Does anyone have an Avatarland update??

[Whatsthegoodword]

avatar was so popular because it was the first truely spectacular 3d effects film... Other than that... Blah

dedicating a whole land to that movie would be extreme overkill in my opinion - if they want to build a section of the park for mythical creatures and have an avatar "attraction" then so be it... But being tied to "avatar" for a whole land... Not smart

+1.

 

[StarWarsJez]

Word on the street is that the REALISTIC release date for the next Avatar movie will not be until 2016 now!

At least it gives Disney more time to get the land built. However, like a lot of people here I think this is sounding like an increasing bad idea and wasted opportunity.

Put simply I believe there are better franchises Disney should be investing in - when you consider risk, potential reward and how they fit in with the overall Disney brand.

 

[DRDISNEYMD]

Oh no Drdisney-- did someone get whacked from the avengers team?

~LOL. No, I don't think so. What brought on that question? Also, I like your username, for some reason it makes me giggle. Obviously, I need to add more members, you're at the top of my list!!!

~I think it's a brilliant, strategic decision to delay the movie until 2016 or later. Disney's Stars Wars, The Justice League & The Avengers 2 are all scheduled to be released that year. Every movie house does this -- Paramount delayed GI Joe 2 because of The Amazing Spiderman, but used the 3d enhancement excuse.

~I'm glad Disney is being bold & taking a risk versus playing it safe. I really have no interest in seeing how many different ways Imagineers can use the clam-mobiles.

 

[PeterPan0]

Avatar land confuses me. Especially being in AK. Maybe I'm wrong, but I always thought the Na'vi on Pandora were considered as aliens. I didn't think they were actually animals. Also, I feel as if this expansion could have gone in Hollywood Studios, since it is a movie and more modern movies have gone to HS (Indiana Jones, Star Wars). Yes, some may argue that the theme of Avatar was to promote wildlife conservation, however, I felt the movie was more of an action movie. Not once did I think of conservation. Wow. This makes me look anti Avatar. Quite honestly, I'm pretty neutral. I'm very excited to see what James Cameron and the Imagineers create. I just feel as if this new land doesn't target all audiences. I didn't go see Avatar in theaters. I rented it. The movie was good, but I don't think I would watch it again. My sister, who was younger, like a tween, did not enjoy the movie at all. I feel that Disney could have made a better decision to go through with something that was targeted to all audiences. Who knows? I guess we will just have to wait and see.

 

[beer dave]

~LOL. No, I don't think so. What brought on that question?

A little while ago there were four---

 

[dairylives]

~It's funny how people attempted to discredit the validity of the Avatarland concept by diminishing the merits of the film. Now, that they have been proven wrong and failed in that regard, "it's silly." So, the new old argument centers around "cultural significance." Give me a break. Seriously, now that's silly, imo. What is cultural significance? How does this distinctly define the theme park experience (for everyone)?

"proven wrong"? yeah, that never really happened in this thread.

Shouldn't a concept's viability be completely tied to the quality of the concept? A lot of people dislike Avatar, so a lot of people are going to dislike the land on principle. It may be an awesome land (there are plenty of attractions that i enjoy while disliking the theming), but their opinions are not invalid because they don't line up with yours.

 

[twebber55]

"proven wrong"? yeah, that never really happened in this thread.

Shouldn't a concept's viability be completely tied to the quality of the concept? A lot of people dislike Avatar, so a lot of people are going to dislike the land on principle. It may be an awesome land (there are plenty of attractions that i enjoy while disliking the theming), but their opinions are not invalid because they don't line up with yours.

Speaking of points never proven i have yet to here a valid a reason why this land shouldn t happen

Is cars
Culturally significant or just an incredibly themed land that sat up perfectly for a theme park

 

[dairylives]

Speaking of points never proven i have yet to here a valid a reason why this land shouldn t happen

Is cars
Culturally significant or just an incredibly themed land that sat up perfectly for a theme park

I cited a few things, sure. My intent was never solely to prove anyone wrong or anything, I just used my unique insight as a media journalist and avid pop-culture congoer to give some reasons i felt as though Avatar was "flash-in-the-pan", as a dedicated fandom has all but died out in the past couple years. I've seen it happen in front of my eyes.

