Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 59
  1. #16

    • Minion
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    toronto
    Posts
    1,497

    Re: Avatar 2 and what it may mean for Avatarland.

    Quote Originally Posted by RandySavage View Post
    Yes, we've had this discussion before (it's coming back) and, yes, I agree with the last part above.

    If a theme-breaker is really well-executed in isolation, and fairly well-integrated into its surroundings (odds are Pandora will be both of these), then it can work within the park's context. It's not what I'd have done, but, for me, Pandora doesn't look like it will wreck Animal Kingdom's theme. Splash Mountain in MK's Frontierland comes to mind as an example of this.
    If this concept is executed extraordinarily well and maintains complete isolation from the remainder of the park then I agree it could work persay and I would not be as perturbed about its addition. Based on recent efforts by the resort however I would be hesitant to commit to either of those points. we will have to wait and see but I am not optimistic at this time based on the place this concept is starting and the initial evidence we have been leaked.

  2. #17

    • Minion
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    toronto
    Posts
    1,497

    Re: Avatar 2 and what it may mean for Avatarland.

    Quote Originally Posted by StevenW View Post
    Is there? And no reason? Please.
    Oceania? South America? North America was poorly executed why not try that again? both parts of Asia could be expanded upon the list goes on and on. if you really believe there is no more material to be touched upon to create a new exciting land in the park then I don't know what to tell you. furthermore if you really want to see why I say no apparent reason you can go back and look over the probably close to 100 pages of past debate on this issue we both have contributed to. I'm not willing to rehash a debate thats happened three times over once more.

  3. #18

    • Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    279

    Re: Avatar 2 and what it may mean for Avatarland.

    Quote Originally Posted by Aladdin View Post
    It is incredibly sad that Avatar does ruin and change Animal Kingdom, into Alien Kingdom. This park wasn't designed for, nor established for creatures Not of earth. That kind of outerspace movie creature belongs at the Studios NOT ANIMAL Kingdom.
    And you KNOW this how? Do you have some magic crystal ball that you can see into the future and KNOW that this will ruin Animal Kingdom?

    I'm sure there were many people that looked at the plans for Animal Kindom and said "Why is Disney building another zoo?", "this will ruin the MAGICAL feel of the parks!". It seems to fit rather well now doesn't it?


    Quote Originally Posted by goofy donald View Post
    Oceania? South America? North America was poorly executed why not try that again? both parts of Asia could be expanded upon the list goes on and on. if you really believe there is no more material to be touched upon to create a new exciting land in the park then I don't know what to tell you. furthermore if you really want to see why I say no apparent reason you can go back and look over the probably close to 100 pages of past debate on this issue we both have contributed to. I'm not willing to rehash a debate thats happened three times over once more.
    The discussion is about AVATAR LAND, not the whole group of parks known as WDW. Sure everyone has suggestions for all of the other parks and maybe, just maybe the money Avatar land brings in may be slated for just that, but to get one you have to have the other.

  4. #19

    • Minion
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    toronto
    Posts
    1,497

    Re: Avatar 2 and what it may mean for Avatarland.

    Quote Originally Posted by maddogjoe View Post
    The discussion is about AVATAR LAND, not the whole group of parks known as WDW. Sure everyone has suggestions for all of the other parks and maybe, just maybe the money Avatar land brings in may be slated for just that, but to get one you have to have the other.
    if you don't know the context of whats being said then don't attempt to lash out at others. what you said makes no sense in the context of the discussion. furthermore I would suggest you looked in your own 'crystal ball' there to suggest Avatar brings in that kind of money in the first place but i digress...

  5. #20

    • Banned User
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1,497

    Re: Avatar 2 and what it may mean for Avatarland.

    Quote Originally Posted by goofy donald View Post
    Oceania? South America? North America was poorly executed why not try that again? both parts of Asia could be expanded upon the list goes on and on. if you really believe there is no more material to be touched upon to create a new exciting land in the park then I don't know what to tell you. furthermore if you really want to see why I say no apparent reason you can go back and look over the probably close to 100 pages of past debate on this issue we both have contributed to. I'm not willing to rehash a debate thats happened three times over once more.
    Perhaps it was a mistake to challenge you on the specific ideas that might interest you more than Avatar. However, I'm not convinced that there are "incredible" stories that could be told or conceptualized when compared with the world of Pandora. Could Avatar be surpassed?

