Say.... What if Avatarland got cancelled?

[lebeau]

It's like you said, the endearing characters and themes of Star Wars and HP pull people into the story and theme park attractions but it seems that they are actually pushing people away from Avatar.

I love Star Wars. It's an important part of my childhood. But let's not kid ourselves. The characters in Star Wars are as two-dimensional as anything in Avatar. They have just seeped deeper into the culture.

Aside from a little character development in Empire, I would not hold out characterization as a strong suit of the Star Wars series.

 

[PirateFrank]

You need to take a trip back through this forum to threads that were made when it was being built, bud. I can't tell you how many people were saying it was going to bomb, that it didn't have a strong franchise, that Harry Potter fever had passed, kids didn't like it anymore, it wasn't Star Wars, UNI was stupid, etc....

Are we using these forums as the only barometer of reaction here? I'm not quite sure whether that's appropriate...

 

[thelookingglass]

I heard the same thing about Harry Potter at UNI. We know how that turned out. :lookaroun

Harry Potter has characters that are household names, a well established die-hard fanbase, etc.

Avatar was just a flash-in-the-pan blockbuster in which people can't remember the names of the characters and the movie has already kind of drifted out of the public consciousness.

 

[lebeau]

Trying to compare every possible new initiative to tWWoHP is a fruitless endeavor. Potter is a unique property: one that combines fantasy elements with the modern world and is directed at children. It developed a massive following in literature, and then film, and there are effectively no other properties out there that could replicate its success (absent Star Wars).

Comparing Potter and Avatar as properties is foolish at face. As an overall property, Avatar is never going to have the following that Potter has. But that doesn't mean an exceptionally well executed theme park experience can't be created using the Avatar property. Quite the contrary.

Universal has chosen to make their Potter attractions very focused on the story from the books and films. It is extremely unlikely that James Cameron presents James Cameron's World of Avatar by James Cameron is going to follow the same approach. The property won't be presented so that you're entering the story from the movie, rather that you are traveling to Pandora and will experience an alien ecosystem as bold adventurers. It will be focused on hard science and the amazing sights and sounds of another planet (well, moon in this case).

Everyone is so wrapped up in Potter and how it's been implemented at Universal that they can't conceive of how differently this will be handled elsewhere. Not all theme park attractions are just introductions into the story of a book or movie and being based on such isn't the only recipe for success.

Bravo!

:sohappy:

 

[wickedfan07]

It's the same with "original lands" like Mysterious Island. It was based on a novel over a hundred years old and not exactly what kids were going crazy for, yet it's one of the most popular lands at any Disney theme park. If you build anything original you're starting from scratch. And you are vastly underestimating Disney's ability to market merchandise that'll appeal to people and kids; you're pointing out the worst end of what can be marketed... To prove your point

There are a few differences between Mysterious Island and Avatarland that I think need to be pointed out:

(1)Yes, Mysterious Island is based on a novel that is over a hundred years old. As a result, the public is more likely to view it as "original" simply because it hass not been in the public consciousness recently and most people have no predetermined opinions about it. Avatar is still pretty fresh in everyone's minds (even if a lot of people have forgotten about it when compared to Potter or Star Wars), and people certainly still do have opinions about it (as seen quite readily in this thread).

(2) Mysterious Island was originally funded by the Oriental Land Company for Tokyo DisneySea and NOT The Walt Disney Company. There is a huge difference between what OLC is willing to pay WDI to do and what WDW is willing t pay WDI to do. If WDW was willing to pay for a copy of Mysterious Island, I'm sure it would already be designed, built and operating at this point.

(3) The creator of the stories featured on Mysterious Island, Jules Verne, is long dead. James Cameron is very much alive. As such, Disney could have interpreted Verne's stories however they wished without the imput of the creator. Cameron, on the other hand, is very much involved and, apparently, has a lot to say about how Disney uses his property. This alone changes how, what and if Disney will do with Avatar, and, in a way, limits the design possibilities much more than Mysterious Island. (And by limited, I mean limited by Cameron's demands vs. Disney's willingness to pay, not a limitation of WDI's ability to recreate Avatar in physcial form.)

 

[lebeau]

Harry Potter has characters that are household names, a well established die-hard fanbase, etc.

Avatar was just a flash-in-the-pan blockbuster in which people can't remember the names of the characters and the movie has already kind of drifted out of the public consciousness.

All franchises were young once. People said the exact same thing about HP. As recently as last year, people here were calling it a "flash in the pan".

I don't know if Avatar will stand the test of time. But you sure don't know that it won't.

