Iger: We're going to put an Avatar land in Disneyland

I guess they threw so much money at this IP they gotta use it - although the ride at animal kingdom is awesome the land isn’t, I don’t think a big draw to do copy 2 ?

I wonder if the land is set to be a straight up clone of the AK version much in the same way that the 2 Galaxy’s Edge lands are dupes of each other or if the area surrounding the attractions will have its own unique look.

I’ve said it here before and I’ll say it again now:
Avatar is a far more popular IP than people on this site seem to realize. It has 2 of the top 3 highest-grossing films in its bag already (and there’s only been 2 released thus far), Part 3 is in the can and Jim Cameron is steadfast working on Parts 4 and 5. He recently even hinted that there could more sequels after that. Don’t underestimate its global popularity either. Disney is playing the long game with this franchise and I never expected them to just build the land in AK and then hide under a pile of blankets and hope the money starts flowing. Love Avatar or hate it people, it matters not in terms of its future park presence. If the films keep raking it in then Disney will keep investing in the IP.

While I don't think that the land in AK ever lived up to the general public's expectations, I think Flight of Passage and the food offerings (that blueberry cheesecake dome!) are absolute homeruns! Hopefully, they make some tweaks and updates (perhaps some Way of Water-related scenes on FoP).

One disappointing trend in stateside parks seems to be a decline in live performers. Look at the success of lands like Zootopia or Arendelle. Imagine Galaxy's Edge or Pandora having that level of kinetic energy and immersion. That's what the new iteration of Pandora needs.

@jeffrey:
I couldn’t agree more about the live performers. I visited the pandora land only once before Covid and it was at night but there was a band playing tribal sounding dance music that really created a nice atmosphere. They were all in costume of course and brought a lot of energy. I don’t know if they still perform or not. I’ve never seen anything like this in Galaxy’s edge though. I think about the street performers in the Harambe village in Africa at AK and how they always draw a nice crowd.

NGL i've pretty much completely lost interest in Disney Parks now that every single thing they do in perpetuity is existing branded IP. Such an odd business decision to try and only appeal to their fans, when for many decades before that they allowed their design people to be creative and make things more appealing to a mass audience that didn't need to be in the Disney fandom to appreciate the parks. Really does any sane person want to take a week long trip to Disney World and have every single thing they see and do, for an entire week, be IP?

Think about it, if Disney was like this in the 90s, at DAK Harambe would have been Lion King land, and instead of Amandapur that land would be Mulan land. Does anyone on earth think that would be better than what they built?

I think PtWoA is a fine land possessing some of the most awe-inspiring scenery in any theme park in the country, which is even more mesmerizing at night. However, WDI really dropped the ball in the way they oversold the interactivity of the land (and did it again with Galaxy's Edge), and the whole conceit of having guests as "visitors" to Pandora AFTER the Na'Vi have left is flat out lazy to avoid having to inhabit the world with complex costumed characters and large animatronic figures. I also feel that 7 years after its debut, guests are deserving of the promised expansion of the DAK land BEFORE creating another Avatar land.

However, even if Disney chooses to expand the Avatar IP into California before expanding PtWoA in Florida, I certainly hope (and expect) that the new land would be completely unique. I give Disney a pass for cloning Galaxy's Edge because the two lands were built at the same time, and the expectation was the cloned lands would ultimately result in cost savings that would be passed onto the guest experience (even if guests never noticed it). PtWoA is a mature land, and WDI should have learned enough from the years of operation to modify designs for a new Avatar-themed land that would see enough changes to create an entirely new experience. As far as attractions, I would hope that WDI could come up with something better than Na'Vi River Journey, either by using the new PotC Shanghi technology or utilizing an all new ride system for the C/D-ticket attraction in the new land. As far as FoP, I don't have an issue with Disney cloning the popular attraction in California as it's one of the best WDI has developed over the past 2 decades. However, I would agree that Disney could utilize new sequences and/or a slightly modified storyline to reflect The Way of Water or the upcoming sequels in the franchise. Also, if WDI does choose to utilize FoP in California, it would mean that they should not utilize the same ride system for the rumored Quinnjet/Wakanda attraction for Avengers CAMPUS.

I am with Jeffrey H in that Avatar is a bit of a sleeping giant in the world of IP. Disney has really played the long game thus far since acquiring the IP, and I think showing restraint has allowed them to take better advantage of the IP without oversaturating it.

Agree with you on this Russell a new Avatar land should not be a clone since the land at DAK has been opened for a while and it would be far more interesting if the changed it up a bit.

I was fairly disappointed when Universal Beijing opened and the Harry Potter land was exactly the same. I mean cloning Flight of the Hippogriff which wasn't even a Harry Potter built ride was just lame. The Hollywood and Japan versions were built fairly close to each other so I gave them a pass but still would have been better for each new land to have something different. The Beijing land though was built so long after the original that it should have been updated with something new.

