Avatarland!!!!

[twebber55]

AH...but there are people (not me) that will say "building Avatar takes land and resources/money away from (insert project name here)".

yeah and i get that argument because i say Nex Gen is taking away from projects right now

 

[Suger Mag]

I am also very excited about Avatarland, I could care less about the movie. I have said (and many others as well) many times that a great ride/land does not have to have a huge blockbusting movie attached. As long as the ride, tech and theming is sweet, then that is all that matters. Proof in point, look at some of the biggest rides at WDW...

Space Mountain= no movie
Pirates of the Caribbean= spawned a movie based on the ride
Splash Mountain= an obscure cartoon
Big Thunder Mountain Railroad= no movie
Expedition Everest= no Movie
Kilimanjaro Safari= no movie
Haunted Mansion= spawned a movie based on the ride (a very bad movie too)
Soarin=no movie
Rockin Roller Coaster= no movie

What matters is what is on the ground, and there is so much raw material that the imagineers can work with on this project that I am VERY excited to see what they come up with.

I just don't get it... complain and complain that there is not enough at AK... and then complain and complain about the new addition. I predict there will be plenty of folks who claimed they would NEVER enjoy Avatarland... sneaking in and out of the awesome new land and having a great time.

 

[Reddog1134]

yeah and i get that argument because i say Nex Gen is taking away from projects right now

But that goes under the assumption that they would be building attractions if they weren't spending money on NextGen.

 

[FlightlessDuck]

I suppose I should watch the movie before I go to WDW next time (after AvatarLand is open). It's like Fern Gully, only with aliens, right?

 

[HM]

I suppose I should watch the movie before I go to WDW next time (after AvatarLand is open). It's like Fern Gully, only with aliens, right?

Exactly. Ferngully in overload.

I love the idea of using the planet that Avatar took place on as a location in AK. Such beautiful ideas to work with.

 

[DCTooTall]

**Sigh** Hey Mod... Can we just get a Avatar bashing sticky? Might give everyone who wants to say how much they hate the idea or how stupid it is someplace to go instead of a new Avatar Related thread popping up every other week.


Anyways.... Rather than type out a response to this thread, I figured I'd just quote my post from the last Avatar thread for those of you who didn't see it.

I've been extremely quiet on all the Avatar threads for the past several months/Year.... I just got tired of always saying the same thing on every new incarnation of "AVATAR IS DEAD!" or "AVATARLAND IS STUPID" threads. But I'm thinking I'll poke my head back up since we have a slightly different core topic (the 3 sequels at once), and I'm seeing a lot of different people here than who were around the last time I really spoke up on this subject.


First off.... I see several different arguments against the Avatar based attractions which are repeated, but don't really make sense when you look deeper.

(a) "I Don't believe any attractions should be built off of Non-Disney Properties." It isn't like this is the first time Disney has licensed or used a property it didn't create in-house for an attraction... or even a headliner for an expansion. You literally can't walk around any of the parks without tripping over non-Disney Original IP. Just look at all the Pixar attractions in EVERY Park. Pixar, When it created all these Stories, Was NOT part of Disney. It was a 3rd party studio that had a distribution deal with Disney. Disney however Eventually Acquired the Studio and brought it in-house, But even the films released after the Disney relationship strengthened came from ideas and stories conceived at the studio before that time. Or Pooh. A.A.Milne was not a Disney Employee. Disney didn't even have any ownership of the Pooh Characters beyond a simple Licensing deal.

The Sunset Boulevard Expansion at the Disney-MGM Studios was the first Major expansion at the park, and it's Headline attraction was based off a license for the Twilight Zone property. (Which also wasn't a very family-focused property). I could also mention all the non-Disney MGM properties based in that park.

And don't forget everyone's FAVORITE Disney Licenses.....Star Wars and Indy. These are Properties that Disney has licensed for YEARS, and which they only just recently acquired ownership of. To say that Disney shouldn't build an attraction off Non-Disney Original IP is unfair to all of the high quality attractions Imagineering has given us over the decades using stories, places, and characters which someone other than Disney made popular.