    Animal Kingdom has stagnated. This is true for a long time. Additions including that of the original attractions of Bugs, then Dinoland, Everest, were boring as heck. Excitement is needed.

    I'm sure James Cameron can bring more to the table as well as more energy.

  6. #21

    • MiceChat Round-Up Crew
    • Prince Ali
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Agrabah
    Posts
    11,060

    Re: Avatar 2 and what it may mean for Avatarland.

    Originally Posted by Aladdin
    It is incredibly sad that Avatar does ruin and change Animal Kingdom, into Alien Kingdom. This park wasn't designed for, nor established for creatures Not of earth. That kind of outerspace movie creature belongs at the Studios NOT ANIMAL Kingdom.



    Quote Originally Posted by maddogjoe View Post
    And you KNOW this how? Do you have some magic crystal ball that you can see into the future and KNOW that this will ruin Animal Kingdom?

    I'm sure there were many people that looked at the plans for Animal Kindom and said "Why is Disney building another zoo?", "this will ruin the MAGICAL feel of the parks!". It seems to fit rather well now doesn't it?

    The discussion is about AVATAR LAND, not the whole group of parks known as WDW. Sure everyone has suggestions for all of the other parks and maybe, just maybe the money Avatar land brings in may be slated for just that, but to get one you have to have the other.
    Animal Kingdom, since its inception, has been based on animals of Earth, including lions, dinosaurs and dragons: real animals that currently live on Earth (Lions), ancient animals that have previously lived on Earth and are now extinct (Dinosaurs), and imagined Earth animals of mythology and legend (Dragons). That is what the Animal Kingdoms foundation is.


    For Encounters of Outer Space Aliens on planets other than Earth, and Hollywood Movies, those properly belong in Disney Studio. THAT is why Star Tours was placed in the Studios Park, at WDW. Avatar fits the Studios on both of those counts, and FAILS to fit the Earthly Animal Kingdom.



    The only way to force the Hollywood Sci Fi Outer Space Aliens Movie creation into WDW's 4th park, is to Change the Entire Focus from an Earthly Animal Kingdom, into an Alien Kingdom.



    Disney was much better off leaving the Alien Kingdoms with Hollywood (well some of that has seeped into TL in WDW's Magic Kingdom with Alien Encounter -which should have really been part of the Studios also) Animal Kingdom should continued to be focused on Earth's Animals, NOT Outer Space. Sadly currently disney management is ruining the focus, by ADDING an entire non Earth based realm to what can no longer be called an Animal Kingdom.


    So, you presented the question, how can you predict the future and know how this Alien Invasion of the former Animal Kingdom will be received? Your are assuming this addition of Avatar will bring in dollars, THAT is a BIG assumption. Especially considering the market for Avatar merchandise was next to nill.

    It is a MUCH wiser question to ask

    "Is this Avatar theme relevant to the Disney Parks at all?"

    "Is the Avatar theme something that should Disney should continue to invest in, considering, the choice of it at the time was a knee jerk reaction to the Harry Potter success at Universal's Orlando Parks"

    "Is this Avatar theme the best possible investment of Disney's Dollars, or will it cause another financial backlash, just like the Magic Bands?"

    "Is there another project or theme that WDW that would draw more guests, than Avatar?"
    Last edited by Aladdin; 12-28-2013 at 02:18 PM.

  7. #22

    • Minion
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    toronto
    Posts
    1,497

    Re: Avatar 2 and what it may mean for Avatarland.

    Quote Originally Posted by StevenW View Post
    Perhaps it was a mistake to challenge you on the specific ideas that might interest you more than Avatar. However, I'm not convinced that there are "incredible" stories that could be told or conceptualized when compared with the world of Pandora. Could Avatar be surpassed?