Regardles, Cars land is a very valid point to bring up. It's received a fair share of criticism, mostly because the Car movies are widely seen as the absolute lowest point in terms of quality for Pixar. While it may not be ideal, the merchandising and theming value of Cars mostly makes up for it in my opinion. I'm not a fan of Cars at all, but honestly even the Cars section of Art of Animation had me extremely impressed.

I'm not saying i won't enjoy Avatar land. I'm sure i will enjoy it, and I'm sure we'll get some cool Imagineering out of it as well. My whole assertion, from the beginning, has been that Disney has been angling this as a "big deal", something to help fight Harry Potter at USO, when in reality the market for Avatar doesn't exist outside of "that was a cool movie a few years ago".

I guess, in the end, for me at least, it comes down to what i see as relevant in pop culture. At my job, i see thousands of kids a day. Almost 1 in 10 kids has some sort of "Cars" merchandise on them or their clothes. Other kids have Star Wars, Superheroes,Princesses, Harry Potter, etc. If Disney was really serious about this expansion, they would buck up and deliver something that would use a preexisting fandom to build up hype and drive sales, instead of picking a franchise that has little to no buzz around it at this point and hoping that people will come based on the memory of a movie that people don't seem to care about anymore.

 

[DRDISNEYMD]

A little while ago there were four---

~Oh, I see. I don't know what happened but the file became too large for both pictures. If you're on a PC -- zoom out, then you can see everyone. You can only see three people zoomed in or on the iPad/iphone. When I get some time, I have to merge both pictures and reduce the file size so everyone fits, lol.

"proven wrong"? yeah, that never really happened in this thread.

Shouldn't a concept's viability be completely tied to the quality of the concept? A lot of people dislike Avatar, so a lot of people are going to dislike the land on principle. It may be an awesome land (there are plenty of attractions that i enjoy while disliking the theming), but their opinions are not invalid because they don't line up with yours.

~It doesn't need to happen in this thread -- it's happened in all the others. If I copy and paste all of my Avatar posts it would be a mile long. Anyway, it's the same argument, spun a hundred different ways and we're just bored & tired of saying the same thing over and over again.

~It's all semantics -- by your logic, maybe Disney should not have built AK at all, because "some people" will think it's a glorified zoo, and won't give AK a chance based on that "principle." I'm not suggesting you have to love Avatarland, but please don't tell me that Disney shouldn't create Avatarland, just because you and a few other people assume you won't like it, based on "principle." Honestly, that comment makes no sense to me. I don't have to be a Harry Potter fan to enjoy WWoHP -- I haven't watched a single HP film or book, in it's entirety. I don't have to be a Star Wars fan to enjoy Star Wars land! I've never seen Star Wars, only bits & pieces -- I'm not a fan, in the traditional sense. And, don't get me started on Carsland. You have no idea how Disney will interpret the Avatar concept to compliment Animal Kingdom.

~If you want predictable and safe, please pass GO and head straight to Fantasyland for story time & apple juice! But, leave Avatarland for those of us who desire something more! I want to see what Disney can do with this. Have an open mind, you might end up loving the place!

 

[DRDISNEYMD]

Speaking of points never proven i have yet to here a valid a reason why this land shouldn t happen

Is cars
Culturally significant or just an incredibly themed land that sat up perfectly for a theme park

~Spot on -- as usual, twebber55! I totally agree!

 

[twebber55]

I cited a few things, sure. My intent was never solely to prove anyone wrong or anything, I just used my unique insight as a media journalist and avid pop-culture congoer to give some reasons i felt as though Avatar was "flash-in-the-pan", as a dedicated fandom has all but died out in the past couple years. I've seen it happen in front of my eyes.

