Longhairbear
Well-Known Member
Kathleen Kennedy? Or the CEO of 20th Century Fox that just left? Both are ties to George Lucas.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Y'all should ...
- Thread starter WDW1974
- Start date
RSoxNo1
Well-Known Member
And both have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that they can stand the test of time. That's a safer bet than Avatar.
themonkeyisthesultan
Well-Known Member
If Universal really wanted to show up Disney they could fast track their own Avatar land while Disney is dragging their feet, only using Nickelodeon's Avatar instead of Cameron's. Universal seems to have a good relationship with Nickelodeon and, while I've grown to actually like the idea of Cameron's Avatar at DAK, I think Nickelodeon's Avatar is a more natural and easier fit for a theme park land.
it wouldnt surprise me at all if disney does indeed bail on avatar that it eventually ends up in universal in some form...some folks never learn
SeaCastle
Well-Known Member
I don't know if it's been commented here before, but has anyone noticed the trajectory of Avatar is similar to that of Pixie Hollow and Hypeoon Wharf? (That is, announce it with few details, have the project pull a Schrödinger's cat for a few months, and then die quietly.)
Magenta Panther
Well-Known Member
Good!!
Magenta Panther
Well-Known Member
Well, if she is the successor, I hope to GOD she appreciates and understands the strength and appeal of Disney-created and adapted properties, and won't go looking to outside sources for rides and attractions at the parks. Enough of that crap already. Maybe she'll even bring back Dreamfinder.
Taylor
Well-Known Member
Yes I competly understand that but I wouldnt mind Star Wars land
to me you cant havent both ways..either you like non Disney properties or not...personally im good with it as long as its Disney qualityYes I competly understand that but I wouldnt mind Star Wars land
doctornick
Well-Known Member
Agreed. I don't have any problems with using non-Disney properties as long as they are well executed and conducive to the overall theming in the park where they are located. I can understand the arguments for and against Avatar specifically, but I don't get the blanket statements about not wanting something because it is "not Disney".
danlb_2000
Premium Member
But there is a potential plus side to using outside properties, you open up the possibility of brining in guests who might not have come to Disney before, or maybe not very often. If you stick with Disney properties you will most likely only tap into Disney fans who are already coming to the parks.
Goofyernmost
Well-Known Member
Oh...Oh!! IS IT ME???? I better get prepared! Where's my golf clubs.
i will say this...
there are very few properties out there that are deserving to be in a disney/universal park
Pandora, Star Wars, LOTR are all ones i deem fit well and could be used to make a ride/land especially LOTR but that's just my opinion
hiptwinmama
Well-Known Member
So I'm not an insider but I have a good bit of park knowledge and am a former cast member. It seems like what should be simple decisions are being made too complicated.
AK- Why bring in Avatar, why not stick with Disney Characters. Wouldn't Pixie Hollow be a perfect fit in AK. Just down size the Tree to not compete with the Tree of Life. Specially since it got scrubbed from MK. Huge meet and greet with all fairies, and 2-3 smaller rides. Maybe even a fly along with Tink ride similar to Soaring, but with much stronger theming.
DHS- Obviously it needs work. Carland would cause my family to add a day to our Trip, and I'm sure I'm not the only one. I would never go all the way to Cali to see it, when I live on the East Coast. I think CARS LAND at DHS is a must. As for the monsters inc rollercoaster idea. I get that they don't want too many over 48" rides, but what about a suspended coaster in which you are in a suspended closed bottom and sides cart that holds 4. Think Peter Pan meets the Barnstormer. Not too fast, but fast enough to entertain adults while still thrilling kids. Remember the old monster sound stage... it was fun. Why not re-theme it Star Wars and show how the special effects are done. How about re-theme the Sci-Fi Drive in Star Wars where you sit in pod racers, the bones are there just re-theme.
Well, that is my rant.
AK- Why bring in Avatar, why not stick with Disney Characters. Wouldn't Pixie Hollow be a perfect fit in AK. Just down size the Tree to not compete with the Tree of Life. Specially since it got scrubbed from MK. Huge meet and greet with all fairies, and 2-3 smaller rides. Maybe even a fly along with Tink ride similar to Soaring, but with much stronger theming.
