Did Disney get the bright idea to go with the Hunger Games instead?
1. Avatarland cancelled
2. Purists celebrate the lack of random movie franchises being added
3. Universal picks up rights
4. Purists complain that Disney cant live up to the technological advancements in Avatarland
Im not a Disney purist, but I'd say they have every right to be mad.
I personally am indifferent about the whole concept, and I wont form a real opinion on it until more details are given, if they ever are. But, here's how I look at the situation:
Every project has its share of obstacles and challenges to overcome, whether they're technological, logistical, financial, etc. etc. Obviously people within the Company, most likely people very high up, saw potential in Avatar and wanted the rights bad enough to pursue them. When people want something bad enough they are eventually willing to do things that are difficult and/or uncomfortable for them (e.g. spending more money, giving over more control to Cameron, etc.). And if Cameron is pushing for super high quality design and theming, I see no reason why the Imagineers wouldn't be 100% behind this concept, especially Joe Rodhe, who undoubtedly has something to do with this project and whose previous projects will attest to his commitment to quality. So if there are executives that still want this to go through and Imagineers behind this, I see no reason why a compromise between Cameron and Disney on how this should be done couldn't be reached. Just because things look bleak right now, doesn't mean they won't clear up in the future.
The problem is that no-one wants to go to Pandora. We all want to go to LV-426.
As long as there's a way to nuke it from orbit ("only way to be sure"), sign me up!
Just give me a Muppet Land at DHS and I'll be happy. Use the specs from back in the 90's and give us a Muppet Dark Ride that goes through a highly themed Muppet restaurant.
Besides that, I don't think they could really announce anything at WDW that would excite me. (Except for a Star Wars Land, and we all know that would never happen.)
DL has so much more going for it. If they changed Bugs Land to Pixar Land, added a Muppet Land, and fixed up Tomorrowland (while bringing back COP), I'd never want to go back to WDW again.
Keep in mind everyone this avatar claim may OR NOT be true, I would like more sources on this. I see the following scenarios could happen.
A. Avatar is never made land in any park/or made in amusement park
B. Cameron will be angry and persue to Universal, and the land will succeed or lose.
C. The claim is false and the land is built in DAK.
---------- Post added 03-10-2012 at 09:01 PM ----------
Bummer. I was really looking forward to an E-Ticket fully immersive boat or omnimover ride into the Avatar world complete with extended night hours (and maybe even Rivers of Light?) at DAK.
Surprised so many people hate the idea :O
I still don't see how this is any different than 'Indiana Jones' and 'Star Wars' in the parks (and those are loved by almost all of you!) As for those that say the movie isn't gonna be popular on long term therefor the land won't be popular in 10 years, look at Carsland! A lot people hated it because they didn't like the movie and said it wasn't going to be around in 10 years. And now look what people say, almost everyone is excited for it! YES I would liked an 'Disney' or 'Original' land more but if it is done right it WILL be awesome (and with someone like Cameron around I don't expect a cheap experience)
About it being in DAK I don't mind it, if 'Dinoland' can be there, than so can 'Alienland' (aka 'Pandora' aka 'Avatarland') Which will be a rich rain forest like surrounding instead of a tacky carnival road thingy (aka 'Dinoland')
It's just my opinion but I think it would be really stupid if they drop this opportunity to FINALLY do something revolutionary again at 'Disney' and 'Walt Disney World' again.