Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 25 of 25
  1. #16

    • Senior Minion
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    8,890

    Re: Why did Disney buy Avatar rights but not Discovery rights?

    Quote Originally Posted by ttintagel View Post
    I'll be surprised if the Avatar sequels are as welcomed as the first. The only thing the first movie had going for it was the novelty of being the first movie to do realistic 3-D, and that's old hat by now.
    It'll be even older hat five years from now when AvatarLand opens (if then). By that time, the original film will be yesterday's news, and others will have surpassed it in tech, immersion and (no surprise) memorable characters and story. Don't look for the sequel to shake the world -- Cameron is not going to get the funding to make the same quantum leap of technology and technique on a sequel that he did with the first film. By the time AvatarLand opens, Disney will have sunk megabucks into a franchise it doesn't even own. A franchise with no memorable characters, minuscule merchandise potential, and yesterday's tech.

    That's today's Disney -- a day late and a dollar short when it comes to innovation, Johnny-on-the-spot when it comes to imitation.
    Last edited by Mr Wiggins; 12-09-2011 at 09:34 PM.
    "With the acquisition of Marvel and now of Lucasfilm,
    Disney may have finally found the grail. You don't need
    imagination or art. All you need is a brand."

    - Neil Gabler


  2. #17

    • Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Ottawa Canada
    Posts
    620

    Re: Why did Disney buy Avatar rights but not Discovery rights?

    Quote Originally Posted by ttintagel View Post
    I'll be surprised if the Avatar sequels are as welcomed as the first. The only thing the first movie had going for it was the novelty of being the first movie to do realistic 3-D, and that's old hat by now.
    Plus it was a quite shallow movie besides the WOO IT COMES OUT OF THE SCREEN effect. Plus I can't even see 3D, so Avatar was a huge waste of time and money.

    Back to topic: to be honest Discovery ain't what it used to be (same with History) and I would not be happy to see the Malestorm become a Deadliest catch ride.
    Last edited by Twist1234; 12-10-2011 at 10:43 AM.

  3. #18

    • DLR Cast Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Central OC (CA)
    Posts
    1,259

    Re: Why did Disney buy Avatar rights but not Discovery rights?

    Quote Originally Posted by Twist1234 View Post
    to be honest Discovery ain't what it used to be (same with History)...
    Unfortunately true. I need another show about alien abductions like I need a hole in the head.

  4. #19

    • Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Ottawa Canada
    Posts
    620

    Re: Why did Disney buy Avatar rights but not Discovery rights?

    Quote Originally Posted by RiversOfAmerica View Post
    Unfortunately true. I need another show about alien abductions like I need a hole in the head.
    Haha, Mission: Space refurb anyone?

  5. #20

    • Minion
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    toronto
    Posts
    1,556

    Re: Why did Disney buy Avatar rights but not Discovery rights?

    Quote Originally Posted by RiversOfAmerica View Post
    How so? DAK is dedicated to animals "real, ancient, and imagined". It's not done very well in the "imagined" area, which is a niche Avatar would fill. It's also a "kingdom of balance, harmony and survival", and no one can argue the fact that Avatar storyline is heavy with the "balance, harmony and survival" concept.
    simply put, regardless of how its spun, its alien and alien or otherworldly does not fall under animal kingdom's criteria of the celebration of our world and the creatures from it. plain and simple. and really they haven't done well with the imagined area? what about the injection of Disney animals into the land (i.e. lion king, and bugs life) i don't think I've ever seen talking anthropomorphic creatures walking around so that would make them imagined wouldn't it? I also think your forgetting about the centerpiece of the park and one of the most celebrated rides in the entire resort. last time i checked, yeti's still weren't real

    ---------- Post added 12-10-2011 at 12:29 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Twist1234 View Post
    I would not be happy to see the Malestorm become a Deadliest catch ride.
    despite the fact that the show is in Alaska and not Norway so it would make no sense on top of the fact it would be a terrible idea lol. it really is sad that i have to have a small level of genuine concern this may actually happen.

  6. #21

    • DLR Cast Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Central OC (CA)
    Posts
    1,259

    Re: Why did Disney buy Avatar rights but not Discovery rights?

    Quote Originally Posted by goofy donald View Post
    they haven't done well with the imagined area? what about the injection of Disney animals into the land (i.e. lion king, and bugs life)
    Anthropomorphic characters isn't what the "imagined" was meant to refer to. That was meant to refer to, like you pointed out, creatures like the Yeti (at least he's not real "yet", and you KNOW someone's gonne come on and say "they're real, just unproven"). Yeti aside DAK hasn't done a very good job of filling that "imagined" niche. If executed correctly, Avatar's mythos would fill that gap, and fill it guite nicely. And at the same time, solve a problem that has plagued the park since it's opening: give guests a permanent after-dusk offering, which means the park can truly be a full day experience from opening to evening. I preface that, however, with the phrase "if executed correctly". I'm cautiously optemistic.

