Looks like Universal win this round

[surferdave]

I really love both WDW and Universal and Really look forward to the thought of a Star Wars Land at Disney. But I am in my mid forties and your statement above makes me wonder if only the youngest of us will still be around to enjoy a possible Star Wars Land at WDW. I mean has anyone even heard of an estimated completion date for Avatarland yet?

That's a legitimate concern for any big Star Wars/Disney fans who hope to see major attractions added to WDW, and I believe it's a reason they should hope to see Universal "win" a few rounds. I think it's the only way they may see any motivation for Disney to do so.

 

[TwinPrincessMermaids]

I've already said Minions were fine and I looked forward to USH that has them...?

 

[jade1]

I like to go upside down. If I do that inside of a mountain then I don't notice any of my surroundings other than darkness, therefore the theme is lost. If you've ridden the Simpsons ride then you know that sometimes guys like to see their car in the parking lot from atop a coaster.

Upside down areas could be exposed if desired-not entirely indoors like RNR. Similar pattern of exposure to Matterhorn built 55 years ago and Splash & BTMRR 40 years ago.

I would prefer RNR as it it is and not an outdoor skeleton either.

Like I said-love Hulk, and think it looks fine where it is. DC as well is a great skeleton ride-but was ruined by staggering the coasters-far more disappointing than the Yeti not moving IMO.

If EE where just a skeleton I don't think it would look as good as it does, but they could fix the Yeti pretty easy I guess.

 

[jade1]

Now if they popped out of here with a coaster-I would be super impressed...........er.

 

[Planogirl]

-

Won't work. The cars at US are in parking garages.

Hey, no fair. I saw it.

 

[jade1]

Won't work. The cars at US are in parking garages.

Hey, no fair. I saw it.

Ha sorry-remembered my cool HP pics-it is super impressive area really wish it was it's own park.

Ramps are awesome for FL sun IMO, seems like WDW just has too much room to need them. I think DTD may be it's first ramp? They aren't super pretty though.

 

[Planogirl]

Ha sorry-remembered my cool HP pics-it is super impressive area really wish it was it's own park.

Ramps are awesome for FL sun IMO, seems like WDW just has too much room to need them. I think DTD may be it's first ramp? They aren't super pretty though.

I agree that they're not pretty. However it is nice to head out to the car on a July afternoon and be able to get in without broiling.

 

[sethschroeder]

I don't defend Avatar because it's a blatant ripoff of Fern Gully (1992). The ONLY reason it made money was because of the "state of the art" 3-D aspect it had going for it at the time. 81% of it's $760 million domestic haul was 3-D. Things have changed since then. I can see Tyler Perry's stomach in 3-D now at any given multi-plex every other month if I wanted to. Avatar was far from renowned in regards to it's script.

http://dbmoviesblog.wordpress.com/2012/05/13/avatar-vs-ferngully-the-last-rainforest-a-case-of-plagiarism/

Disney has a lot riding on this IP. I don't really understand the investment but what do I know? If Avatar 2 is loosely based on any Seinfeld episode ever created then I would be all over it.

Oh wow word for word.

Hmmm lets take a look at pretty much any "new" movie that has come out in the last 30 years and its based of something prior to it.

Lets look at Harry Potter vs Star Wars:
http://www.bitrebels.com/geek/harry-potter-vs-star-wars-the-similarities-are-striking/

Even better:
http://blog.capitalogix.com/public/...f-harry-potter-and-star-wars-infographic.html

The Best:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wbQEryw2f38

So YA

EDIT:
PS - Did I now convince you never to read or watch Harry Potter again? Personally I can care less as greatness breeds more greatness. We wouldn't have Video Games without TVs, we wouldn't have TVs without radio, we wouldn't have radio without newspapers, we wouldn't have newspapers without military reports, we wouldn't have that military reports without urge for conquest, we wouldn't have urge for conquest without human curiosity and greed, we.....

 

[jade1]

Ramps are awesome for FL sun IMO,

However it is nice to head out to the car on a July afternoon and be able to get in without broiling.

