9/20/2011 10:49:20 PM
BrentDodge
Administrator
Posts: 1195
|
Today Disney announced that they are making an Avatar themed land over at Disney's Animal Kingdom. What are your thoughts on the land?
--
Author of From Screen to Theme and host of the W.E.D.nesday Show!
"Anything can happen if you let it"
|
|
• permalink
• reply with quote
|
9/20/2011 10:54:14 PM
Disneyfan80
Posts: 2749
|
I voted like it, I actually loved the movie but it might be a bit soon for a Avatar Land. I would have liked Disney to worked on getting Marvel into the parks instead at this time. I am sure it will be visually stunning to say the least though.
--
When you feel like giving up, remember why you held on so long in the first place.
Brent Dodge for President!
Loki: I have an army.
Tony Stark: We have a Hulk!!!!
Hi there! My name is Dug, my master made me this collar. He is a good and smart master and he made me this collar so that I may speak. Squirrel!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
• permalink
• reply with quote
|
9/20/2011 11:15:56 PM
pap64
Posts: 179
|
This is a WEIRD announcement! I would expect an Avatar land at Universal, since that's where Cameron's Terminator series ended up. I have not seen the movie nor do have I been to park so I don't know how I feel about it.
--
|
|
• permalink
• reply with quote
|
9/20/2011 11:17:19 PM
KramNebuer
Posts: 49
|
I wasn't sure how to vote...there was button that said vote so I clicked it but nothing happened. I think something's screwy with my internet.
But anyhow, I dislike this idea a lot. While I am happy that Animal Kingdom is finally getting some attention with doing something about creating an additional land, I am very disappointed it is with Avatar. Not that Avatar was a bad movie and didn't break ground with visuals or whatever, but the fact that Disney is going with some other movie they did not make or produce. It's like they don't have faith in their own properties to expand Animal Kingdom, when they have hundreds of other things that could work in Animal Kingdom much better than Avatar fits in. Sure the Imagineers can have fun with the mythology and visuals of Avatar, but it's soo disappointing that they already developed the Beastly Kingdom area for DAK using pre existing much loved Disney characters, stories, etc. and even original ideas that have the potential of becoming classic Disney attractions.
I don't understand why all of a sudden movie franchises are taking over the world.
--
"Anything can happen if you let it"
- Mary Poppins/Brent Dodge
"The grass is always greener as long as you remember to water it."
- Monterey Jack (Rescue Rangers)
|
|
• permalink
• reply with quote
|
9/20/2011 11:21:12 PM
WonderGirl
Posts: 15
|
Don’t even get me started on this ridiculous non-sense. Not only is this new land a waste of money, but a waste of valuable space that could be used for something that could be truly amazing, such as “Beastly Kingdom”.
I think the decision to add an ENTIRE land devoted to this movie is pre-mature. This film is still relatively new in the world of movies, and has yet to stand the test of time. Additionally, how will the two un-release and un-created movies do? Will they be as well loved and received as the first?
Why is Disney using a non-Disney movie to base an entire land on? I am well aware that they have used non-Disney movies in the past for attractions (such as Indiana Jones, Star Wars, Twilight Zone, and The Muppets). However, these are all just one attraction, and are at Hollywood Studios where the theme is movies. These non-Disney movies have also stood the test of time. They have been around for many years, and have numerous generations of followers.
I also don’t understand how this is family friendly. Avatar is rated PG-13. Last I checked that meant that little kids weren’t supposed to see it. (yes I know, that doesn’t mean they didn’t…) But to me, Disney is “fun for all ages”. Yes, ALL. That means the 4 year old, and dear old 93 year old grandma. Doubtful that they will both have a clue what Avatar land is.
Lastly, why couldn’t Disney use something they already own? I’m not saying that I want to see any Marvel in Disney, but Disney spent $4 BILLION to buy all the Marvel characters. Why go out and buy something new just to try to compete with Harry Potter, when you have something that has a huge, and multi-generational fan base just sitting there, waiting to be used?
