Avatar-land coming to DAK-just hit the Orlando Sentinel

[AndyPok1]

Coming from someone who has never seen Avatar, I'm still excited.

A) Any WDW expansion is going to excite me.
B) My knowledge of Avatar makes me think it could be similar to the Beastly Kingdom idea as others have said. So it's not an outrageous stretch.
B.1) People that want the original Beastly Kingdom... you can... go to Universal. Dueling Dragons (or whatever it was renamed for WWOHP) was the E-ticket attraction. So Beastly Kingdom as originally designed can never happen. I think that this Avatar land can be a great substitute though.

 

[lugnut33]

My biggest problem with this is that Avatar is not a Disney property and I don't understand why they have to go out of their own catalog and BUY the rights to someone else's movie. I felt the same way about the American Idol Experience at DHS. It was a bad idea when they announced it and it still is. Disney has enough material of it's own that it could be adding to the parks and enough creativity in their Imagineering Department to create unique attractions like Expedition Everest, why do they need to buy other properties that are not part of their brand?

Almost every movie Walt ever made he had to buy the rights for. Very few were actually original stories.

 

[starwood]

I just don't think this belongs in the Animal Kingdom. Avatar was an interesting movie but not one I want to watch over and over again like Star Wars or Indiana Jones. The main icon of the movies was a big tree so is Animal Kingdom going to have 2 trees now or are they going to "re-theme" the tree of life?

 

[jeanigor]

Personally, I'm amazed by the number of people who are saying "I haven't seen the movie. Hate Hate Hate. I don't see how it fits in with AK". How can you possibly judge or know how it would or wouldn't fit in if you HAVEN'T SEEN THE MOVIE??? Talk about judgmental. Go see the movie; then you can comment on whether it fits or not.

Personally, I saw the movie, and while the story is on the simplistic side, the visuals are totally STUNNING, and the world of Pandora is amazingly well realized. I can totally see a ride based on riding & training your own banshee. And if they were somehow able to make you able to "be" an Avatar, and see the world through the eyes of your Avatar... Wow! That could be amazing. I'm really looking forward to seeing what Disney will do with the world.

I totally agree!



Sayhello

Well said. Perhaps they will update/improve the DisneyQuest technology and create a virtual experience where you are an avatar.

And riding a banshee was the first thing I thought of when I read the news. I want a dragon-bird thing!

I just don't think this belongs in the Animal Kingdom. Avatar was an interesting movie but not one I want to watch over and over again like Star Wars or Indiana Jones. The main icon of the movies was a big tree so is Animal Kingdom going to have 2 trees now or are they going to "re-theme" the tree of life?

Well with the new Fantasyland expansion, the Magic Kingdom is getting a second castle. Are you crying foul at that?

 

[starwood]

Well with the new Fantasyland expansion, the Magic Kingdom is getting a second castle. Are you crying foul at that?

In a way yes... There should be one castle in MK and one tree in AK. What's next? Another golf ball in Epcot? They are recognizable symbols.

Or maybe I'm just in a bad mood over the changes to facebook LOL.

 

[Tarheel girl 1975]

Stop interrupting the backlash with logic. Let's hang Cameron. The movie was hardly seen by anyone and 3D is a fad that will not be around five years from now. I mean haven't we learned anything from Harry Potter. Popular blockbuster movies are not to be made into lands in amusement parks. It will never work.

I appreciate your sarcasm, but I think there is a huge difference between Harry Potter and and Avatar. Harry Potter is something that will be timeless. Like Star Wars of Star Trek. No matter how old those movies/ shows are, people will still be watching them. Even without the movies, the books will continue to be read and shared by generations. I just don't think that Avatar has that kind of staying power. I've seen the movie. I even liked it more than I thought I would. But years from now, I think it'll just be something mentioned in a VH-1 special.

And I don't like Disney building a whole land around a movie that they didn't make or even distribute. I just don't.

 

[PeterPan09]

I will wait to judge. I have never seen Avatar, and I don't currently plan to, but a new land might tempt me to borrow a copy.

Harry Potter has been in the public concious since 1997, has 7 books and 8 films, and is still as big as ever. Avatar has been around since 2009, with one well received film. I don't really feel Avatar has firm enough ground to stand on.

That's what concerns me. Harry Potter was already a strong franchise when Universal got it and had a proven rabid fan base. Honestly, who has even thought about Avatar until yesterday? I liked the movie-even though it was basically Pocahontas, it was visually stunning-but it was also the first new 3D movie that came out and a lot of the popularity at the time had to do with the new technology.

Someone said this on another thread-but why not go for LOTR? Lots of fanciful creatures there and an opportunity to create a truly unique land. Best of all it has a fan base that was rabid BEFORE the movies came out and there is still another one coming.

