Disney's Avatar land cancelled?

[mrsklamc]

Hey Bob- little tip- at shareholders meetings you should not tell people things that make them want to SELL their stock.

 

[flicx]

I really did not like the idea to begin with.I really think disney can do alot better than the avatar idea anyhow. As far as Iger goes I think he is terrible,way way overpaid and has done a ton of damage to disney world. Someone needs to take over his spot!!

 

[Planogirl]

If Disney builds the Avatar area and does it right then it will work. Disney originally planned a fantasy land in Animal Kingdom and this would just be that land. I see it as no worse than many other ideas that looked a bit goofy at first but worked well. The Pirates movies for example. I heard plenty of fussing about that before the first movie came out.

 

[minnie mum]

If Disney builds the Avatar area and does it right then it will work. Disney originally planned a fantasy land in Animal Kingdom and this would just be that land. I see it as no worse than many other ideas that looked a bit goofy at first but worked well. The Pirates movies for example. I heard plenty of fussing about that before the first movie came out.

Some ideas should be quietly put to sleep. Look at the fabulous job they did with the Narnia attraction. If Disney decides to do Avatarland on the cheap then it will bust big time.

 

[Planogirl]

Some ideas should be quietly put to sleep. Look at the fabulous job they did with the Narnia attraction. If Disney decides to do Avatarland on the cheap then it will bust big time.

I agree. Doing it right would require big money. Narnia could have been nice if handled correctly.

 

[KellyNY]

If not already posted....

Bob Iger's thoughts.....

http://www.wdwmagic.com/Attractions...coming-to-Disney's-Animal-Kingdom-in-2015.htm

So he does read what we post or he is among us...

 

[magicbob]

What does it say about me exactly that MK is my favorite park?

Am I opening myself up here or what?

It tells ME that your first visit to WDW was in 1973 (verified by your signature block) when the Magic Kingdom WAS Disney World. FOr those of us who first started going to WDW long before EPCOT even broke ground, there will always be a huge nostalgia factor when thinking about MK.

 

[Bullseye]

Cameron has any kind of support he wants to make future Avatar movies. His track record is um...pretty good so far. Walt Disney is a huge player also. They didn't enter into an agreement together without some big long term plans. You would expect some "artistic" differences between such strong egos on a project this big. You wait and see, it's going to be freakin awesome, we'll that is...until the yeti breaks!

 

[JoshuaShaw]

So they tolerate letting the girls have a significant presence in ONE land of the MK? They already toned down the princess elements in the expansion pretty significantly.

You can also remind them that the POTB recently took the Carousel away from Cinderella and gave it to Prince Charming. Maybe they'll want to ride now.

I'll never understand how a property with a male protagonist is for everyone, but one with a female protagonist is for girls. I'm a strapping, hair-sprouting manly-man, but I was sorely disappointed when I saw how much they scaled back from the original Fantasyland expansion and that they blamed The Princess and the Frog's modest box office performance on the fact that the word 'princess' was in the title. Am I just naive to think that just because I did as a child, lots of boys enjoy Disney animated movies and attractions, even the ones with princesses?

 

[DRDISNEYMD]

That's impressive so far as it goes, but I'm non convinced that US has it over WDW.

We did both resorts during Spring Break last year and other than the crowds at WWOHP, you could have shot a canon through both IOA and US without much danger of hitting anyone. All of the WDW parks, on the other hand, were packed every day.

That said, I have less than zero interest in Avatarland.

~Thanks for the update! I must admit I'm very surprised to hear this. I could see why Universal wanted to work with Cameron again and get their hands on Avatar!

These are 2010 park attendance numbers:


1 Walt Disney Parks and Resorts United States 120,600,000
2 Merlin Entertainments Group United Kingdom 41,000,000
3 Universal Studios Recreation Group United States 26,300,000


Universal might have had an amazing honey moon period with Harry Potter, but Disney will always have the bigger fan base and loyalty. These companies will fight with each other til the end of time and in the end "we" win. As long as they are competing with each other, we will continue to see multi million dollar expansions that will only benefit us and the future generations.

~Pretty cool stats! I totally agree with you, I'm not saying in anyway that Universal is "better" than Disney. That's not my argument nor is it my point. Disney has never had the pleasure of experiencing an opening day turn out of that magnitude for any of their parks or attractions, clearly that's what they're going after.

~Below is just my personal thoughts, it's not aimed at the above posters or anyone in particular.

