Was Avatarland really the best idea?

[james1865]

It was a huge movie and I'm sure the sequels will do well. However, I'm not
certain that it has the draw and iconic status to pull this move. It is a huge risk by Disney, IMO. Was it a knee jerk reaction to Harry Potter over at Universal? I know at the time this decision was made Disney did not own Star Wars, but a Star Wars section at HS (not just Star Tours but an entire "land")?or even a whole stand alone Star Wars theme park seems a more viable option to compete
with Harry Potter. Thoughts?

 

[rteetz]

It was a huge movie and I'm sure the sequels will do well. However, I'm not certain that it has the draw and iconic status to pull this move. It is a huge risk by Disney, IMO. Was it a knee jerk reaction to Harry Potter over at Universal? I know at the time this decision was made Disney did not own Star Wars, but a Star Wars section at HS (not just Star Tours but an entire "land")?or even a whole stand alone Star Wars theme park seems a more viable option to compete with Harry Potter. Thoughts?

Well like you said Avatarland was in place before disney bought Star Wars. I don't see disney ever doing a whole just Star Wars park yes it has enough for that but disney would never do that on one movie franchise. Look at all of disneys parks even universals none are based on one movie franchise it's just never going to happen. A land or ride is almost certain disney has to capatilize on Star Wars in the parks. Now as for Avatarland disney and James Cameron have the capability to amazing things imagineering and Cameron are some of the best minds out there. Just think they are going to try to do floating mountains, an bioluminescent forest, riding a banshee, and AK will get a night time show. I don't think is a huge risk, the movie didn't have the best storyline but the base of the movie has the potential for an amazing theme park land. James Cameron is not going to let disney do shortcuts with this, he will only settle for the best.

 

[gilltrooper]

It was a huge movie and I'm sure the sequels will do well. However, I'm not certain that it has the draw and iconic status to pull this move. It is a huge risk by Disney, IMO. Was it a knee jerk reaction to Harry Potter over at Universal? I know at the time this decision was made Disney did not own Star Wars, but a Star Wars section at HS (not just Star Tours but an entire "land")?or even a whole stand alone Star Wars theme park seems a more viable option to compete with Harry Potter. Thoughts?

I agree !!! I think Star Wars would've been a WAY better choice !

 

[Crystal824]

I also agree. I'm not thrilled with the Avatarland especially at DAK. I think it belongs at DHS.

 

[mom2cinderella]

Our household has five Star Wars fans, so to me a SWland would have been great. And a 5th gate of all SW would have been even better!

I'm not looking forward to anything Avatar, but hoping whatever they come up with is awesome and cutting-edge.

 

[flutterby3744]

I think it's a fantastic move. IMO the draw will be the themeing and not the movies. With HP, the draw is the books/movies, you are seeing a beloved story come to life. Would it be cool to see if it was just a castle and not HP? Sure. But it wouldn't be a destination per say. Now Avatarland/Pandora has the possibility to be mind blowingly beautiful. Regardless of the Avatar movies, the land will be great.

I know I'm in the minority here, but I'm just not a Star Wars fan. I would visit if there was a Star Wars land, but I wouldn't be crazy excited. I AM excited though about them recreating Pandora with bioluminescence and floating mountains.

 

[BuckeyeBama]

For AK, Avatar makes more sense. I like the idea of opening a whole new park with Star Wars theming.

 

[TLSnell1981]

I have no desire to see Avatarland.

 

[jimmysmom74]

I feel like AvatarLand is trying to attract a different audience. Bring in people who aren't into just "Disney". However, with the success of SWW through the years, I can't belief we are still only talking about a SW addition to DHS, and it's not being built already. SW area at DHS would be awesome!!!

Not interested in Avatar, but we certainly will try it when it ever gets finished...I'm 37 hopefully in my lifetime.

 

[MuddyTires]

Personally, I wasn't a fan of the idea at all. An Avatar themed land doesn't appeal to me in anyway whatsoever. For me, it just also doesn't seem to fit.

As others have said, I would absolutely love a Star Wars land, but Disney didn't have Star Wars back then so it wasn't an option between the two. But I think there were many other options that would have been preferable.

I would have rather seen the Cars Land added, and a Disney villain themed land. For Animal Kingdom, I would have probably preferred the Beastly Kingdom idea, which I think they could have done a lot of exciting things with and still tie it back to the Disney movie brands.

Maybe they'll come up with some extraordinary Avatar attractions that I'll want to see, but it will be the nature of the attraction, not the Avatar theme, that would have to get me interested.

And they didn't need Avatar to push the envelope with greater technology and more incredible attractions. They could have done that with new attractions that better fit with the Disney themes and brands.

From a less personal and subjective view, it seems to me like the Avatar brand is old news. I don't really see it as something that has been a well sustained brand. Maybe I'm wrong. Of course, the Avatar land at Disney and another Avatar movie may change that.

 

[mom2cinderella]

Just curious - has anyone read something specific about any Avatar attractions? The articles I just skimmed were rather vague.

 

[PACVII]

Not a fan of the movie or the idea but if done right would still enjoy it just the same. I'm sure overall they will do a great job with it and the added attractions will be great if I'm a fan or not. Just don't see the depth to it. Only the one movie and your putting a lot if eggs in one basket here. I do agree with others star war would be GREAT to see.

 

[Happyjen27]

I have zero interest in Avatarland.

The movie was fine, I will probably rent the sequels from Redbox when they come out.

I can't imagine it will ever draw someone TO Disney that wasn't already planning on going anyway. Whereas the WWoHP compelled me to visit Universal. I probably wouldn't have gone to Universal if they didn't have WWoHP.

This will be a swing and a miss.

 

[james1865]

I think a Star Wars theme park would be very do-able and would have the audience to sustain it. You could have different themed "lands" based on planets: Tatooine, Hoth, Coruscant, Dagobah etc.

 

[5Hfan]

I have no desire to see Avatarland.

Plus 5 more in our family. Ewok village??

 

[amg35]

I don't care about the movie at all, but the plans make it sound pretty awesome. (Pandora, water ride, glow in the dark plants)

As long as it's done right and has great technology, some new ride, and most importantly, allows for nighttime touring of Animal Kingdom, I think this will be a win. Mostly I think it will be a beautiful addition to Animal Kingdom, which happens to be my favorite park.

We are going this year, and then not planning on going back again until they finish Avatarland....hopefully before we turn 90!

 

[rteetz]

I also agree. I'm not thrilled with the Avatarland especially at DAK. I think it belongs at DHS.

No way avatar is much more suited for AK than DHS. Star Wars should be at DHS not AK.

 

[dixiegirl]

I have no desire to see Avatarland.

Same here.

 

[Indecisive]

Like some of the previous posters, I don't understand what Avatar has to do with animals? I think Avatarland is a bizarre concept for Animal Kingdom.

 

[PSUGuy]

We saw the movie in the theater, a rarity for us, and we liked it enough but I just don't see it and sequels having staying power like the Star Wars/Star Trek franchises. If there are thrill rides, we're there, but I think when this park has it's 25th anniversary the young 'uns will wonder what's all the fuss. Of course, in 1962 I declared that the Beatles were a passing fad.

Bill From PA