Tree of life 'grows' new roots

[twebber55]

Tweb, I have been with you on this from the beginning. I can't wait for the Harambe expansion to open. To me, that is going to continue to demonstrate the effort that is being put into this particular park in terms of immersive, beautiful theming.

When the new, expanded Harambe FotLK opened, I remember my family and I were walking around the entire area, my wife was taking pictures and such, and we ran into this guy that was working on the theming. He indicated that he was a free lance contractor that helped with all of the minor theming that you see throughout the park. The amount of work to immerse people in this park is tremendous. To me, things like new roots for the ToL are just the icing on an otherwise elaborate cake.

I was actually there on my vacation last June 1 (the first day the FOLK opened) I was blown away how nice and immersive it looked and im sure the expanded area will be great this spring
good times ahead for DAK

 

[lazyboy97o]

I'm sure the 'Land' itself will get built but whether it opens Avatar themed or something else is up for grabs as you are correct Disney rarely stops after they go vertical (AoA being a recent exception),

Pandora could easily be replaced with Endor and even use the same attraction mechanics - Soarin theater changes from banshee to speederbike, Boat ride - well it's a forest in both cases but one's blue and glows in the dark. banshee change to X-wing

The only thing I am sure of is if Avatar 2 is a box office flop, There will not BE an Avatar attraction at AK. There will be something else there in it's place which shares many of the thematic elements.

Pandora IS the "Potter Swatter." Building it is more about personal desires than the numbers.

 

[twebber55]

Pandora IS the "Potter Swatter." Building it is more about personal desires than the numbers.

for the record I don not think there is such as thing as Potter swatter...universal is growing and will continue to expand because they seem to have a vision for their company

 

[ford91exploder]

Pandora IS the "Potter Swatter." Building it is more about personal desires than the numbers.

If so I'm surprised because so far everything at WDW has been driven solely 'By The Numbers', I think it's seen as the 'Potter Swatter' because of the first one's huge boxoffice success, Yet it has virtually no impact on the popular culture like SW and HP have, And sans 3D effects its a preachy movie which is virtually unwatchable.

 

[ford91exploder]

we disagree but you are one of my favorite posters on this site...very informative and entertaining

I enjoy discussions like this - and it WILL be fun to see what finally opens.

 

[ford91exploder]

Tweb, I have been with you on this from the beginning. I can't wait for the Harambe expansion to open. To me, that is going to continue to demonstrate the effort that is being put into this particular park in terms of immersive, beautiful theming.

When the new, expanded Harambe FotLK opened, I remember my family and I were walking around the entire area, my wife was taking pictures and such, and we ran into this guy that was working on the theming. He indicated that he was a free lance contractor that helped with all of the minor theming that you see throughout the park. The amount of work to immerse people in this park is tremendous. To me, things like new roots for the ToL are just the icing on an otherwise elaborate cake.

Definitely agree the Harambe expansion is done to 'Old School' Disney standards, It is to be hoped that TDO keeps this level of quality coming.

 

[jakeman]

If so I'm surprised because so far everything at WDW has been driven solely 'By The Numbers', I think it's seen as the 'Potter Swatter' because of the first one's huge boxoffice success, Yet it has virtually no impact on the popular culture like SW and HP have, And sans 3D effects its a preachy movie which is virtually unwatchable.

Definitely agree the Harambe expansion is done to 'Old School' Disney standards, It is to be hoped that TDO keeps this level of quality coming.

You know why I like you? Because you have such a lack of self awareness that you can completely contradict yourself in a span of 3 post.

 

[Sage of Time]

So just to butt in here regarding the theme of Animal Kingdom as a former cast member when the park was just a year old and it's mission statement was still pretty strong.

The theme of Animal Kingdom is "animals that were, animals that are, and animals that will never be". There was no more or no less to that.

You know, save for the fact that all of the lands were build with thematic touches that made them linked to cultures and parts of subaltern "real and gritty" parts of the world that have deeper aesthetic meanings to how man and nature interact.

Keeping ideas of the park simple do it no favors at all. Animal Kingdom, in reality, is just as much about our relationship with nature and animals than it is about the animals themselves. That's been a part of the literature on the park since day one.

"animals that were, animals that are, and animals that will never be" is certainly valid, but it has to fit into the aesthetic and thematic paradigm I spoke about above. Space aliens are pushing it...

 

[jakeman]

You know, save for the fact that all of the lands were build with thematic touches that made them linked to cultures and parts of subaltern "real and gritty" parts of the world that have deeper aesthetic meanings to how man and nature interact.

Keeping ideas of the park simple do it no favors at all. Animal Kingdom, in reality, is just as much about our relationship with nature and animals than it is about the animals themselves. That's been a part of the literature on the park since day one.

"animals that were, animals that are, and animals that will never be" is certainly valid, but it has to fit into the aesthetic and thematic paradigm I spoke about above. Space aliens are pushing it...

It's not only valid, but it's what the cast was trained on and it was the theme the park was built around.

