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

[*Q*]

The "something goes terribly wrong" part is that Avatarland even exists.

 

[Nick]

The "something goes terribly wrong" part is that Avatarland even exists.

While not the ideal IP, you have to admit this thing should look pretty damn beautiful when finished.

 

[Disneyhead]

While not the ideal IP, you have to admit this thing should look pretty damn beautiful when finished.

I'm thinking it is going to be jaw dropping.

 

[UNIrd]

I'm more excited for the river ride than the E-ticket. Probably because of all the simulators we've gotten from both resorts as of late. But a boat ride... there hasn't been a new one since what...Jurassic Park?

 

[*Q*]

While not the ideal IP, you have to admit this thing should look pretty damn beautiful when finished.

Oh, I fully admit that this could easily veer into WaterWorld territory: terrible movie, excellent attraction. I'm just afraid Disney has exorbitantly unrealistic expectations for the gains from this, and that it'll kill any further ambitious spending.

 

[WAJAS]

I'd love to know where you heard that, but I think we have a much greater chance of getting an "Avatar Weekends" type-deal (if movies 2-4 are really successful) rather than what you are talking about.

None of what I said was supposed to be taken seriously. I thought that would be obvious with the ridiculousness of the statement.

 

[ThemeParks4Life]

On the most recent Disney Dish, Jim Hill was saying that a late 2016 opening might be possible. I don't buy it but I can believe Early 2017.

 

[IzzyB]

Oh, I fully admit that this could easily veer into WaterWorld territory: terrible movie, excellent attraction. I'm just afraid Disney has exorbitantly unrealistic expectations for the gains from this, and that it'll kill any further ambitious spending.

I agree with this. I didn't see the first movie so I have no clue how good or bad it was or how a sequel would work.

 

[misterID]

Oh, I fully admit that this could easily veer into WaterWorld territory: terrible movie, excellent attraction. I'm just afraid Disney has exorbitantly unrealistic expectations for the gains from this, and that it'll kill any further ambitious spending.

I think it will be huge for AK.

 

[*Q*]

I think it will be huge for AK.

It will help the park, for sure, but I don't think anywhere near as much as other things they could have done.

 

[IzzyB]

It will help the park, for sure, but I don't think anywhere near as much as other things they could have done.

I meant to say in my last post that I don't agree Disney will use this as a gauge to expand or not expand. Star Wars will be a gold mine and propel then to do more like Potter did for Uni.

 

[*Q*]

I meant to say in my last post that I don't agree Disney will use this as a gauge to expand or not expand. Star Wars will be a gold mine and propel then to do more like Potter did for Uni.

I'm afraid Avatar will underperform and they'll use that as an excuse for severe budget cuts on Star Wars.

 

[UNIrd]

I'm afraid Avatar will underperform and they'll use that as an excuse for severe budget cuts on Star Wars.

Avatar will only underperform if it's success is measured in the revenue it brings. It will bring people to the park, yes, but I don't foresee any guests clearing out any Avatar merchandise or lining up to try food and drink. Those opportunities just aren't there. Star Wars, on the other hand, will print money.

 

[misterID]

It will help the park, for sure, but I don't think anywhere near as much as other things they could have done.

The park has a lot to do with it, though. It's a perfect fit, because of the other offerings, or lack there of, in that half day park. The ride system, the experience and the press it will generate. I think you're underestimating the wow factor and how popular the film was.

I will say I'd rather have that Mysterious Island/Beastly Kingdom hybrid that was planned at one time, with a clone of Mystic Manor (my Pipedream, not what was planned), but I'm not sure they would be as big of draws as I think Avatar will be.

If anything, I think this could encourage more growth at AK.

 

[twebber55]

I still think you see a bigger than cars land bump at DAK
one reason, the parks dynamics are changing... everything we ve seen so far doesn't look cheap in fact it looks like the scale will be incredible

but im glad we can talk about the success of the avatar before its opening we haven't quite touched on this topic yet

 

[captainmoch]

I'm hoping AK gets some expansions after Avatar, too. The park will be good, but still could use a lot more to become a full day experience. The only reason it's a full day experience currently is because it closes so early, around when you'd be done with everything. With it opening later, getting another expansion (Austalia? South America? Beastly Kingdom?) someday preferably soon would be nice.

 

[*Q*]

The park has a lot to do with it, though. It's a perfect fit, because of the other offerings, or lack there of, in that half day park. The ride system, the experience and the press it will generate. I think you're underestimating the wow factor and how popular the film was.

I will say I'd rather have that Mysterious Island/Beastly Kingdom hybrid that was planned at one time, with a clone of Mystic Manor (my Pipedream, not what was planned), but I'm not sure they would be as big of draws as I think Avatar will be.

If anything, I think this could encourage more growth at AK.

The wow factor was derived entirely from the realistic 3-D, so the success of the film was more predicated on a gimmick than any lasting value found in the story and characters. If the exact same movie had come out now instead of 2009, there's a good chance it wouldn't have done anywhere near as well in the face of so many other 3-D spectacles. I think the park may see a big initial boost in attendance, but then the long-term effect may be negligible. I would wager that the new night show and other nighttime offerings will probably have a better effect on long-term attendance gains than Avatar does.

 

[UNIrd]

You felt the impact Everest had on this park almost immediately. I would frequent it before Everest and once they opened that, it was like... they want me to park WHERE? It was night and day. This will do the same if not more for DAK. Remember: every pass holder and everyone with park-hopping privileges can go to DAK. They just haven't had a new reason to in 10 years.

 

[UNIrd]

The wow factor was derived entirely from the realistic 3-D, so the success of the film was more predicated on a gimmick than any lasting value found in the story and characters. If the exact same movie had come out now instead of 2009, there's a good chance it wouldn't have done anywhere near as well in the face of so many other 3-D spectacles. I think the park may see a big initial boost in attendance, but then the long-term effect may be negligible. I would wager that the new night show and other nighttime offerings will probably have a better effect on long-term attendance gains than Avatar does.

I tried to do some research in defense of Avatar but turns out you're right. Apparently 80% of it's domestic gross at least came from higher-priced 3D showings.

 

[*Q*]

I tried to do some research in defense of Avatar but turns out you're right. Apparently 80% of it's domestic gross at least came from higher-priced 3D showings.

What would really interest me to see is how the Blu-ray/DVD sales were for Avatar in comparison to some of the other mega-blockbusters from within the past ten years or so. That could be a much better gauge of how popular the film really is.