    Animal Kingdom has stagnated. This is true for a long time. Additions including that of the original attractions of Bugs, then Dinoland, Everest, were boring as heck. Excitement is needed.

    I'm sure James Cameron can bring more to the table as well as more energy.
    The addition of Everest was boring as heck? haha I think you forget because it was so long ago but that addition was anything but boring, in fact it was one of the most exciting additions in disney history at the time. When the yeti was actually working it was being praised for being one of the best theme park attractions in the world. however you are correct the park has stagnated but the cause of this is simply because nothing significant outside of the finding nemo show has been added to the park (which simply inhabited an already constructed theatre) since everest in 2005. eight going on nine years with no new construction and of course a park is going to stagnate somewhat. Furthermore if you doubt that disney's imagineers supposedly some of the most creative people on earth cannot come up with an original idea as good or better then Pandora based on our natural earth and instead must rely on outside imagination, you in turn must believe that the system is massively damaged. For decades in the past imagineers seemed to do just fine coming up with ideas all by themselves and created phenomenal attractions that actually fit appropriately with theme, tailor made to their respective areas, it is their job to do so today and the fans demand it of them.

    Yes Disney Imagineers have and can do better then Avatar, its not like this is the hamlet of screen plays, and the visuals the film so heavily relies on were based off of actual places on earth. Ever seen Planet Earth? I would gladly argue the visuals in that rival Avatar's any day. why not simply take those visuals from our real world and utilize them with mythology and a little imagineering magic to produce a BETTER story overall and in turn a better experience that fits in this park.

  8. #23

    • Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    279

    Re: Avatar 2 and what it may mean for Avatarland.

    Quote Originally Posted by goofy donald View Post
    if you don't know the context of whats being said then don't attempt to lash out at others. what you said makes no sense in the context of the discussion. furthermore I would suggest you looked in your own 'crystal ball' there to suggest Avatar brings in that kind of money in the first place but i digress...
    I'm sorry, did I step on your toes? Where in this line "Oceania? South America? North America was poorly executed why not try that again? both parts of Asia could be expanded upon the list goes on and on." did you mention Avatar land? Sorry I must have a reading problem. You made a sweeping comment and I called you on it. I didn't lash out at anyone. The point I am trying to make here is only NOBODY KNOWS what WDW will do, nor how it will be received. Will it make money? I bet it will, Disney is pretty good at doing that.

    Quote Originally Posted by Aladdin View Post
    Originally Posted by Aladdin
    It is incredibly sad that Avatar does ruin and change Animal Kingdom, into Alien Kingdom. This park wasn't designed for, nor established for creatures Not of earth. That kind of outerspace movie creature belongs at the Studios NOT ANIMAL Kingdom.





    Animal Kingdom, since its inception, has been based on animals of Earth, including lions, dinosaurs and dragons: real animals that currently live on Earth (Lions), ancient animals that have previously lived on Earth and are now extinct (Dinosaurs), and imagined Earth animals of mythology and legend (Dragons). That is what the Animal Kingdoms foundation is.


    For Encounters of Outer Space Aliens on planets other than Earth, and Hollywood Movies, those properly belong in Disney Studio. THAT is why Star Tours was placed in the Studios Park, at WDW. Avatar fits the Studios on both of those counts, and FAILS to fit the Earthly Animal Kingdom.



    The only way to force the Hollywood Sci Fi Outer Space Aliens Movie creation into WDW's 4th park, is to Change the Entire Focus from an Earthly Animal Kingdom, into an Alien Kingdom.



    Disney was much better off leaving the Alien Kingdoms with Hollywood (well some of that has seeped into TL in WDW's Magic Kingdom with Alien Encounter -which should have really been part of the Studios also) Animal Kingdom should continued to be focused on Earth's Animals, NOT Outer Space. Sadly currently disney management is ruining the focus, by ADDING an entire non Earth based realm to what can no longer be called an Animal Kingdom.


    So, you presented the question, how can you predict the future and know how this Alien Invasion of the former Animal Kingdom will be received? Your are assuming this addition of Avatar will bring in dollars, THAT is a BIG assumption. Especially considering the market for Avatar merchandise was next to nill.