 

[ChrisM]

Harry Potter has characters that are household names, a well established die-hard fanbase, etc.

Avatar was just a flash-in-the-pan blockbuster in which people can't remember the names of the characters and the movie has already kind of drifted out of the public consciousness.

I'd argue that's a good thing.

Let's assume today's Disney had the former...the property sells itself, right? Why invest in something cutting edge to attract crowds? They're storming the walls for it regardless of the quality. (Kudos to Universal for swinging for the fences and also creating a great theme park experience with it.)

Now, Disney has the latter. It doesn't necessarily sell itself. Aside from some diehard folks who paint themselves blue and such the reaction is mostly head scratching and a few shrugs. They better dang well create some mindblowing experiences if they want people to show up. The only way to make this the success they want it do be is to do it right.

It's strange that the same people bemoaning the lack of quality at Disney are also advocating for Disney to pick up or try to do something with a property that would give them every incentive to continue lacking in quality.

 

[PirateFrank]

I love Star Wars. It's an important part of my childhood. But let's not kid ourselves. The characters in Star Wars are as two-dimensional as anything in Avatar. They have just seeped deeper into the culture.

Aside from a little character development in Empire, I would not hold out characterization as a strong suit of the Star Wars series.

Surprising, because you've been very negative on SW since as far as I can remember in this thread. Regardless, you may not think there are strong characters in SW, but walk around any kid filled neighborhood on Oct 31...and you're proven wrong.

Personally, I have some serious issues with SW. Take the logical idiocy of a planet destroying space station having to orbit a planet in order to destroy another. :brick: I know, I know. It's a plot device. It's still dumb.

But all things aside, SW and HP have something that Avatar will NEVER have. I've already stated them....and I feel those things are integral when creating a theme park land tied in name and mythology to a movie.

People can argue till their blue in the face about the idea that a 'different approach' can yield similar success.' But at the end of the day, without drawing in children & parents into the fantasy of a particular mythology, all your left with is a gimmick...and if you tie a name to that gimmick, you're going to be forever associated with it, whether it's popular or not.

Take away the characterization and mythology of WWoHP and it's scottish castle in Six flags or Busch Gardens. But it works and has ironically become the thing we all measure against, because of the mythology and the characterization. Go figure....

 

[misterID]

Are we using these forums as the only barometer of reaction here? I'm not quite sure whether that's appropriate...

Dude, you're using yourself, your kids, and your assumption's about what other people think as a borameter...

There are a few differences between Mysterious Island and Avatarland that I think need to be pointed out:

(1)Yes, Mysterious Island is based on a novel that is over a hundred years old. As a result, the public is more likely to view it as "original" simply because it hass not been in the public consciousness recently and most people have no predetermined opinions about it. Avatar is still pretty fresh in everyone's minds (even if a lot of people have forgotten about it when compared to Potter or Star Wars), and people certainly still do have opinions about it (as seen quite readily in this thread).

(2) Mysterious Island was originally funded by the Oriental Land Company for Tokyo DisneySea and NOT The Walt Disney Company. There is a huge difference between what OLC is willing to pay WDI to do and what WDW is willing t pay WDI to do. If WDW was willing to pay for a copy of Mysterious Island, I'm sure it would already be designed, built and operating at this point.

(3) The creator of the stories featured on Mysterious Island, Jules Verne, is long dead. James Cameron is very much alive. As such, Disney could have interpreted Verne's stories however they wished without the imput of the creator. Cameron, on the other hand, is very much involved and, apparently, has a lot to say about how Disney uses his property. This alone changes how, what and if Disney will do with Avatar, and, in a way, limits the design possibilities much more than Mysterious Island. (And by limited, I mean limited by Cameron's demands vs. Disney's willingness to pay, not a limitation of WDI's ability to recreate Avatar in physcial form.)

There was a plan for Mysterious Island themed to Beastly Kingdom pitched and designed for AK... It was nixed.

You need to have someone like James Cameron, not only to get the thing built, but kept from getting watered down. They weren't willing to do it with J.K. Rowling, what makes anyone think they're willing to invest in anything?

But I like where you're headed... OLC should buy WDW

 

[PirateFrank]

Dude, you're using yourself, your kids, and your assumption's about what other people think as a borameter...

Wow, talk about assumptions.....



and its spelled barometer...

 

[lebeau]

Surprising, because you've been very negative on SW since as far as I can remember in this thread. Regardless, you may not think there are strong characters in SW, but walk around any kid filled neighborhood on Oct 31...and you're proven wrong.

