Page 14 of 17 FirstFirst ... 411121314151617 LastLast
Results 196 to 210 of 241
  1. #196

    • Closed Account
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    18

    Re: Avatarland Canceled?

    Quote Originally Posted by Twist1234 View Post
    Id bring up the proven franchise argument for Star Wars but Kei would bring up the sequels makes more argument. As for Jungle Cruise I actually completely forgot it was based of a movie. Can you say Indiana Jones for WDW? Really all it got was a "so so" stage show. Yeah they're all great still I really still don't feel comfortable with this, this is a whole land based off Avatar just as a knee jerk reaction from TDO to Wizardin World of HP when some sections of the resort are in piss poor state.
    Getting the license before the sequels come out allows them to cash in on the hype they will produce. It makes perfect financial sense. Disney isn't stupid.

    If Disney didn't get this license, Universal would have. There may have even been a bidding war.

    You're also acting like if they didn't build a new land, they would spend that money on refurbing everything. I just don't see how you could come to that conclusion at all. Actually, the new area would allow for lots more stuff to go down and get refurbed or reworked due to the extra capacity and money coming in.
    Last edited by Kei; 04-22-2012 at 02:45 PM.

  2. #197

    • Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Ottawa Canada
    Posts
    620

    Re: Avatarland Canceled?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kei View Post
    You're also acting like if they didn't build a new land, they would spend that money on refurbing everything. I just don't see how you could come to that conclusion at all. Actually, the new area would me lots more stuff could go down and get refurbed or reworked due to the extra capacity and money coming in.
    That's not what I meant, what I meant was that they prioritize the knee jerk move instead of of fixing previous screw ups.

  3. #198

    • Metro-Retro Historian
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Brava Centauri
    Posts
    1,009

    Re: Avatarland Canceled?

    What I'm seeing is a very compelling argument to make Avatar sequels. Given the success of the first movie, it would take a large amount of incompetence for the sequel to not make money. It's about as close to a sure thing as you can get in the film industry. Sequels that don't perform as well as the originals do exist, but even then, they usually turn some sort of a profit.

    This is not about making another Avatar film, though. This is about making an Avatar land. It's an entirely different medium that isn't based on turning a quick profit. In fact it is the mindset that theme parks can be run using that quick profit model of a film studio that is responsible for the decline in standards we've been seeing the last couple decades.

    Yes, many movie sequels have made as much or more money than the first film, but how many of those sequels are considered to be better movies? It's actually a very rare occurrence. This point is less important to a film because they can make their money at the box office from the loyal fans and then disappear until the DVD comes out where they can make money from the same people again. By that point they have pretty much served their purpose unless the Franchise is really successful. Then maybe they get the limited edition box set to tap the customer one last time before fading into oblivion.

    Theme park attractions aren't intended to fade away. Lands especially are intended to be permanent. This is why Walt created Frontierland and not Davy Crockett Land. Crockett was bigger than Avatar, Twilight, Hunger Games, and yes even Star Wars, yet today next to nobody under the age of 60 has seen the episodes. Once the property it's based on is no longer fashionable, you can't just put it in the vault. It has to be torn down and replaced, which is a very expensive undertaking. Having to revamp an entire land is an even larger and more expensive project.

    This is where quality and a timeless appeal outweigh a quick quarterly profit. Fantasyland in the Magic Kingdom is in the middle of it's first major overhaul in its 40 year history. By contrast, most attractions at Universal Studios Orlando (All based on blockbuster films) have had to be replaces in roughly half that time frame. Which is better for a permanent entertainment enterprise? When you have a timeless theme, you can update when you want to, when you have a better idea. When you are themed to a fad, you fall into the problem of updating because you have to, so your park doesn't look dated.

