Avatar coming to Disney's Animal Kingdom

[supernova]

The thing is avatar= not even CLOSE to harry potter. I saw avatar and ever really liked it...but I had zero interest in watching it more than once and would have no interest in visiting its land. If I were already in Disney I'd see the land for sure, but never make a special trip for it. I agree they needed SOMETHING, and especially something for boys, but avatar? I've read all the harry potter books a dozen times, watched all the movies in theaters, and then bought them and have re-watched them at least once... I've seen people with Harry Potter themed weddings even! My 6 year old nephew and my 50-something year old mother in law love it equally. It's something a lot of people will make a special trip to Florida to see. Sure, tons of people liked avatar... but it is NOT even close to being on the same scale and does not have a story that will stay popular for as long. Harry Potter really is similar to Star Wars if anything.

Let's bring this down to basics here. First of all, adults having Harry Potter-themed weddings are nerds. But I digress.

I look at it as something quite simple: If I were a child in 2011, would I want to be seen in school carrying a Harry Potter backpack or an Avatar backpack? Avatar had its run, made gobs of money, but not because it was anything amazing. No one said, wow, what a powerful story. Visually appealing? You bet. Groundbreaking effects? Absolutely. Does it have legs to sell merchandise at Toys R Us? No, absolutely not.

For adults, if I hear that a new Avatar attraction is opening, I am immediately pointing my car toward Universal Studios to check it out as a curiosity piece. When I walk through Islands of Adventure but not find it, I'm shocked because it's the perfect location for it, but I head over to Universal Studios to find it there instead. D*mned if I'm not floored to find out that it was at Animal Kingdom all the time.

[DAR]

Star Wars and Indiana Jones aren't Disney either and people seem to like those.

Neither are half the movies in the Great Movie Ride.

[DAR]

As for why not Narnia, because it's a dying franchise. Avatar and its sequel will likely both top 1 billion again at the box office.

[Aww Phooey]

Star Wars and Indiana Jones aren't Disney either and people seem to like those.

Neither are half the movies in the Great Movie Ride.

To say "it's not Disney" is not the best way to describe what is probably the real underlying argument behind that sentiment.

"It's not a movie I'd watch with my children" is probably more apt. Hence the disconnect some people see with bringing this into a Disney park. Or at least that's the disconnect I see with it.

[acityinspain]

I'm not a huge fan of the Avatar movie, but I think this could be a great thing for Walt Disney World.
I'm disappointed that so many people have been begging for something new at Animal Kingdom, and now that they have announced something major - everyone wants to be hyper-critical.
I've heard a lot of people saying "Why not just one attraction instead of an entire land?" But it makes me think about the other partnerships Disney established, like the ones with Lucas and Henson, and how bummed out people are we don't have a Lucas land or a Muppets-themed area in Hollywood Studios. I think they want to deliver an immersive experience rather than just a brief shot of Pandora.
I like to see Disney going for it. I appreciate their drive, and I think it'll pay off. It's still so early in the process, why complain? I want to see what they have to offer, and I for one will go see the land when it opens for sure. (You know you will, too!)

[DVCDad]

Nice to see the food and whine festival is in full force here.

I dunno, how about actually waiting for details before whining like a 2 year old?

As for the "not for children" BS answer, let's get rid of Tower of Terror, Rock-n Roller coaster, Star Tours, hmm... anything else that could scare a kid? THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!! (sarcasm) Should we bulldoze the golf courses and race track while we're at it?

[JoshK47]

I'm not a huge fan of the movie, although the visuals are amazing, and I think that Disney will do a fantastic job capturing that. I have no doubts that Disney will do a great job, as they have very few mis-steps in their history.

My main concern is just how much of a pull this will really have in the parks. Avatar is all but forgotten about now, really... and I doubt the sequels will have the same draw as the original, but time will tell!

[bigthundermicky]

Disney is right many more times than wrong. One can make the argument that the entirety of the Epcot park is not "child friendly". People get as possesive about Disney and the park related things as they do their own family. I trust the judgement of the Disney braintrust and the imagineers that they will ensure that we will get extrodinary technology, attractions, restaurants, etc. There is a serious appreciation for all of that Star Wars brings to DHS, for example, and that is not Disney franchise. I am looking foward to this major announcement to additions to a park that some call a half-day park.

