Avatar land coming to Animal Kingdom!!

[FosterA]

Coming soon... Twilight Land, complete with sparkly vampires, werewolves, and a show where you experience the birth of Reneseme in 3D.

(If all Disney is going to do is chase hot movie franchises, I can see that's where this is headed.)

oooooh, I love this idea. Team Edward!!

I can do without Reneseme and werewolves though. Maybe just an Edward Park?

 

[disney_bob]

Of all of the movies and ideas available to you... you chose Avatar. According to http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0499549/companycredits Disney had absolutely nothing to do with it.

WHAT WERE YOU THINKING!?

 

[mmay60046]

I'm one of the, what, 10 people in America who never saw Avatar. But based on what I'm reading in this thread I should be able to see much of Avatar land without worrying about long lines because so many people already hate it based on the announcement? Awesome!!

 

[Magpie]

I only made it part way through this thread so forgive me if this is covered by someone else, but a cast member told me that Universal only has three years with the Marvel stuff. Disney offered to buy them out up front right away but they refused. He also told me that there are rumors of a "Marvel" land in the future for Disney since they still have so much open land or at least an addition to HS. Now he wasn't a bus driver but I will still wait to see how much of this is true. Has anyone else heard anything similar?

Here's how it was explained to me... Disney bought the rights to Marvel BUT Universal gets to keep using all the Marvel characters they currently have. So basically, they're licensed for eternity.

And since Spiderman and the Hulk and Dr. Doom and all the rest are very much linked to Universal in their advertising, I don't foresee Disney wanting to use them in its parks. It'll just confuse people and/or send them running over to Universal. What Disney has going for it is that it has dibs on any NEW Marvel characters that might become incredibly popular in the future.

 

[mstinson14]

Yet another reason to skip it...

 

[DCTooTall]

Didn't care much for the movie, though technically well done. I care for this idea even less.

A new country in Epcot would be better.

In any event, we can look forward to trip reports ten years from now that say: "Yeah, the Na'vi guy is still in B mode, strobes going."

At least Betty would have a dance partner.

I don't like this idea for Animal Kingdom at all.
What happened to the mythical creature type land that was originally planned for Animal Kingdom? Dragons and unicorns and other creatures that have already existed in literature and world culture for thousands of years would fit well.
If they wanted rights to a James Cameron movie I'd rather it have been "TITANIC" than "AVATAR".

What happened to Beastly Kingdom? well.... It got put into development limbo... then Disney fired/layed off a large number of the Imagineers who helped design the section of the park.... Then those ex-disney employees got Hired by Universal.... where they promptly dusted off some of their ideas and helped use them to fill out sections of the Lost Continent section of Islands of Adventure.

The most obvious remaining one of these rides? the Dueling Dragons Coaster.

Speaking of which, can this big budget project maybe free up a bit of cash to fix the Yeti?

If nothing more, with another major draw in AK, I could see them being able to FINALLY take EE down for the extended refurb rumors have indicated would be necessary to fix the Yeti. Right now they have the problem where if they take EE down for an extended length of time, there wouldn't be much of anything left in the park to draw people or eat the crowds.

I only made it part way through this thread so forgive me if this is covered by someone else, but a cast member told me that Universal only has three years with the Marvel stuff. Disney offered to buy them out up front right away but they refused. He also told me that there are rumors of a "Marvel" land in the future for Disney since they still have so much open land or at least an addition to HS. Now he wasn't a bus driver but I will still wait to see how much of this is true. Has anyone else heard anything similar?

Not true. Universal has an open ended contract on the Marvel characters they are using. That means they have exclusive theme park rights east of the Mississippi for all the characters currently used in their Marvel section of the parks for as long as they want to use them. Universal would either need to voluntarily relinquish the Marvel properties back to Marvel (now Disney), or they would need to violate terms of the contract such as failing to maintain the attractions in order for Disney to be able to revoke the Contract.


There have been numerous rumors about Disney buying out Universal's contract and building their own Marvel park or land since Disney purchased Marvel, however there have been no indications that this is what Disney wants. With the Marvel purchase they gained a LARGE number of existing properties and content to use on there their then recently rebranded Disney XD cable channel, and they also gained the rights and financial interest in the Marvel films which are making massive amounts of $$$. Theme park opportunities were not one of the primary reasons for the purchase.

 

[Dan Murphy]

Of all of the movies and ideas available to you... you chose Avatar. According to http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0499549/companycredits Disney had absolutely nothing to do with it.

WHAT WERE YOU THINKING!?

Hi neighbor.

Did they have anything to do with Star Wars or Indiana Jones?

 

[crostorfer]

if i sat down and wrote a list of 500 ideas for a new land at animal kingdom, avatar wouldn't have been on it. avatar? Really?

ditto

 

[carolinagirl]

My thoughts exactly. I am sure Disney will make the new land look great. I am sure we will all be saying "Wow! It is so much more then I expected, why did I doubt".....

But HP was a popular book series, then a popular movie series. Millions of kids followed the saga for their entire childhood. It is in our culture, much like Star Wars and to a lesser extent Indiana Jones. Avatar was one movie. Who knows if the next two movies will be any good? Not to mention, lots of people did not even like the first one.

I can see this land being built and then renamed/rethemed in a few years because no one cares about Avatar. This decision seems short sighted and shallow.

These were my thoughts exactly. I had actually already forgotten about Avatar. In a few years it will be like Ava-what? It will not ever be the pop-culture sensation that Star Wars or Harry Potter has been. Not a chance. This will be a huge, costly mistake for Disney. Animal Kingdom might see an initial increase in attendance...then it will be like..meh...whatever. Short-sighted...yep, exactly!

