AVATAR coming to Disney Parks

[CAS]

I only hope enough money is spent to do it correctly and with incredible detail. It's fit into AK? The whole theme of Avatar is people's relationship to nature and eachother. Isn't that how we would exactly define AK's purpose?

Perfect fit.

[sixshot19]

What happens when Avatar 2 tanks?

The first movie was the first big budget 3D movie and probably half the audience went for that one reason. It was a stunning looking movie, but I saw it once and don't really need to see it again.

That being said Imagineers and Cameron working together could put together something spectacular.

It's not a great fit, but I'm hoping they surprise us.


Final note if they are doing Avatar, I want my Marvel Universe land now!

[Aurora]

Notice how it's DISNEY calling Pandora a "mythical world." It's NOT mythical. It's imagined, fictional. There is a huge difference. They are trying to make AVATAR fit where it's obvious that it doesn't. It's a stretch and they know it.

Natalie, not trying to nit-pick, but one of the dictionary definitions of mythical IS "imaginary; fictitious." Disney's use of the word is not incorrect. Just saying this because their use of the word seems to bother you, but they're not wrong in this case.

[BriarPatchKid]

I don't find this to be the worst idea in the world. Disney banked off Star Wars when it was popular. Knowing that there are sequals in the works, people will surely be up in arms about the Avatar universe for quite some time, especially if James Cameron can continue to make box office gold with this concept.

Plus, where else would this concept go but AK. The "Tree of Life" idea, the protection of nature, etc... It all fits with the ideals of the Avatar universe. For one, I'd like to see it take over the space where Rafikis Planet Watch is, but still keep the conservation message.

[Jared]

Natalie, not trying to nit-pick, but one of the dictionary definitions of mythical IS "imaginary; fictitious." Disney's use of the word is not incorrect. Just saying this because their use of the word seems to bother you, but they're not wrong in this case.

You're not nitpicking. Anyway, as I pointed out in an earlier post, Michael Eisner said "imaginary" animals would be a part of the park during his opening-day dedication speech.

[Frog]

Guys-
I find it really funny that everyone is getting worked up over this...
Calm down, it is Disney- They will do it right!
Its gonna be cool! And if they don't do it right, we will find some other place to spend our "down time". Why don't we take the "I am excited they are doing something over in AK" attitude and sit back with a coke and watch it happen!! Now, if you want to get worked up, check in to whats happening in Sub-Saharan Africa right now! We have it soo good if all we need to worry about is what an imagineer is planning in Orlando!!

[wjdoc]

Lots of interesting comments here. I was taken aback at first also, but only because i have never seen the movie. And honestly i don't know anyone who really is nuts over it. And even shopping for gifts at christmas/birthdays for my son and nephews, i never get the feeling that Avatar is as big of a merchandise seller as other franchises (the franchise related lego stuff, superheroes, starwars, cars, etc). Given the fact that Cameron really does try to do things better than anything has been done before, i believe it will be impressive. And i also believe that Cameron is looking at this partnership as a way to do it backwards and almost push the Avatar series into that upper echelon of properties by using the personal experience of avatar land as a boost. If that makes any sense.

All in all, I do think this avatarland will be done very well but it seems to me that this would be better placed at DHS. Putting it in AK is the only part that seems forced.

[barnaby]

Dislike!

I read it and thought it was some kind of time-delay April Fools Joke.

Exactly my thought. I had to look at my calendar.

I was looking for another announcement that the monorails were being extended throughout the property.

[wjdoc]

I don't post often obviously but this one is so interesting that it draws another question i often have when reading posts about AK.

Why was everyone always tied up in adding more "lands" like beastly kingdom? Why not build more rides in the existing lands. Adding Everest to Asia was a great addition. Sure you might have to reconfigure a few walking paths to make it work, but just incrementally adding more rides to the existing setup would have been fine for me.

But now that avatarland will show up, i all of a sudden have an interest in seeing the film that i never had before. The problem now is that i need to find someone with a 3D tv so i can get the full effect!

[azcavalier]

I don't really get the whole, "It fits in DHS because it's a blockbuster movie" argument.

So...any attraction based on a movie has to be in DHS? So, the Festival of the Lion King? Dinosaur? Finding Nemo, the Musical? They all should be at DHS?

What about "Honey I Shrunk the Audience"? That's based off of a successful movie, too...why isn't that at DHS? How come we've got Toy Story, Aladdin, Stitch and Monsters Inc. attractions in the Magic Kingdom? Those don't fit there...they came from movies! They should be at DHS!

Aren't half the attractions in all four parks from movies, or have movie tie-ins? Why do all attractions based on movies have to be in DHS?

Now, i'm not saying that Avatar wouldn't fit at DHS. However, I DO think that what park it would be in would also change the message of the attraction. If they had decided to put Avatar in DHS, I would imagine that the focus of the attraction would be more about amazing visuals and thrills. At AK, they'll feature the "one with nature" aspect of it (though i'm fairly certain that it will still have thrills).

Oooh! I wonder if they'll try to create an attraction where you are in one of the Avatar chambers, and you get to experience what it might be like to be an Avatar. That would be awesome with 3D effects....

[wjdoc]

I don't really get the whole, "It fits in DHS because it's a blockbuster movie" argument.