DHS- Obviously it needs work. Carland would cause my family to add a day to our Trip, and I'm sure I'm not the only one. I would never go all the way to Cali to see it, when I live on the East Coast. I think CARS LAND at DHS is a must. As for the monsters inc rollercoaster idea. I get that they don't want too many over 48" rides, but what about a suspended coaster in which you are in a suspended closed bottom and sides cart that holds 4. Think Peter Pan meets the Barnstormer. Not too fast, but fast enough to entertain adults while still thrilling kids. Remember the old monster sound stage... it was fun. Why not re-theme it Star Wars and show how the special effects are done. How about re-theme the Sci-Fi Drive in Star Wars where you sit in pod racers, the bones are there just re-theme.
Well, that is my rant.
ctxak98
Well-Known Member
I like some of this but...I love the scifi theater the way it is..its so much fun everytime! And I don't think pixie hollow fits into animal kingdom at all....animal kingdom to me is one giant beautifully themed park(minus dinorama) but adding that would look tacky to me...idk
FrankLapidus
Well-Known Member
How does that fit with Animal Kingdom though? Are there any animals they could use? Do the themes fit with those of the park?
I'm not going to get my hopes up about Avatarland being cancelled, though I do have sympathy for those who were looking forward to it who would be let down if it does go the way of the dodo. I like a lot of the suggestions people have made for a replacement, especially a Critter Country-type land that would encompass WDAS films like The Jungle Book, The Lion King, The Rescuers and Bambi.
hiptwinmama
Well-Known Member
Animal Kingdom is all about nature and preserving it... that's what fairies are all about, they change the seasons, they create rain, snow, water, and they care for animals. However, I do understand why you might not agree. But then again... how does a mythical Yeti tie in, how does a planet other than earth in a story from the future tie in either. What would be nice to see at AK would be some new animals or aquariums (but not as aweful as The Seas has become, when I was a kid The Seas was sparkling and beautiful, full of life. Now it is dingy and green) . Frank, I agree some Jungle Book Tie in's would be great, but imagineering seems to be focused on the newer films and not the "classics". Could you imagine "Bambie" little fawns and deer, how cute.
Just found this on another site, what a great idea. a canoe type Omnimover would be great for Pocahontas ride
AK is a hard fit for a lot of stuff. What about conservation station, it pretty boring. Couldn't they do more there?
I don't think Avatar has any place at any WDW park. Sorry... I know a lot of you are hardcore Avatar fans and might not agree.
I love the Sci-Fi Drive In (other than the food, which is seriously lacking). But if they are looking to add more Star Wars theming it would be an easy change of theme. My thought behind the change was that it would give them the most bang for the buck in re-themeing, not necessarily that I think it needs to be done.
Just found this on another site, what a great idea. a canoe type Omnimover would be great for Pocahontas ride
AK is a hard fit for a lot of stuff. What about conservation station, it pretty boring. Couldn't they do more there?
I don't think Avatar has any place at any WDW park. Sorry... I know a lot of you are hardcore Avatar fans and might not agree.
I love the Sci-Fi Drive In (other than the food, which is seriously lacking). But if they are looking to add more Star Wars theming it would be an easy change of theme. My thought behind the change was that it would give them the most bang for the buck in re-themeing, not necessarily that I think it needs to be done.
ctxak98
Well-Known Member
I still don't see how tinkerbell fitss...the yeti is a mythical animal and so are avatar creatures.....so that makes up for the lost "mythical" section of the park. I think the less characters at animal kingdom the better...but if you wanna bring the classics all into one land like jungle book and bambi...I'm all for that
disneyeater
Active Member
So you can expand on Stars Wars, but Avatar doesn't belong. Based on what?
I agree with the previous poster that says you can't have it both ways.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
I think looking only at ownership, which so many fans seem to do these days, makes the issue ridiculous for either side. What I think matters is the typology of content. Is the content, be it created by Disney or not, "Disneyesque?" Is it something that people would naturally associate with the ideas of Disney? Even Disney owns content that they do not associate with the Disney brand.