    Building themed environments based on film properties has the exact same pitfall that scared Disney off of futuristic settings. Like "the future" a popular film franchise is a moving target and if it fails to stay relevant, it becomes sad very quickly. Avatar has not proven that it has lasting appeal. I don't see many Avatar toys in the toy aisles or picture books at the book store. That can't be a good sign for the franchise's longevity. While an Avatar land might make the turnstiles click for a while when it's new. There is nothing to show that the Avatar name will keep people coming back year after year. That is entirely up to the strength of the attractions and environments the Imagineers build. That quality would be there with or without Pandora.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kei View Post
    1. The world of Pandora, whether you think so or not, is compelling to many, many people. Many people will come to DAK to experience it for themselves outside of the movie going experience.
    They will come to see it once. What is going to keep them coming back? The Superbowl may be the highest rated event on TV every year, but how many people watch reruns of old Superbowls?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kei View Post
    2. It's something we haven't seen at an amusement park yet. The themed areas and rides are likely be completley new experiences.
    Yeah, a land based on a movie. Never seen that before.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kei View Post
    3. It can create a great immersive fantasy experience due to the nature of Pandora. That's what Disney parks are supposed to be about.
    Why do they need Pandora to do this? They've been making immersive fantasy experiences just fine without it for the past 57 years.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kei View Post
    4. It will be financially successful. It will be a draw to Animal Kigdom, a park that is probably at the lower tier of Disney theme parks in terms of visitors.
    There is no guarantee that it will be financially successful as a land. This is not a film sequel. This is a theme park land that makes no money off of individual attractions. There's really no evidence that three rides in an Avatar land would draw more people to the Animal Kingdom in the long run than three new non-franchise rides. Especially if Avatarland has to be re-themed to something else in a decade.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kei View Post
    5. It will attract people that don't go to Disney currently. People that just love Monsters Inc., for example, are probably already coming to Disney. This is why Harry Potter was good. It attracted an audience that wasn't already going to Universal.
    Disney already has 3 parks that aren't about Mickey Mouse and fairytales. They just choose not to market them at all. They could easily market to film buffs, science nerds, animal lovers, and people interested in world history and culture. They don't. Instead it's all princesses and pirates. They don't need Avatar because they have nothing "Non-Disney" to offer. Even now with all the toonification dorks like me complain about, they still have more non-animation and Pixar based offerings than the do things that are based on those things. They just think that only magical dream celebrations with Mickey Mouse and Nemo sell.

    Harry Potter was great for Universal. Universal has one park based on movies and another based on printed works. This franchise was therefore a perfect fit for them. Disney getting Avatar reeks of Disney getting it so Universal won't, which is really the worst argument for the deal.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kei View Post
    6. It will force Imagineering to think outside the box for once, which can have many benefits for the Avatar attractions and other unrelated attractions down the road.
    Think outside the box of building rides based on movies? Because they don't do that now? This is pretty much staying completely within the same box they've been in since the 90s.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kei View Post
    7. Due to it's financial success related to the draw of Avatar, it will benefit Animal Kingdom and other parks. This means more new attractions, more refurbishments, more investment, etc. not directly related to Avatar.
    That again assumes that the land draws a profit which is by no means a sure thing. I foresee some pretty expensive maintenance budgets for this land. Especially if James Cameron decides to get really hands on with it.
    It bothers me when people selectively edit quotes to support whatever point they are trying to prove.

  4. #199

    • Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    south florida
    Posts
    700

    Re: Avatarland Canceled?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kei View Post

    2. Stop talking about how the first film didn't have a good story or characters. That's your opinion, and it is MEANINGLESS in this argument. The people that went to the movie over and over again thought it had a good story and characters. Your opinion is about as relevant as the guy that hates football arguing that football won't be profitable in the future and thus people shouldn't invest in it.
    Um, not meaningless in this argument at all. Speaking as one of the people who saw Avatar in the theater over and over, I did NOT think it had a good story or good characters. It was a really cool experience, more of an attraction than a film. I've never rented the dvd, because I know it's a lame film without the big screen/3d effects. People I know who rented the DVD having never seen the film in the theater don't understand why it was a big success. I've tried to explain to those people that seeing the film in 3d was really immersive and put you right in the middle of the action on this pretty planet. I don't see how Disney or anybody else could add to, or actually compete with, that original theater experience. I mean, what are they going to do? An omni-mover ride with animatronics? Count me out. a 3d experience? That's what the original film was. A Forbidden Journey-type thing? Meh. Not worth it. Avatar is not Potter, not even close. People are still re-reading the Potter books, talking about Potter all the time... it has permeated the culture in a lasting way. Star Wars is/was like this also. Who is still talking about Avatar? No one I know.

  5. #200

    • Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Bay Area
    Posts
    80

    Re: Avatarland Canceled?

    Ok..let me just throw out that for those who were comparing Harry Potter to Avatar that it doesn't work. Potter has already lasted the test of time seeing as the book came out 15 years ago, and they just built a theme park land for it now.

    I'm not saying that Avatar won't stand the test of time because I haven't seen it and am not interested in seeing it, but maybe waiting until after the 2nd movie comes out and seeing how it is received would be a better idea to see if we should involve avatar in the parks..