So...any attraction based on a movie has to be in DHS? So, the Festival of the Lion King? Dinosaur? Finding Nemo, the Musical? They all should be at DHS?

You make a very good point. I just personally think this movie is so world-renowned because of the way it did change the way Hollywood makes movies. That it isn't character driven like the other movies you say, it is more of a game-changing Hollywood innovation like the star wars films (and to a lesser-extent) the muppets were. As i stated before, i have yet to see the movie, so once i do see it maybe i will totally change direction and see it more as a conservationist piece than a technological one.

[Pagan]

Wow...reading through here I keep seeing the scene in "Wayne's World" where Garth hits the robotic hand with a hammer and says "We fear change..."

[mickeyman42]

wow, I don't know the last time a discussion got up to 8 pages before! When I first read the announcement I thought everyone on here would be all for it. I mean everytime someone posts about # of days to spend in each park most people claim to only spend a 1/2 day at AK and be gone by lunch or that AK doesn't have enough attractions and isn't finished, blah blah blah. To me this sounds pretty cool, now do I like the movie? Nope, actually I fell asleep before it was over, but I think it belongs in AK, it adds something to a park that most people feel lacks something, and gives Disney another Blockbuster movie franchise to compete with WWoHP. I mean if Disney builds some amazing attractions in Avatarland (I would say they will call it pandora) that compare to Forbidden Journey in the WWoHP then everyone here will be all for it claiming that its the best thing ever and GO Disney!
I guess my point is that the success of this land will be determined by the attractions, shows, and attention to detail, not the fact that its Avatar or whatever other movies they decide to use in the future. Also, why do I have the feeling that if this was Universal announcing this, we would all be saying "see, look at disney sitting back and doing nothing while universal is building amazing lands based on major movies" I don't think disney can announce anything anymore without us being down on it until proven otherwise.

[mdricks]

I just don’t get it from a marketing standpoint. Perhaps future tie ins will raise awareness and complete the mythos but to dedicate an entire land to a movie known best for "stunning visuals" seems to be a big gamble.

The idea of whole "lands" based on a movie franchise is a relatively new idea. Harry and Cars are about it and Cars isn’t even fully realized yet.

I talk to my kids as we go through the parks lamenting the great rides of the past that are no more. My kids, "Who the heck is Mr. Toad?"

They know who Luke Skywalker is, and Frodo and Harry. They both saw and loved Avatar but I bet they can’t name a single character.

The cost benefit analysis of any tie-in has to take into account its expected "useful life". Go into toys-r-us and ask to buy a movie tie in toy from Star Wars, Harry, Rings and Avatar. I’m willing to bet I know which one you will have the hardest time finding.

And while I’m on the marketing, who is the target audience? They did market analysis and came up with strong demographical cross section to justify it? Really?

This reeks of, "Oh my god did you see the numbers at Universal?!? Quick what’s a big blockbuster we can chase?"

Don’t get me wrong, I’m a sci-fi fantasy nut. The movie was stunning and deserving of all the accolades. The story, however, was a weak re-do. I don’t remember a character's name but I remember what the critics called it...

"Dances With Smurfs"

[caryrae]

I think amount of tickets sold makes more sense then how much a movie grosses with how much ticket prices change over the years and these days you got Imax and 3D movies that cost more then the basic 2D version.

Just read this on Wikipedia:

On a worldwide basis, Avatar ranks third after adjusting for inflation, behind Gone with the Wind and Titanic, although some reports place it ahead of Titanic.

Pretty good for Cameron, even with adjusting for inflation to have 2 in the top 3 worldwide.

[Jared]

I guess my point is that the success of this land will be determined by the attractions, shows, and attention to detail, not the fact that its Avatar or whatever other movies they decide to use in the future. Also, why do I have the feeling that if this was Universal announcing this, we would all be saying "see, look at disney sitting back and doing nothing while universal is building amazing lands based on major movies" I don't think disney can announce anything anymore without us being down on it until proven otherwise.

I agree with everything in this portion of yoir post. Pandora will be judged on the quality of the environment and its attractions, not the movie tie-in.

[sacandjac]

I am super excited for AK to have something new. I love this park and I'm sure it will be wonderful. Another positive thought is if I am at AK in Avatar land I am not at work. Lol. Looks like with all the negative posts the crowds won't be bad!

[Altair]

Looks like with all the negative posts the crowds won't be bad!

The Disney big shots are probably loving this quote.

[Gator]

Look like every Intercotee showed up for this one. And I'm late.

I like the idea. Is it Disney? No, but neither is a Yeti. Does it fit the left-leaning eco-earth ideas of AK? Yes. Not that I feel that way, but it does fit.

Everytime I've watched Avatar, I think that it looks cool. I find myself wondering what it would be like to roam Pandora...without everything that would kill me. Now I'll have the chance. Sounds good to me.

[DisneyQuester]

My first thought was excitement due to the fact that one of the smartest, most detail-oriented directors in Hollywood is teaming up with Imagineers to create an entire new land in a park we all agree needs more. I didn't care for the movie, but I was entranced with the visuals. If they can capture that in real life then I'm all for it.

99% of the tourists that visit Disney World do not care which park is the 'best fit' for this. They just want to get the best bang for their buck. AK is left off the list of many shorter vacations for a day trip to Universal's HP. It is a smart business decision to put it in AK.