I do love Star Wars. Not as much as I did when I was a kid. But it will always be special to me. IMy comments here have been negative because I'm arguing a counter-point to the majority.

The fact that kids wear Star Wars Halloween costumes doesn't mean the characters were 3-dimensional. The most popular kids characters from Mickey Mouse to Superman (and yes, Luke Skywalker) are cardboard cut-outs.

The characters in Star Wars (original trilogy anyway) may resonate. But they aren't fully developed characters.

Personally, I have some serious issues with SW. Take the logical idiocy of a planet destroying space station having to orbit a planet in order to destroy another. :brick: I know, I know. It's a plot device. It's still dumb.

Yeah, I remember realzing as an adult how stupid that was. Or the fact that Luke barely mourns the death of the aunt and uncle who raised him but is torn up about the death of an old vagrant he has known for a week tops.

Or in Empire, when Luje completes his training on Dogaobah in the time it takes the Millenium Falcon to travel from Hoth to Cloud City.

But you get caught up in the story and you don't worry about that stuff.

But all things aside, SW and HP have something that Avatar will NEVER have. I've already stated them....and I feel those things are integral when creating a theme park land tied in name and mythology to a movie.

People can argue till their blue in the face about the idea that a 'different approach' can yield similar success.' But at the end of the day, without drawing in children & parents into the fantasy of a particular mythology, all your left with is a gimmick...and if you tie a name to that gimmick, you're going to be forever associated with it, whether it's popular or not.

Take away the characterization and mythology of WWoHP and it's scottish castle in Six flags or Busch Gardens. But it works and has ironically become the thing we all measure against, because of the mythology and the characterization. Go figure....

I think you're really stuck on that. And it's silly to say Avatar will never have that "it" factor. For all you know, a lot of people feel differently right now. If not, maybe they will after the sequels roll out.

If it weren't for Empire, I'd wager that Star Wars would be a cultural footnote like ET or any other blockbuster movie from the past. Let's see what kind of impact the sequels have on Avatar as a franchise before we cast judgement on its viability.

 

[ChrisM]

But all things aside, SW and HP have something that Avatar will NEVER have. I've already stated them....and I feel those things are integral when creating a theme park land tied in name and mythology to a movie.

People can argue till their blue in the face about the idea that a 'different approach' can yield similar success.' But at the end of the day, without drawing in children & parents into the fantasy of a particular mythology, all your left with is a gimmick...and if you tie a name to that gimmick, you're going to be forever associated with it, whether it's popular or not.

Take away the characterization and mythology of WWoHP and it's scottish castle in Six flags or Busch Gardens. But it works and has ironically become the thing we all measure against, because of the mythology and the characterization. Go figure....

"...blue in the face..." Ha! Awesome.

Allow me to offer a humble anecdote that may help cast a little light on the situation...

I know a fair number of young boys ages 3-9 or thereabouts. My son and his friends, some nephews and their friends, etc. None of them have seen "Avatar".

But if you talk to them, 95% of them are totally jacked about the idea of blasting off in a rocket to another planet. And if you show them some pictures of a bioluminescent landscape, floating mountains, "dragons" you can fly on, and a Thanator bearing down on them, the same percentage respond "holycowohmanthatistotallyawesome!!!!"

Again, just an anecdote. Boys love this stuff. And I wouldn't be surprised if they came to love it more than wizards and wands, at least as far as theme park experiences go. A good half of those boys think Potter is "really dorky".

 

[PirateFrank]

I think you're really stuck on that. And it's silly to say Avatar will never have that "it" factor. For all you know, a lot of people feel differently right now. If not, maybe they will after the sequels roll out.

If it weren't for Empire, I'd wager that Star Wars would be a cultural footnote like ET or any other blockbuster movie from the past. Let's see what kind of impact the sequels have on Avatar as a franchise before we cast judgement on its viability.

I agree with you regarding Empire....and we'll see regarding avatar. I've said it before, I feel strongly that this is going to be a disaster...but I really want to be pleasantly surprised. I want to be proven wrong. I really do.

"...blue in the face..." Ha! Awesome.

Allow me to offer a humble anecdote that may help cast a little light on the situation...

I know a fair number of young boys ages 3-9 or thereabouts. My son and his friends, some nephews and their friends, etc. None of them have seen "Avatar".

But if you talk to them, 95% of them are totally jacked about the idea of blasting off in a rocket to another planet. And if you show them some pictures of a bioluminescent landscape, floating mountains, "dragons" you can fly on, and a Thanator bearing down on them, the same percentage respond "holycowohmanthatistotallyawesome!!!!"