    I'm not sure how the contract works or anything, but that just seems like a good thought to me.

    P.S. the Beastly Kingdom seems like it would be a lot of fun!

  6. #201

    • Banned User
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Montreal, Quebec, Canada
    Posts
    2,899

    Re: Avatarland Canceled?

    Yeah and Winnie the Pooh has a 91%, Mission: Impossible Ghost Protocol has a 93%, The Hunger Games has an 85% and The Muppets has an 96%. Your point?
    What's wrong with those movies? You don't happen to like them?
    (Sarcasm alert) Oh well, case closed, then!

  7. #202

    • враг народа
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    13,986
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: Avatarland Canceled?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dapper Dan View Post
    Yes Davy Crockett was a big part of early Frontierland but he was also a real person, so that gets a pass.
    Just an aside on this, as it does get brought up a lot regarding the supposed eternal synergy of Disneyland, but Davy Crockett became a Disney character on Disneyland. Had Figment shown up in promotional material for EPCOT Center and became popular before opening, would anybody really try to say that Journey Into Imagination was about synergy with Figment? No. Crockett was "created" as a promotional character for Disneyland.

  8. #203

    • Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Ottawa Canada
    Posts
    620

    Re: Avatarland Canceled?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dapper Dan View Post
    I have to comment on this because I actually do have a damn clue what he would have done with EPCOT. When you look at the available information on the original plan for the city and compare them to the park and the entire resort as they exist today, there are actually some startling similarities. Phase one of "The Florida Project" is remarkably similar to what Walt presented in the filmed presentation of EPCOT. A theme park similar to Disneyland surrounded by hotels and other recreational facilities for tourists connected to the rest of the resort by monorail was what was promised and the company delivered.

    The city was a bigger challenge. The hurdle that proved to be insurmountable was that is was a city and this is the US so the citizens of that city would have the right to vote on a wide variety of things from who runs the city to what sort of building and zoning regulations would become law. The democratic power structure and the corporate power structure (which is a lot closer to feudalism) really don't mix all that well. Once people started moving into EPCOT, it wouldn't be Disney's city anymore. So outside of the residential areas, what is left of EPCOT? There's is the international shopping district in the city's enclosed core. That idea would evolve into World Showcase. There is also the industrial park where companies would house their research and development facilities and also have an exposition space designed by WED Enterprises to show off their ideas for the future. That sounds an awful lot like Future World. EPCOT Center was a pretty decent compromise. Aside from the permanent residents and transportation systems, the core of the idea is still there. If the Eisner team had put some more thought into where they built things they could have come a lot closer, but that discussion really deserves a thread of its own.
    Wow, I never actually saw it that way, quite facilitating really. I guess I stand corrected then.

    And I'll believe that once I get back from the Spain Pavilion at Epcot and Dick Tracy's Crime Stoppers.
    I laughed, thanks for the great post Dapper Dan.

  9. #204

    • Metro-Retro Historian
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Brava Centauri
    Posts
    1,009

    Re: Avatarland Canceled?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kei View Post
    That's an absolutely ludicrous thing to believe. Maybe 20 percent (or less) have sat through one Indiana Jones movie, but "just about everyone?" If this is what you're going to start this long thread off with I can't see you making the solid logical connections that will prove anything.
    So you're saying your random guess of the percentage of Walt Disney World guests that have seen an Indiana Jones film is better than my random guess because you say so? There was a study once that showed 75% of all Disney guests are adults. This is an old study but even with all the focus on princesses that number is likely still over 50%. People who are now adults are either people who were children in the 80s or grandparents whose children grew up in the 80s. So what you're saying is you think less than half of those people have seen an Indiana Jones movie and none of those adults who were children in the 80s ever once shared any of those films to their own children? Let's also remember that these films run back to back for free on television on the weekend about once a month. Yeah, I'm the delusional one.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kei View Post
    But if you want to pretend like something that ludicrous is true, I'll present another one. How many people that ride Splash Mountain have seen Song of the South? Is Splash Mountain considered a failure or is it one of the most popular and successful rides in the history of Disney?
    You do realize that in saying this you're further proving my point that a successful film franchise has little to no bearing on what makes a successful theme park attraction, right? That said, Song of the South is a single mediocre film from 1945 that is not available in the United States in any form. If someone wants to see this movie they either have to buy a dvd from another country that has a region code compatible to their dvd player, or commit to a small amount of internet piracy. Comparing that herculean effort to a tetralogy of blockbuster films that are not only available on dvd and blu-ray, but are also shown regularly on network television is ludicrous.