Can't have everything I guess since both Disney and Universal are planning to do it again with future expansion. I guess its just too convenient to copy and paste and I assume they probably think that most people don't bother visiting multiple resorts around the world so there's no real need to be different.

I agree with the overall sentiment that the Disney parks should stop cloning rides/lands. By losing exclusivity, Disney is devaluing the need to travel to other locations for one-of-a-kind experiences.

I'm fine with using similar theming or ride ideas, such as Phantom Manor or Disneyland Paris's Big Thunder Mountain, which have unique enough elements that justify their existence. But Disney should really be enticing guests to travel to different parks with distinct experiences instead of having WDW be the "destination" park.

As crowded as these parks are, I have no problem with cloning the locations. I think the Avatar area is great, but I wonder how they would have the space. I will now state an unpopular opinion: Flight of Passage, while incredible, is slightly overrated. The river journey is extremely underrated but should be longer. I am a sucker for dark boat rides, however, and I even love the one in the Mexico pavilion.

What would make the whole land better is more live actors walking around, and also upgrade the gift shops. They are either crappy plastic toys or wildly expensive items few people would want. The food is also much better than it should be. I would hope they would keep the offerings.

Or…

Pandora is a big place. They could have the same attractions but a different location on the planet. Have a different movie for the flight and a different part of the river. But I really wonder about the space.

The space issue is going to be a factor as can't be as huge as in DAK but I like how they can put a spin on things rather than just carbon copy.

Realistically, I see three ways for this to work in Disneyland:

-A replacement of Autopia and Nemo in Tomorrowland (most likely option)
-A reskin of Grizzly Peak, reutilizing existing attractions with modifications (cheapest option)
-A portion of the Disneyland Forward expansion (preferred option)

While I find the Avatar franchise as a whole overhyped and Pandora was underwhelming to me, there's no denying that the IP is a cultural phenomenon. With a lengthy series of films now appearing likely, it's only natural for Disney to start building additional attractions based on the property. It's not something that would compel me to visit the parks any more than I currently do, but it undeniably will have an impact on the resort.

As for cloning, such has been standard Disney practice since the 1970s and should be expected with anything new announced these days. Sure, it's disappointing to those who actually make an effort to get out and visit multiple resorts, but I'd guesstimate 2/3 to 3/4 of those who visit the Disneyland Resort will never set foot in another Disney park, so duplication makes no difference to most. Given the development costs on unique ride systems often employed by Disney, it is also the only financially viable way to regularly add major new attractions across multiple destinations.

I love the land in AK and the Fight of Passage ride, obviously the boat ride is a stinker. That said, I think they'll put this in the Hollywood Backlot area of DCA which is in major need of reshaping and unless they plan to extend the Avenger's Outlet Mall, Pandora should go there.

But, if it's just a clone of the other land and not something entirely new, I could take it or leave it. Why not give us a brand new Pandora adventure on a different part of the planet? And give us a thrill ride, not another screen based ride. If they add FOP then they have that, Soarin, Midway Mania, Web Slingers- all screen based rides, plus whenever the great white buffalo Avengers ride actually opens if it's a Zootopia screened out trackless ride, that's ANOTHER screen based ride in the same park.

@FingerPoppinDaddy - I think your desire for fewer screens is unrealistic. The DisneylandForward proposal recommends the conversion of parking areas to park space, but would necessitate indoor attractions to limit noise pollution. Even if Disney were to replace Autopia/Nemo with a thrill ride, being along the eastern perimeter of the park, it would also be subject to noise restrictions.

I think pretty much any new attractions added at Disneyland would need to be indoor attractions that may have some practical effects and animatronics, but almost certainly will rely on screens.

@Russell - For sure, what I'm getting at are thrill rides, even at the GoTG level of thrill. It doesn't have to be a massive coaster, just something other than the same song and dance.

@FingerPoppinDaddy - You realize that GotG:CR is a "massive coaster", right? The show building (the newer structure housing the coaster, not including the queue, pre-show, and maintenance areas in the old Universe of Energy building) would take up the entire footprint of Autopia, and is nearly 50% bigger than any show building currently at DL/DCA.

There's only so much "thrill" you can pack into a small space. Motion simulators, be it like Star Tours, RotR, GotG:MB, Soarin', or FoP, allow designers to generate thrills from limited footprints, which is of high importance in a park with finite real estate like DL.

Now, I wouldn't be surprised to see Disney build an attraction in the next 10-15 years in California that uses a new/unique ride system that they've never used before, but it almost certainly will be framed as a dark ride with screens and practical effects helping to accentuate motions simulated by the ride vehicle.