Avatar experience announced for Disneyland in California

Consumer33 minutes ago

I grew up and lived in California for 20 years. I still visit regularly. I've been from San Diego to San Francisco, from the Sierras to the coast. I love California. I love her fertile valleys and her dear mountains I adore. Her grandeur is not lost on me, and neither are her flaws, which I have seen and experienced first hand. I'm not saying Grizzly Peak will ever be as jaw dropping as Yosemite, but it can give the same pleasantness to those who can't afford the high cost of gas to drive up the 5. Hollywood Land is probably the best example of the potential of a California theme park. The real Hollywood sucks. It's a filthy, stinky, crowded, disgusting mess full of drugs and homeless encampments. Despite that, the idea of a Hollywood full of glitz and glamor lingers on in the minds of Americans. It is that fictional, exaggerated, romanticized idea of Hollywood that DCA should be creating. One of limousines, movie stars, and high society. That Hollywood does not exist, nor will it ever exist, but it could exist in a Disney park. That's what Disney parks excel at. New Orleans is nice, but it's no New Orleans Square. Marceline has its charm, but it's not Main Street USA. I'm sure India, Africa, and the Near East are thrilling, but I'd rather visit Adventureland. California Adventure should have been what Disneyland is to these places.

mickEblu1 hour ago

Decimating Grizzly Peak and having to retheme the Grand in the name of IP consistency is crazy talk. DCA (as most theme parks) is a hodge podge of lands/attractions / themes. Some with ties to California, some with paper thin connections and some with no connection at all. It will still be a hodge podge of lands if Grizzly Peak was rethemed to Avatar. Except instead you now spent billions of dollars for very little gain in capacity and instead of just losing Monsters Inc you lost all of that beautiful atmosphere and two popular rides. For what, so 13 hardcore Super fans can sleep better at night knowing that 8/8 of lands are themed to IP at DCA instead of 7/8? With all due respect, please don’t quit your day jobs. Lol. There’s a Big Al statue next to GRR and Redwood Creek is themed to Brother Bear if that makes y’all feel better. Haha Unless maybe does Avatar 5 take place in a forest that resembles that Pacific Northwest?

MistaDee1 hour ago

Totally agree that it's an imperfect metric, just wanted to offer an alternative to nominal box office. I'm curious to see which brands will be driving growth for Disney over the next 15 years and how that IP is then utilized for theme park uses. Not saying Marvel is terrible or irrelevant, just that there are some other ways to look at these IP - particularly in terms of theme park uses. Avatar for instance, very high box office numbers, inflated partly from 3D glasses - but very little else on Walt's "flywheel" not a ton of merchandise, books, video games, etc. I'd also say characters aren't a super strong element from the IP but all of those downsides fail to matter because the world of Pandora itself translates to a theme park in a really compelling way. I'm actually a big fan of Marvel comics going back well before the Disney acquisition, but have really lost interest in the MCU post Endgame. I don't think I'm alone in that, and suspect that much of the delay we've seen with this Avenger's Campus E-ticket is due to Disney's own questions about the relative viability of the IP. Just in terms of content, they've really slowed down production: And accordingly, box office numbers and review scores are also down quite a bit: The MCU is undeniably a major franchise pillar in Disney's IP empire, but it does seem as though those consumers are starting to vote in a different direction more recently. Do you buy into this ****hole reputation that many on Fox News would have you believe? The idea that you can experience some sanitized version of "the greatness that is CA" by visiting DCA is frankly quite laughable.... Fair enough, I can see where you're coming from. In that case are you rejoicing now that it seems we're moving towards the more abstract "Disney Adventure Park (in California)" concept? As others have pointed out, both the proximity and the theme of the flagship hotel for the entire Disneyland Resort's are predicated on Grizzly Peak remaining largely as it is. The negative impacts that major construction would have on multiple years of 5 star hotel stays would far outweigh any potential benefit. I think it's fair to surmise that Avatar is headed for either the Hollywood Backlot (most likely) or into the new Simba plot (possible)

Mr. Sullivan18 hours ago

I really hope this is eventually what happens. I can appreciate the charm of what is left of the California theme, but it's just not going to work the more this park continues to grow. I think it would genuinely help the park overall to not have to be caught between two different identities like it currently is.

Disney Irish19 hours ago

Don't kid yourself, the conversation will keep coming up no matter what happens with Grizzly Peak or what Disney does with the rest of the Park.

coffeefan19 hours ago

Well, the conversation will keep coming around because of the Grizzly area, and the park will remain a disjointed piecemeal park until Disney goes all-in on a Movie/IP park experience. That is why many of us would prefer a reimagined Avatar land for Grizzly. And if the layout is improved the space may even be big enough for an Endor land there too.