Again, just an anecdote. Boys love this stuff. And I wouldn't be surprised if they came to love it more than wizards and wands, at least as far as theme park experiences go. A good half of those boys think Potter is "really dorky".

lol...listen, I've said it a few times in this thread already. I may be wrong here. I don't think I am. But if this place gets built and suffers from traditional cost cutting and scope reduction that Disney applies to projects, it could be an unmitigated disaster.

 

[misterID]

Wow, talk about assumptions.....



and its spelled barometer...

Thanks for the spellcheck. :kiss:

And it's not an assumption when you've been spouting out through the entire thread what you think, your kids think, and what everyone else thinks about Avatar about why it should be cancelled...

 

[ChrisM]

But if this place gets built and suffers from traditional cost cutting and scope reduction that Disney applies to projects, it could be an unmitigated disaster.

No argument here.

Frankly, I'd prefer they add an "Aliens" world to Animal Kingdom. Game over, man!

 

[lebeau]

I agree with you regarding Empire....and we'll see regarding avatar. I've said it before, I feel strongly that this is going to be a disaster...but I really want to be pleasantly surprised. I want to be proven wrong. I really do.


lol...listen, I've said it a few times in this thread already. I may be wrong here. I don't think I am. But if this place gets built and suffers from traditional cost cutting and scope reduction that Disney applies to projects, it could be an unmitigated disaster.

There's definitely the potential for disaster. But if Disney doesn't take any chances, we just wind up getting more of the same. And that's not any better than taking a few chances.

If Disney cheaps out, that could ruin any project. Just as it has ruined many projects. That's part of the appeal of the Avatar project. Someone (Cameron) is there to keep Disney from cheaping out.

 

[xdan0920]

I think it's really hard to gauge negative reaction. We're living in an overly cynical society right now where the loudest voices are usually the most irrational and/or dellusional. This happens in many facets of life, most notably politics, religion and of course... sports. I'll use sports as the comparison because it's most likely to stay in the thread.

Going into last season, everyone assumed that the World Series was going to be the Red Sox vs. the Phillies because they were the best teams on paper. Just for fun, the other 28 teams decided to play that season as well and sure enough, the masses were wrong.

In the case of Avatar, we need to let them "play the games" so to say before we can truly see what happens. We are basing our opinions on our views of the movie Avatar "on paper". Yes, we were able to see the movie in 3D, but until the 3D world is truly recreated it's difficult to determine what the quality level will be. Keep in mind that the designers of World of Avatar do have a decent track record of creating new things.

Sadly, the realistic, rational opinions are never the loudest voices. A cry of "WAIT AND SEE!!" doesn't really resonate.

Here is my issue with that...

Wait and see is 99% of the time, the right attitude to take. For example, that the BatB resturant. Maybe I don't like BatB, maybe I think it sounds dumb to eat in Beast's castle. However, building a resturant is a relatively minor investment, and has the potential for alteration going forward.

AvLand is an enormous investment, not just money, but time as well. Having a wait and see approach could very well lead to a very bad decade for WDW fans. I personally feel it has a low chance of success. So I would rather nip this thing in the bud and move on.

 

[Monty]

Here is my issue with that...

Wait and see is 99% of the time, the right attitude to take. For example, that the BatB resturant. Maybe I don't like BatB, maybe I think it sounds dumb to eat in Beast's castle. However, building a resturant is a relatively minor investment, and has the potential for alteration going forward.

AvLand is an enormous investment, not just money, but time as well. Having a wait and see approach could very well lead to a very bad decade for WDW fans. I personally feel it has a low chance of success. So I would rather nip this thing in the bud and move on.

Pretty sure you don't get a vote. Iger gave no indication that the project was anything but on track today during the shareholders' meeting. Seems people like dwelling on defunct rumours.... :shrug:

 

[lebeau]

Here is my issue with that...

Wait and see is 99% of the time, the right attitude to take. For example, that the BatB resturant. Maybe I don't like BatB, maybe I think it sounds dumb to eat in Beast's castle. However, building a resturant is a relatively minor investment, and has the potential for alteration going forward.

AvLand is an enormous investment, not just money, but time as well. Having a wait and see approach could very well lead to a very bad decade for WDW fans. I personally feel it has a low chance of success. So I would rather nip this thing in the bud and move on.

I had no idea you had so much power within Disney...

 

[xdan0920]

Pretty sure you don't get a vote. Iger gave no indication that the project was anything but on track today during the shareholders' meeting. Seems people like dwelling on defunct rumours.... :shrug:

So I sent in that absentee ballot for nothing? :shrug:

Dang it all