Avatar land coming to Animal Kingdom!!

[Jennasis]

I would hope they eventually name this travesty...I mean land PANDORA and not go with lameness like Avatarland. An avatar, as described in the movie, is a representation of you (Jake's big blue Navi body). So unless the section of the park is about Avatars instead of the Navi and the landscape of Pandora, I would imagine they'd go with the more authentic name.

But then again...look what they did to the name of the carousel.

 

[sukhakuli]

Please... I did not say that HP was going away. You quoted me, yes but did you actually read what I wrote? "Harry Potter is not going away, I'm not saying that, it will continuously attract new readers and fans but not at level it once did. With no new books and/or movies in the works, its natural to expect interest to dwindle and things to level off."<---------- If you disagree with this, than okay, I respect that. I never wrote HP was "going anywhere soon".

As for Avatar, I expect the theme park experience and attractions to be far greater than the films. I'm looking at the budget, the technology and level of creative effort that will be put into this project --it's going to be major. I have hope.

Actually, I think you mis-read what I wrote.

 

[Wadecool]

Disney had the chance to make the right proposal to JK Rowling. She simply preferred what Universal offered. I do wonder what Disney did offer though.

Disney wouldn't allow Rowling to have total control over the HP area. Universal basically told her she could do whatever she wanted and so that's where she went.

 

[nemofans]

As I understand from what I read at the time, Universal offered her almost total control over the project. Disney, being control freaks, weren't willing to concede the level of control that she wanted. She was insistent that everything stay true to the books and not get cheesy or touristy and she wanted veto power if things started heading down a wrong path. She wanted input at every stage.

She did the same thing when it came to the movies and merchandising. She insisted on total control and went with the studio that gave it to her. Can't blame her, really. She once said something like she didn't want Harry Potter on stuff like underwear.

I have heard this too & glad she did. It's wonderful when movies, rides, themed lands, etc stay true to the original book (when it's an amazing book). Although, I am hoping Cameron does NOT have any agreement like this w/Disney. That way Disney can be more free to make it more general & not all Avatar.

 

[CurlyJo224]

All I hope is that the deal with James Cameron goes the same way as the deal with JK Rowling.

 

[Anjelica]

Disney wouldn't allow Rowling to have total control over the HP area. Universal basically told her she could do whatever she wanted and so that's where she went.

That agreement appeared to work out very well - I LOVE the HP area at IOA and was so taken aback by all the details. I dared to even say it was better than anything I have seen at Disney.

I can "visualize" HP at Universal being immensely popular for years to come because of the appeal to younger generations as well as older. I think Universal creating HP and apparently giving full "control" over to Rowling was probably the best decision they have made in a long time (Universal that is).

 

[morethananyonex]

I would hope they eventually name this travesty...I mean land PANDORA and not go with lameness like Avatarland. An avatar, as described in the movie, is a representation of you (Jake's big blue Navi body). So unless the section of the park is about Avatars instead of the Navi and the landscape of Pandora, I would imagine they'd go with the more authentic name.

But then again...look what they did to the name of the carousel.

This whole time I've just been assuming there'd be no way they would name it something as lame as Avatar Land, and something better will be announced eventually. Avatar Land sounds like something I would have named a Roller Coaster Tycoon park when I was 9 .

 

[JimmyV]

The problem is that it's really polarizing--Avatar, while being very pretty, was the sort of annoying environmental extmism that alienates about half of the country. And the sort of leftist who salivated over Avatar isn't a large part of Disney's demographic; they'd rather go somewhere "authentic."

First of all, I doubt that half the world, (let's not overlook that WDW is not meant just for this country), views abject deforestation in the name of "progress" as a polarizing issue. Secondly, "leftists" (whatever that is supposed to mean), vacation at "authenic" places in addition to WDW. Not in place of WDW.

Avatar is the highest grossing movie of all time with sequals at the ready. Capitalizing on the phenomenon seems like a logical, apolitical move. If you didn't like the movie and don't like the idea of an Avatar World, fine. Don't go. But don't paint this as a political issue. Personally, POTC is one of my favorite rides of all time and I haven't enjoyed a single POTC movie (of those that I saw. I think I gave up after #2.)

 

[KellyNY]

I have heard this too & glad she did. It's wonderful when movies, rides, themed lands, etc stay true to the original book (when it's an amazing book). Although, I am hoping Cameron does NOT have any agreement like this w/Disney. That way Disney can be more free to make it more general & not all Avatar.

Considering he is a perfectionist it may be even more difficult to work with him then with Rowling however result may be just remarkable. Area should feel like real Pandora and not like a theme park with Pandora theme. I hope Disney is up to the task, creating something that amazing is very difficult, HP was a piece of cake comparing to Avatar.