 

[macphisto96]

Oh wow word for word.

Hmmm lets take a look at pretty much any "new" movie that has come out in the last 30 years and its based of something prior to it.

Lets look at Harry Potter vs Star Wars:
http://www.bitrebels.com/geek/harry-potter-vs-star-wars-the-similarities-are-striking/

Even better:
http://blog.capitalogix.com/public/...f-harry-potter-and-star-wars-infographic.html

The Best:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wbQEryw2f38

So YA

EDIT:
PS - Did I now convince you never to read or watch Harry Potter again? Personally I can care less as greatness breeds more greatness. We wouldn't have Video Games without TVs, we wouldn't have TVs without radio, we wouldn't have radio without newspapers, we wouldn't have newspapers without military reports, we wouldn't have that military reports without urge for conquest, we wouldn't have urge for conquest without human curiosity and greed, we.....

There are no truly new ideas in drama or comedy. Most dramas are modifications of those invented by the Greeks. Yet there is also infinite variation.

Avatar was enjoyable for the visuals, less so for the story, but Disney is really pushing the visuals with Pandora. I think it will be magnificent when it opens.

Harry Potter is not a completely original concept. Nor is Lord of the Rings. Yet both took prior concepts, expanded on them, and made them new and fresh. Harry Potter is a strange amalgam of boarding school story and fantasy, so it blends genres in many regards. The school year timeline was unique to fantasy when it was first created and I don't read enough to know if it has been replicated.

Lord of the Rings has a lot of calls to various mythologies and ties into Tolkien's very deep Middle Earth mythology as well. I'm biased as Tolkien is my favorite, but that is incredible work. Yet Tolkien himself would say it was not "original". We all owe to what came before, but that doesn't mean we are doing straight lifts. There's nothing wrong with taking a prior concept, expanding on it, and making it your own. People will see the inspiration, but inspiration and theft are completely different things.

 

[chapie1968]

I don't defend Avatar because it's a blatant ripoff of Fern Gully (1992). The ONLY reason it made money was because of the "state of the art" 3-D aspect it had going for it at the time. 81% of it's $760 million domestic haul was 3-D. Things have changed since then. I can see Tyler Perry's stomach in 3-D now at any given multi-plex every other month if I wanted to. Avatar was far from renowned in regards to it's script.

EXACTLY!!!!!!

I hear many Disney devotees preaching how it is such a great idea because it i one of the highest grossing films ever. That proves how popular and beloved Avatar is. As you said, the main reason this film made so much money was because of the 3D gross. Avatar is not beloved, nor is it a film that has drawing power like a Star Wars. NO ONE was clamoring for an Avatar sequel. It is a horrible idea to invest all of the money and space into an Avatarland and it will just add to the list of recent Disney Theme Park Failures.

 

[FLchick415]

Speaking for myself only, my excitement for Avatarland has absolutely zero to do with the movie because I never saw it. I think the concept art looked amazing and if they can pull it off it's going to be a beautiful addition to an already beautiful park.

 

[sethschroeder]

EXACTLY!!!!!!

I hear many Disney devotees preaching how it is such a great idea because it i one of the highest grossing films ever. That proves how popular and beloved Avatar is. As you said, the main reason this film made so much money was because of the 3D gross. Avatar is not beloved, nor is it a film that has drawing power like a Star Wars. NO ONE was clamoring for an Avatar sequel. It is a horrible idea to invest all of the money and space into an Avatarland and it will just add to the list of recent Disney Theme Park Failures.

BS on no one, I know many people who were hoping after day 1 for a sequel... Just because your very limited group doesn't ask for another Avatar doesn't mean anything. Even if you subtract out 1/2 the revenue for the "3d" which is likely high your looking at the 3rd highest behind titanic and marvel...

