Originally Posted By FerretAfros Wasn't the original version of Kilimanjaro Safari far more political than it is now? Didn't it include an AA dying elephant ('Red', who is still in the script but not seen) and live actor as a poacher at the end? I never saw it, but I heard it was quite heavy-handed. The current version still gets the point across oh-so-clearly, but manages to not be so preachy. And Kali is among the preachiest attractions ever. Not that there isn't a place for that in a zoo (yes, it's a zoo), but it doesn't have to be the focal point of every single experience there.
Originally Posted By CDF2 On the one hand, this seems like a complete copy of the Potterland scenario that successful at Universal being dropped into DAK - on the other hand, with past attractions such as Indy and Star Wars, why not partner up with a guy like Cameron who is known to be cutting edge and has very high standards? There are additional Avatar movies planned and one suspects there will be ample opportunities for synergy between those movies and theme park attractions. So it seems like a decent and actually somewhat "typical" scenario for Disney to do this.
Originally Posted By u k fan In regards of being a response to WWoHP I think a non-Disney property was the only way to go. I've seen coverage of this on lots of news sites yet I doubt Beastly Kingdom would have even got a mention from mainstream media. Only a POTC "land" would be as big a draw IMHO and it wouldn't fit in DAK and causes all kinds of complications unless it's added to MK where it's signature attraction already lives!!!
Originally Posted By Doobie I don't agree. There is tons of coverage now but does it matter? It's not opening for years. I think once it does open, Disney would get just as much or nearly as much coverage with or without Avatar (assuming its a high quality creation). I think Universal needed a licensee to pull in new people. I really don't think Disney does. If it's sub-par, having Avatar attached will help a lot. But if it's high quality, I don't think Avatar will make much difference. Doobie.
Originally Posted By Bob Paris 1 And besides, Doobie is very well known for not really liking POTC! ; )
Originally Posted By RickJM Long Time. First Time. "Its fluorescent forests and animals will look amazing at night, solving one of Animal Kingdom's biggest problems by giving people a reason to stay after the giraffes go to sleep" I wouldn't count on DAK staying open later than it already does. Well, maybe winter hours might increase a little. I live in one of the largest cities in the U.S. and in the middle of the summer, the zoo still closes at 5:00. The San Diego zoo, probably the most prestigous zoo in the U.S., closes at either 5:00 or 6:00. I think DAK's hours have more to do with the animials than anything else. Maybe there is some Zoological Society rule about operating hours. In the summer it doesn't get dark until 9:00. I'm curious to see how Disney handles this since the color palette is probably the best part of Avatar.
Originally Posted By sjhym333 Yes, during AK previews Kilimanjaro had a large Elephant figure laying down on it's side, Little Red in the back of the jeep and actors playing a warden and poacher. It didn't last long. I opened Kilimanjaro and within a day the number of guest complaints (and children screaming about a dead Big Red) were amazing and Big Red was removed from the attraction. Over the years so has the jeep chase which I thought was a cool effect when it worked. Michael Eisner was a big proponent of the whole message thing at AK. He loved the whole Big Red is dead thing as well as Kali River deforestation thing. It took a lot of convincing to have them remove Big Red but after standing at unload for a bit he was convinced that the message was wiping away everything else Kilimanjaro was offering. Kilimanjaro was further sanitized several years ago to tone down the message even further.
Originally Posted By HokieSkipper <<That story makes me miss Eisner. >> I miss Eisner every time Iger opens his mouth. Eisner sure screwed up royally in his final years with the company, but at least the man had passions and a love for the company, even if it became heavily tainted. Iger just seems myopic and bored with everything.
Originally Posted By Kennesaw Tom <<why not partner up with a guy like Cameron who is known to be cutting edge and has very high standards?>> Roman Polanski and Woody Allen are also known for being cutting edge and having high standards but I don't think they are a good match for Disney either.
Originally Posted By Bob Paris 1 I was there in October 2001 and the whole dead elephant thing and the poachers was still happening then.
Originally Posted By oc_dean Pardon my pessimistic reaction - I'll believe it, when I see it! And with their record - What are the chances Disney will cut corners .. and make it subpar? I'd say ... based on their recent history: Pretty good! If they are willing to change their ways - Then HALLELUYAH!
Originally Posted By oc_dean Also ... rather interesting ... the largest vote (so far) at 35% ... is "Not Excited at All". Not surprised. ;-) And I'm almost positive that reaction is based on Disney's history of making big announcements ... just to find out .. they aren't really all the exciting, once the bean counters have their say - and turn a wonderful project into a 'ho hum' project! Or worse .... It's "postponed" or canned! Too many examples to list, to prove the point!
Originally Posted By Bob Paris 1 Like I said elsewhere - it will consist of a giant shed with some blacklight effects. Since the attraction will be visited by litigious modern day Americans, you cannot have guests that are known for checking their brains at the main gate wandering over hills and through valleys of a made up environment with folliage and things that can ensnare their ankles, so what is the solution? Well, the military will have since visited Pandora and will have paved the planet with walkways, nice safe walkways with HIGH railings so nobody can jump into the undergrowth, hurt themselves and then sue Disney. What does THAT mean? It means the environment is no longer like the one in the movie - instantly it is compromised. Anyway, just another example of how this cannot be done in the way people may envision it. And then, what, floating mountains at the back of the eighty story show building? Of course not. So it's going to be digital projections on the back of the shed wall. I can go to the movies to see film. So there's going to be a simulator ride akin to Body Wars, or even worse, Mission Space, where "something goes wrong...." (c) (tm), along with a stupid dragon thing spinner. There will be bored Orlando teens dressed as giant blue cat smurfs wearing those leg spring things and then there will be a cheesy restaurant like that Rainforest Cafe place and some shops selling neon blue cat smurf tails. NEXT!!!
Originally Posted By Bob Paris 1 "And I'm almost positive that reaction is based on Disney's history of making big announcements ... just to find out .. they aren't really all the exciting, once the bean counters have their say - and turn a wonderful project into a 'ho hum' project! Or worse .... It's "postponed" or canned! Too many examples to list, to prove the point!" Or, in the case of Chester and Hesters, it got built!
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "And with their record - What are the chances Disney will cut corners .. and make it subpar?" I hear you Dean, but surely you've been following the developments of Cars Land and Buena Vista Street, both of which are hardly sub par in terms of execution.
Originally Posted By leobloom >> Roman Polanski and Woody Allen are also known for being cutting edge and having high standards but I don't think they are a good match for Disney either. << It'd be an okay match if we could get a "Chinatown" ride or an "Annie Hall" show.
Originally Posted By leobloom >> So there's going to be a simulator ride akin to Body Wars, or even worse, Mission Space, where "something goes wrong...." (c) (tm), along with a stupid dragon thing spinner. There will be bored Orlando teens dressed as giant blue cat smurfs wearing those leg spring things and then there will be a cheesy restaurant like that Rainforest Cafe place and some shops selling neon blue cat smurf tails. << You make it sound so appealing, Bob! And I wouldn't be surprised if you just described exactly what this place will be like.