    It is a MUCH wiser question to ask

    "Is this Avatar theme relevant to the Disney Parks at all?"

    "Is the Avatar theme something that should Disney should continue to invest in, considering, the choice of it at the time was a knee jerk reaction to the Harry Potter success at Universal's Orlando Parks"

    "Is this Avatar theme the best possible investment of Disney's Dollars, or will it cause another financial backlash, just like the Magic Bands?"

    "Is there another project or theme that WDW that would draw more guests, than Avatar?"
    Funny, I thought AK was more about conservation and protecting the planet.... much like the main story line of the movie Avatar. Who have thought those two might work well together?

  9. #24

    • Under that tree again!
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    7,461

    Re: Avatar 2 and what it may mean for Avatarland.

    Suck it up. Avatarland is coming.
    Be Cool Stay in School!
    Next year I'm trying for a summer internship at Stark Industries.

  10. #25

    • New Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    14

    Re: Avatar 2 and what it may mean for Avatarland.

    I've heard rumors on here that Avatarland will let Animal Kingdom be open later, due to the addition of animal-less rides. Whether or not the Avatar theme fits within Animal Kingdom or Walt Disney World as a whole, won't later park hours (assuming that's true) be better for AK? I mean, I think making AK a full-day park would draw more visitors to it (which may, in turn, draw more attractions to it).

  11. #26

    • Under that tree again!
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    7,461

    Re: Avatar 2 and what it may mean for Avatarland.

    Quote Originally Posted by LivTC View Post
    I've heard rumors on here that Avatarland will let Animal Kingdom be open later, due to the addition of animal-less rides. Whether or not the Avatar theme fits within Animal Kingdom or Walt Disney World as a whole, won't later park hours (assuming that's true) be better for AK? I mean, I think making AK a full-day park would draw more visitors to it (which may, in turn, draw more attractions to it).
    Not just rumors but press releases from D23 Tokyo showed a coming night show, and night rides on the Safari.




    Be Cool Stay in School!
    Next year I'm trying for a summer internship at Stark Industries.

  12. #27

    • Minion
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    toronto
    Posts
    1,497

    Re: Avatar 2 and what it may mean for Avatarland.

    Quote Originally Posted by maddogjoe View Post
    I'm sorry, did I step on your toes? Where in this line "Oceania? South America? North America was poorly executed why not try that again? both parts of Asia could be expanded upon the list goes on and on." did you mention Avatar land? Sorry I must have a reading problem. You made a sweeping comment and I called you on it. I didn't lash out at anyone. The point I am trying to make here is only NOBODY KNOWS what WDW will do, nor how it will be received. Will it make money? I bet it will, Disney is pretty good at doing that.
    originally steven W asked if there were any concepts for lands that could rival avatar land based upon our real world. I listed several. therefore I stand by what I said previously as you obviously did not understand the context of what was being said.

    furthermore I agree with what you say regarding what WDW will do or the addition's reception, nobody knows. the negative side in this case however has had and continues to have far more evidence then the affirmative. I have stood by my statement throughout these discussions that I would be very glad if they could make this concept work in a contained environment that would not damage the integrity of the remainder of the park, even if I'm still not happy about the circumstances that brought the addition to WDW, or the fact that it should not even be there in the first place. Based upon what disney has done in the recent past though, I am less then confident that this will occur and we will merely end up with a big heap of lunch for the dung beetles of Its tough to be a bug while arguably my favourite park will loose its most significant attribute and become another dulled down franchise land.

    If this discussion brings about anything other then the vitriol it has in its other forms, it should bring about the further discussion of what has happened to original thought at WDW imagineering. whenever they do almost anything significant based upon an original thought and not a franchise it is very often a massive success and extremely popular. why then do we not see more of this action and instead have to settle for shoehorning in these second class concepts from third parties? its limiting the creativity of what should be some of the worlds most creative people.

  13. #28

    • Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    976

    Re: Avatar 2 and what it may mean for Avatarland.

