danlb_2000
Premium Member
You really doubt Disney's ability to merchandise the life out of anything they can get their hands on?
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Spirited News, Observations & Thoughts IV
- Thread starter WDW1974
- Start date
- Status
You really doubt Disney's ability to merchandise the life out of anything they can get their hands on?
Disneyhead'71
Well-Known Member
No doubt they'll try. But does anybody WANT a Mickey Na'vi action figure?
Bairstow
Well-Known Member
What exactly did he say to you?
Clever Name
Well-Known Member
This sounds like the most logical conclusion. I don't think that Cameron or Disney are willing to trust Rohde with a project of this complexity. After all Rohde is directly responsible for the disco yeti fiasco.
Last edited:
doctornick
Well-Known Member
The ROI would be to:
(1) get people to spend full days at DAK, spending more money (even if not on Avatar merch, at least getting food)
(2) get people to spend more days at WDW in general (whether by going to DAK when they otherwise would not or spending a full day at DAK instead of going somewhere else that evening and adding a day)
(3) having something to advertise which might motivate people to check out/visit WDW for a vacation.
#3 doesn't require people to be like "I love Avatar and can't wait to see it in real life because I'm a massive fan". It just needs people to say "that Avatar land looks pretty cool with the rocks and glowing trees, we should go to Disney to check it out".
I'm not saying that this would get a good ROI compared to the money spent -- though it's tough to quantify with theme parks anyway -- but I can see the rationale that any large addition to DAK could help out with increasing revenues by the above factors.
Last edited:
JimboJones123
Well-Known Member
And a Minnie one, with nipples.
JimboJones123
Well-Known Member
Count me in the Rohde=Overrated camp.
Disneyhead'71
Well-Known Member
My question is, with the size of those rocks, how big will the nets need to be to catch them when they start falling off like the limbs on the tree of life?
Fe Maiden
Well-Known Member
If some rube is willing to wear a magic band t-shirt I'm sure they can find someone to buy a Mickey Na'vi.
ford91exploder
Resident Curmudgeon
No you will not, I walked out of the movie halfway through wondering why I wasted money and time on it, I am so disgusted with TWDC's downward spiral and now they grab this piece of dreck to save themselves from HP rev 1.0 and 2.0, Story and Show == Entertainment. TWDC is doing neither Story nor Show, Green eyeshade types doing static analysis well Movie X had huge boxoffice so if we build a land for it people will flock to see it never bothering to ask WHY movie X had huge boxoffice.
Weird Al could not even be bothered to mock it except in 'Perform This Way', If it's not worth Weird Al mocking it it has not made an impact on popular culture which is why it will fail, Just like the sequels to the Matrix failed
There is no 'fan fiction' for the Blue Cat People movie, There are huge fan fiction communities for HP, Star Wars, Star Trek and even Indiana Jones.
With NGE and it's baggage I'm selling DVC my points while people are still buying. I've been going for 3 decades but no more - TWDC is an organization which is going to crash the only question is when.
Captain Chaos
Well-Known Member
You sure there is no "fan fiction" for Avatar? You really want to go that far out on a limb and state that as a fact? Think twice...
BrianLo
Well-Known Member
I think Harry Potter (which I love), has sadly misguided the fan community into believing IP is king in the theme park industry. It never used to be this way and Disney built beautiful and engrossing theme parks without it.
Whether or not you feel Avatar is beloved does not really matter. If they use it as a vessel to build a beautiful world with engrossing attractions, it doesn't matter if anyone knows a character. Many great attractions have been "characterless". Fortunately they seem to "get this" with Avatar. It's Pandora land, not Na'vi Land (or blue sex kitten land as people colloquially love to demean it by). Whether or not you love or loathe the story doesn't matter as long as they take this approach (which the artwork indicates they are).
You know what are mediocre IP's? Tower of Terror, Song of the South, Transformers, Cars.... sure I could go on. Yet they were vessels for creativity that surpassed the IP it was based on, or at least something no longer deemed relevant.
Sure the consensus is that no one will be "rushing" to visit a land based on Avatar. No one would be rushing to visit AK Dragon and Unicorn land either (except the Disney fans who know it as the Beastly Kingdom). They are both crap non-existent IP's that may form the basis for a good land, or it could be total crap, but the IP does not matter.