 

[jcb]

Staggs would not commit to Avatar being a new land. DinoLand USA is a creative miss just as was California Adventure. WDW could make DinoLand Avatar Land (Pandorica - or I am crossing fantasies again?).

Primeval Whirl could be the Flight of the Mountain Banshee while DINOSAUR could be redone as the fight sequence from the AT-99 Scorpion Gunship perspective.

 

[PinkBudgie]

That's what concerns me. Harry Potter was already a strong franchise when Universal got it and had a proven rabid fan base. Honestly, who has even thought about Avatar until yesterday? I liked the movie-even though it was basically Pocahontas, it was visually stunning-but it was also the first new 3D movie that came out and a lot of the popularity at the time had to do with the new technology.

Someone said this on another thread-but why not go for LOTR? Lots of fanciful creatures there and an opportunity to create a truly unique land. Best of all it has a fan base that was rabid BEFORE the movies came out and there is still another one coming.

LOTR! Great idea! Where were you when the Disney execs were "brainstorming"? Now that I could get really excited about!

Avatar is kind of a let down: Disney is making a new land!!!! It will be based on the movie Avatar. Wah...Wah....

If this land turns out to be truely amazing, then I will gladly eat my words. Because I would sure rather be wrong about this than right.

Maybe Disney will be the company to finally revolutionize the gaming industry with real avatars like the movie.

 

[DisneyKevin]

Per Jason Garcia...

"Disney said it would begin construction of Animal Kingdom's Avatar land in 2013 and expects to open it to guests about five years from now."

"Disney's plans for Avatar appear far more ambitious. Staggs said the project would be similar in scope to "Carsland," a 12-acre themed area based on the Pixar animated films "Cars" and "Cars 2." When Carsland opens next year in Disney California Adventure, it will include multiple attractions, stores and restaurants."

"Although Avatar is a science-fiction movie, the film is set on a lush, Earth-like planet with its own flora and fauna. Staggs said that made it a natural thematic fit with Animal Kingdom, which designers always envisioned as including mythical animals in addition to living and extinct ones."

 

[fromscratchmom]

While I'm happy Disney has finally announced something completely new for the AK, Avatar I thought was really overhyped and didn't really do it for me. I wish they went with a more traditional beastly kingdom.

hahahaha. That's exactly how I felt about Titanic... and Dirty Dancing when I was younger. After the hype the movies were just nothing. Hype can be such a movie killer. My favorite way to see a movie is with no fore-knowledge and no expectations whatsoever. That's how I saw La Bamba and I just loved it.

I enjoyed Avatar in spite of myself. I couldn't suspend disbelief completely enough to not notice the Disney's Pocahantas rip-off thing with the storyline and Pocahantas is the only Disney movie I've ever hated. Nor could I get into it enough to not care at all about the propaganda/message angle and yet I still enjoyed the movie overall. The special effects were so fascinating. And lets face it, almost anything the writers of a movie care about and believe in can provide a vehicle for their imaginations and be the springboard for them to really make something special.

I truly hope that the imagineeers manage to pull off something amazing in scope and in technological impressiveness with this new land.

 

[fromscratchmom]

I just don't think this belongs in the Animal Kingdom. Avatar was an interesting movie but not one I want to watch over and over again like Star Wars or Indiana Jones. The main icon of the movies was a big tree so is Animal Kingdom going to have 2 trees now or are they going to "re-theme" the tree of life?

I "hope" they wouldn't choose to retheme the original tree but I think having another big tree that is that different could totally work.

I noticed some asking about if it would be in new space... boy I sure hope so. I'm looking at it all in a very optimistic light... as though they are working on the scale of scope and imagination that Walt himself is famous for. If they go small, I'm sure many people will be terribly dissappointed and the projected 4mil pricetag will never be justified.

 

[fromscratchmom]

For Avatar, the ride that anchors the land would have to be an 'E' ticket - I'm not sure they could get away with anything less. I just hope it's not a 3d film. Was there any aspect of the film that lent itself to a ride concept?

Oh, yes. I think there is quite a playground of possibilities for the fertile minds of the imagineers to play with. Makes me wish I could work with them. fun times ahead in their careers.

By the way the blue things are aliens, intelligent/sentient type thing going on there.

 

[fromscratchmom]

Here's a question. Who thinks the Avatar brand/franchise will have enough longevity even after the 2nd and 3rd films to maintain a themed land for 20 or 30 years down the road? The Star Wars and probably Potter films certainly have, but will Avatar be able to maintain a presence that far in the future? Will guests walk into Avatar "Land" 25 years from now and say..."What was this movie about?" I think this is the risk of jumping in early to create a land based on the film. I know this is way forward-thinking, but was just curious what others thought.

hmm, not a bad question. But on the other hand I believe that Disney has the possibility of creating attractions that have longevity even if the movie doesn't. Then again I'd still ride Mr. Toad's Wild Ride in a heartbeat if I could get the opportunity to bring it back. OOOOH and the old version of Pirates of the Caribbean!

