1. Follow the DIS on Instagram! www.instagram.com/the.dis

Avatarland is being delayed

Discussion in 'Disney Rumors and News' started by Buffalo2Disney, Sep 5, 2012.

  1. smitch425

    smitch425 DIS Veteran

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2011
    Messages:
    12,060
    The problem with adding the imaginary now is that it has been open for several years and by adding it now, it messes with the feel of the park. For me, at least. I would much rather see Australia or some other part of the world that hasn't been showcased by either AK or EPCOT yet. So many real places on Earth for kids and adults to learn about/experience. I just don't see the point of a fake planet with fake people in a park as beautiful as AK. A ride in DHS would be fine, though.

    Even with two upcoming sequels, which are also reported to now be delayed, I just don't think it will hold the interest/appeal that Disney would want to invest in for the long term.
     
  2. Avatar

    Google AdSense Guest Advertisement


    to hide this advert.
  3. JetsetJAK

    JetsetJAK Mouseketeer

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2012
    Messages:
    194
    I was thinking the same thing. I'm definitely more inclined to consider the rumors about a Hollywood Studios expansion now that Avatarland's been shelved. The main reason I was doubting all of that was because I couldn't believe Disney would be doing both projects at the same time.

    I've never even seen Avatar so I wasn't really opposed to or in favor of Avatarland either way, but I do still think it's for the best. Between Animal Kingdom, Epcot and Hollywood Studios (since Magic Kingdom has New Fantasyland), personally I think AK is the least in need of something like a new "land" (I'm not really counting the new Test Track at Epcot since from what I understand that project was more a Chevrolet thing as opposed to something Disney actually wanted to do).

    .
     
  4. KellyNY

    KellyNY DIS Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2009
    Messages:
    7,225
    They did not walk away, JK did not like their idea and went with Universal. I mean they lost opportunity to have Harry Potter success. I understand both JK and Cameron need for control, they do not want cheap versions like Narnia, so I think it is more like Disney is a control freak here, because they like to do it their, cheap way and in this case they can only do it with their own creations. No respectful author will let them do it to their ideas. Disney needs to learn to play with others.
     
  5. Reddog1134

    Reddog1134 DIS Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2009
    Messages:
    4,952
    JK has shown before that she has strong ideas about the portrayal of her creation. Spielberg passed on the Harry Potter films because JK insisted they only use British actors. The point remains the same. Disney was not willing to accommodate her and Universal was.
     
  6. dawnmichele

    dawnmichele DIS Veteran

    Joined:
    May 20, 2010
    Messages:
    694

    You've probably heard this before, but if you've seen Pocahontas, you've seen Avatar. It really is the same movie, just set on a fictional planet.

     
  7. KellyNY

    KellyNY DIS Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2009
    Messages:
    7,225
    I think there was something else besides British actors, since there is nothing wrong with British playing British. However point remains, Disney lost the opportunity to get lots and lots of money because they want to do it their way. You can play with your own stories but when it comes to someones else, keep your interpretations to yourself. Yes, it was suppose to be an exact replica, just like JK wanted, not inspiration by HP. Universal made a great move and I am sure Disney is very sorry they did not. Same with Cameron. I am not saying Avatar could be as popular as HP, we did not see others movies yet, but it is about same attitude, same mistakes Disney makes when it comes to working with others.
     
  8. Reddog1134

    Reddog1134 DIS Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2009
    Messages:
    4,952
    I think this is why they made the deal with Cameron. They thought they could work with him to make a great product (like Uni did with JK) but then realized they were again unwilling to accommodate the original creator.
     
  9. KellyNY

    KellyNY DIS Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2009
    Messages:
    7,225
    But they will not be able to work with anyone till they change their attitude. Till then, they will milk their existing ideas and movies but how many real hits they came out with lately. Pirates was the only real hit lately, I can't think of any other movie that people talked about. Cars, Toy Story very cute but was it nearly as popular as HP or even Avatar. Brave, Tangled, Tiana, did not go even close to original princess movies. They have nothing to work with and they are not willing to open their doors to others because their word will not be final there. Sorry but as cute as princesses are, FLE is just another way to milk what you already have, parks need something fresh.
     
  10. Dizneefamily+4

    Dizneefamily+4 Wish I could live in Cinderella's Castle!

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2011
    Messages:
    1,678
    +1 :thumbsup2
     
  11. pilferk

    pilferk <font color=red>Jambo Wildbunch Gang<br><font colo

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2005
    Messages:
    6,558
    Hold on, everybody.

    If you trace the threads back through the entire rats nest, from the article quoted above, to the original IGN article, to the original source (an Indiewire Playlist article)...you'll see something very interesting.

    Their entire reason for saying the AK Avatar project is delayed is....they expected to see concept art by now. That's it. Their whole reasoning. Not that they've talked to anyone at Disney or WDI or in the Cameron camp. That they haven't seen concept art.

    Now, maybe it's true...maybe the project has been put on the back burner/delayed. But I'm not sure the reasoning behind THIS stream of articles is all that solid.
     
  12. pilferk

    pilferk <font color=red>Jambo Wildbunch Gang<br><font colo

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2005
    Messages:
    6,558
    It depends on how you look at it.

    Reportedly, JK was much more demanding and exacting when negotiating with Disney. They pointed out operational issues with her ideas...and she said, basically, "my way or the highway".

    They chose the highway.