Regardles, Cars land is a very valid point to bring up. It's received a fair share of criticism, mostly because the Car movies are widely seen as the absolute lowest point in terms of quality for Pixar. While it may not be ideal, the merchandising and theming value of Cars mostly makes up for it in my opinion. I'm not a fan of Cars at all, but honestly even the Cars section of Art of Animation had me extremely impressed.

I'm not saying i won't enjoy Avatar land. I'm sure i will enjoy it, and I'm sure we'll get some cool Imagineering out of it as well. My whole assertion, from the beginning, has been that Disney has been angling this as a "big deal", something to help fight Harry Potter at USO, when in reality the market for Avatar doesn't exist outside of "that was a cool movie a few years ago".

I guess, in the end, for me at least, it comes down to what i see as relevant in pop culture. At my job, i see thousands of kids a day. Almost 1 in 10 kids has some sort of "Cars" merchandise on them or their clothes. Other kids have Star Wars, Superheroes,Princesses, Harry Potter, etc. If Disney was really serious about this expansion, they would buck up and deliver something that would use a preexisting fandom to build up hype and drive sales, instead of picking a franchise that has little to no buzz around it at this point and hoping that people will come based on the memory of a movie that people don't seem to care about anymore.

good post thanks for your input

 

[lockedoutlogic]

Not to jump back in here...but a couple of things...

Again, I don't think anyone is stating emphatically that an avatar ride/land will be horrid because of the movie being...well...what it was.

But...big BUT...I laugh at the twist of the argument that somehow the long term, broad impact of the content is NOT an issue for Disney. I have loosely called it "cultural phenomena" for lack of better terms.

Of course it is...because no matter what side of the avatar debate a person is on...

To question the longterm popularity of avatar passes the only judge on this board: the common sense test.

This IS common sense. The longterm is everything...an that is where avatars merits are highly debatable.

I'll give two examples:
Why was everyone so ga-ga over Harry potter land?
Because it has already shown broad appeal and impressive legs.

Why did Disney just buy Lucas...mostly Star Wars for 4 billion?
Perhaps because it has been the highest selling license brand for 10 of the last 11 years?
I'm sure...but why is that?
Jar jar binks? Crappy movies for the last decade?
NO!
Because it had widespread popular appeal for 30 years prior...

You know what that's called: a cultural phenomenon
You what else is one?
Mickey Mouse.

So back to avatar...
Made a lot of cash...sequels inbound...

But still there are no LEGS! Find a non-sci fi fan that has mentioned this movie in the last five years...

I dare ya...5 bucks on the line.

 

[rteetz]

I just really wish disney would make up there mind and release exactly what they are doing I know they said at the Disney Springs thing they said it was till on. I just want disney to tell us when it's gonna start and when it's gonna end and what is it somewhat going to look like. I'm sick of all this it's going to start sometime this year and end in either 2015 or 2016 just tell us what is going on.

 

[twebber55]

Not to jump back in here...but a couple of things...

Again, I don't think anyone is stating emphatically that an avatar ride/land will be horrid because of the movie being...well...what it was.

But...big BUT...I laugh at the twist of the argument that somehow the long term, broad impact of the content is NOT an issue for Disney. I have loosely called it "cultural phenomena" for lack of better terms.

Of course it is...because no matter what side of the avatar debate a person is on...

To question the longterm popularity of avatar passes the only judge on this board: the common sense test

This IS common sense. The longterm is everything...an that is where avatars merits are highly debatable.

I'll give two examples:
Why was everyone so ga-ga over Harry potter land?
Because it has already shown broad appeal and impressive legs.

Why did Disney just buy Lucas...mostly Star Wars for 4 billion?
Perhaps because it has been the highest selling license brand for 10 of the last 11 years?
I'm sure...but why is that?
Jar jar binks? Crappy movies for the last decade?
NO!
Because it had widespread popular appeal for 30 years prior...

