Originally Posted By mrkthompsn Future article: "James Cameron, new partner of WDI, takes over design and theming of The Living Seas". Good thing or bad thing?
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA ^^^Would it have to be themed to 'The Abyss' in order to be approved? (For the record, I'm very tired of movie tie-ins with theme park attractions -- boring!)
Originally Posted By EPCOT Explorer >>Future article: "James Cameron, new partner of WDI, takes over design and theming of The Living Seas". Good thing or bad thing?<< If he keeps it original, I'm his biggest fan.
Originally Posted By ExpDave ^^(For the record, I'm very tired of movie tie-ins with theme park attractions -- boring!) I agree, I really like Avatar but I wonder if Disney parks can do anything completely original anymore that is not based on a movie,tv show, or character. I wonder if they are even trying or if the top brass will even allow them to try.
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA Universal Studios used to be 'Ride the Movies! -- now it's at all theme parks. zzzzzzzzzz.....
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo Come to Efteling, or Europa Park or Phantasialand Jim, no movie licences there (except a great movie ride rip off in Phantasialand). But agreed, originality is far more intriguing. Sadly, just as Hollywood roles out sequels, prequals and redos galore, that seems to be all the parks have in store. Thank goodness the theatre is still alive.
Originally Posted By EPCOT Explorer ^^^ I'm just getting sick of theme parks in general. Other destinations are much more rewarding. >> I agree, I really like Avatar but I wonder if Disney parks can do anything completely original anymore that is not based on a movie,tv show, or character. I wonder if they are even trying or if the top brass will even allow them to try.<< I honestly doubt that they can.
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo That is probably where you are in your life EE. Me too, though I love travel that combines real sites and theme parks. That is perfect.
Originally Posted By mrkthompsn For my statement above, Cameron would not attach his works to movies. Just apply his insight and visions.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "I wonder if they are even trying or if the top brass will even allow them to try." It's the nature of the theme park industry these days, and all the major players in the business are doing it. Disney's biggest advantage over its competitors, including Universal, is the strong emotional connection that its brand has with consumers.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "Come to Efteling, or Europa Park or Phantasialand Jim, no movie licences there (except a great movie ride rip off in Phantasialand)." I really wouldn't be surprised if it happens eventually. I don't know much about those parks and who they are marketed to, but it could happen.
Originally Posted By CoolDisneyFan I am really late to this conversation - that has now been hijacked about ET ... start a new thread! But my comments are similar to a couple I have seen mentioned by 2 others: "Why this?" and "Eh". Harry Potter is not about whether you like the movies or not. I don't know about you all, but I am a 39 year old male. I didn't care for the Harry Potter movies. I could tolerate them. But my girls LOVE THEM, they LOVE the books, their friends love the books and movies. THEIR GENERATION is the target market for the next 30 years of Orlando vacationers. They used to love Disney but now mention nothing about it, they want to go to see Harry Potter. Avatar - I thought the movie was a big disappointment, my wife kind of liked it. My guess is the movie really was popular with women aged upper 20s to 40s. Not sure that translates into lots of Disney guests. I am hoping they turn this dull movie into a great land with wonderful attractions, I'm just not sure that it will be worth it.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "My guess is the movie really was popular with women aged upper 20s to 40s. Not sure that translates into lots of Disney guests. " LOL. Are you kidding?
Originally Posted By CoolDisneyFan No, women aged 20-50 (OK women ANY age) may decide what movie to go see, and they may decide a vacation. But I seriously doubt they would decide to vacation to WDW because of an Avatar themed land. I don't claim to know the female mind, but this would surprise me greatly to see lots of new visitors because of this park.
Originally Posted By CoolDisneyFan I should add, in my family, the kids have a lot of influence on what theme park vacation we will do. If vacation is up to the parents, we would avoid Orlando, Anaheim, etc. Sorry its just our preference. I love the parks but it is not a vacation, its work with kids.
Originally Posted By HokieSkipper I'm 95% sure we're getting Soarin':Avatar Edition for the main ride. In every interview Cameron has done on the theme park announcement, all he's talked about was Soarin'. Blerg
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt Well my point is really that so much of what is at Disney parks these days appeals directly to the women in the audience, particularly in the Magic Kingdom parks. I think I read somewhere that TDL's single biggest demographic is women in the 20-40 year old age bracket. Women that age may not list WDW as the first place they want to go for vacation, however they may be more inclined to consider it if there's a major attraction that appeals to them. "I should add, in my family, the kids have a lot of influence on what theme park vacation we will do." And I would imagine that's typical of most families, however there are plenty of things to do at WDW that aren't necessarily marketed to kids specifically. If Avatar helps broaden the appeal of the place beyond families with kids in tow then I think that's great.
Originally Posted By plpeters70 <<It's the nature of the theme park industry these days, and all the major players in the business are doing it.>> You say that like it somehow excuses Disney's lack of creativity. Just because other theme parks in the industry are doing nothing but movie tie-ins doesn't mean that Disney has to automatically follow suit. Disney was amazingly successful for many years with only limited theme park tie-ins to movie or TV properties - they were almost ALL about original adventures in their parks. They could still be so now - if only they had the right leadership at the top to see beyond the easy path of tying everything into an already existing property.
