Source: Avatar project for DAK postponed indefinitely

[CandyMandy]

Originally Posted by DisneyDan73

I'm sorry, I just don't see Avatar as that "beloved by generations" brand that has the lasting power of Harry Potter or Star Wars.

Excellent point, which codifies the weakness of the pro-Avatar arguments. They all state or imply the latter is already a robust, embedded franchise with a huge fan base of rabid, passionate fans.

But never offer any evidence to prove that.

I agree Disney looks like it is in somewhat desperate reaction mode if they are serious about pursuing this.

[Jasonkat]

Avatarland will fail because no one will care about it's plot in 30 years. How many people are really that passionate about hating Jimmy Carter or Ronald Reagan today?

Avatar is a political movie. When people forget about/no longer care about those politics they will lose interest in Avatar.

[diamondpixienc]

Originally Posted by Jasonkat

Avatarland will fail because no one will care about it's plot in 30 years. How many people are really that passionate about hating Jimmy Carter or Ronald Reagan today?

Avatar is a political movie. When people forget about/no longer care about those politics they will lose interest in Avatar.

Well, sadly most people don't really care or even sweat the theme of an attraction especially if it's a really cool ride itself. For example my local theme park here changed the kid's area from Nickelodeon to Peanuts. My kids don't care, they just want to ride the big kid coaster.

[rrushford]

I liked Avatar. Does it have a huge fan base for something like this though? I doubt it. They need to go back to their original plan of a Beastly Kingdom. That leaves it so open to so many ideas (even an Avatar addition).

[MJMcBride]

Originally Posted by rrushford

I liked Avatar. Does it have a huge fan base for something like this though? I doubt it. They need to go back to their original plan of a Beastly Kingdom. That leaves it so open to so many ideas (even an Avatar addition).

I definitely agree

[WDWChloe]

Originally Posted by Cheshire Figment

What is needed is the originally planned Beastly Kingdom!

Thank. You.

I didn't like Avatar, I'm pretty sure I never will.
It's just a ripoff of Pocahontas. "Original story"...

SOMETHING, ANYTHING [Disney] but Avatar. How is it even relateable to DAK besides the subject of conservation?

[sammons70]

I personally think that Disney has enough of it's own franchises to base new parks areas, and attractions on. I do agree with the pro comments about Up, Narnia, more Star Wars( now that they own the rights) etc. On the other hand, I do understand the financial implications of not competing with Universal. If there is a desire to have a "beastly kingdom" area in Animal Kingdom, and there is a need to compete with Universal's Harry Potter land, I'm wondering if Disney has looked at a partnership with Peter Jackson for Tolkein's Hobbit and Lord of the Rings. Nothing could better match theme of a " beastly kingdom. Dragons, Orks, Trolls, this land could have it all.

[stephm0188]

It's silly to compare Avatarland to WWOHP.
HP is so much more than just a movie. It had that mass appeal. There was a generation of kids who grew up reading the books with their parents and seeing the movies and dressing up as HP for Halloween. HP is very, very marketable because it has staying power. You have people who buy the merchandise and play quiddich and eat and drink things inspired by the storyline.

Avatar just doesn't have that. It was a beautiful, visually stunning movie that was directed by one of Hollywood's best, and that is about it. Once it was out of the theater, that was it. I have no doubt that Avatarland would be beautiful, but it doesn't have the potential to be classic Disney. In 10 years, I could take my kid to WWOHP, and he would get it. Avatarland? Doubtful.

They'd be better off doing Beastly Kingdom and finding a way to incorporate Avatar there somehow.

[MJMcBride]

Originally Posted by sammons70

I personally think that Disney has enough of it's own franchises to base new parks areas, and attractions on. I do agree with the pro comments about Up, Narnia, more Star Wars( now that they own the rights) etc. On the other hand, I do understand the financial implications of not competing with Universal. If there is a desire to have a "beastly kingdom" area in Animal Kingdom, and there is a need to compete with Universal's Harry Potter land, I'm wondering if Disney has looked at a partnership with Peter Jackson for Tolkein's Hobbit and Lord of the Rings. Nothing could better match theme of a " beastly kingdom. Dragons, Orks, Trolls, this land could have it all.

If Narnia had been more popular that woukd have worked very well

[krichie]

Originally Posted by tjkraz

The problem with Beastly Kingdom is it doesn't have that magic "S": Synergy

It seems clear that Disney was hoping Avatar would bring in "new business"...customers who aren't part of the traditional WDW audience but would take notice of Avatar and/or James Cameron.

That's what Universal got from Harry Potter. The Mummy, The Simpsons, Men in Black, Dr Seuss, Shrek, Spider-Man and many more properties were not enough to get certain people into their parks, but WWoHP was the proverbial tipping point. Millions of new customers responded by opening their wallets.

Beastly Kingdom may have turned out to be a fantastic addition but without any sort of name recognition, it's probably not enough to draw in millions of first-time guests who wouldn't otherwise visit WDW. That's the end result of the economically competitive / social media / smartphone / short attention span society we live in today. Sometimes just being "good" (excellent, superior) isn't good enough.

Personally I've never even watched Avatar. But I was in favor of that project because (IMO) the potential upside warrants a significant investment on Disney's part and Cameron's involvement would all but guarantee high quality. If it's good entertainment, the theme becomes secondary. Even non-fans could still enjoy the experience. Don't think I have ever seen "Song of the South" or "Ichabod and Mr Toad" but Splash Mountain and Mr. Toad's Wild Ride are still worthwhile.

Now if the rumors are to be believed, Disney may be hoping a carbon copy Cars Land provides the synergy and attendance bump they are seeking. Yay....more ride clones.

Kudos to reaching a different audience. Personally, I love Disney rides. I was introduced to Disneyland when I was six, and from that time until about 1 year ago, the only movies I saw that had corresponding rides in the park were Peter Pan and Roger Rabbit. I still loved and continue to love all the other rides. I'm planning my first trip to Disneyworld, so I am catching up on all Disney movies via Netflix, which I think may enhance my appreciation for the MK.

In regards to Orlando Studios, I completely agree, and I am one of those that would only go to OS to see Harry Potter land.

Now, Avatarland? I LOVE the movie, and definitely agree that it will appeal to those who aren't traditional Disney lovers. I really hope they come up with something that will appeal to everyone (and I'm sure they will.)

[ChrisFL]

Originally Posted by DCTooTall

FWIW.... You will NEVER see LoTR at a Disney Park. Tolkien had a big dislike of the Disney way of doing things and the people in charge of the properties today are honoring his wishes to never give Disney control of his creation.



I think it's great idea with lots of potential..... if done right....

Too bad, I really wanted to see "Soarin' over Sauron"