(b) "I don't know/care about/don't like/have no interest in/don't agree with the story in the movie. They can't make a decent attraction out of this unliked/bad/forgotten about property" Once Again.... Splash Mountain. If it weren't for that attraction, or the song "Zip-a-dee-do-da", How many of us would really know what the movie "Song of the South" was about.... or that it even existed?? Even if the source material isn't the most conducive to a great attraction, Don't underestimate imagineering's ability to give us something much greater than the source material would hint was possible.... if they are given the freedom and resources to work with.

(c) "This is a movie! It doesn't fit in the Animal Kingdom park!" Honestly... I think it'll be a great fit, and can fit better here than any other park. More importantly, The Animal Kingdom is probably the park that is the most in need of a major addition. From a thematic view, the core idea behind the first Avatar movie was an environmental message. (Seriously, they beat you over the head with it. it was hard to miss). That Environmental message fits seamlessly with the core theme of the Animal Kingdom.

Outside of that.... Try not to see it as "Avatar: The Theme Park Land!".... Think about it as "Pandora"... the world upon which the movie was based. We are talking about a very lush and beautiful environment that would very easily fit into the Animal Kingdom. Just imagine the current foliage, the trees and bushes, along the path from Discovery Island to Camp Mickey/Minnie. There is already a jungle vibe there with the overgrowth, so creating a "seamless" transition from the jungle of Discovery Island, to the alien jungle of Pandora shouldn't be too difficult to pull off for the Imagineers.

Beyond just that ready-made fit, Cameron has already created as part of his super-detailed alien world, a complete ecosystem, complete with plants and animals that complement each other and fit within the location he created. He created much more detail in the ecosystem of the planet than we saw in the movie. In this regard, I see the Disney deal for the IP as already giving Imagineering the completed building blocks to build a comprehensive story and environment for the attractions and set designs they have in mind. They don't need to take the time, effort, or money to try and design the details of the place, Because someone has already done all that groundwork for them. (Sorry Rodhe.... No safari's to the Amazon to learn about untouched by man ecosystems)

So there is a lot of upside and potential for Imagineering to create something amazing here, Something that is worth taking a wait and see approach and not calling it a failure before we even get actual concept ideas.


Beyond just that.... Animal Kingdom needs the love. According to all rumors or rationalization, Everest is going to need a pretty lengthy refurb if we ever want to get Betty the Yeti out of the Disco. The Problem is that the park just doesn't have the attraction capacity to absorb the loss of one of it's few E-tickets.... either in attraction capacity... or even really in the ability to pull people into the park. Since the attraction still works as a coaster, There is no reason to bring it down like it needs. The Pandora expansion would/should give the park the extra breathing room so they can afford to take Everest down for a more extensive refurb. I can also see the whole bioluminescent aspect of the planet making for some amazing nighttime visuals, and the added attraction capacity (and location away from the animal pens) could make it more likely that they could keep the park open later after the animal based attractions have to close as the animals are bedded for the night.


(d) "Avatar was a pretty weak movie/universe and won't stand the test of time. They should pick something more popular... like Star Wars!"

I'll freely admit that the first Avatar movie had some very impressive visuals, in part because they were the first of their kind that we saw in the theaters, But had a pretty weak and rehashed story once you got past the eye candy.

When you think about it though.... So did a pretty great Eye-Candy movie that came out in 1977. The first Star Wars movie broke new ground visually, but it also had a pretty weak story that was a rehash of any number of old serials.

It wasn't until Empire and Jedi that the Star Wars Universe was fleshed out into something much more substantial, and ultimately gave the franchise the real staying power it has today. (Which really says something when you look at how hard Lucas has tried to destroy the franchise in the years since.).

Avatar had some great visuals, But it's Dances with Smurfs/Pocahontas storyline wasn't anything we hadn't seen before. With the Sequels planned there is potential to flesh out the universe created into something much more fleshed out and able to withstand the test of time. (Will Avatar become Star Wars after Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi? Or will it become the Matrix after Reloaded and Revolutions? We don't know yet and it's too soon to say).


Now, Star Wars also had a major advantage over any new original theatrical property that will be released today.... The way the theater system worked in the late 70's, and the way the pop culture machine worked in the late 70's, is ENTIRELY different than the way things operate today. The First Star Wars movie had a bit of an extra boost with it's initial run since there weren't 20 other movies with huge budgets competing for the theater space the same weekend, and each following weekend.