    Quote Originally Posted by Kei View Post
    Because it will draw a lot more attention being the most successful film (and eventually possibly franchise) ever made? It will raise gate attendance? It will produce even more income to the DAK from increased gate attendance with food, merchandise, etc. Because people other than you, one very biased person, generally want to see the world of Avatar for their selves?
    There's nothing wrong with wanting to see the world of Avatar, but why does it have to be at the Animal Kingdom? The rest is just speculation based on bias, which you seem to accuse other people of doing a lot without noticing just how much you do it yourself.



    Quote Originally Posted by Kei View Post
    So in the end this is just whining about what YOU want. I don't see any argument about what general populace of the planet many want. I see NO evidence that they don't want to see Pandora. And the guests are called stupid because they want to see something they know. It doesn't matter if you think they're stupid. It's a business. Making things they want to see is pretty important.
    No, what I'm whining about is artistic integrity and unity of purpose. This has nothing to do with financial success or what the general populace wants, which probably explains why you don't understand it at all. If you started a website that invited the general populace to write a novel, when it was done you wouldn't end up with the greatest novel ever written, you'd get a giant jumbled mess. Designing entertainment based on focus groups never works. It always comes out cold and flat. Art takes the vision of a single person to drive the creative process toward a single goal to tell a compelling story or create a specific emotional response. Not just make big piles of money.

    You are also assuming that everyone who saw Avatar A) liked it, and B) wants to visit that world. Clearly this isn't true. You're complaining that everyone that doesn't agree with you is trying to pass their opinion off as fact, yet you're doing the exact same thing. The only evidence you have to support your opinion is the financial success of a single film. In fact that is your entire argument. "The film made a lot of money so a land based on it will have the same result." Why bother having parks with different themes then? Why not just buy the rights to all the most successful film franchises and make Movie Park 1,2,3,&4 brought to you by Disney? By your logic it will be the most successful park ever built.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kei View Post
    Avatar absolutely dwarves the Matrix's success. It's honestly a laughable comparsion I think. The only reason I used Matrix as an example is because someone was making the absolutely idioitic argument that the sequel could somehow be unprofitable and used the sequel to the Matrix as an example. My guess is the people that loved the first Avatar and made it huge, will love the second film. Cameron knows what he's doing far more than the directors that made the Matrix films. He's responsible for two of the most heralded sequels ever made, Aliens and T2. Thinking he's going to fumble the ball as bad as Matrix Reloaded is just wishful thinking. Wishful thinking to supplement your irrational hatred for anything new in WDW that is based on a film.
    Clearly you completely missed the point. After the Matrix came out and the two sequels were announced a lot of people were saying that it was going to be this generation's Star Wars. When was the last time you heard anyone say anything about The Matrix? Avatar Sequels being successful enough to make it a lasting franchise is not a sure thing. Cameron also wrote and directed Piranha 2. He's not infallible.

