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

Discussion in 'The DIS Unplugged Podcast' started by PeterPan09, Sep 20, 2011.

  1. AndyPok1

    AndyPok1 Back in MCO!

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2011
    Messages:
    330
    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.
     
  2. Avatar

    Google AdSense Guest Advertisement


    to hide this advert.
  3. lugnut33

    lugnut33 DIS Veteran

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2008
    Messages:
    6,374
    Almost every movie Walt ever made he had to buy the rights for. Very few were actually original stories.
     
  4. starwood

    starwood <font color=red>This mouse GOT her next cruise<br>

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2000
    Messages:
    6,243
    :scared1: 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?
     
  5. jeanigor

    jeanigor DIS Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2008
    Messages:
    14,756
    Well said. Perhaps they will update/improve the DisneyQuest technology and create a virtual experience where you are an avatar. :scratchin

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

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

    starwood <font color=red>This mouse GOT her next cruise<br>

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2000
    Messages:
    6,243
    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.
     
  7. Tarheel girl 1975

    Tarheel girl 1975 Supposed Former Fastpass Hoarder

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2008
    Messages:
    2,084
    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.
     
  8. PeterPan09

    PeterPan09 <font color=royalblue>bury my iPod with me, on shu

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2009
    Messages:
    3,778
    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.
     
  9. jcb

    jcb always emerging from hibernation

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2007
    Messages:
    3,849
    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.
     
  10. PinkBudgie

    PinkBudgie <font color=deeppink>Expert Disneyland Snowball Ma

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2008
    Messages:
    6,916
    LOTR! Great idea! Where were you when the Disney execs were "brainstorming"? :rotfl: Now that I could get really excited about!

    Avatar is kind of a let down: Disney is making a new land!!!! :banana: It will be based on the movie Avatar. :confused3 Wah...Wah.... :sad2:

    If this land turns out to be truely amazing, then I will gladly eat my words. :laughing: 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. ;)
     
  11. DisneyKevin

    DisneyKevin Kelvis Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2005
    Messages:
    9,094
    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."
     
  12. fromscratchmom

    fromscratchmom DIS Veteran

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2006
    Messages:
    509
    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.
     
  13. fromscratchmom

    fromscratchmom DIS Veteran

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2006
    Messages:
    509
    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.
     
  14. fromscratchmom

    fromscratchmom DIS Veteran

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2006
    Messages:
    509
    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. :cloud9:

    By the way the blue things are aliens, intelligent/sentient type thing going on there. :flower3:
     
  15. fromscratchmom

    fromscratchmom DIS Veteran

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2006
    Messages:
    509
    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!:rotfl:
     
  16. JB2K

    JB2K DIS Veteran

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2008
    Messages:
    3,024
    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...
     
  17. wasabi girl

    wasabi girl <font color="894fbf">Mouseketeer<br><font color="9

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2004
    Messages:
    1,091
    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.
     
  18. kaligal

    kaligal DIS Veteran

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2009
    Messages:
    7,015
    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. :)
     
  19. WaltD4Me

    WaltD4Me <font color=royalblue>PS...I tried asking for wate

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2003
    Messages:
    9,703
    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.
     
  20. sayhello

    sayhello Have Camera, Will Travel Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2006
    Messages:
    11,074
    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.

    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
     
  21. fromscratchmom

    fromscratchmom DIS Veteran

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2006
    Messages:
    509
    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.
     

Share This Page