I really am not an Avatar fanatic but when people blatantly have it out for Avatar because its not LOTR, Star Wars, or HP I need to speak up. I also don't say that revenue means fans because Avatar is not up with Star Wars, Star Trek, HP, LOTR, and others... What I think anti-avatar people need to realize is when people point to revenue is that even if its not the most popular series it still has a pull for people.

Also I love the fact that people will call Avatarland a failure before they even know what it fully involves with how things will be pulled of. Basically anything other than StarWars is going to be a failure it seems to most people for Disney. I mean floating mountains, moving animal kingdom to a night park, and the possibilities of a foreign "rain forest" to walk through make it enough to bring something new and fun to Animal Kingdom.

 

[macphisto96]

Speaking for myself only, my excitement for Avatarland has absolutely zero to do with the movie because I never saw it. I think the concept art looked amazing and if they can pull it off it's going to be a beautiful addition to an already beautiful park.

Agree completely. I really like Animal Kingdom, but it has always felt incomplete. Knowing the story behind the Beastly Kingdomme and the dragon on the original signs justifies that feeling. Before Everest, it felt even more like that. Like the Studios, it suffered from the "let's build the park halfway and let profits from the park pay to make it fully realized" concept that was a hallmark of the Eisner era. MGM, Animal Kingdom, Disney Studios in Paris, California Adventure, Disneyland Paris, and Hong Kong Disneyland. Only DisneySea opened with a truly full slate of attractions during Eisner's tenure. The other parks were all crippled in some way.

Pandora finally will give Animal Kingdom that fantasy animal area it was supposed to have all along. I've not even seen Avatar nor do I care to, but the concept art Disney has shown is fantastic. I also look forward to the night show that will come with it, rumored to have some elements of the fountain show out at California Adventure, The Wonderful World of Color. Another land to explore, another E-ticket, and a nighttime spectacular. That will make Animal Kingdom complete finally - and the most beautiful of the parks (well, it already is that, but more so).

Though Pandora will highlight the problems at Hollywood Studios. It has already fallen behind Animal Kingdom in attendance and will probably fall way behind after Pandora debuts. Epcot still needs a lot of work too, but the festivals keep Epcot attendance in very good shape. Hollywood Studios needs more attractions - E-ticket and otherwise. It really could use an expansion as well to push up capacity.

Universal has the advantage of only needing to deal with two parks. Disney has four to worry about and can't spend big money at all four simultaneously. Even Universal tends to alternate. After Diagon Alley opens, expect to see USF not getting anything new for 3-4 years. IOA will be getting anywhere from 2-4 new attractions during that period, though USF will get some refreshes and upgrades.

 

[DisUniversal]

BS on no one, I know many people who were hoping after day 1 for a sequel... Just because your very limited group doesn't ask for another Avatar doesn't mean anything. Even if you subtract out 1/2 the revenue for the "3d" which is likely high your looking at the 3rd highest behind titanic and marvel...

I really am not an Avatar fanatic but when people blatantly have it out for Avatar because its not LOTR, Star Wars, or HP I need to speak up. I also don't say that revenue means fans because Avatar is not up with Star Wars, Star Trek, HP, LOTR, and others... What I think anti-avatar people need to realize is when people point to revenue is that even if its not the most popular series it still has a pull for people.

Also I love the fact that people will call Avatarland a failure before they even know what it fully involves with how things will be pulled of. Basically anything other than StarWars is going to be a failure it seems to most people for Disney. I mean floating mountains, moving animal kingdom to a night park, and the possibilities of a foreign "rain forest" to walk through make it enough to bring something new and fun to Animal Kingdom.

Is your "I know many people" really any different than his "very limited group"? Only time will tell, but my personal "very limited group" of friends and family enjoyed Avatar, but shortly after seeing it, nobody ever really mentioned it again. None of them are waiting for a sequel. There's no demand for an Avatar video game. Even my children who will watch something they enjoy repeatedly, never asked to see Avatar even a second time.