    What do you mean by my "irrational hatred for anything new in WDW that is based on a film"? First of all it's not irrational. I'm pretty sure I gave a pretty darn rational explanation for why I don't want film based attractions just plopped down wherever. Secondly, this hatred you're saying I have doesn't even exist. What I said was, things based on movies should go in the park based on movies. That idea is neither irrational nor is it a hatred for film based attractions. I'm starting to think you aren't even reading my responses.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kei View Post
    If you think the world of Avatar just looks like a basic jungle, you really are drinking your own kool-aid. Even the haters on this thread admit that Pandora is extremely visually stimulating, immersive, and exicting. As someone pointed out earlier, even to the point that people developed mental issues due to the fact they didn't live in that world. It just not some trees with vines. If you think so, you're in denial. If that is your real opinion, than realize everyone that has seen that movie disagrees with you.
    Sorry, it's a jungle with flying islands and trees that glow at night. The flying islands are only possible in indoor outdoor environments due to pesky physics and only a few outdoor plants will light up in the evening because of budget constraints and the fact that too many fake plants start to look obvious and that's a little tacky. The majority of the area's theme will rely on real jungle foliage because it is the closest match to the Pandora environment. I thought that was implied in my previous post, but I guess you needed it spelled out better. If you think that they would for some reason do more than that when they build the land, you are the one that's in denial. I also like how you accuse me of drinking my own kool-aid and then in the same paragraph say, "everyone that has seen that movie disagrees with you." Clearly you have spoken with everyone that has seen the movie about this. Well, I've seen the movie, and I don't disagree with me, so you're wrong again. I'm loving the irony of you saying that everyone who disagrees with you is blinded by their agenda while you comment as if everyone that has seen Avatar agrees with you completely like some mindless zombie ant colony.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kei View Post
    There's nothing safe about Avatar. Replicating Pandora with theming and rides is going to be very hard and going to take a lot of creative thinking and design. This is going to push the Imagineers like they haven't been pushed before, which is good.
    Meh, like I said, a waterfall, some jungle foliage, fake rocks to hide the show buildings, lights along the pathways disguised as trees and ferns. Pretty standard procedure actually.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kei View Post
    If you see the EPCOT theme park when you look at that model on the TTA, you are delusional. I'm sorry, but I see churches and houses and such. I don't see Morocco and the Universe of Energy. It wasn't a "decent compromise." They are two wildly different things that share almost zero similarities other than the name and transportation via raised rail (and even that is barely even similar and does not accomplish what it does in the original model, it doesn't even transport guest through the park).
    Ok now I know you're not reading what I write. Kinda makes me wonder why I'm still writing this, but anyway... I'm not basing what I know about EPCOT and EPCOT Center on the model along the TTA route. Clearly you are. So your knowledge of EPCOT is based on a 15 second drive by of half (yes half) of the original Progress City model. That model it self wasn't even a third of the things planned for the city of EPCOT. What I'm talking about is based on that model, the film hosted by Walt, another documentary film on the development of Walt Disney World, dozens of historically researched articles based on the evolution of the project, and a few books. I can say with a fair amount of confidence that when it comes to Epcot, I usually know what I'm talking about.

    Let's go back to the model though. That par of it that is "Morocco" that you don't see, you aren't seeing because it is inside that big enclosed area in the central hub; the part that the peoplemovers are going into. Inside that area, along with some apartment buildings is an international shopping district. There's a bit of concept art for this. Some of it even appears in the Walt EPCOT film where it is mentioned by name.

    At a different monorail stop, aka a place not a part of that model at all but still very much a part of the original plan was the EPCOT industrial park. I can look at an Exxon R&D facility and WED designed showcase there and very easily see the "Universe of Energy." Don't call me delusional because you have no idea what you're talking about. Personal attacks don't further your point any and they generally come off as tacky and childish.



    Quote Originally Posted by Kei View Post
    I hear the sound of one hand clapping for your efforts. Really, I feel really sad for anyone that is not impressed by the theming and E-ticket at Carsland. But yes, let's diss something that obviously turned out fantastic on some childish principal that has nothing to do with the quality of the rides, business, or what the audience wants.
    Yup unity and integrity are childish. How great is Carsland and attractions there? The last I checked, it's still not open, so nobody knows.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kei View Post
    Frankly, I don't really give a crap about the animated movies Walt worked on before 1960. They're good movies, but I don't care enough to actually watch them. Yet, I still enjoy and love the rides based on those things. Arguing against rides based on films (and even in the currently 4th tier Disney theme park in WDW) is a pointless argument that is going to go nowhere.
    And again you prove my point that quality of a film and quality of ride are not related. Maybe I should just leave you alone and let you argue with yourself for a bit.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kei View Post
    Frankly, WDW is acting far less stupid with this one than others in the past. They are spending money on something that is already a ridiculously gigantic success. That's not what they did with Dinosaur. However, Dinousaur is still a good ride, so most people don't even care.
    And here you are proving my point that Avatar is the safe play.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kei View Post
    It's not comparable to those things because Disney doesn't own Avatar. Disney could do whatever they want with those things or nothing at all. On the other hand, there is a contract involved here. If nothing is ever built, I guarantee you that contract is going to end. Then Universal will scoop it up and make Disney look like fools again. Also the people at Disney aren't so moronic that they're going to let the license for the BIGGEST MOVIE OF ALL TIME go down the drain instead of trying to jump on that gravy train with quality attractions. It's just not going to happen. All the hate fueled wishful thinking and tin-hat produced conspiracy theories are not going to change that. I'm not one of those nuts that accuses the CEO of Disney of lying to shareholders.
    As I said above, Disney doing it so Universal can't is the worst argument to defend the Avatar deal. It's just proof that they are following instead of leading, have no original ideas, or are trying to top pigs with pigs to beat Potter.