What matters is people see it, and love it for what it is, not what is is based upon. If it turns into something great (like Carsland), 99% of the people complaining will get over the IP and appreciate what it is. The other 1% will just forgo it (proving a point to no one but themselves) and complain about it on a forum for the next decade, because really they have nothing better to do with their lives.
Whether or not you feel Avatar is beloved does not really matter. If they use it as a vessel to build a beautiful world with engrossing attractions, it doesn't matter if anyone knows a character. Many great attractions have been "characterless". Fortunately they seem to "get this" with Avatar. It's Pandora land, not Na'vi Land (or blue sex kitten land as people colloquially love to demean it by). Whether or not you love or loathe the story doesn't matter as long as they take this approach (which the artwork indicates they are).
You know what are mediocre IP's? Tower of Terror, Song of the South, Transformers, Cars.... sure I could go on. Yet they were vessels for creativity that surpassed the IP it was based on, or at least something no longer deemed relevant.
Sure the consensus is that no one will be "rushing" to visit a land based on Avatar. No one would be rushing to visit AK Dragon and Unicorn land either (except the Disney fans who know it as the Beastly Kingdom). They are both crap non-existent IP's that may form the basis for a good land, or it could be total crap, but the IP does not matter.
What matters is people see it, and love it for what it is, not what is is based upon. If it turns into something great (like Carsland), 99% of the people complaining will get over the IP and appreciate what it is. The other 1% will just forgo it (proving a point to no one but themselves) and complain about it on a forum for the next decade, because really they have nothing better to do with their lives.
MerlinTheGoat
Well-Known Member
I agree, though Tower of Terror was based on the Twilight Zone (a certainly NOT crappy IP), and just kind of existed like a "new story" (though itself was a sort of original plot as the old TV series didn't have any Tower of Terror episodes as far as I know). The Tower of Terror movie came well after the ride, it was the ride that inspired the movie there.
And while some people might not enjoy parts of Song of the South, the cartoon parts were always good (the parts that the ride centers around). Also without the old TV show, the Transformers movies wouldn't even exist (never saw the original show but many people seem to have fond memories of it even if they hate the movies).
But yes, IP doesn't matter as long as the end resulting theme park experience is amazing. We'll see if they can deliver on Pandora (I am somewhat hopeful there).
And while some people might not enjoy parts of Song of the South, the cartoon parts were always good (the parts that the ride centers around). Also without the old TV show, the Transformers movies wouldn't even exist (never saw the original show but many people seem to have fond memories of it even if they hate the movies).
But yes, IP doesn't matter as long as the end resulting theme park experience is amazing. We'll see if they can deliver on Pandora (I am somewhat hopeful there).
FigmentJedi
Well-Known Member
Since when is the Twilight Zone considered mediocre? I'll give you Transformers considering they're just using the MIchael Bay movies rather then any of the other "Continuity Families" that are better regarded by people.
BrianLo
Well-Known Member
Sorry, my addendum to that train of thought also included no longer deemed relevant, at least by the same metric that people seem to be judging Avatar. I was also using mediocre as hyperbole, using the same criteria that folks are judging Avatar on (I think none are truly mediocre in the theme park business). They fit into the same category where they are not part of the public conscious that they once were. No one can name a character from Twilight Zone, and apparently that same criteria makes Avatar the worst thing to ever happen to Animal Kingdom (which it is not - that's Chester and Hester).
TalkingHead
Well-Known Member
Maybe it'd be better if the episodes were colorized. Someone needs to get Bob Iger in touch with Ted Turner.
Bairstow
Well-Known Member
Probably because The Twilight Zone was an anthology; it never actually had any recurring characters.
Now that I think about it, does the Tower of Terror actually have anything in common at all with the show?
Sure, it has Rod Serling in it (or a reasonable facsimile), uses the music, and has a couple nicknacks that resemble props from the show, but other than that it's really just an original ghost story with little connection to the themes or plots of the series.
BrianLo
Well-Known Member
Exactly, my point was it was a jumping point to create a great attraction. I think we can agree whether you love or hate Avatar, there is enough material to be a jumping point to create a beautiful land and populate it with things that will wow guests (to use some corporate speak).
That's what matters (as long as they go that direction), not whether your 3- and 30-year-old prays at the alter of Jake Sully.
culturenthrills
Well-Known Member
- Status