You can make it more complicated if you want. I'm just telling you what the official theme was near the time that the park was opened.

 

[Sage of Time]

It's not only valid, but it's what the cast was trained on and it was the theme the park was built around.

You can make it more complicated if you want. I'm just telling you what the official theme was near the time that the park was opened.

I'm not complicating it... rather, I'm parroting what opening day literature also said on the topic. It's explained pretty clearly in Melody Malmberg's book and in the WDI Field Guides.

http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/8370.The_Making_Of_Disney_s_Animal_Kingdom_Theme_Park

The fact is, if you compare Avatar's 'space alien and other planet' aesthetic with the rest of DAK's thematic and aesthetic methodology, a departure can easily be seen.

 

[jakeman]

I'm not complicating it... rather, I'm parroting what opening day literature also said on the topic. It's explained pretty clearly in Melody Malmberg's book and in the WDI Field Guides.

http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/8370.The_Making_Of_Disney_s_Animal_Kingdom_Theme_Park

The fact is, if you compare Avatar's 'space alien and other planet' aesthetic with the rest of DAK's thematic and aesthetic methodology, a departure can easily be seen.

Okay.

You do realize that both of the references you cited are also going to gloss over the fact that the "never were" didn't make it into the final product beyond a character meet and greet land because the budget was cut? There is going to be a certain degree of revisionist history regarding that aspect of the park.

Regardless, I'm not making an argument either way as to Avatar's inclusion, I'm just presenting what I know as facts regarding the basic theme of Animal Kingdom.

 

[lazyboy97o]

for the record I don not think there is such as thing as Potter swatter...universal is growing and will continue to expand because they seem to have a vision for their company

A Potter Swatter is and always has been about saving face and ego, not knocking Universal's expansion.

If so I'm surprised because so far everything at WDW has been driven solely 'By The Numbers', I think it's seen as the 'Potter Swatter' because of the first one's huge boxoffice success, Yet it has virtually no impact on the popular culture like SW and HP have, And sans 3D effects its a preachy movie which is virtually unwatchable.

Passion projects always trump numbers. The box office numbers and the star power of Cameron make the deal look like a coup, but if it was all about numbers then the deal would have died long ago with the toy sales. Cars Land was built around merchandise sales. Tangled and Wreck-It Ralph had good box office numbers, but didn't ignite merchandise sales. Disney was perfectly willing to let Sony hold onto the film rights to Spider-Man because they got the merchandise rights.

You know why I like you? Because you have such a lack of self awareness that you can completely contradict yourself in a span of 3 post.

How? The Harambe expansion was built around Festival of the Lion King. It's one of the best rated attractions in all of Walt Disney World, so there would be high expectations of a replacement. It was also built on a shoestring budget and its biggest props are old parade floats.

The fact is, if you compare Avatar's 'space alien and other planet' aesthetic with the rest of DAK's thematic and aesthetic methodology, a departure can easily be seen.

Aliens are not new. Nor is the concept of relating aliens to protecting nature new. Mars being ravages by its inhabitants was a popular conceit. It just seems odd to me that with all of the literary and historical knowledge inside Walt Disney Imagineering, the idea of aliens as metaphor being included didn't occur until some top-level executives with little to no interest in themed entertainment decided it should.

Okay.

You do realize that both of the references you cited are also going to gloss over the fact that the "never were" didn't make it into the final product beyond a character meet and greet land because the budget was cut? There is going to be a certain degree of revisionist history regarding that aspect of the park.

Regardless, I'm not making an argument either way as to Avatar's inclusion, I'm just presenting what I know as facts regarding the basic theme of Animal Kingdom.

But look at the types of "never were" animals. That is the whole point. Aliens could have been included, but there is not evidence that they were ever even considered as a means of filling the "never were" role.

 

[twebber55]

A Potter Swatter is and always has been about saving face and ego, not knocking Universal's expansion.


Passion projects always trump numbers. The box office numbers and the star power of Cameron make the deal look like a coup, but if it was all about numbers then the deal would have died long ago with the toy sales. Cars Land was built around merchandise sales. Tangled and Wreck-It Ralph had good box office numbers, but didn't ignite merchandise sales. Disney was perfectly willing to let Sony hold onto the film rights to Spider-Man because they got the merchandise rights.


How? The Harambe expansion was built around Festival of the Lion King. It's one of the best rated attractions in all of Walt Disney World, so there would be high expectations of a replacement. It was also built on a shoestring budget and its biggest props are old parade floats.


Aliens are not new. Nor is the concept of relating aliens to protecting nature new. Mars being ravages by its inhabitants was a popular conceit. It just seems odd to me that with all of the literary and historical knowledge inside Walt Disney Imagineering, the idea of aliens as metaphor being included didn't occur until some top-level executives with little to no interest in themed entertainment decided it should.