    Quote Originally Posted by goofy donald View Post
    Based upon what disney has done in the recent past though, I am less then confident that this will occur and we will merely end up with a big heap of lunch for the dung beetles of Its tough to be a bug while arguably my favourite park will loose its most significant attribute and become another dulled down franchise land.
    I don't think you need to worry about quality. It should end up being something on par with Carsland (an environment also tangentially (or un)related to California and shoe-horned in) in execution: similar budget, similar "world-building", same WDI producer (Mangum), same rockwork designer (Hormay), similar ride line-up (Big E, minor C) with taskmaster Cameron lording over all of it. The floating rockwork model looked very promising.


    If this discussion brings about anything other then the vitriol it has in its other forms, it should bring about the further discussion of what has happened to original thought at WDW imagineering. whenever they do almost anything significant based upon an original thought and not a franchise it is very often a massive success and extremely popular. why then do we not see more of this action and instead have to settle for shoehorning in these second class concepts from third parties? its limiting the creativity of what should be some of the worlds most creative people.
    I'm sure (hope) many (most?) at WDI, were they in charge, would opt for more original, cohesive content for the parks. Alas, they are not. The sad irony from an artistic viewpoint is Disney is the one company in the theme park business that could leave IP behind, build original and people would still come in droves (especially to WDW). They have that rare, established freedom (earned, in part, by their originality in the past) and are letting it go to waste.

  14. #29

    • Minion
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    toronto
    Posts
    1,497

    Re: Avatar 2 and what it may mean for Avatarland.

    Quote Originally Posted by RandySavage View Post
    I don't think you need to worry about quality. It should end up being something on par with Carsland (an environment also tangentially (or un)related to California and shoe-horned in) in execution: similar budget, similar "world-building", same WDI producer (Mangum), same rockwork designer (Hormay), similar ride line-up (Big E, minor C) with taskmaster Cameron lording over all of it. The floating rockwork model looked very promising.
    while i would like to agree with you I'm not that optimistic. keep in mind the leaked drawings showing something more in tune with a soarin style attraction as their answer for the lands e-ticket, not something I would call on par with cars land. hopefully this has changed since and that was just an early conception because that did not interest me in the slightest. we will have to see about the quality of the exterior execution but those are positive signs. as for containment however clearly with concept drawings specifically targeting the tree of life, if Avatar overwhelmingly infiltrates the heart of the park all has gone out the window in that respect. which would be the worst infraction this addition could make IMO.

    I'm sure (hope) many (most?) at WDI, were they in charge, would opt for more original, cohesive content for the parks. Alas, they are not. The sad irony from an artistic viewpoint is Disney is the one company in the theme park business that could leave IP behind, build original and people would still come in droves (especially to WDW). They have that rare, established freedom (earned, in part, by their originality in the past) and are letting it go to waste.
    agreed tenfold

  15. #30

    • Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    668

    Re: Avatar 2 and what it may mean for Avatarland.

    Quote Originally Posted by goofy donald View Post
    Yes Disney Imagineers have and can do better then Avatar, its not like this is the hamlet of screen plays, and the visuals the film so heavily relies on were based off of actual places on earth. Ever seen Planet Earth? I would gladly argue the visuals in that rival Avatar's any day. why not simply take those visuals from our real world and utilize them with mythology and a little imagineering magic to produce a BETTER story overall and in turn a better experience that fits in this park.
    Yes.

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. [Chat] HK Disneyland to get Marvel first-What does this mean for Disneyland?
    By Disneymike in forum Disneyland Resort
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 02-27-2013, 09:12 PM
  2. Replies: 21
    Last Post: 11-06-2012, 12:46 PM
  3. [News] Bob Iger to be replaced as CEO in 2015 - what does this mean for the parks?
    By Disney Analyst in forum Disneyland Resort
    Replies: 43
    Last Post: 10-08-2011, 10:34 PM
  4. What CMs Say And What They REALLY Mean!!
    By Dan - Tasmic! in forum Break Room
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 01-16-2008, 02:24 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
  •