I truly hope that Disney changes their mind and gets rid of this plan. If they create this I see it being a fad, not something that will stand the test of time.
edited by BrentDodge on 9/20/2011
|
|
• permalink
• reply with quote
|
9/20/2011 11:30:16 PM
Escapay
Posts: 78
|
The idea of a whole land dedicated to a franchise that only started TWO YEARS AGO is rather ridiculous. Especially as it won't really be a franchise until the sequels are out, however good or bad they are. The first movie was okay, but certainly not worth building a whole mini-theme-park within Animal Kingdom. Ideally, I'd prefer if they added just one attraction, and if it were done a couple more years after the sequels came out. Then we'll know if the franchise is worth expanding.
--
|
|
• permalink
• reply with quote
|
9/20/2011 11:33:58 PM
KramNebuer
Posts: 49
|
AMEN WonderGirl! This decision seems incredibly hasty and most definitely with short term profits in mind. Disneyland has stood the test of time because besides Fantasyland, most of it was virtually based on original ideas and time tested genres and concepts. Sure, I enjoyed Avatar, but not enough to see it again or desire to visit a theme park version of it. And even if I did want to see it in theme park form, Disney would be the last place I expected to go! I'm going to Disney World to see Disney characters. I'm going to Animal Kingdom to see Simba and Friends and maybe Pocahontas because she was so one with nature and the animals. She had heron and otter brothers for crying out loud.
Oh wait, Pocahontas was there, but you took her out and now you're replacing her with the blue skinned rip off alien planet of Pandora. I'm confused. Who is running this company again.
WAIT Did John Lasseter approve this?? Isn't he involved with Imagineer and theme parks too in addition to Pixar and Disney Feature Animation?
The more I think about this news the more upset I get. I know I know we should be grateful as Disney Theme Park fans that DAK is getting a new land, but they're totally going the wrong way about this!!
--
"Anything can happen if you let it"
- Mary Poppins/Brent Dodge
"The grass is always greener as long as you remember to water it."
- Monterey Jack (Rescue Rangers)
|
|
• permalink
• reply with quote
|
9/20/2011 11:39:14 PM
BrentDodge
Administrator
Posts: 1195
|
If they were going to make a land based off of blue skinned people, they could at least had the decency to make it Smurfs Land! Not happy with this one
--
Author of From Screen to Theme and host of the W.E.D.nesday Show!
"Anything can happen if you let it"
|
|
• permalink
• reply with quote
|
9/21/2011 1:20:20 AM
pap64
Posts: 179
|
I mentioned this on Reuben's Facebook post, so I might as well mention it here. I have the suspicion that Disney bought the rights to an Avatar land in hopes of replicating the success of Universal's Wizarding World of Harry Potter. Avatar is a VERY successful film, one that has very loyal devotees. So it wouldn't surprise me if the intentions are to create a whole land where fans can go in and "experience" the magic of the film. Not only that, they also have the guidance of its creator James Cameron.
The problem, however, is that Avatar is just a one movie franchise (and a really divisive one at that). By the time there was a Harry Potter park, there were years of books, movies, merchandise and many other things. Plus, Harry Potter is a powerful nostalgic vehicle. People that are fans of the book love it, people that love the movies also enjoy it and fans who grew up with Harry Potter can also enjoy it by themselves or with a family. Avatar just doesn't have. Yes, it's a really popular movie, but right now it is known as the movie that "ripped off Pocahontas and Fern Gully in one swell swoop". Is it wise to invest on a franchise that may or may not have a chance of making it beyond the first installment?
On the other hand... I am curious to see what Disney does with this series. Disney is VERY creative when it comes to taking different franchises and turning them into solid to great theme park experiences. Take Star Wars, Muppets and Indiana Jones, for example. They were also franchises people thought wouldn't work in a Disney environment, but eventually became a staple of the whole park.
So I want to see what they come up with this Avatar land and how it mixes with the rest of the park. Who knows, right now we may have a big issue with it, but it could change our minds when it is done, regardless if you love the movie or not. But like I said, I have not seen the movie or been to the Animal Kingdom park to fully have a view from those fans.