~I have long been a Disney loyalist and I've never been to Universal/IOA, I'm NOT a fan of Avatar, but I respect the film's overwhelming box office success. IMO, 2.8 Billion dollars is not a fluke, there were no A-list actors, the actors used were and still are relatively unknown and there were no books or TV series behind the film. This alone speaks volumes to Avatar's success!

~Cameron is filming his new movie with brand new (never before seen) 3D technology that he helped to create and I expect the upcoming sequels to be even more successful. Cameron holds the title for the two highest grossing films ever! Avatar is number one and the second highest grossing film ever is Titanic and that was 15 years ago! It would take three Harry Potter movies to beat Cameron's one (Avatar). Harry Potter is done, while Cameron still has two more to go!

~The new Fantasyland is for the Disney traditionalist, purist, loyalist or whatever. Avatarland is NOT, it will appeal to a very large demographic, who would not be caught dead in a Disney park, otherwise and balks at the sight of anything Disney!

~The fact is, Disney World is NOT the United States most visited tourist spot! New York is the number one most visited US tourist destination, with over 37.6 million visitors last year alone! That more than doubles the 17.1 million visitors at WDW last year, which is also ranked as the fifth most visited US destination. This is why Disney advertised so heavily in New York Times Square on New Years Eve! The second highest tourist destination is Las Vegas with over 30 million visitors.

~Disney isn't everything to everyone and they're smart enough to know that. There is NO ONE in my circle of friends, family and associates who appreciates Disney, it's just my immediate family that's hooked on Disney.

~There is plenty of land in AK for both Avatarland and Australia. I loved the idea of Australia at AK. But when I read a complaint in another thread from Australian who was extremely offended by the mere suggestion of Australia in AK, I don't care to see anything from Australia.


~The more I hear people complain about Avatarland the more I LOVE it! And it convinces me that Disney is making the right decision. The collaboration between Disney Imagineers, James Camron's innovative team and a half billion dollar budget equals huge success.

~I cannot wait to see Avatarland, if you don't like it, don't go, it really is that simple! That's why Disney is building the new Fantasyland, which looks fabulous by the way and I fully intend to enjoy both. Also, I will be there on opening day for Avatarland and I really want to support Disney 100 percent on this venture, but of course, I need more details. Hopefully, they'll start leaking some artwork and ideas in the future! This is so exciting, I can't wait!

~Off my soapbox ---> for now.

 

[mesaboy2]

~The new Fantasyland is for the Disney traditionalist, purist, loyalist or whatever. Avatarland is NOT, it will appeal to a very large demographic, who would not be caught dead in a Disney park, otherwise and balks at the sight of anything Disney!

I think you, and probably some Disney brass, are making a big miscalculation here.

 

[mking624]

There is plenty of land in AK for both Avatarland and Australia. I loved the idea of Australia at AK. But when I read a complaint in another thread from Australian who was extremely offended by the mere suggestion of Australia in AK, I don't care to see anything from Australia.

The more I hear people complain about Avatarland the more I LOVE it! And it convinces me that Disney is making the right decision. The collaboration between Disney Imagineers, James Camron's innovative team and a half billion dollar budget equals huge success.

These two statements contradict each other. So you don't want to see anything from Australia because someone complained about it...but you think Disney is making the right decision about Avatarland and you "LOVE" it because people are complaining about it. So are complaints a good or bad thing to you?
I also wonder how complaints convince you Disney is doing the right thing. Why? What makes it a sure thing when you hear so many complaints? Now I'm not saying Disney won't do something good...but you explanation as to why just makes no sense to me. People complaining does not automatically equal an excellent decision. I'm not thrilled with the idea of Avatarland, but I am also in a wait and see mode...I cannot be convinced by either side that it will be absolutely awful or absolutely wonder just because people complain or praise it before anything about it is even released (such as concept art). I will be convinced one way or another when I SEE it. My personal issue with Avatarland comes with an entire land being devoted to a tie in with a movie that's not even their own...completely different than individual rides over at Hollywood Studios. So I'm hoping they come up with an amazing concept that can eventually drop the movie tie in yet still be able to stand on its own two legs and blend in seamlessly.

The new Fantasyland is for the Disney traditionalist, purist, loyalist or whatever. Avatarland is NOT, it will appeal to a very large demographic, who would not be caught dead in a Disney park, otherwise and balks at the sight of anything Disney!