 

[khertz]

I adore Animal Kingdom, but I'm completely uninterested in this idea. After hearing people rave about Avatar, I finally saw it myself and spent the whole time wondering what the big deal was and when the movie was going to get interesting. It never did for me. I will try to go into it with an open mind to see what Disney does with it, but for now - unimpressed.

 

[DCTooTall]

Here's how it was explained to me... Disney bought the rights to Marvel BUT Universal gets to keep using all the Marvel characters they currently have. So basically, they're licensed for eternity.

And since Spiderman and the Hulk and Dr. Doom and all the rest are very much linked to Universal in their advertising, I don't foresee Disney wanting to use them in its parks. It'll just confuse people and/or send them running over to Universal. What Disney has going for it is that it has dibs on any NEW Marvel characters that might become incredibly popular in the future.

They also get a very nice cut of Universal's merch sales and licensing fees, and let Universal's marketing budget pay to advertise the Marvel properties.

There are also rumors that Universal may need to give Disney access to it's books in relation to sales due to clauses about percentages of sales and/or park admission.

 

[Sweettears]

I'm with those that say wait and see. Never saw the movie. For that matter I never saw Harry Potter and think that although the Star Wars movies were entertaining, IMHO they're not worthy of expansion in the parks.

The wait and see part is that the new land may be anchored by an AVAtar ride (or more) but I wouldn't be surprised if other elements from past planning in relation to the BEastly Kingdom get added as well. Disney is famous for recycling older ideas that didn't get developed in their original form.

I'm just happy to see continued investment and effort to keep moving forward with new attractions.

 

[disneyguy1818]

I love this comment. By the way, those who complain about Disney being pro-environmental, where were you for Wall-E, Pocahontas, Tarzan, etc.? Disney has been advocating environmentalism for decades now.

 

[PIRATEGIRL007]

I can't believe people are already saying this is a bad idea. i think it's great and can't wait until they release some additional details and concept art. This is going to be big and well liked by a lot of people. Just look how well the movie did? Give it time people!!!!

Seriously? I would think this would be a 1st post from someone, that is what we do on the DIS. Disney zigs..... DIS'sers complain, Disney zags ...... we complain some more.

 

[Cheltenham]

Of all of the great things Disney could have done in the parks, it is very disappointing that they are building land based on Avatar.

The movie is forgettable. There are no memorable characters and little story. It was popular only because it was a special effects spectaular. Those special effects, however, will be dated in just a few years. Story and characters are the magic of Disney. Perhaps Avatar's special effects could be enough to sustain an attraction, but not a land.

Avatar is no Harry Potter. Avatar is no Star Wars.

If the sequels bomb (and plenty do) Disney will be left with a half built Pandora land.

A Sci-Fi themed land does not fit with the tone of AK.

I think Disney was blinded by Avatar's big box office receipts. Just because people saw the movie does not mean they care enough about it to pay big money to visit a land based on the movie.

But once again and most of all - there are so many other far far better additions they could have made. Very disappointing.

 

[JasonDVC]

My e-mail to Disney...

9-20-11

I just learned that Disney is teaming up with James Cameron to bring an "Avatar Land" to the Animal Kingdom Park. My first reaction is "Are you NUTS!!??"

I would like to take this opportunity to let you know that the movie Avatar makes me sick to my stomach and I found it offensive as an American. The movie does nothing but make the American military out to be murderous thugs. I'm shocked that Disney would want to affiliate itself with a brand that promotes such abhorrent anti-Americanism and desecrates the good men and women that make up our armed services and put their lives on the line everyday defending this great country. I know I am not the only person that feels this way, in fact I know people who love the movie BECAUSE of the way it presents the American military as brutal savages. Those people hate the American military and take joy in seeing it humiliated on the big screen and now Disney has decided to cater to those who would spit on an American soldier if he/she were to walk by. Shameful!

I am a DVC member at 2 resorts and am now going to take a step back and see what Disney decides from here. Will you retract from your announcement to partner with a hideous film and brand or will you scoff at those who take personal offense to the disgusting display of disrespect shown by James Cameron and Avatar. Your decision will affect mine.

 

[disney_bob]

Hi neighbor.

Did they have anything to do with Star Wars or Indiana Jones?

No, they didn't. But I didn't say I agree with those choices either Looking back, though, those two franchises are far superior to this movie.

 

[bytheblood]

This sounds like a bad bus-driver rumor.


Universal gets Harry Potter, and Disney gets JC's bloated ego and a mediocre movie on which to build a whole land?? I am stymied.

 

[morethananyonex]

The imagineers are still going to be the ones helping to create this new project. Just because it's not a disney movie this is a bad idea??

That's not what I said at all, did you even read my post?

I specifically said I would not want them to base an entire land on one of their own movies either, especially not at AK. IMO the only place that would fit is at DHS. I feel the imagineers do their best work on attractions that are not based on a previously existing movie or character. The fact that Avatar isn't Disney has little to do with this. The fact that this is a whole land not just an attraction makes it that much worse.

 

[Nature Mom]

Does anyone think in 15 years after Avatar has lost its appeal to the masses (and no argument, there were many people who enjoyed it, which is obvious by the revenue) that the land can FINALLY be re-themed to the Beastly Kingdom? I never saw the whole movie, so I don't know anything other than the copied storyline, but the visuals I did see were beautiful and almost magical, which is what Disney is about, afterall.

I don't mind it being in AK, the environmentalism fits, but I highly doubt it has lasting power as Avatar land for more than 15 years before time to re-theme. But what do I know?