 

[sexyravenfan]

Avatar seriously? That's horrible. How about a Cars land at DHS then it will get interesting.

 

[pilferk]

First of all, I doubt that half the world, (let's not overlook that WDW is not meant just for this country), views abject deforestation in the name of "progress" as a polarizing issue. Secondly, "leftists" (whatever that is supposed to mean), vacation at "authenic" places in addition to WDW. Not in place of WDW.

Avatar is the highest grossing movie of all time with sequals at the ready. Capitalizing on the phenomenon seems like a logical, apolitical move. If you didn't like the movie and don't like the idea of an Avatar World, fine. Don't go. But don't paint this as a political issue. Personally, POTC is one of my favorite rides of all time and I haven't enjoyed a single POTC movie (of those that I saw. I think I gave up after #2.)

And lets face it...prior to a remodel a few years back....POTC had some elements that were MUCH less "PC" and a could be taken by a whole lot more people as "offensive" than it does NOW.

Yet it was still as beloved BEFORE the remodel as it is now.

 

[Wadecool]

I can "visualize" HP at Universal being immensely popular for years to come because of the appeal to younger generations as well as older. I think Universal creating HP and apparently giving full "control" over to Rowling was probably the best decision they have made in a long time (Universal that is).

I completely agree with this statement. I would imagine that some folks in executive leadership at Disney regret not giving the same deal to Rowling before Universal did.

 

[centurythree]

Look..I think we're overlooking the point to a new expansion...

...it's more about the environment and aura that surrounds a movie/attraction that is the draw. I don't think the new Avatar land will walk you through the steps of the movie...but rather immerse you in to some kind of different world where you can escape reality..much like the rest of Walt Disney World.

When I visit a THEME park I want to be taken away from reality...regardless if it's in some Avatar world, Star Wars world, Harry Potter world, Fantasyland world, etc.

When I ride Snow White..I don't think how much I didn't or did like the movie..I just like being swept away...same thing for Winnie the Pooh...Aladdin...Haunted Mansion (no original movie)...etc.

*deep breath* !!

Let's allow Disney to sweep us away from reality once again in a way that they do so well!!

Very well said.

In the end, it doesn't matter how great the starting materials are if you end up with the next Superstarlimo on your hands. It doesn't matter how bad your starting materials are if you end up with the next (insert your favorite attraction/land here.)

There are several attractions at Disney based on movies I don't like or even detest. That doesn't stop me from loving Peter Pan, Splash Mountain, and some others. I'd never seen a Twilight Zone episode before being wowed by the Tower of Terror.

I'm amazed at the fanboi claws coming out over an announcement that doesn't even include any artwork. (Not here that I've seen, but then the DISboards don't exactly cater to the truly insane fans who do things like make threats against specific people because Disney closes a bar. ) On the other hand, I totally understand reasonable people being underwhelmed by the idea of a whole section dedicated to a movie they don't like. I sure wasn't thrilled with Universal announcing the Harry Potter hamlet. But next time I'm at UOR I'll have a look and judge it on it's merits as a theme park section, not on my opinion of the franchise. From what I can see it's well-executed so I'll probably like what's there so far.

 

[Peepster]

I'm guilty of not having read all of the posts but did read several articles about the Avatar and Disney venture.

My personal opinion is that it's all about money and not guest wishes.

Perhaps it will end up being something that I'll have to eat crow about but my dislike of James Cameron is so strong that I refused to see Avatar and I can find no way that it associates with the Disney brand. At this time Animal Kingdom is my second favorite park and I would rather see other additions.

Avatar is in no way on the level of Harry Potter, as I saw previously (and correctly) pointed out.

Please, Disney management, rethink this BEFORE you invest all this money.

This is a very divisive and unDisneylike decision. Are you certain that your core fans, those of us who frequent your parks REGULARLY, will support "Avatar Land"?

 

[Pluto1976]

What happened to the Australia themed-land idea? Let's review some of the AK lands and find a good fit. Here we go:

Asia
Africa
Avatar

No scratch that. How about:

Asia
Africa
Australia

There we go!

Seems to me the second list just flows better and is more in-line with the Animal Kingdom.

 

[centurythree]

This is a very divisive and unDisneylike decision. Are you certain that your core fans, those of us who frequent your parks REGULARLY, will support "Avatar Land"?

Disney Parks' "core fans" are a diverse demographic. Just like every other decision they've made, including creating Animal Kingdom, some will like it and some won't. Their focus should probably be on becoming more appealing to people who normally don't show up all the time. You know, like that resort down I-4 did by adding Harry Potter.

 

[Brocktoon]

I'm probably in the minority but if Disney really wanted to shoe horn in a film franchise with a truly "rabid fan base" in AK and still appease those of us who are still irate over the lack of a Beastly Kingdom they would have purchased the theme park rights to THE LORD OF THE RINGS.