You know what that's called: a cultural phenomenon
You what else is one?
Mickey Mouse.

So back to avatar...
Made a lot of cash...sequels inbound...

But still there are no LEGS! Find a non-sci fi fan that has mentioned this movie in the last five years...

I dare ya...5 bucks on the line.

i found your post pretty interesting and certainly understand where you are coming from... so this morning ** asked my son about the tv show twilight zone he said "i dont know what you re talking about the only twilight zone i ve heard of is tower of terror" same thing with song of the south yet two disneys greatest rides

ask yourself why is cars so successful? is it the long term cultural phenomenon of the movie cars? doubt it... there is probably 5 pixar films better than cars, certainly the incredibles was better yet cars got an entire land..why i say because of the idea of radiator springs was more adapatable and more aesthetically pleasing as an immersive land as opposed to the incredibles.... you can say"well cars is popular with little boys" and i agree but there s a whole lot more people going to see cars land than little boys... i think cars land and avatar have something in common which is taking a really cool environment from a movie and making it an incredibly immersive experience in a theme park... who knows what disney will do with avatar whether it be one ride or an entire land but i look forward to fighting the hoards of people that i bet show up

this is just my silly, unprofessional, theme park fan geek self opinion

 

[DRDISNEYMD]

I cited a few things, sure. My intent was never solely to prove anyone wrong or anything, I just used my unique insight as a media journalist and avid pop-culture congoer to give some reasons i felt as though Avatar was "flash-in-the-pan", as a dedicated fandom has all but died out in the past couple years. I've seen it happen in front of my eyes.

Regardles, Cars land is a very valid point to bring up. It's received a fair share of criticism, mostly because the Car movies are widely seen as the absolute lowest point in terms of quality for Pixar. While it may not be ideal, the merchandising and theming value of Cars mostly makes up for it in my opinion. I'm not a fan of Cars at all, but honestly even the Cars section of Art of Animation had me extremely impressed.

I'm not saying i won't enjoy Avatar land. I'm sure i will enjoy it, and I'm sure we'll get some cool Imagineering out of it as well. My whole assertion, from the beginning, has been that Disney has been angling this as a "big deal", something to help fight Harry Potter at USO, when in reality the market for Avatar doesn't exist outside of "that was a cool movie a few years ago".

I guess, in the end, for me at least, it comes down to what i see as relevant in pop culture. At my job, i see thousands of kids a day. Almost 1 in 10 kids has some sort of "Cars" merchandise on them or their clothes. Other kids have Star Wars, Superheroes,Princesses, Harry Potter, etc. If Disney was really serious about this expansion, they would buck up and deliver something that would use a preexisting fandom to build up hype and drive sales, instead of picking a franchise that has little to no buzz around it at this point and hoping that people will come based on the memory of a movie that people don't seem to care about anymore.

~I agree with the highlighted & this is a great post overall! Is Avatar the "answer" for HP? I would say no. But, Animal Kingdom needs something more! I agree that initially Disney hyped this up to be a big deal.

~Unrelated to the above quote -- who's currently talking about Harry Potter??? Avatar has two more films in the works, good or not remains to be seen, but the buzz and hype surrounding the film(s) will be everywhere! The Mummy coaster at Universal has been winning awards for best coaster for over a decade now & the mummy movies were hardly epic. The land will speak for itself, the budget determines the hype, that's what got me excited! If Disney were to shrink the budget, then my feelings would change instantly. I think it's amateur to predict the success of a theme park attraction based on whether or not a movie has a "strong fan base." We've seen this with Carsland, and every other theme park attraction, this just isn't the case. Great attractions can even inspire films, as we've seen with Pirates of the Caribbean! Disney just unveiled a brand new Fantasyland & Carsland, but everyone is still talking about Avatarland.

 

[twebber55]

~I agree with the highlighted & this is a great post overall! Is Avatar the "answer" for HP? I would say no. But, Animal Kingdom needs something more! I agree that initially Disney hyped this up to be a big deal.