Disney Irish19 hours ago

No one here called it stupid if you like the "California" theming, so not sure why you have to call other's opinions stupid just because they don't like it and provided reasons why. Just because someone has a different opinion than you doesn't mean you have to disrespect them. I've traveled and lived in different locations within the state as well as outside the state for more years than you've been alive, all places are flawed. But that doesn't mean I want a fantasized version of them just because they are flawed. The concept has its merits but its also still very limiting in my opinion. And if I'm going to spend my money on a theme park vacation I rather spend it on a place that isn't themed to a specific locale but is themed to a broad theme.

Disney Irish20 hours ago

I appreciate your opinion, as I do the Professor there, and I agree that DCA 1.0 was just a pathetic attempt at a Park due to many factors but specifically execution. However with that said while its possible I would have enjoyed a TDS level of theming execution for DCA had it been done, we're back to the "What if"/"What could've been" discussion. Its a futile exercise that ends up just upsetting people. In the end I still stand by my opinion that no matter the level of execution "California" is just a limiting theme for a Park, ie I don't need to be sold on the idea which it appears many tries to do when this topic comes up. I appreciate broad themes not locale themes. As there is so much more that you be done with a broadly themed Park then one themed to a specific locale, again just my opinion. That doesn't mean anyone that likes the "California" theme is wrong, its just what I like vs dislike.

waltography21 hours ago

What do you mean, don't you experience momentary lapses in consciousness when you hang glide around California listening to movie music on your AirPods? 😛

Consumer22 hours ago

Bingo. The "I can just travel California" argument is stupid. I love seeing the places that have inspired Disneyland, but ultimately Disneyland is still Disneyland and that carries a certain air that distinguishes it from its influences. Same goes for DCA. I can go to Los Angeles, Hollywood, and Santa Cruz, but I can't go to Carthay Circle, Hollywood Tower Hotel, and Paradise Pier. California's great, and I heavily encourage people to travel and see it, but it's still flawed with high costs, homelessness, drug use, high crime, and a plethora of other issues that have the state its reputation as a by the rest of the country. DCA is a way to enjoy the greatness that is California without all of the filth associated with it.

AZDLR23 hours ago

Funny how you mention books and other media but on that list it only counts the MCU, forgetting about 80 years of comic books video games etc. Also you notltice how spider man is right below the MCU? Kinda part of marvel too you know. Also this graph shows no video games or other revenue for the MCU. So it is that high on the list based only on box office and movie merchandise. This list is also 5 years old so Marvel has continued to be huge when star wars, Harry potter etc have been relatively quiet. Also pokemon, hello kitty etc are far bigger outside the US. So no biggie if you don't like Marvel, but US consumers who vote with their wallets disagree with you and this makes it worthy of a large space in a disney theme park. Fans get excited for these attractions. Cosmic rewind is my current favorite ride in the US. I can't wait for the 2 new avengers campus rides because overall the rides for AC have been disappointing. Especially since I hate elevator drops lol.

MistaDee23 hours ago

For the sake of argument, I agree that "the high seas" is the far more expansive theme that can really traverse across the whole coastal-ish globe, time period and fantasy/reality. I also agree with you that "California" is an imperfect, limiting choice for a theme park. From a design perspective, it closes far more doors than it opens. That said, I do think the DisneySea comparison is relevant because it demonstrates the level of execution that Imagineering was capable of for two parks that opened the same year. For me, DCA 1.0's irredeemable failure was not its choice of theme. I think that had Paul Pressler and Eisner been willing to make the investment in DCA that Oriental Land Co were able to for DisneySea we would have a beautiful park that most of us on the forum would be happy with. Others have offered some ideas for what sort of lands/themes they could go for, but I'm curious: I understand your stance that the choice of "California" was wrong. If we'd gotten a DCA concept executed to the level of DisneySea, do you think you'd enjoy that? I know I would!

MistaDee23 hours ago

This is only true if you're comparing nominal box office numbers, which given inflation, you really shouldn't be doing. It also doesn't capture interest expressed through merchandise, books, comics, video games etc. The MCU is actually smaller than both Star Wars and Harry Potter when accounting for all that over the lifetime of the property. This method is also imperfect though as you're comparing franchises that haven't been around the same length of time, but very interesting! Crazy how well Pokemon and Winnie the Pooh seem to do.

Disney Irish1 day ago

Disney Seas is not themed to one location, ie its not themed to Tokyo or Japan. It has a broad theme around the seas, the location of which doesn't matter. So its not limiting in what they can do with it, ie they don't have to make sure that everything they do is themed to anything other than something to so with the seas. With DCA themed to California, you think that is a broad theme or at least broad enough so its not limiting in your mind. I don't feel that way. I don't need everything in that Park themed around a location. I find that very limiting as you can't do a lot of things because if its not tied to "California" it wouldn't make sense, example the topic of this thread Avatar. We've been debating over and over how they can get Avatar into DCA if it doesn't fit "California", that is what I consider limiting. I rather have the Park be broadly themed, like the seas or some other similar concept that doesn't limit it to asking "how does this happen in California". For example if DCA was themed to the seas like TDS you can easily say "Hey Avatar fits because Way with Water deals with the seas in Pandora". That is my point, that is my opinion, that will not change.