Star Wars and Harry Potter have a huge following and wide appear to all ages. LotR has a huge following as well, but doesn't seem to have as wide of an appeal to all ages. In my opinion, Avatar depends nearly 100% on the success of the upcoming sequels as it appears to have not built much of a following at all. If you adjust for inflation, both E.T. and Snow White are ahead of Avatar and they sustain single attractions at parks, not whole lands. I hope Avatarland does succeed, but it is a HUGE risk on an unproven "franchise".

 

[Planogirl]

I was agreeing. I do that occasionally.

 

[Planogirl]

Who cares if Avatar appeals to this group or that? WDW is full of rides that are based on nothing and perhaps had movies made after the fact or none at all. One is based on a movie that most people will never see. A wonderful attraction can stand on its own merits.

I also argue that a movie that made that much money had to appeal to someone. It couldn't have just been due to nice effects. Avatar made "only" $760,507,625 in the US but $2,782,275,172 worldwide. Maybe foreign visitors would enjoy an Avatar attraction even if those people who paid over 760 million in the US have forgotten why.

 

[tiggerrr]

Who cares if Avatar appeals to this group or that? WDW is full of rides that are based on nothing and perhaps had movies made after the fact or none at all. One is based on a movie that most people will never see. A wonderful attraction can stand on its own merits.

You know, I was all set to wholeheartedly agree with this. Then, my brain started overthinking it (a perpetual problem with me). You're certainly right about the popularity of Splash Mountain. And right about not needing a movie at all as the list of popular "no movie" attractions is long.

Where I wonder if it will hold for Avatarland is if people will have expectations from their movie experience that will carry over to DisneyWorld and affect their assessment ("That isn't part of Pandora", "It shouldn't look like that", etc). It puts a higher risk on doing a great job. And I'm not sure NFL gave me confidence in Disney's ability to meet that level of expectation. If they had built a completely unknown mythical land, those expectations are not the same. It can look and contain anything they Disney wants it to and who's to say differently.

Universal took a big risk with HP. Obsessive fans with multiple books and movies with high expectations. I think their attention to detail and design were incredibly good at meeting those expectations. Now maybe Avatar doesn't create that same level of expectation (no books, only 1 movie now) but I fear Disney has to be much better than they have been.

 

[TaylorsDad]

I loved the Avatar movie. I left amazed at the wonderful 3d. When it finally came out in 3d blu ray I bought the movie to watch at home and watched it the night we bought it. That being said neither I nor any of my friends walked away eager to see a sequel or saying how great it would be to visit Pandora. I have no desire to see an Avatar 2 made-now. The first movie wrapped things up nicely and I feel a sequel would only take away from the original. However, when, if a sequel is made if the trailer looks good and reviews are good I will go watch it but with less than stellar expectations.
I also, have no desire to see an Avatar Land in Animal Kingdom-at least now. I like Many on the Disboards , do not seem to feel it works well with the overall theme. However if once it is eventually made and I am still young enough to enjoy rides, and if the pictures, videos, and reviews are good I will visit it when I go to Animal Kingdom. Wait, who am I kidding with so little in Animal Kingdom now I would probably visit it if reviews are horrible. I just would not plan a special trip to go to Orlando to visit an Avatarland like I would Universals WWOHP, DA,HHN, or even WDW's MNSSHP. I guess for me and my family the difference is Avatar was great to watch, Harry Potter was a great adventure to experience.

 

[mellyf]

I just would not plan a special trip to go to Orlando to visit an Avatarland like I would Universals WWOHP, DA,HHN, or even WDW's MNSSHP. I guess for me and my family the difference is Avatar was great to watch, Harry Potter was a great adventure to experience.

I think this sums it up for me. I enjoyed the movie, but really don't care about any sequels. I still think Avatar Land could be amazing though, with wonderful rides. However, I probably won't make a special trip down to see it when it's completed...we'd just go when we planned our next trip to Disney.

On the other hand, we've planned our first Universal only trip for this winter for Harry Potter. I'm excited about the rest of the park, too...we LOVED the Mummy ride when we were there a few years ago (and T2, and Shrek, and MIB), but HP is what's getting us back down to Orlando right now.