No matter how you look at it, I truly believe it's too early to make a final judgement on how Avatar will end up going.... Either as a theme park property, or as a theatrical/pop culture property.

 

[jcemom]

Anyways.... Rather than type out a response to this thread, I figured I'd just quote my post from the last Avatar thread for those of you who didn't see it.

 

[Reddog1134]

Well done DCTooTall.

The biggest thing "Avatar: the theme park land" has going against it is "Avatar: the movie".

I'm not saying the movie was good or bad (I haven't actually seen it) I'm just saying it exists. And because it exists, a lot of people have a prejudiced opinion about the theme park land.

They don't seem to want it to stand on it's own merits.

For all those that don't like this idea, I would love to hear your opinion of (or argument against) Avatar the theme park land if Avatar the movie did not exist.

Imagine that the only thing that exists is a description of an alien landscape and the message of conservation and THEN give me your opinion.

 

[sabrecmc]

I think for me, it isn't just that I didn't particularly like Avatar (I didn't like Cars at all and would be thrilled with Radiator Springs), its that Avatar doesn't feel Disney to me in the way that Star Wars does...obviously, that is totally a personal opinion, and Disney could certainly do it right, but nothing about Avatar said family entertainment to me. I would love a fantasy-creature land at AK like was originally considered, but blue alien world? Eh. I just can't get excited for it and yes, a part of me does say, "But that could be spent on Star Wars/Cars Land" or whatever. I mean, poor DHS needs something exciting! Avatarland may end up being awesome, I may love it more than any other part of the park, who knows? But at the outset, it doesn't seem a good fit. That's all. I do appreciate that Disney is trying something outside the box.

 

[DummbGiRL]

I still have hopes for Avatarland. I absolutely HATED the movie but Pandora was truly beautiful. I think it could be a lovely, sparkly place to wander through.

I like this outlook.

 

[mvk]

Think how ridiculous this would look now, if said 25 years ago -

I honestly can't believe that they are still going to go ahead with this. What a waste of time and space and money. I really thought that with the lack of interest, they would quietly do away with the project.
Splash Mountain? Honestly? All I see is an abandoned area like the old waterpark.

I'm joining this! I hate this idea! I would rather have any other ride in MK then a stupid movie. I did not like the movie. This will drive me away! I'm more excited about death than this recent development! If they go through with this I will never enter that area again. Ew.

I just saw an updated travel channel show lat week which included imagineers plans for Splash Mountain. I think there are so many other, more interesting ideas, out there. Wish they would scrap this one.

I agree. I think Song of the South is so over-rated. Will not be visiting this section of the park as it has no interest to me what so ever. No one I know even liked the story. What a waste.

Seriously, Song of the South? Didn't that movie come out like a four decades ago? Hated the movie and have no interest in a single attraction.

I've never been crazy about the Splash Mountain idea either. I've seen bits and pieces of the movie, but I've never seen it the whole way through and honestly have no desire to. I know the movie made a ton of money and the cartoon graphics intersperced with the humans were incredible, but I don't see it going down as a "classic" that people will enjoy for years to come. I certainly don't see it being the type of draw that Harry Potter is to Universal.

 

[Nudoru]

The idea of an Avatarland is completely unappealing and even annoying to a point for me. However, with Disney's recent track record with building new attractions, I'll be dead by the time this one comes online, so I guess it really should not bother me

*cough* I'm a just put this here :
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1630029/

Expected date dec 2016....

So a sequel to the highest grossing movie of all time, released to generate a bit more interest.. I'm thinking that the issues brought up in this thread RE the longevity of the movie or franchise may be a bit premature...

Looking forward to AvatarLand personally.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

Agree to some extent...Not excited about Avatar Land, but if the rides or entertainment is fun and enjoyable I will go...

LOL....

you're going anyway. i love it when anybody (including me) says something like this...we're all going...there is no doubt

 

[lockedoutlogic]

But that goes under the assumption that they would be building attractions if they weren't spending money on NextGen.

and that assumption is completely incorrect.

there seems to be this misconception that if they weren't going to build avatar (which is a bad movie/franchise...but that doesn't necessarily mean its DOA at animal kingdom...though as I'VE said on every avatar thread - the negative buzz on the concept of building this seems worse/higher than any other disney development i can remember. that includes when they demolished the beloved horizons to build mission:heart attack...or the fabulous new imagination...or chester and hesters joke-o-rama. heck, i think the closing of the adventurers club was received more warmly) or the tachyon beam radio detection/tracking next gen....then they would have a half constructed death star built in orbit above I-4 a la return of the jedi...

wrong, wrong, and completely incorrect.

anybody who truly believes that is forgetting to look at wdw with two key words in mind: "money" and "business"

i know i keep saying this over and over again...maybe eventually the fish will bite?