    In negotiating with Universal, she reportedly LISTENED to their ideas and concerns, and was willing to modify her original ideas to fit the logistical issues involved. That's why you're not bottlenecking through an entrance to Diagon Alley at IOA.

    I'm not sure Disney feels like they lost, all things considered.
     
  13. pilferk

    pilferk <font color=red>Jambo Wildbunch Gang<br><font colo

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2005
    Messages:
    6,558
    JK didn't REALLY listen to their ideas, actually.

    She DID listen to Universals.

    Reportedly, she was willing to give Disney less leeway, because she did not want to be "A.A. Milne"'d by them.

    They also did not have to invest massive amounts of capital in WWOHP, nor conform to JK"s strict vision of what that "land" would have been (logistical issues and all). And they have not seen any drop in any of their park attendances (actually, some growth). I'm not sure you could quantify what that "lost opportunity" cost them (if anything).

    No, they don't, actually. They are the 9000 lb gorilla in theme parks, entertainment, etc. They can choose their projects based on what benefits them most...and that likely doesn't involve playing well with others. It involves what's going to make them the most money. Given their vast library of IP's....they can play with their own toys until the right deal strikes them.
     
  14. LukenDC

    LukenDC DIS Veteran

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2004
    Messages:
    4,868
    Add me to the chorus of voices hoping that Avatarland is never built.
     
  15. pilferk

    pilferk <font color=red>Jambo Wildbunch Gang<br><font colo

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2005
    Messages:
    6,558
    Why?

    They're making record profits, seeing increases in their attendance, and actually increasing per capita guest spending.

    I get why people WANT all the stuff you mentioned (and by people, I mean potential WDW guests). I'd love to see some of it, too (along with huge DHS and AK expansions).

    But why, from an actual business perspective, do they "need" to do what you're proposing? Disney is reactionary, now. They don't do anything unless the bottom line on some spreadsheet tells they to.

    Also, keep in mind the demographics we're talking about, here, for WDW. Just because "Cars" didn't bust box office records doesn't mean it's a loser for WDW. The merchandising, along, proves it's a winner for Disney in terms of franchises. Kids, obviously, love it.
     
  16. timmac

    timmac DIS Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2007
    Messages:
    1,871
    As a few others have pointed to, I think Disney was perfectly happy to not have to submit to Rowling's demands. Perhaps they simply didn't feel it would be a profitable move to have to do it exactly her way, or felt that it would take away from attendance/spending elsewhere in their parks?

    Bottom line is that Disney always has a reason for whatever decisions they make, and typically, that's a financial reason at the end of the day. Any such statement that they "lost" or "didn't learn their lesson", is at best hard to demonstrate, and really just speculation.
     
  17. KellyNY

    KellyNY DIS Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2009
    Messages:
    7,225
    Yes you have to invest to get profit and Universal bloomed with HP. it brought not only profit but new visitors, something Disney would die to get, why do you think they are building new rooms, to fill them. So yes, they lost opportunity to earn.


    Yes they are gorillas but they are not only players, which became obvious with Universal and HP project was exactly what they want, money. They do not have enough ideas to bring new customers, therefore open doors for outside world and benefit from it.

    I am actually talking from business perspective, they kept attendance high by constant discounts and offers. People of course will go as long as kids are born but if place becomes boring to slightly older generation like teens and above, there is a problem. A family with teens will split stay with Universal or other places and this is money they could leave at Disney. FLE will not bring new customers and HP would, that is the whole difference.
     
  18. robin19871

    robin19871 DIS Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2010
    Messages:
    807
    I am another that hopes that they build it.. The visual beauty of Pandora is amazing on the movie.. You truly need to see the movie to understand how visually stimulating it is...
     
  19. amberpi

    amberpi DIS Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2012
    Messages:
    681
    Please WDW gods, go with Beastly Kingdom, please, please, please!!!!!!! I loved the concept art and the first year at AK when they talked about it I was so excited, please, please, please!
     
  20. MaxsDad

    MaxsDad DIS Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2007
    Messages:
    643
    Disney is all about dreams. Can't you just let us dream it won't be built? ;)
     
  21. fuzzlekins

    fuzzlekins Mouseketeer

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2012
    Messages:
    493
    CLEARLY very few here ever wanted Avatarland (myself included), so I hope Disney listens to the fans and saves themselves some money to spend elsewhere. I didn't see the movie, don't really care to make a point to, and have no interest in future installments. To me, it's kind of conservation sci-fi. That doesn't seem to have much to do with the prevailing animal nature (no pun intended) of AK. Plus, to point out the obvious, it's not a cartoon. While I'm sure there are a fair number of couples and singles that visit WDW, their biggest demographic is obviously families ... particularly those with young children. I think they've gotta stick with the cartoons because that's what's served them well. I can't imagine anyone going to AK FOR Avatarland. Visit it b/c it's there, sure. And I have no doubt Imagineering could do AMAZING things with just about any theme, but I'd rather see them put that energy elsewhere. How about something with the Jungle Book in the animal vein? Granted, it's old but it's a classic. Avatar - I don't see it becoming a "classic." Sequels doesn't always mean classic. Cartoons, which are more timeless, seem to have more longevity in almost every case.

    Incidentally, I so wish WDW would've done Harry Potter for 2 reasons: 1) I prefer the Disney parks - HP (and Seuss Landing) are my main reasons to visit Universal IOA and 2) even though I think Universal did a fantastic job with the HP world, I have to think that Disney's Imagineering could have even trumped that.
     

Share This Page