I agree with mesaboy...I think this is a big miscalculation. Yes, it will gain some attention and curious people will check it out. But I also think there is a misconception it will have the same popularity and notoriety as Wizarding World (which started attracting the Disney "loyalists") and that's just not going to happen. Yes, Avatar was popular. But you are not seeing the same type of phenomenon with it as Harry Potter, regardless of how much it made at the box office.

 

[DRDISNEYMD]

I think you, and probably some Disney brass, are making a big miscalculation here.

~"I think?!?" ...your opinion is simply too vague. At least, I elaborated somewhat with my opinion and offered some insight as to how I formed this opinion.

These two statements contradict each other. So you don't want to see anything from Australia because someone complained about it...but you think Disney is making the right decision about Avatarland and you "LOVE" it because people are complaining about it. So are complaints a good or bad thing to you?

~I don't think there's much of a contradiction because I am referencing a real country and the concerns and objections voiced from a real citizen of that country versus a movie where the director is not only thrilled but has chosen Disney to interpret and represent his creations specifically at Animal Kingdom -- big difference. I think complaints are a good thing. I have long envisioned Australia at AK but after hearing the complaints about citizen(s) having a strong desire NOT to be represented at AK or defined by "just the Outback" and I'm assuming it's because of the possible stereotypes associated with it, such as "Crocodile Dundee", etc. -- it certainly changed my point of view. On the other hand, there is James Cameron who is excited, passionate and most importantly, he wants Avatarland at AK!!

I also wonder how complaints convince you Disney is doing the right thing. Why? What makes it a sure thing when you hear so many complaints? Now I'm not saying Disney won't do something good...but you explanation as to why just makes no sense to me. People complaining does not automatically equal an excellent decision.

~It makes no sense to you because my reasons are totally personal, lol. What can I say? I LOVE the underdog!! I seem to have a natural inclination to cheer for the underdog and the most underrated, almost to a fault! Key word being ---> 'almost'. Most of the time, I am right. You may not believe me but I will tell you anyway. I called "Animal Kingdom" the race horse who won the Kentucky Derby, I bet on that horse on won! He was predicted to come in last place. I hope that helps, but probably not!

I'm not thrilled with the idea of Avatarland, but I am also in a wait and see mode...I cannot be convinced by either side that it will be absolutely awful or absolutely wonder just because people complain or praise it before anything about it is even released (such as concept art). I will be convinced one way or another when I SEE it.

~Honestly, I think this is a wonderful attitude to have, it's actually one of the most sound and logical posts I've read in relation to Avatarland! We all should embrace this attitude, myself included. Unfortunately, what we have mostly, is extreme polarization on both sides of the continuum, with the overwhelming majority expressing disdain and opposition. You are clearly the centrist, but we need a least one person on the 'other' side, so I guess that will be me, lol.

My personal issue with Avatarland comes with an entire land being devoted to a tie in with a movie that's not even their own...completely different than individual rides over at Hollywood Studios. So I'm hoping they come up with an amazing concept that can eventually drop the movie tie in yet still be able to stand on its own two legs and blend in seamlessly.

~Again, I think this is a valid concern. I expect Disney Imagineers to interpret certain aspects of Avatarland and incorporate them into the overall theme of AK. I believe it will be done in good taste with only subtle references to the film. You're not going to enter this land and be blindsided with everything blue! I am of the opinion that Avatarland cannot be done like the Wizarding World of Harry Potter, people don't want to be blue aliens, that's just too weird. Disney will not present Avatarland in that way. I believe Disney and James Cameron will give us a beautiful, immersive, and state of the art technological masterpiece that will transform AK into a full day park experience with more thrill ride(s), attractions and a stunning night show or at least transform AK into a fabulous night park!

I agree with mesaboy...I think this is a big miscalculation. Yes, it will gain some attention and curious people will check it out. But I also think there is a misconception it will have the same popularity and notoriety as Wizarding World (which started attracting the Disney "loyalists") and that's just not going to happen. Yes, Avatar was popular. But you are not seeing the same type of phenomenon with it as Harry Potter, regardless of how much it made at the box office.

~I think this project will bring Disney center stage and will gain a lot of attention. Once Cameron's film is set to release, it will be the year of Avatar, again! Disney will be prepared to seize and capitalize on the ridiculous amount of worldwide press and hype this film is going to get. Disney can tie in and promote their parks and brand alongside with the film -- you can't buy that kind of publicity. Obviously, there is so much more to Disney than Avatarland, but it can be used as a strong mechanism to draw unlikely visitors to the parks and once they arrive, then Disney can appeal to this demographic based upon their own merits, but again, the challenge is how to get this group there in the first place, and Avatarland could very well be the answer.