[Aww Phooey]

As for the "not for children" BS answer, let's get rid of Tower of Terror, Rock-n Roller coaster, Star Tours, hmm... anything else that could scare a kid? THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!! (sarcasm) Should we bulldoze the golf courses and race track while we're at it?

You're missing the point. They're not referring to the attractions or planned attractions. They're referring to the source material.

I have no doubt that Disney is going to find a way to make this enjoyable for all ages and it will probably be beeeeeautiful. I'm just anticipating holding back a few chuckles when I think about how unlike Avatar this land could end up being. Is this a "past" Pandora (or rather a "current" Pandora since the movie takes place in the future)...or a seriously retconned one featuring Jake, Neytiri, and all their animal friends? Are they bringing Pandora's wildlife to Earth or are we "going to Pandora itself"? Canonically it doesn't have a breathable atmosphere for us and I assume Earth's air would not be breathable for them. I'm curious to see how Disney chooses to make this meeting of two worlds happen.

[zippitydoodah]

Yep, I have no problem with it "not being Disney" or whether or not its "age appropriate"... its that I just don't think avatar has the staying power to have an entire land made of it. I know how well it did, but I did a quick poll at my work day and every person but one (out of 11) owned at least one Harry Potter movie and 7 owned the books, while only one person owns avatar. I also volunteer at a school (I'm newly graduated teacher on the job hunt) and I have never once seen an avatar backpack, tshirt, etc. It's just not popular enough...

[DVCDad]

How is Avatar any less child-friendly material than Star Wars or Indiana Jones? I just can't see the argument having any legs whatsoever. I don't see too many kids with Twilight Zone backpacks either, but that's a popular ride. People just like to complain for the sake of complaining.

Wait and see people, don't hate before you know anything.

[zippitydoodah]

How is Avatar any less child-friendly material than Star Wars or Indiana Jones? I just can't see the argument having any legs whatsoever. I don't see too many kids with Twilight Zone backpacks either, but that's a popular ride. People just like to complain for the sake of complaining.

Wait and see people, don't hate before you know anything.

as I just said, I don't care about it being child-friendly and I'm not arguing whether it is or not. I'm arguing that kids as well as adults don't care enough about it. It's just not all that popular.... They likely wouldn't make an entire Twilight Zone land either to be honest though. Star Wars is something both adults and kids love, its popular and 30 plus years later after the first movies they still can sell a TON of star wars merchandise. It's not a matter of being "child friendly", its a matter of whether kids (and adults) LIKE it that much and whether it will still be relevant years from now when the area is finally completed.

I also find it funny that Ive had people make comments that I have too much of an "everything is wonderful and happy and nothing is wrong at WDW" attitude, and now that I finally think an idea is bizzare I have people commenting the opposite! I just can't win!

[zippitydoodah]

Oh, and I know how much money avatar made. So did Titanic, and I don't see it being very relevant except for jokes nowadays...

[petals3485]

As for why not Narnia, because it's a dying franchise. Avatar and its sequel will likely both top 1 billion again at the box office.

But how long will it stay popular? Harry Potter has been popular for how many years now and will prob stay popular for a while to come.

This is a huge announcement. I think this is a big move on Disney's part to do a "Lucaslike" partnership with Cameron. This is a great response to Harry Potter across town.

They should build Twilight town complete with Cullen family This would make me happy lol

Seriously though what the frick has Avatar got to do with Disney? Surely there's some other animal/nature related movie out already or to be released that is actually related to Disney?

Also re Marvel superheroes are they not already in IOA?

[MJMcb]

As for why not Narnia, because it's a dying franchise. Avatar and its sequel will likely both top 1 billion again at the box office.

I am not sure why we assume either of avatars 2 sequels were be huge hits. Does anyone remember Matrix 2 or 3?

Having said that, if the attractions are fun/exciting/interesting it will be fine. It visually appealing for certain, but its unlikely to garner the droves of fanatics like Potter does at IOA.