--
|
|
• permalink
• reply with quote
|
9/21/2011 9:05:33 AM
AdmiralDuke
Posts: 1
|
I love this because there is such a HUGE chance it will fail!!! I think this a moment for Disney Imagineering and Disney in general to really shine. This is a monstrous undertaking! If anybody can do it... it's got to be Disney!
|
|
• permalink
• reply with quote
|
9/21/2011 9:31:13 AM
WonderGirl
Posts: 15
|
I completely agree that if anyone CAN do it, its Disney. But just because you can, doesn't mean you should.
|
|
• permalink
• reply with quote
|
9/21/2011 10:31:11 AM
Staciajc
Posts: 532
|
Now I guess I should see the movie, huh??
--
When you wish upon a star, your dreams come true!
How long until POTC part 5 comes out??
"But why is the rum gone?"
I've had it with wobbly-legged, rum-soaked... PIRATES!!!
|
|
• permalink
• reply with quote
|
9/21/2011 11:58:08 AM
pap64
Posts: 179
|
AdmiralDuke wrote:
I love this because there is such a HUGE chance it will fail!!! I think this a moment for Disney Imagineering and Disney in general to really shine. This is a monstrous undertaking! If anybody can do it... it's got to be Disney!
I never looked at it that way. I guess that's also why they chose this franchise: they really want to do something with it. It also gives the imagineers the chance to shine. If they can turn a divise film franchise into an attraction that a lot of people worked, then mission accomplished.
Didn't Disney say that it is fun to do the impossible? :p
--
|
|
• permalink
• reply with quote
|
9/21/2011 12:15:25 PM
TDodge
Posts: 88
|
Its not even a Disney movie so why would they be building it but even that it will be cool
|
|
• permalink
• reply with quote
|
9/21/2011 3:20:03 PM
.jpg)
mickeyfan4ever
Posts: 885
|
avtar land shoud be put in in disney hallowwood studios not amamil kingdom i think t i hard that it might and i just read that disney boght rigts to avtur
--
disneyland reptive of the
matt myers
W.E.D.nesday Show and fromscreentotheame,com[DLR
91,95,99,00x2,01,02,03,04,06,08,09x2,10and the wdw
 
|
|
• permalink
• reply with quote
|
9/21/2011 3:20:04 PM
mickeyfan4ever
Posts: 885
|
avtar land shoud be put in in disney hallowwood studios not amamil kingdom i think t i hard that it might and i just read that disney boght rigts to avtur
--
disneyland reptive of the
matt myers
W.E.D.nesday Show and fromscreentotheame,com[DLR
91,95,99,00x2,01,02,03,04,06,08,09x2,10and the wdw
|
|
• permalink
• reply with quote
|
9/21/2011 8:56:02 PM
alexandraWDW
Posts: 91
|
Wait. This isn't a horrible nightmare I had?
I am not impressed at all with Disney's decision to create an Avatarland. Like it has been mentioned I feel like this is a Universal Studios type of move and does not relate to the other lands, characters and stories of Disney's Animal Kingdom nor any Disney park for that matter!
My opinion was that this movie was overhyped to begin with. I get it is a money making effort to make two more Avatar movies in the next few years but this will be a short lived fasination with this movie franchise ESP. in the eyes of Disney fans. I have talked to many Disney fans who have never seen Avatar before.
I think this is a big mistake on Disney's part. If they have the money for this random addition I think it would have received a much more positive response from Disney fans if they had used the money to refubish and enhance current attractions (fix the Yeti etc.)
|
|
• permalink
• reply with quote
|
9/22/2011 8:59:37 AM
MatthewHarris
Posts: 14
|
When I first heard the news of the purposed Avatar land I was not for it at all. I thought to myself why Disney would do this. But after thinking more critically about this choice I would like to relay my opinion about the matter.
First let us look at the movie; Avatar is a visually striking movie and I think a land that embodies the world of Pandora would be an awe inspiring experience. Secondly and I think most importantly is the underlining message of the movie, what is that you may ask. Well it’s the symbiotic relationship between the earth and its inhabitance. And is that not what Animal Kingdome is all about, preservation of the earth. And this land would just be the replacement for the once planed Beastly Kingdom.