 

[JB2K]

Hearing a lot of chatter both here and at the official Disney blog about this new addition...

Before the Disney purists go crying "foul" on this deal, we have to consider that some of WDW/DL's best-known attractions (Star Tours, Indiana Jones), have absolutely nothing to do with Disney canon. These attractions were brought to the Disney parks to enetertain guests (and have them spend a little more $$ on retail merchandise when they exit the attraction).

We Disney fans have to face the facts -- outside of the traditional animated features/Pixar canons, there's currently not a whole lot of movie material to pull theme park attractions from. That's one of the many reasons why Disney spent big money to acquire Marvel -- and get ready -- while some Marvel characters may already be committed to Universal Orlando for the long haul, most of the characters used in Marvel Studios' feature films from 2008-forward (i.e., Iron Man, Thor) have not been used at any theme park.

For those who don't already know, Disney recently laid-out $115 million to Paramount Pictures for the worldwide distribution rights for both The Avengers (2012) and Iron Man 3 (2013) -- and yes, both of these movies will carry the full Disney branding/marketing (since Walt Disney Productions has already given pink slips to some of the former Marvel staff). Obviously, Disney feels very strongly about the Marvel franchise, and we can expect more big-money deals of this caliber should these two movies become box office monster hits (since some of the movie rights to their characters are currently held by other studios such as Sony and Universal).

Yeah, it all boils-down to a business decision, and it's also Disney's reaction to the Harry Potter franchise taking root at Universal Orlando and becoming wildly successful. The one positive we can take from this deal is that both the movie "Avatar" and Animal Kingdom both carry heavy environmental themes, which I am certain the imagineers and others will have no problem linking-together...

 

[wasabi girl]

Hmmm...will Avatar still be a viable franchise in 2 or 3 decades? I don't think so, that is why my response is, Really Disney? This? Of all things you could've gone with. From epic literature to mythology to nearly anything else, and you're giving us Avatar? What? I'm still scratching my head on this one....I hope it isn't as poorly conceived as other ideas they've had recently. Me? I'm still miffed that the Adventurers club is gone to make way for more shopping...wow, 'cause I can't shop at home? I still miss 20,000 Leagues, had to go all the way to DL to ride the Nemo subs...Disney has made some stinker decisions, I hope this isn't another.

 

[kaligal]

I don't mind so much that they're using something that isn't theirs. Just don't like Avatar. At all.

But they're doing it and that's that. I'm sure it will be pretty enough and God knows the AK needs another restaurant.

In the meantime, I'd like the Jungle Book show, please.

 

[WaltD4Me]

Disney already had Pocahontas.

Now they have Pocahontas in Space.

Perfect fit. All about the synergy now.

If Universal had made this announcement:

a) I'd have said, meh, that's nice, but makes sense for them

b) everyone here would be complaining that Disney let US "steal" Avatar from them and posting "how cool would a Disney Avatar ride be? But the cheapskates at Disney didn't want to pony up the money to get it."

Darned if you do. Darned if you don't.

Pocahontas in Space? Really? Not a selling point IMHO.

I can absolutely 100% guarantee I would not have said or thought any of point "B" ... "A" yes, that is exactly what I would have thought.

 

[sayhello]

Someone said this on another thread-but why not go for LOTR? Lots of fanciful creatures there and an opportunity to create a truly unique land. Best of all it has a fan base that was rabid BEFORE the movies came out and there is still another one coming.

Because JRR Tolkien's estate would never in a million years approve such a deal. It was hard enough to get the movies done (and that only happened because Tolkien himself sold the movie rights to United Artists before he died. That movie never happened, and the rights bounced around from studio to studio until Miramax started the Peter Jackson films, and then sold the rights to New Line Cinema). Tolkien's son Christopher keeps a tight reign on what can & can't be done with LOTR (and it isn't much). A theme park would NEVER be OK'd as long as Christopher is head of the estate.

hahahaha. That's exactly how I felt about Titanic... and Dirty Dancing when I was younger. After the hype the movies were just nothing. Hype can be such a movie killer. My favorite way to see a movie is with no fore-knowledge and no expectations whatsoever. That's how I saw La Bamba and I just loved it.

Yes, and nobody watches Dirty Dancing fanatically any more? Dirty Dancing is very much still around and a cultural icon. I don't think you can say that either Dirty Dancing or Titanic faded away after they opened because they were over-hyped.

Sayhello

 

[fromscratchmom]

Pocahontas in Space? Really? Not a selling point IMHO.

I have to agree with this. I think this can be super successful, all depending on the work of the imagineers which will most likely be astounding. But I think a key element will be to downplay the dogmatic message behind the movie in favor of the elements that actually grabbed peoples attention and wow'd them.