  7. #22

    • Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Ottawa Canada
    Posts
    620

    Re: Why did Disney buy Avatar rights but not Discovery rights?

    Quote Originally Posted by goofy donald View Post
    despite the fact that the show is in Alaska and not Norway so it would make no sense on top of the fact it would be a terrible idea lol. it really is sad that i have to have a small level of genuine concern this may actually happen.
    Did you ever realize that Nemo had nothing to do with the future.

  8. #23

    • Minion
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    toronto
    Posts
    1,556

    Re: Why did Disney buy Avatar rights but not Discovery rights?

    Quote Originally Posted by RiversOfAmerica View Post
    Anthropomorphic characters isn't what the "imagined" was meant to refer to. That was meant to refer to, like you pointed out, creatures like the Yeti (at least he's not real "yet", and you KNOW someone's gonne come on and say "they're real, just unproven"). Yeti aside DAK hasn't done a very good job of filling that "imagined" niche. If executed correctly, Avatar's mythos would fill that gap, and fill it guite nicely. And at the same time, solve a problem that has plagued the park since it's opening: give guests a permanent after-dusk offering, which means the park can truly be a full day experience from opening to evening. I preface that, however, with the phrase "if executed correctly". I'm cautiously optemistic.
    Well you cant really assume to know what they were thinking but i agree with you on that point at least. regardless, adding Avatar is NOT good for the park for the above obvious statement you were unable to speak to for that exact reason, it takes all validity out of having Avatar in the park. if they wanted to inject more imagined creatures into the park why not do it tastefully and the right way like they did in Asia? they could focus on another environment in another continent (south america, Australia would be preferences), immerse you in said environment like in africa and asia, bring in the animal walking trails and area specific architecture, restaurants serving local foods. then to fix the attraction problem you bring in a c or d ticket of some kind and an e ticket based on the area or animals and another e ticket based on local mythology of some kind. see i made that idea up in 2 minutes and its already better then what disney has planned. also your thought of Avatar being a night offering is false, its not going to happen. the proposed spot for the expansion is located at the back of the park, meaning it would have to close down just as early as everything else. again, i see no positive in adding this to DAK.

    ---------- Post added 12-10-2011 at 12:58 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Twist1234 View Post
    Did you ever realize that Nemo had nothing to do with the future.
    i would say that's the worst thing to happen to a future world pavilion but then i look at the imagination pavilions big new draw of......drum role please 7 patterned color lights on the wall and i cringe.

  9. #24

    • Pilot EdForceOne
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    15,649

    Re: Why did Disney buy Avatar rights but not Discovery rights?

    Quote Originally Posted by Twist1234 View Post
    Plus it was a quite shallow movie besides the WOO IT COMES OUT OF THE SCREEN effect. Plus I can't even see that, so Avatar was a huge waste of time and money.
    You can't see 'that' - because Avatar had none of that in the movie.
    Check out my blog - Coreplex: Rambling from inside the Grid


    Am I evil? yes, I am
    Am I evil? I am man, yes, I am

    Quote Originally Posted by sleepyjeff View Post
    Disneyland was meant to be sipped not chug-a-lugged

  10. #25

    • MiceChat Round-Up Crew
    • Prince Ali
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Agrabah
    Posts
    11,068

    Re: Why did Disney buy Avatar rights but not Discovery rights?

    Avatar creatures are no better suited, even worse, than the creatures out of the Star Wars Universe. At least with Star Wars characters they are better known and have better longevity than what was in Avatar. A far better choice would be Mythos, as Universal has turned away from that idea, in favor of Harry Potter.

    Instead of some creatures which most people don't know, go to some of the basic creatures, which have created and become legends in themselves: Go for the creatures out Greek Mythology and /or Egyptian Mythology. Bring some of the creatures to life from out of Sinbad. Several of these creatures have been in Disney Animation, from the animated Aladdin tv series which had some of these. Hercules has his own Pegasus and Hydra along with other creatures. Give us Pegasus, Dragons, Unicorns. Some were in both Fantasias. These are creatures that have stood the test of time, within our imagination. NOT just from one movie, which has an extremely debatable future, and don't hold a candle to these mythological creatures that have fascinated people over centuries! Avatar is a bad choice, when their are so many other creatures that Disney does NOT have to pay a licensing fee too.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Similar Threads

  1. [Question] Why did Disney choose DHS as the site of Fantasmic and not the Magic Kingdom?
    By disneyboi92 in forum Walt Disney World Resort
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 01-08-2009, 07:17 AM
  2. [Question] Since Walt bought 12,500 acres in Florida why did he buy more?
    By disneyboi92 in forum Walt Disney World Resort
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 11-30-2008, 08:47 PM
  3. At Disney, but not of Disney things
    By aimster in forum Walt Disney World Resort
    Replies: 41
    Last Post: 03-06-2008, 01:07 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-06-2006, 07:32 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •