Pandora: The World of Avatar Announcement, Construction, & Preview Discussion

[twebber55]

The line should have been drawn several miles back, but it's never going to be drawn because WDI is wildly out of control and in need of a reorg.

you would think someone at disney would see this, the fact that it never is mentioned is amazing

 

[brianlo]

It has been noticed slowly, there is a reason there was a cleaning of house.

Shanghai was representative of 2009/2010 WDI/Dis. Pandora is representative of 2011/2012 Disney. Change is slow and the effects of change even slower.

 

[GAcoaster]

I wonder how much of each budget for a Disney project is spent on in the know jokes and tributes to Imagineers as well as the stuff that no one usually sees except when they do a "did you know..." trivia thing for D23? While that stuff is cool, it's also BS.

 

[fryoj]

I'd say it doesn't help when you have the entire theme park community(basically) gushing over Diagon Alley that is..... two rides in a highly immersive environment. Couple that with how well Cars land was received, another immersive environment with limited rides. The success of Potter is going to push us to more lands like this.

 

[SkiBum]

I'd say it doesn't help when you have the entire theme park community(basically) gushing over Diagon Alley that is..... two rides in a highly immersive environment. Couple that with how well Cars land was received, another immersive environment with limited rides. The success of Potter is going to push us to more lands like this.

I guess that in a few months we will see how Pandora impacts Animal Kingdom.

 

[Legacy]

I'd say it doesn't help when you have the entire theme park community(basically) gushing over Diagon Alley that is..... two rides in a highly immersive environment. Couple that with how well Cars land was received, another immersive environment with limited rides. The success of Potter is going to push us to more lands like this.

You're not wrong, but the anchor rides of those two expansions are huge advancements in themed rides and compelling weenies that feature far more relevant and compelling IPs. The immersion of Harry Potter, specifically, highlights a desire of the fans to BE wizards, and everything about those expansions allows them to do that.

Avatar features a boat ride and an inverted simulator that, while are likely going to be enjoyable, I doubt will set new standards or actually blow away expectations.

 

[DragonSlayer]

I think the problem people aren't really addressing (at least I haven't really seen it) is a question of narrative. The screens work in Shanghai's Pirates because of the ridiculous scale and spreed of the story. It's essentially Spider-Man on water and so screens are basically the only way to make everything flow effectively. Nothing about the way Disney is branding Avatar leads us to believe the boat ride will anywhere near as "fast." I think that's why the people who are put off by screens in that ride are put off. It would be like using the Spider-man ride system for Cat in the Hat. Sure, you can do it, but is it actually the best way to tell your story?

This is an excellent point which indeed hasn't been raised before. You could achieve what is (we presume) being achieved in NRJ with 1960s Small World boats and a room full of static scenery and animatronics -- it doesn't need the modern ride system or the screens either. This links in with @GAcoaster's point about thinking the wrong way around: they use an 'all-new' ride system purely for the sake of the video in which they wax lyrical about the 'all-new' ride system for the sake of giving fans the soundbite.

 

[fryoj]

You're not wrong, but the anchor rides of those two expansions are huge advancements in themed rides and compelling weenies that feature far more relevant and compelling IPs. The immersion of Harry Potter, specifically, highlights a desire of the fans to BE wizards, and everything about those expansions allows them to do that.

Avatar features a boat ride and an inverted simulator that, while are likely going to be enjoyable, I doubt will set new standards or actually blow away expectations.

The question is, how much do the rides themselves matter in the overall land? Does it need to be groundbreaking for the land to be good? Does it even need to be unique? If Gringotts was not as innovative would it really matter to the success of the land? If they would have dropped an updated Mummy clone, would the land not still be a success? I think these lands will succeed or fail on how enjoyable and how much time(and money) people will want to spend there, not on how unique or innovative the ride is. A unique ride will help a land for sure. I think Cars land is greatly helped by RSR if not saved by it. And it really wasn't even innovative, just a better version of test track. I wouldn't walk through it and just hang out without riding RSR. Hogsmede and DA, I could walk through just to grab a Butterbeer or to eat without riding FJ or Gringotts.

Where Pandora falls on this scale is yet to be seen. Regardless of how good the rides are, if how successful the land is is determined by how innovative the rides are, or even how good they are, it'll probably be a failure. And that's not to say I think the rides will be bad. I just think the rides themselves are not the biggest part of this deal.

 

[twebber55]

what you have here is a land based on an IP thats not as popular as it once was using an updated ride system that is a classic for Disney using incredible themeing

 

[orlandoiloveyou]

Whether or not Pandora was a good choice for a land..I could debate for days. But I think it's a little unfair to say we can't see where the money has gone. Lifelike plants are important in an immersive alien world. The theater has 4 show areas, and rock work is really expensive.
DA is impressive, but it's small, and the corners are pretty apparent when you walk in and the forced perspective happens.. the path angles upwards and the buildings get smaller as you walk towards Gringotts. And the dragon, while cool, totally breaks it for me. It's literally a photo op. And I'm saying this as someone who has been to Universal Studios 5 times in 2 years and to Disney 1 time in the last 2 years.
Universal is doing great things but I think there's rose tinted glasses on if you think the attractions are at some other level. Some of these attractions over promised and under delivered. Kong being a big one for me, although that animatronic really does a lot for me. And Gringotts is a little slow paced, and didn't really deliver the type of experience many of us thought a Gringotts roller coaster should. Even a Mummy styled standard roller coaster made more sense. The technology is incredible, probably more so than the attraction. Not to say any of these are BAD attractions. I'd say they are pretty great, but I think it's important to keep our perspective on these projects.

Now that all being said..the river ride does bug me. One shot from the video shows what looks like very old school black light tech that looked really..shall I say..not good. And then the other shot showed the blue lighting mixed in better and was much more interesting. I hope the screens really help add a sense of scale to the river, but I am really disappointed by the length. It is reasonable to say that if you spend that kind of money and only build 2 rides, they better be amazing. The NRJ feels like an afterthought or like someone going "we need another thing" after they drew up the plans, especially if it's going to be that short. As other users have pointed out a regular boat ride would have been acceptable if it meant a longer attraction. In general you'd think 2 E-Tickets make sense at Animal Kingdom where there are still not that many attractions. It still could be considered a 3/4 day maybe? instead of half day.

 

[DragonSlayer]

With all the uncertainty a couple of years ago over whether the boat ride would happen at all, is the reason for the length some pretty savage cuts compared to the original design simply to ensure it happened in some form rather than being axed? Is this really NRJ-lite?

 

[twebber55]

With all the uncertainty a couple of years ago over whether the boat ride would happen at all, is the reason for the length some pretty savage cuts compared to the original design simply to ensure it happened in some form rather than being axed? Is this really NRJ-lite?

no the boat ride was never going to be axed in fact it was plussed since the leaked plans

 

[Nick]

no the boat ride was never going to be axed in fact it was plussed since the leaked plans

I can't say if you are right or wrong here, but I do know that around 2012-2013 there were a lot of creative issues surrounding the project with many disagreements between James Cameron and WDI.

 

[brianlo]

I think the problem people aren't really addressing (at least I haven't really seen it) is a question of narrative. The screens work in Shanghai's Pirates because of the ridiculous scale and spreed of the story. It's essentially Spider-Man on water and so screens are basically the only way to make everything flow effectively. Nothing about the way Disney is branding Avatar leads us to believe the boat ride will anywhere near as "fast." I think that's why the people who are put off by screens in that ride are put off. It would be like using the Spider-man ride system for Cat in the Hat. Sure, you can do it, but is it actually the best way to tell your story?

Sort of. I wouldn't call PoTC a fast ride though or frantic in the same vein as Spiderman. There are slow (and quiet) scenes still where the screens incorporate into a better product. The screens work because they are well incorporated with physical sets and mostly act as additional backdrop. There is a natural transition and smoothness to where the set ends a screen starts and a set takes over again. They convey the sense that there is more space. They aren't generally there for characters to remain a fixed focal point and shout exposition at you. If a character is going to stand in one place and talk at you they are an AA, if they are going to jump around the scene, a screen is appropriately applied.

I expect NRJ to function in the same way, in fact I don't even think you'll even be getting a giant Imax screen scene like you do in PoTC. The screens are just a *small* backdrop to the sets you'll be looking at. Unlike Spider-man to Cat in the Hat... we are talking about the exact same ride system.

 

[brianlo]

With all the uncertainty a couple of years ago over whether the boat ride would happen at all, is the reason for the length some pretty savage cuts compared to the original design simply to ensure it happened in some form rather than being axed? Is this really NRJ-lite?

As @twebber55 said. The original, original blue-sky plans were for NRJ to be a small tertiary attraction. Internally they called it a C-ticket. Then they budgeted the whole blue sky proposal and the executives scoffed. When the executives came back with a number the other main attraction got cut and the boat ride further cut. They prioritized saving the land itself rather than the attractions. That led to a lot of friction between Dis (for cost savings) and Cameron. There was some relenting eventually.

Eventually what was spit out was the other main attraction continued to be cut and more money was dumped into the C-ticket boat ride to make it a bit more impressive. There have been no "cuts" to this project after it was committed to. They have since let this project pull a My Magic Plus and have just kept moving the budget goal post and dumping more money to achieve what they committed to do in 2013.


For everyone caught up in the budget, rightly or wrongly they spent the bulk of the money on the land itself. They were fully capable of spitting out 4 E-tickets in un-themed boxes. Somewhere there is a happier medium between the extremes. But that's how they choose to prioritize this one. Rock-work, more rock-work and an extreme lighting package.

A comparable is how they spent boatloads of money on the Tron cover. Not the actual coaster itself, but the undulating glass cover. Sometimes they kind of get stuck on the flourishes. Pandora is a exercise in flourishes. Yes, even more than Potter. Rohde was let wild on his 'details'.

At least now that all the money is spent they can always throw another E-ticket in a box behind the pretty land.

 

[epcyclopedia]

The happy middle is to have impressive scenery but carefully control where it can be viewed from and spend not a penny more on an area that's not meant to be in guest view. See: Hogwarts.

 

[erider]

It sounds like Avatar is more about the pretty rockwork than the rides. I hate that. Just like I didn't like New Fantasyland at all. Sure, it's pretty to look at, but I come for the immersive rides every time and New Fantasyland definitely dissapoints. At least both Harry Potter lands have a revolutionary ride. I sure hope Avatar will be expanded in the future with a big revolutionary new E-ticket without spending an enourmous amount on the rockwork on the outside.

 

[darkridelover]

It sounds like Avatar is more about the pretty rockwork than the rides. I hate that. Just like I didn't like New Fantasyland at all. Sure, it's pretty to look at, but I come for the immersive rides every time and New Fantasyland definitely dissapoints. At least both Harry Potter lands have a revolutionary ride. I sure hope Avatar will be expanded in the future with a big revolutionary new E-ticket without spending an enourmous amount on the rockwork on the outside.

It's not even pretty rockwork. There are almost no details sculpted in most of the rockwork because most of it is covered with plants.

 

[Prototype_82]

It sounds like Avatar is more about the pretty rockwork than the rides. I hate that. Just like I didn't like New Fantasyland at all.

Considering the new norm is 1 new ride per land, I think Pandora has a pretty impressive formula. Think we are going to be very very surprised by these attractions.

 

[Parkscope Joe]

Considering the new norm is 1 new ride per land, I think Pandora has a pretty impressive formula. Think we are going to be very very surprised by these attractions.

Huh? Only "new land" with only one new ride is Hogsmeade.