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.