Secondly I want to address the idea of movie not being family friendly. Well what about the Pirates of the Caribbean movies, they had subject matter that was not always family friendly.
Thirdly people are mad because Disney went to an outside company for this project. But what about the George Lucas partnerships, and more interesting look at the Muppets. They were not an original Disney idea. And for you that think, well those are only attractions, well originally the area around the Muppets was going to be a Muppets themed area land, which would have had a restaurant and the Great Muppet Movie Ride.
I think it is a little early to completely condemn this new idea. I am open to new ideas and remember Walt himself said that as long as there is imagination in the world, the Disney parks would never be completed. I think that this new land will add a lot to Animal Kingdom and to the Disney Company as a whole.
|
|
• permalink
• reply with quote
|
9/22/2011 4:23:40 PM
pap64
Posts: 179
|
Great response, Matthew.
Funny you should mention Avatar not being family friendly. Indiana Jones isn't exactly family friendly either, considering that one of the movies has a bad guy that rips hearts out, and one scene in which the faces are melted off the bad guys in a gruesome, graphical manner. Star Wars is generally more friendly, but it has an iconic villain that would quickly kill just to get his way.
Also, now we accept Muppets, Indiana Jones and Star Wars because they have already become a staple of the park, no one is questioning now. But I am sure there were many fans back in the day that thought that they too were bad ideas. I am sure that many die hard Muppet fans feared that the union of the two franchises would cause one to swallow the other whole, since the Muppets are Jim Henson's legacy, not Disney's. With Star Wars, as a behemoth it is now, many believe that now it is mainly but a fat cash cow for George Lucas and friends, and the Disney theme parks attractions and representation is just an extension of that marketing ideal.
I sitll stand that Avatar is a high risk gamble since it only had one movie and even if it was successful and an award nominee we don't know if movies two and three will continue it further (think of it like The Matrix. First movie was crazy successful, the two sequels and various spin offs grounded its potential to become a franchise). But I rather see what Disney comes up with and how does it mesh with the theme park rather than just pick once side (the "I LOVE IT" side and the "I HATE IT" crowd).
Not to diss either camp, but I rather look at things through various points of view and decipher various possibilities from there.
--
|
|
• permalink
• reply with quote
|
9/23/2011 6:08:49 PM
mickeyfan4ever
Posts: 885
|
MatthewHarris wrote:
When I first heard the news of the purposed Avatar land I was not for it at all. I thought to myself why Disney would do this. But after thinking more critically about this choice I would like to relay my opinion about the matter.
First let us look at the movie; Avatar is a visually striking movie and I think a land that embodies the world of Pandora would be an awe inspiring experience. Secondly and I think most importantly is the underlining message of the movie, what is that you may ask. Well it’s the symbiotic relationship between the earth and its inhabitance. And is that not what Animal Kingdome is all about, preservation of the earth. And this land would just be the replacement for the once planed Beastly Kingdom.
Secondly I want to address the idea of movie not being family friendly. Well what about the Pirates of the Caribbean movies, they had subject matter that was not always family friendly.
Thirdly people are mad because Disney went to an outside company for this project. But what about the George Lucas partnerships, and more interesting look at the Muppets. They were not an original Disney idea. And for you that think, well those are only attractions, well originally the area around the Muppets was going to be a Muppets themed area land, which would have had a restaurant and the Great Muppet Movie Ride.
I think it is a little early to completely condemn this new idea. I am open to new ideas and remember Walt himself said that as long as there is imagination in the world, the Disney parks would never be completed. I think that this new land will add a lot to Animal Kingdom and to the Disney Company as a whole.
does that mean thir going to paint the three of life blue licke they going to when the the muppets and turn disneyland in to muppet land
--
disneyland reptive of the
matt myers
W.E.D.nesday Show and fromscreentotheame,com[DLR
91,95,99,00x2,01,02,03,04,06,08,09x2,10and the wdw
|
|
• permalink
• reply with quote
|
Powered by AspNetForum
6.6.0.0
© 2006-2010 Jitbit Software