    Quote Originally Posted by Kei View Post
    The list goes on and one but stops with one example that doesn't even work. Is the Yeti an animal? Were cyclopses and unicorns animals? Why aren't the creatures in Avatar animals then? Actually, Avatar may fit better because it has a nature and environmental theme. That is the theme of the park, unless you don't understand what that giant tree in that middle is supposed to make you conscious of or Rifiki's Planet Watch flew over your head. It just uses the theme in a scifi/fantasy setting. Good grief, I guess fantasy is outlawed at Walt Disney World now.
    Is a yeti an animal? Yes. Is a cyclops an animal? Debatable. Is a unicorn an animal? yes. Are the creatures in Avatar animals? No. They are aliens. Fake aliens. Pandora is another world, and an imaginary one at that. Animal Kingdom is about the creatures of this world past, present, and fantastic. Pandora is an unnecessary departure from that theme. They are imagined creatures, but they were never imagined to exist in the world that the park is celebrating and trying to conserve. Let the fake corporation mine the fake planet for its fake resources. I don't care, it's fake. Show me a cave where the locals say a dragon once lived and I'm interested. Could it be true? Are there bones? Are there scorch marks on the wall from its fire breath? Can we go in?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kei View Post
    If the "it's based on effects" thing was supposed to be an argument, the ridiculous profit of the film is enough to prove audiences loved it and don't look down on it like you do. So that doesn't work either.
    The profit proves that audiences SAW it, not that they loved it. That's a classic example of Worthington's Law.
    It bothers me when people selectively edit quotes to support whatever point they are trying to prove.

  10. #205

    • Banned User
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1,497

    Re: Avatarland Canceled?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dapper Dan View Post
    The profit proves that audiences SAW it, not that they loved it. That's a classic example of Worthington's Law.
    After reading the rest, this is what essentially your argument. Exactly, how did you arrive that people didn't love it especially if we discount its box office success? I guess we can always make the John Carter Land. I'm sure Disney will always love its own beautiful babies. What's another $250 million down the drain? The public just might learn to love John Carter, The Ride!

    It should be clear that it is just impossible to reach the box office figures of Avatar, Star Wars, and Titanic without repeat visitation. Titanic just reach $2 Billion in box office after its re-release in 3D. Avatar was surpassed all expectations in China.

    Avatar was actually reissued in its original run.
    Last edited by StevenW; 04-24-2012 at 12:36 PM.

  11. #206

    • Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Bay Area
    Posts
    80

    Re: Avatarland Canceled?

    ^^
    boom.
    Last edited by Patman345; 04-24-2012 at 10:36 PM.

  12. #207

    • Banned User
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1,497

    Re: Avatarland Canceled?

    Avatar is quite close to the beloved Beastly Kingdom. It is highly likely that there will be a simulator ride where guests will ride a dragon or ride along side a dragon. That's where most of the action scenes take place in the movie. Then there is the Mother Tree in Pandora. I can see Disney incorporating a walk through attraction where you can visit the stores within the tree. You can touch the leaves and it makes a sound. This will be a fun interactive exhibit for kids like an advance version of a musical piano.

    Of course, I can also see them incorporating a conservation message in a ride. When I went to the Las Vegas Star Trek Adventure (now closed), they had a Borg ride. I think they should use the technology in the same fashion. Instead of getting assimilated like a Borg, you can inhabit an Avatar and go on an adventure. Fight against an alien race and save the planet from exploitation.

    There are many possible rides and adventure with Avatar. It works perfectly in Animal Kingdom.

  13. #208

    • Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Bay Area
    Posts
    80

    Re: Avatarland Canceled?

    All Time Box Office Adjusted for Ticket Price Inflation

    Avatar is 14th?

    ---------- Post added 04-25-2012 at 11:07 AM ----------

    All Time Box Office Adjusted for Ticket Price Inflation

    Avatar is 14th?

    And Star Wars is 2nd

  14. #209

    • Banned User
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1,497

    Re: Avatarland Canceled?

    Quote Originally Posted by Patman345 View Post
    All Time Box Office Adjusted for Ticket Price Inflation

    Avatar is 14th?

    And Star Wars is 2nd
    Not quite. Only domestic.

    Let's do something else.

