarland. Have fun with that.

This is what I don't get. People cheer when something gets cancelled even if no replacement is announced. Do people like stagnation that much? :shrug:
 

WDW1974

Well-Known Member
OK, checked with a Spirited source this morning and Avatarland isn't dead ... yet. It seems to be a matter of when, not if.

Disney and Cameron have a distinct difference of opinion over how this should be done and, more importantly, how much it should cost. And because of the strange new world the movie showcases, turning this into a theme park world that isn't all screens (something Cameron put his foot down early as WDI did want a second generation Soarin where you flew on one of those dragon-creatures over and through and around Pandora as the highlight E-Ticket experience of the land) has proven very problematic.

Disney is also aware the general public (not simply crazy Disney fans who post on sites like this) gave a collective yawn to the announcement AND the two new films are behind schedule by quite a bit and knowing the perfectionist that Cameron is may be delayed by quite a while, giving Disney nothing in the pop culture of the times to play off of when the imaginary land opens.

I was told if they take this off life support to not expect any announcement 'if they can help it' ... that it will quietly be taken off the slate of working projects and hopefully no one will ask any questions.

So, I guess you can say it isn't dead ... but it's like a dying hanging upside down tree that no one is nurturing at this point ... and that fanbois want to see cut down so they can get a better view of Wishes and a fiberglass castle!

~Too much snark there?~
 

NemoRocks78

Seized
Premium Member
Yes...while Disney is touting their amazing new mural for Be Our Guest Restaurant and their exciting Dumbo spin land, Universal is creating an ultra immersive experience with a Hogwart's Express train all decked out to look incredibly realistic on the outside and also to include luxuriously appointed cabins on the inside complete with realistic lighting, sounds and special effects for riders to experience as they travel to Diagon Alley that will include an amzing E-ticket ride that will exceed most expectations. Hmmm do you think Disney should step up their game a bit?

:sohappy:
 

HMF

Well-Known Member
This is what I don't get. People cheer when something gets cancelled even if no replacement is announced. Do people like stagnation that much? :shrug:

They need to fix what they already have before any more expansion.
 

xdan0920

Think for yourselfer
OK, checked with a Spirited source this morning and Avatarland isn't dead ... yet. It seems to be a matter of when, not if.

Disney and Cameron have a distinct difference of opinion over how this should be done and, more importantly, how much it should cost. And because of the strange new world the movie showcases, turning this into a theme park world that isn't all screens (something Cameron put his foot down early as WDI did want a second generation Soarin where you flew on one of those dragon-creatures over and through and around Pandora as the highlight E-Ticket experience of the land) has proven very problematic.

Disney is also aware the general public (not simply crazy Disney fans who post on sites like this) gave a collective yawn to the announcement AND the two new films are behind schedule by quite a bit and knowing the perfectionist that Cameron is may be delayed by quite a while, giving Disney nothing in the pop culture of the times to play off of when the imaginary land opens.

I was told if they take this off life support to not expect any announcement 'if they can help it' ... that it will quietly be taken off the slate of working projects and hopefully no one will ask any questions.

So, I guess you can say it isn't dead ... but it's like a dying hanging upside down tree that no one is nurturing at this point ... and that fanbois want to see cut down so they can get a better view of Wishes and a fiberglass castle!

~Too much snark there?~

That is pretty shocking stuff there. If true, is there a plan B I wonder.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Top Bottom