~Unrelated to the above quote -- who's currently talking about Harry Potter??? Avatar has two more films in the works, good or not remains to be seen, but the buzz and hype surrounding the film(s) will be everywhere! The Mummy coaster at Universal has been winning awards for best coaster for over a decade now & the mummy movies were hardly epic. The land will speak for itself, the budget determines the hype, that's what got me excited! If Disney were to shrink the budget, then my feelings would change instantly. I think it's amateur to predict the success of a theme park attraction based on whether or not a movie has a "strong fan base." We've seen this with Carsland, and every other theme park attraction, this just isn't the case. Great attractions can even inspire films, as we've seen with Pirates of the Caribbean! Disney just unveiled a brand new Fantasyland & Carsland, but everyone is still talking about Avatarland.

You re on fire today. The answer to what is the potter swatter is...... Nothing..... Let avatar stand on its own and compare it to cars land

 

[DRDISNEYMD]

You re on fire today. The answer to what is the potter swatter is...... Nothing..... Let avatar stand on its own and compare it to cars land

~Awww, thanks so much, twebber55! This means a lot coming from you! I just love your posts -- you knock 'em down, one by one in the most kind and genteel way, lol.

 

[supercruiser420]

I think Disney got excited by the fact that a third party was willing to throw in tons of money and ideas and give imagineering full control of it. Kind of like what happens in the Asian Parks. However, I think James Cameron's creative process which includes doing nothing for years can be a little daunting to WDI. Even though it doesn't appear like it, Disney sets a very tight schedule and usully abides by it. So waiting for JC and fox may become very frustrating. One of the first things they had to think of was the relocation of festival and the meet and greet locations. The new location for festival behind the dawa bar and the new pathway heading back down to the camp minnie mickey area is perfect and fits disneys needs for guest flow whether or not they build Avatar. They have gotten lots of feedback over the years about how inconvient festivals location is. So putting it in the middle of everything and freeing up that back corner of the park for anything in the future makes sense.

If I had to guess, If Avatar is going to happen, we are going to see the full expansion of DHS and some new additons at EPCOT before anything moves foward. Dont expect Avatar this Decade.

 

[StarWarsJez]

I think comparisons with "The Mummy" ride are misplaced, since that was just a single ride - whereas Avatar will be a complete land. BIG difference.

Universal went for the Mummy since it had at the time 2 successful movies and another on the way. Since its always been a core Universal asset I suppose they felt it had "legs". Interesting that a reboot is planned suggesting that the building of a single ride was justified. A bit of cheap "re-theming" can go a long way - like the subtle improvements to the PotC rides.

I think a single ride for Avatar would also be great. I'm sure as an entire land it will be nice - but my experience suggests to me that it wont generate the same level of interest as Disneys own franchises (which they own and can leverage how they please).

IMO when it opens everyone will be like "Wow". However a couple of years down the road it will be like "Meh". It just doesnt have the legs that Star Wars, Marvel, Toy Story, or several other Disney franchises have. Just look at the merchandising!

 

[twebber55]

I think comparisons with "The Mummy" ride are misplaced, since that was just a single ride - whereas Avatar will be a complete land. BIG difference.

Universal went for the Mummy since it had at the time 2 successful movies and another on the way. Since its always been a core Universal asset I suppose they felt it had "legs". Interesting that a reboot is planned suggesting that the building of a single ride was justified. A bit of cheap "re-theming" can go a long way - like the subtle improvements to the PotC rides.

I think a single ride for Avatar would also be great. I'm sure as an entire land it will be nice - but my experience suggests to me that it wont generate the same level of interest as Disneys own franchises (which they own and can leverage how they please).

IMO when it opens everyone will be like "Wow". However a couple of years down the road it will be like "Meh". It just doesnt have the legs that Star Wars, Marvel, Toy Story, or several other Disney franchises have. Just look at the merchandising!

one of the rumors is that it may just be one e ticket and a shop...once again thats a rumor so who knows