    The Inflation Calculator

    Avatar $2,782.3 Million, 2009, 2010 (final year) = $2826.82 in 2010

    Star Wars 775.4 Million, 1977, 2010 = $2756.97 in 2010

    Titanic 2,121.8 Million, 1997, 2010 = $2869.10 in 2010

    They are all comparable. You can certainly discount Avatar for IMAX and 3D so let's do another comparison with Harry Potter DH Part 2.

    Harry Potter DH Part 2, $1,328.1 Million in 2011. Oops. The inflation calculation doesn't work beyond 2010. Avatar still wins in modern times with more competition from alternative viewing methods.
    Last edited by StevenW; 04-25-2012 at 10:28 AM.

  15. #210

    • Minion
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    toronto
    Posts
    1,438

    Re: Avatarland Canceled?

    Quote Originally Posted by StevenW View Post
    Hey, this is getting ridiculous. You clearly did not read the article. It was merely comparing Avatar's box office figure at that moment in time that beat Star Wars' final box office. It didn't take into account the Avatar's final box office figures of $2.7 Billion, which is yet to be written as that article was dated Jan 17, 2010.

    You haven't considered total ticket sales, which was always your argument. You continue to make this argument without proof or further analysis.

    More examples of you making things up. So you want an Avatar crazy country right now. How about the good USA? People are exited about the new Avatar Land in the Animal Kingdom. You can certainly check out the Avatar Fan Sites. Or Here.

    I don't need to respond to more nonsense.

    Again, not reading the links properly and making things up as you go.

    It is clear that we're done.
    ....and the film was out of theaters a few short weeks after that article, do you honestly believe the film sold enough tickets to pass such a wide gap in that period of time? it just doesn't make sense. It constitutes valid proof that it is still not on the same level as those other films. i have considered total ticket sales every time thank you keep in mind some of the points you seem to be missing such as the huge number of imax and 3d viewers for this film in particular and the amount of money that each of those tickets cost which is far more expensive then regular admission and even more expensive then admission when star wars came out.

    you keep saying I'm making things up but please illustrate how I'm making them up. love how the examples you use still don't support your point. first there's the USA today article which is a short blurb about the announced project with some company-men quotations, it has 8 comments and more then half of them are negative. then there is the Avatar fan site (my personal favorite) which i took a little time to explore. it has 8 facebook likes, and very sporadic discussion that is currently kept alive by a few select members that still visit the site. third you have a Bing search (bing really?) that you could do with any franchise and does not help you in any way. just for the heck of it though lets try it with some other films, Ill even use bing just for you:

    (all searches ending in "movie fan site" as you did)
    Avatar: 20.7 mil hits
    Star wars: 63.9 mil hits
    Harry Potter: 35.1 mil hits

    Does any of that show that US is Avatar crazy? no not at all. where's the avatar merchandise i can buy? wheres the actors getting hounded by groups of loyal fans wondering about the next movie? wheres the syndication on tv, books and comics adaptation's ect ect, Avatar has none of this it is and has faded.

    what you dismiss as nonsense is plenty of quality fact supporting my arguments. Do not attempt to slander what i have illustrated quite clearly because I see your viewpoint as incorrect. let public opinion decide who has developed the better argument, that's part of the reason forums exist. perhaps you should spend more time developing a sound argument and less attempting to devalue other peoples opinions. the only thing that is clear is that instead of having a cohesive debate on the subject you have chosen to become standoffish, dismissive, and plain rude when an argument you have made is exposed in several different occurrences with several different posters. In my opinion that's not the best way to discuss on a forum.

LinkBacks (?)

  1. 03-14-2012, 07:58 PM
  2. 03-09-2012, 10:00 PM
  3. 03-08-2012, 09:40 AM
  4. 03-08-2012, 01:07 AM
  5. 03-07-2012, 02:25 PM

Similar Threads

  1. Are the fireworks canceled often?
    By jag_girl in forum Disneyland Resort
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 06-24-2006, 08:50 AM
  2. Fantasmic! Canceled Last Night.
    By WRDup in forum Walt Disney World Resort
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 03-22-2006, 01:54 AM
  3. Replies: 31
    Last Post: 07-25-2005, 06:40 AM
  4. Trip Canceled
    By monorail_rider in forum MiceChat Main Lounge
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 04-07-2005, 03:44 PM
  5. Haunted Mansion Holiday Event 2005 - Canceled.
    By cellarhound in forum Disneyland Resort
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 03-10-2005, 08:48 PM

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
  •