Avatar coming to Disney's Animal Kingdom

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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.

---

But again, these are RIDES. Not lands. If they want to build an Avatar attraction, fine. But the movie hasn't proven to have legs yet. I see people wearing novelty Star Wars shirts every now and again (granted, they are by guys who are old enough to know better, but still...). Avatar isn't a franchise, it's one movie. And a mediocre one at that, story-wise. The Great Movie Ride is just that... a ride about great movies, or genres. When it was first built, the place was a (semi) working studio. Indiana Jones was a way to show how stunts were made. Back when they first brought in the Muppet attraction, Disney hadn't yet owned them, either. So your argument could be made for the puppet show as well.

I'm pretty apathetic about the situation at this point... I think that Avatar will have a big showing for guests... Just not Disney fans... I'm holding judgemet on this... I'll get back after I see what kind of plans they come up with...

What I will say is this...

1. AK needs something to boost the draw... Plain and simple... I know we all wanted to see Beastly Kingdom... Sadly this is probably it...

2. For everyone screaming Narnia... Let's face it guys... Disney took the losing franchise over the 3 bug fantasy franchises (HP and Lord of the Rings being the others) Narnia will never see another thing in the park... Remember... Disney bailed halfway through production on the most recent one...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by supernova

But again, these are RIDES. Not lands. If they want to build an Avatar attraction, fine. But the movie hasn't proven to have legs yet. I see people wearing novelty Star Wars shirts every now and again (granted, they are by guys who are old enough to know better, but still...). Avatar isn't a franchise, it's one movie. And a mediocre one at that, story-wise. The Great Movie Ride is just that... a ride about great movies, or genres. When it was first built, the place was a (semi) working studio. Indiana Jones was a way to show how stunts were made. Back when they first brought in the Muppet attraction, Disney hadn't yet owned them, either. So your argument could be made for the puppet show as well.

---

Mike... I'm with ya here... I think if they wanted to make a ride or attraction that's fine... But we really dont know how this will be as a franchise...

I think Disney is hoping on the sequels being a success. I don't really get the negativity. Cameron teamed up with the imagineers? There is going to be technology that probably is on the drawing board now. I am excited to see what comes. If you think about it, Disney adapted every one of their "Disney" stories from buying the rights to other people's stories and adagpting them to have that Disney touch. I believe that they will do the same with a dedicated land to AK.

The real big news here is that they are going to be adding to AK! This is something many of us have been wanting for a long time. Of course we've all had our own ideas of what they should add. I'm sure none of us expected this at all.

My take on this is that this wasn't done for the us, the hard core fan. This is to bring new people to the parks. They've seen what Potter did for attendance at Universal, so by bringing in what will become a fairly significant movie franchise, at least box office wise, they're hoping to lure in a new audience that may not have considered Disney before.

I'm eager to see the first plans.

True. AK really doesn't pull a high percentage of the young generation or they hit Everest and Dinosaur, maybe and head out the gate.

When Epcot was fully operational it use to take us 2 days to get through there. Now a day. AK, a half day at best. Disney I am sure is seeing the hard core fan has time to spend a day or two at the Universal Parks. Seems like they are trying to find ways to keep us Hard Core Disney Fans on Disney Property and possibly sway some Universal Fans to the property as well.

Note: Today was the first trial day for UP interactive (Kim Possible) at AK. Doing similar at MK. At least they are trying and I'm sure this is the trickle down effect from the shake up of the Disney Ex's.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bigthundermicky

I think Disney is hoping on the sequels being a success. I don't really get the negativity. Cameron teamed up with the imagineers? There is going to be technology that probably is on the drawing board now. I am excited to see what comes. If you think about it, Disney adapted every one of their "Disney" stories from buying the rights to other people's stories and adagpting them to have that Disney touch. I believe that they will do the same with a dedicated land to AK.

---

I disagree. I don't see how they are going to make Avatar an Disneyfied attraction. The whole reason I am opposed to an idea like this is that it seems they are giving up on trying to use their own properties, or even their own original ideas (ie Dinosaur) to continue making it a Disney style park. An amalgamation of others' properties sounds more like Universal (Shrek, Simpsons, Jaws, Bullwinkle, Spiderman, King Kong, Hitchcock, Hannah Barbera, Nickelodeon, Dr. Seuss, etc).

Disney's Hollywood Studios started off that trend, with Star Wars, Muppets, Indiana Jones, Twilight Zone, and... Aerosmith? Yeah, I still don't get that one, either. But if you're going to borrow another property, keep it with the rest of them in one park. Which we can now call Universal Studios, Jr.

Okay….here's my final take on "Avatar-Land"…I am cautiously optimistic. I am not excited or enthused. I'm not of the group that think that this the greatest thing since Walt picked up a pencil, but I'm also not of the group that thinks that this is the death knell of the company, that this was the worse thing they could do. I've never seen the movie. I trust that Cameron & WDI will do this well, especially with a healthy budget…both are detail oriented. I am willing to wait and see what develops.

Might be an interesting, healty budgeted detail-oriented attraction. Still ill-fit anywhere but DHS.

until the announcement the other day, i havent heard about avatar since it was released on dvd what was that last year?

i agree it doesnt have the staying power that star wars, indy, or hp does. those IMO appeal to everyone kids teens and adults...where as avatar to me appealed only to mostly adults.

however, we do have a few years to see how wdi spins this and what they come up with.

It seems that Disney has just given up at this point and is playing the "throw a bunch of cr*p at the wall and see what sticks" game.

Maybe when Avatar opens, disney will finally fix the Yeti.

Or just stick a big stupid blue character in its place.

I feel like the angle here was to build a partnership with Cameron in order to get their hands on his technology (live actors as "avatars") in order to use it in their own projects. With all of the push for more sophisticated character guest interaction, you have to think they see the potential in the work he is doing in that area.

I haven't seen the movie myself, but I can definitely see the fit in AK based on what I know of the themes of the story. I'm also not too worried that Disney will not rebrand it accordingly if Avatar does not continue its relevance. With Disney input, the franchise itself could move in a more Disney-fied direction. Who knows?

I thought the whole idea behind AK was living in the real world, one of the reasons why, of all the lands they decided to scrap when money got tight, was Beastly Kingdom. Still doesn't fit to me.