But look at the types of "never were" animals. That is the whole point. Aliens could have been included, but there is not evidence that they were ever even considered as a means of filling the "never were" role.

aren't you being somewhat of a hypocrite then? you cant say avatar was a numbers issue or Iger is all about greed and then claim avatar has no merchandising potential and wont make the park any money
you cant have it both ways...maybe we should then applaud Disney for not going the merchandise route with an IP with such limited merchandising potential

 

[jakeman]

But look at the types of "never were" animals. That is the whole point. Aliens could have been included, but there is not evidence that they were ever even considered as a means of filling the "never were" role.

Oh. Good. Lord.

I even said in the post you quoted I'm just delivering information and not stating one way or another what should be included.

 

[lazyboy97o]

aren't you being somewhat of a hypocrite then? you cant say avatar was a numbers issue or Iger is all about greed and then claim avatar has no merchandising potential and wont make the park any money
you cant have it both ways...maybe we should then applaud Disney for not going the merchandise route with an IP with such limited merchandising potential

I never said anything about the park not making money nor am I denying how much a pop culture phenomenon Avatar was when it was released. Just because the current typical metric of merchandise was not held up is not a reason to celebrate. The property was chosen in a futile attempt to beat Universal to it (they weren't interested) and get a "Potter Swatter" announced. It wasn't chosen because of pitches from creatives or chosen by executives passionate about themed entertainment (or even cute stories about it being so-and-so's kid's idea).

This is all exactly why some are worried about the land being a success, lest it again encourage even more poor decision making. The entire history of Disney's Animal Kingdom is Joe Rohde making something stunning out of less than ideal situations. It was the first post-Euro Disney park and of those low attraction count, budget slashed parks it has faired far better than Disney's California Adventure, Walt Disney Studios Park and Hong Kong Disneyland. Festival of the Lion King, Asia and Chester and Hester's DinoRama all followed the same path of being underfunded but well executed; and in turn reinforced the idea that fast and cheap was Disney's path to fixing the errors of Euro Disney. Even this thread is a repeat of that same story. There is celebration of the widening of walkways and removal of landscaping that created the more wild appearance of the park because the replacement was at least exquisitely executed.

 

[twebber55]

I never said anything about the park not making money nor am I denying how much a pop culture phenomenon Avatar was when it was released. Just because the current typical metric of merchandise was not held up is not a reason to celebrate. The property was chosen in a futile attempt to beat Universal to it (they weren't interested) and get a "Potter Swatter" announced. It wasn't chosen because of pitches from creatives or chosen by executives passionate about themed entertainment (or even cute stories about it being so-and-so's kid's idea).

This is all exactly why some are worried about the land being a success, lest it again encourage even more poor decision making. The entire history of Disney's Animal Kingdom is Joe Rohde making something stunning out of less than ideal situations. It was the first post-Euro Disney park and of those low attraction count, budget slashed parks it has faired far better than Disney's California Adventure, Walt Disney Studios Park and Hong Kong Disneyland. Festival of the Lion King, Asia and Chester and Hester's DinoRama all followed the same path of being underfunded but well executed; and in turn reinforced the idea that fast and cheap was Disney's path to fixing the errors of Euro Disney. Even this thread is a repeat of that same story. There is celebration of the widening of walkways and removal of landscaping that created the more wild appearance of the park because the replacement was at least exquisitely executed.

i definitely respect your Disney purist mentality

 

[Sage of Time]

Okay.

You do realize that both of the references you cited are also going to gloss over the fact that the "never were" didn't make it into the final product beyond a character meet and greet land because the budget was cut? There is going to be a certain degree of revisionist history regarding that aspect of the park.

Regardless, I'm not making an argument either way as to Avatar's inclusion, I'm just presenting what I know as facts regarding the basic theme of Animal Kingdom.

False. Malberg's book was published in 1998.

There's no revisionist history here, Jake. Just the fact that a reliance on earth culture and aesthetics is part of DAK's core and "other worldly" aesthetics don't really commit to that.

The basic theme of Animal Kingdom isn't specific enough to the conversation being had in this thread, I think.

Aliens are not new. Nor is the concept of relating aliens to protecting nature new. Mars being ravages by its inhabitants was a popular conceit. It just seems odd to me that with all of the literary and historical knowledge inside Walt Disney Imagineering, the idea of aliens as metaphor being included didn't occur until some top-level executives with little to no interest in themed entertainment decided it should.

Right. The problem is the context in which they are being used. Avatar isn't the direct translation of what you are describing. As I have been saying, Avatar lacks the subaltern and humanistic elements of culture that makes DAK what DAK is... and not just another zoo with rides. The aspects about that park and about people make it something far more sophisticated.

 

[jakeman]

False. Malberg's book was published in 1998.

There's no revisionist history here, Jake. Just the fact that a reliance on earth culture and aesthetics is part of DAK's core and "other worldly" aesthetics don't really commit to that.

Animal Kingdom opened in 1998. Don't you think they would have their company line straight by then?

 

[Sage of Time]

Animal Kingdom opened in 1998. Don't you think they would have their company line straight by then?

Are you making my point for me?

 

[jakeman]

Are you making my point for me?

No clue...