George Lucas on a Bench
Well-Known Member
Wait, you guys all hate Avatar too? Or is this a trick?
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
News Star Wars: Galaxy's Edge - Historical Construction/Impressions
- Thread starter BrianLo
- Start date
Curious Constance
Well-Known Member
I'm betting Avatarland will be amazing when it's done. I'm HOPING it's not very Avatary, but will have a great atmosphere and vibe to it aside from the movie and characters. I can't imagine why they would have chosen Avatar as an IP. That would probably be my last choice. I bet the second movie won't do anywhere NEAR as well as the first one did. And I would think you'd want to choose an IP that has a lot of base, core fans, and has stood the test of time, like Star Wars. That way you don't have to rely on current popularity since that never lasts long.
D
Deleted member 107043
This can be said of pretty much any well produced IP based ride though Phurby. I couldn't care less about Harry Potter, but I'm almost certain I would enjoy most of WWoHP.
yookeroo
Well-Known Member
Ummm... It's box office is significantly higher then even Star Wars. Like, by a third.
They're making two Star Wars Lands. One on each coast.
AKL needed something. Especially one that will keep guests at night. Avatar is a pretty good fit for an animal themed park. It did huge box office. Whatever the problems were with the movie, it wasn't in the world building or art direction. That world was beautifully done. The plot was by-the-numbers, but the planet was pretty incredible.
The next movie could not do nearly as well as the first and still do $2 billion.
dweezil78
Well-Known Member
I remember enjoying Avatar when I saw it -- caught it on big IMAX in 3D the way it was to be seen at the Universal City theater so it was a pretty great in-theater experience. Have had no desire to see it ever since though.
That said, I think the idea of having Pandora at Animal Kingdom is a pretty cool fit and from what I'm seeing so far, it looks extremely ambitious. To me the movie was way more about the setting and message than it was the characters involved, so it works on that level. I actually couldn't even tell you a single character in the movie!
That said, I think the idea of having Pandora at Animal Kingdom is a pretty cool fit and from what I'm seeing so far, it looks extremely ambitious. To me the movie was way more about the setting and message than it was the characters involved, so it works on that level. I actually couldn't even tell you a single character in the movie!
D
Deleted member 107043
I recall enjoying the movie when I saw it. I also remember a lot of people losing their minds over it too.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/SHOWBIZ/Movies/01/11/avatar.movie.blues/
A franchise with that kind of emotional impact seems like a smart move for Disney to leverage at P&R as it is guaranteed to open up WDW to whole audience segment that it has never seen before. The same goes for SW Land.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/SHOWBIZ/Movies/01/11/avatar.movie.blues/
A franchise with that kind of emotional impact seems like a smart move for Disney to leverage at P&R as it is guaranteed to open up WDW to whole audience segment that it has never seen before. The same goes for SW Land.
Curious Constance
Well-Known Member
I know. I just feel like the first movie, everyone wanted to see it less for the actual movie content and more for the visual uniqueness. Didn't that movie pretty much introduce 3D in theaters? It seems like it was more novel at the time, than a good movie.
Phroobar
Well-Known Member
You can base a ride on "Bob Iger's day at the beach" and people will come running to ride it. The popularity of the IP just makes the ride even more popular. The ride will still be ridden no matter if its a stinker or not.
Add a magic band to the ride and Bob Iger will say your name as he throws a virtual beach ball over your head.
Add a magic band to the ride and Bob Iger will say your name as he throws a virtual beach ball over your head.
RandomPrincess
Keep Moving Forward
Thanks for starting this thread!
Curious Constance
Well-Known Member
I agree with this, but I think where it might underperform would be in it's ability to draw big crowds to WDW specifically to see it when it opens. People would hear there is a new Avatarland, and assume, without looking into it much, that they wouldn't be interested since they aren't much interested in Avatar.
D
Deleted member 107043
I agree, except I'd be very surprised if Avatarland under performed. The thing with massive IPs like Harry Potter, Avatar, and Marvel is that they have incredibly strong adult appeal, and they each have dedicated fan bases that might not otherwise visit Disney or Universal theme parks in large numbers. By investing in a monumental Avatar attraction Disney stands to expand its business to a wider audience. Maybe Avatar won't draw every single Harry Potter nut flocking to Universal up the road, but that's kind of the point I think.
D
Deleted member 107043
About $2.8 billion worth. Don't forget that's gross revenue from only one film. There's scant (if any) merchandise, theme park tie-ins, TV spinoffs, that they can bank on. Yet.
Last edited by a moderator:
Phroobar
Well-Known Member
It's just Pocahontas in Space. Seven years later that movie would never bring in that kind of money. It was innovative at the time. Now it is been done hundreds of times since. There is not an Avatar fanbase like there is for Star Trek, Marvel or Star Wars to support the merch.
D
Deleted member 107043
That's obviously true, but if you're Disney your primary concerns are expanding your customer base and increasing guest spending at Animal Kingdom, which will undoubtedly happen when Avatarland opens.
Phroobar
Well-Known Member
They will come for the new rides and environment. Not the IP. It would be equally successful if it wasn't an IP. They will eat in the restaurant but no one is going to buy Na'vi figures. On the other hand, SWL in DHS will kick Avatarland's mechanism sales.