 

[Brer Chump]

So a sequel to the highest grossing movie of all time, released to generate a bit more interest.. I'm thinking that the issues brought up in this thread RE the longevity of the movie or franchise may be a bit premature...

Looking forward to AvatarLand personally.

Adjusted for inflation, "Gone With the Wind" is the highest grossing movie. Avatar is #14.

It is however the highest grossing movie with the theme that humans and especially Americans (and their military) are evil. Which goes perfectly with AK's theming.

 

[twebber55]

Adjusted for inflation, "Gone With the Wind" is the highest grossing movie. Avatar is #14.

It is however the highest grossing movie with the theme that humans and especially Americans (and their military) are evil. Which goes perfectly with AK's theming.

number 2 actually...world wide...and im certainly no liberal but pandora can be an incredible theme park addition.....whether your anti environment or not...people and even americans sometimes arent the good guys..its just a movie..the movie has nothing to do with how good this addition will be.... the d23 teaser showed in videos highlighted the peaceful part of avatar...i bet you a years membership to this site the military will never be mentioned lol

before judging it maybe give it a shot

 

[twebber55]

it will be interesting where JC takes avatar 2 and will any of that will be incorporated in avatar land

 

[carrie1626]

I'm neither For or Against AVATAR the movie.

And that won't matter to me once this whole thing is done.
I just hope if fun, innovative and cool!!

BUT, if this is all WDW can do to answer Universal's HP, then WDW is sadly mistaken.

An announcement of BEASTLY KINGDOM would make world headlines and create unmeasurable anticipation without question.

WHO are these guys making the decisions anyway?

 

[Darkwing981]

I'm neither For or Against AVATAR the movie.

And that won't matter to me once this whole thing is done.
I just hope if fun, innovative and cool!!

BUT, if this is all WDW can do to answer Universal's HP, then WDW is sadly mistaken.

An announcement of BEASTLY KINGDOM would make world headlines and create unmeasurable anticipation without question.

WHO are these guys making the decisions anyway?

Why the creative and imaginative company stockholders of course.

I'm trying to keep an open mind, but still holding out hope that they'll shelve this whole thing.

Why not just revive the Beastly Kingdom concept? And if they really went on a creative streak, do something similar to New Fantasy Land with park visitors being transported to lands based on The Jungle Book, The Lion King ,Pocahontas and Tarzan? But I guess Uncle Bob probably wouldn't like that because he wants more franchises in the parks.

 

[mdutch39]

To be honest, I don't like the movie, and at one point I was not pleased with this idea. Of course after seeing so many arguments on this thing, I am not holding any expectations for it. I know this may not be relevant, but I love The Little Mermaid. I can watch the movie on repeat. But I was EXTREMELY disappointed with the new attraction at MK. With that said, this makes me feel as though I never know what to expect from Disney. They took a great movie and made the attraction...meh not so good. Maybe they can take a bad movie and turn it in to something...meh pretty good. We shall all have to see.

One more note - to all of those saying "you probably haven't seen Song Of the South, so how could you like Splash Mountain blahdy blah." It's because Splash Mountain is a great ride on its own. I did not know SotS even existed until a few years ago (I'm still young, I promise. And people are too sensitive.) but Splash Mountain has been my favorite ride since I can remember. I don't think that argument is valid in this situation because we don't know if "avatar land" will be an attraction that they could have made without the movie, and be entertaining. I don't know if this makes sense to anyone else. I guess just keep an open mind while going into it, because maybe you will be surprised. Or, like when I went on the mermaid attraction, maybe you won't be surprised and will be a little pissed off.

Are we not adults on here...? Like...grow up. Disney has been around long enough to make their own decisions, and if it flops, then even more congratulations to Universal for creating a Harry Potter world.

Military Wife & Disney Lover. be there December 15-18.