Then we could have had dragons, hobbits, orcs, a forest of Ents and on and on.

I agree with this!

I'm not even a rabid LOTR fan, but I've read the trilogy and The Hobbit and really enjoyed the movies. From a lasting impact, LOTR has a much more robust fanbase and will continue for decades to come. With all the appendicies in the books, Middle Earth is a much more realized work than Pandora, and woul probably fit in much better to a Beastly Kingdom theme. And a collaboration with Peter Jackson and WETA would be just as great as a Cameron / Digital Domain venture.

I just think WDI has gotten stale over the years. I'm not sure why ... maybe budget and timetable constraints? But it seems like all the new projects just aren't busting the envelope on ride technology. Toy Story added 3D to the Buzz Lightyear formula ... The new Star Tours adds 3D the old Star Tours ... the new 7 dwarves coaster maybe adds an interesting car concept to the Big Thunder idea and the Little mermaid is just another dark ride ... none of these new rides have a huge wow factor. Sure they're fun, but they're not revolutionary. Even Everest is just a plussed Big Thunder, and the Yeti that makes it cool is busted. Where is the next Mission:Space or Tower of Terror?

While I'm not a huge fan of AVATAR or Pandora, this is where I'm excitied about Cameron's involvement. I hope he somehow has a lot of pull in the development of the attractions. I want someone who has the guts to push WDI to develop new technologies that could create entirely new experiences for the park goers ... not just add 3D, or make a bigger form of an existing attraction.

Three visionary filmakers I always wanted to callaborate with WDI - James Cameron, Peter Jackson, and Guillermo del Toro. Disney has snagged one of them, and now lets see what they can do!

 

[DRDISNEYMD]

Universal Studio's is not on Disney's level. So, while Harry Potter carries Universal -- Disney will successfully carry Avatar.

I think the Fantasy Land expansion is for the purists and Avatar land is looking to target the young adult male demographic that is noticeably absent from its parks.

 

[JimmyV]

This is a very divisive and unDisneylike decision. Are you certain that your core fans, those of us who frequent your parks REGULARLY, will support "Avatar Land"?

I don't see how jumping on the bandwagon of a multi-billion dollar franchise is divisive. An awful lot of the “haters” admit to never having seen the movie. That is their prerogative. But it more or less eliminates them from being able to make objective criticism. In the end, it will all be about execution.

The fact that one does, or does not like a particular movie has little to do with anything. If neither the Dumbo ride nor the Alladin ride existed today, and a poll were taken here asking which “go up and around in circles” ride they would rather see at WDW, one based on Dumbo or one based on Alladin’s magic carpets, I am guessing that the vote would trend 10-1 in favor of the more recent, better, and more profitable movie. Yet when the MK opens, people storm toward Dumbo and Alladin remains a relative “walk-on” all day long. Dumbo is one of Disney’s weakest efforts (IMHO) that did little at the box office, and most kids today who ride the ride haven’t even seen it. Of if they have, they don’t count it among their favorites. (Wait for it……you know it’s coming…..somebody out there is going to chime in that it is their snowflake’s favorite movie…But that doesn’t change the overall perception of the movie.) This same thing could be said about a lot of rides at WDW. Most people under 40 have no idea what Twilight Zone is or was. In fact, I tried to DVR a few episodes before our last trip so that my daughter could see what it was all about. There isn’t a single network carrying the show in syndication. But does your 12 year old love Tower of Terror? How many of you (or your kids) have actually seen Song of the South? Except for some random copies on EBay, the movie is unattainable. But who doesn’t love Splash Mountain? Wasn’t the Matterhorn at DL patterned after some low budget, now forgotten Disney live action picture?

About the only thing that people on both sides of this “divisive” issue can agree upon (assuming they even saw the movie) is that Avatar featured some stunning, state of the art computer animation and technology. Let’s let time run its course and see if Disney can create a ride or land with that much vision. Sure beats the “princess-ification” of the MK, if you ask me.

 

[Zife]

This is a very divisive and unDisneylike decision. Are you certain that your core fans, those of us who frequent your parks REGULARLY, will support "Avatar Land"?

I gave my opinion in regards to the announcement earlier in the thread, but just thought I'd mention something about this. I read a few months ago that, while there are a lot of sites and forums (like this) dedicated to those who live, breathe and sleep Disney, 80% of Walt Disney World guests are first time visitors (while the inverse is true of Disneyland).

So while many of us might not agree with the idea (I'm not looking forward to it personally, but I'll hold judgement until more details come about), in the grand scheme of things, it doesn't matter what "those of us who frequent the parks regularly" think. We're really not Disney's core audience, at least not when it comes to ticket sales at WDW.