 

[magicbob]

ONE person from Australia complained and that makes it a bad idea?

I would think that countries would WANT to be included. Are people from Africa and Asia offended by their inclusion in AK? Do the countries represented in EPCOT object to being represented there? I hardly think these countries are being exploited or anything. I'd think they would consider a "feather in their cap" to be represented in this way, showing off their natural beauty, etc.

Africa, Asia, and Australia are all continents, so it seems to make sense geographically (not to mention the diversity of animal life in those locations).

 

[DRDISNEYMD]

ONE person from Australia complained and that makes it a bad idea?

I would think that countries would WANT to be included. Are people from Africa and Asia offended by their inclusion in AK? Do the countries represented in EPCOT object to being represented there? I hardly think these countries are being exploited or anything. I'd think they would consider a "feather in their cap" to be represented in this way, showing off their natural beauty, etc.

Africa, Asia, and Australia are all continents, so it seems to make sense geographically (not to mention the diversity of animal life in those locations).

~I thought it was a great idea but I am going to have to assume that the one poster represents a certain segment of the populace from that region, who obviously find this offensive. I took that into account when forming my opinion. Because of this, I look at it differently now and I fell out of love with the idea. There are several other fabulous concepts available for our entertainment. The poster also argued how they would rather be represented as a country in Epcot instead of a continent in AK, primarily because of the association with the outback, at least that's how I read it. But after reading that, I don't care to see it at all, at Epcot or AK. Unless you are from that region, I guess it would be hard to understand why someone would feel so strongly about a mere suggestion. Again, I'm not saying it's right or wrong, I just don't like the idea anymore.

 

[Dziactor]

I really don't like the idea of Avatar land. It makes me feel like their trying to do something in response to Harry Potter at Universal, but Avatar is no Harry Potter.

 

[xipetotec]

Our family were just discussing this just last week.

I see what they are trying to do, bring a major fanchise into the parks like Universal did with Harry Potter. But frankly, none of us ( and we were a group of 17, all ages, knowing all kinds of people ) really saw the appeal to Avatar.

I mean, is it even relevant anymore? It seems like the movie came out, had a huge spike of interest, the movie DID do incredibly well... but unlike Star Wars or Harry Potter or even say Lord of the Rings, it has pretty much died down. I think the hype for this movie is over. Yes there's a sequel in the works... and I'll be curious to see just how well THAT does. But It seems everyone I talk to is pretty "meh" on Avatar as a whole.

That being said, I agree with the guys on the DIS podcast who say that no matter what WDI will probably come up with some cool stuff... but banking specifically on Avatar... I dunno...

 

[NewsiesGoil]

I'm a huge Avatar fan (not Avatard, that sounds so offensive) and the bickering over money makes me nervous. James Cameron is a perfectionist, so I have faith in his vision. But if Disney continually tries to cut the budget like they did during HP negotiations, I feel like Cameron will walk away just like JKR. They're going to need a lot of money to make this thing worthy of the movie, and I honestly don't see it happening. I'm just envisioning a bunch of cast members painted sparkly blue with cat ears and a Hallelujah Mountains roller coaster and maybe a light up walkway and it kind of makes me want to cry.

 

[W.E.D.]

I think it was a huge mistake, not because I hate Avatar or anything. I enjoyed the film. But devoting a "land" to a single movie is a huge gamble, IMHO. The rest of the trilogy hasn't even come out yet. The new films could totally jump the shark.

With Harry Potter, you have a multi-book, multi-film dynasty. Not so (yet) with Avatar.

 

[xipetotec]

I think it was a huge mistake, not because I hate Avatar or anything. I enjoyed the film. But devoting a "land" to a single movie is a huge gamble, IMHO. The rest of the trilogy hasn't even come out yet. The new films could totally jump the shark.

With Harry Potter, you have a multi-book, multi-film dynasty. Not so (yet) with Avatar.

Exactly my point. While it's true that I'm not a big fan of Avatar, what you are saying is what I was getting at. For example, I'm not a fan of American Idol either, but I can appreciate that it IS huge, and HAS been running for many seasons and has tons of fans after many years. I just don't go to the attraction myself, but that's fine, others who like it can...

But does Avatar really have the staying power required to dedicate a whole land to it? I find this highly doubtful.