Vote of the week: Avatar vs. Iron Man?
Do new attractions motivate you to book a theme park vacation? Yes, no, maybe? Let's talk about a couple of specific new attractions, then. How about the new Avatar show/ride coming to Disney's Animal Kingdom? Or the rumored new Iron Man ride at Disneyland? Would either of them entice you into taking a trip you might not have made without them? If so, which one would you most want to book an extra trip to experience?
The future home of Stark Expo?
Let's make this our Vote of the Week. We know a little bit about Avatar - that it will be built on what's now the Camp Minnie-Mickey section of Animal Kingdom, and that it's centerpiece attraction will be something like a next-generation Soarin' - in 3D. A second, smaller ride might also be included in the Avatar complex.
Plans for Iron Man are less clear at this point, but seem to be focused on the Innoventions building in Disneyland's Tomorrowland (that used to be America Sings, and before that, Carousel of Progress). Remember that Disney owns the theme park rights to its Marvel characters everywhere outside Orlando, so Disney doesn't need to cut a deal with Universal (which owns the Orlando-area theme park rights to Marvel), to build an Iron Man-themed attraction in Anaheim.
So, given what we know about the scope of these potential attractions, which one gets you more excited for a future theme park trip? And let's not forget the Disney World vs. Disneyland factor, too. I'm looking to see which of these rides is more likely to drive additional visits to its resort. The rest of the resort, of course, factors into that. Or do neither of these rides inspire you to book a visit?
Please tell us in the comments how you'd compare these attraction ideas. And thank you, as always, for reading and for spreading the word about Theme Park Insider.
Avatar is part of a whole new Pandora-based land... Iron Man is rumored to be a smaller version of one attraction in Pandora. Gotta go with the whole new land. Avatar, baby!
Since I'm a Florida local, I'm going with Iron Man. However, let's not forget California still has some Marvel limits (the others are fine).
Iron Man FTW!
I'm with James on this one. As much as I enjoy Marvel over Avatar, Avatar's going to be a whole immersive land (Disney's strong suit) while Iron Man would just be an immersive attraction (Universal's strong suit).
To be honest, neither strike me as must see attractions. Neither inspire me to book a visit at this moment. Really, I'd rather save my vacation money for when the new Wizarding World of HP opens at Universal.
After experiencing Carsland, I realize that you can really not like a film (I think the Cars films are PIXAR's laziest, most pointless productions) and still dig on its theme park counterpart (I love Carsland).
I loved both movies, but only once. I really don't think they can hold up in longetivity, but this is irrelevant for a theme park attraction. Both will find success as theme park rides. I just don't think most people will care. It doesn't warrant a special trip to the park. I will certainly visit as part of my regular vacation. I do love Animal Kingdom. I will visit the park anyways. Avatar will be a bonus. I just hope it opens when I arrive in 2016. It doesn't matter for Iron Man. I live 15 minutes away from Disneyland.
Disneyland is our home park and we will continue to go semi-regularly regardless of what they put in (although I'd looking forward to the Iron Man ride). Avatar-land was announced shortly after we returned from our first family Disney World trip last fall. While I would go back right away, I can entice DH much more easily when Avatar-land opens in a few years.
Everyone bash on Avatar being a bad movie, so the new Avatar land will be, in their mind, as bad. I'm sorry, but did any Harry Potter was a good movie. I know the books are great, but the movies were just OK, still, the Wizarding world is amazing.
And that's why I voted for Iron Man. I live quite a bit farther than 15 minutes, but I do have an AP. I would probably book a trip, even if it's a daytrip. WDW, on the other hand, is out of reach (yuk! no pun intended) for the forseeable future. And yes, I did read your tips, Robert.
A Stark Expo could be really cool if it was done right. Not sure about Avatar yet, even the Disneyphiles are labeling it Soarin' 2.0 (if the leaked plans are authentic).
I guess I'm just all for any new attractions.
The reality is that no matter what a park adds, any new attraction is not enough to make me travel to the park if it is not a local park. All it will do is change its position on my park trip priority list. I voted Iron Man because that would potentially be enough to convince me to buy an annual pass to Disneyland versus once a year visits (which I currently do as I live 30 minutes away). Avatarland honestly holds no interest for me, as I found the movie seriously overrated. If the land ends up being excellent and I don't visit WDW before it opens, it could move a Florida trip higher on my priority list, but I wouldn't make a special trip there just because of Avatarland (especially if I end up visiting before it opens). What a new attraction might do in some cases, however, is delay a trip (for example, I will definitely not visit Florida until after the Harry Potter expansion is complete since I'm interested in that, but just because it is complete doesn't mean I'm automatically going to book a trip).
Well I voted Avatar, just like I'd said "6-TIMES" with the Star Tours, Harry Potter comparison. Avatar full land, vs a ride. Full land will "almost" always win for me.
Stark expo sounds strangely similar to the T2 experience at universal doesn't it? Don't forget that dated (but still good) attraction was a Cyberdine expo of sorts. Something tells me that iron man will be similar to that, not necessarily a ride.
The Avatar ride/movie system seems pretty innovative and conducive to some big thrills. With the success of the first Avatar film and the projected release of at least two sequels, I think this is a franchise that would do very well in the Animal Kingdom park, and would bring in some big crowds to a park that is rather short on big thrills. I could definitely see this same system being used for Iron Man, but I know the size of the space at Disneyland, and it just isn't big enough to do Iron Man properly. Now, if we were to take the space currently devoted to the Autopia and use it for Iron Man, I would easily give it the win. I think that the Innoventions building could be turned into a mega-Marvel meet-and-greet spot with any number of heroes (and villains) appearing throughout the day for photo ops. I think that if there were room, a Marvel stunt show would do very well, too.
I voted for neither. Coming from outside the US, neither of these projects are exciting enough to make me book a trip. Honestly, I'm sick of Disney and Universal basing rides and lands off movies. The last thing that REALLY excited me from the planning stage was Expedition Everest. It had me hooked from the concept phase because I didn't know anything about it - there was no "movie" plot. Thus, when it became "live", I booked a trip from Australia to Florida to experience it! I say, more original story lines and concepts. Less movies. Pirates and Mansion are still some of my favourite memories. I think it's time to do some REAL imagineering again and base rides and lands on "themes" rather than "movies" ;) Now, THAT would excite me and bring my $$$$ into the US.
Well Daniel, just about everyone here agrees with you. Were happy to get franchises over nothing at all, but ya I bet 90% of people here would trade iron man, avatar, cars for another haunted mansion or pirates of the Caribbean attraction, totally immersive and totally original!
Fantasy land, in all parks, is uninspiring and nonsensical. In Disney land it's a mini movie park and in Disney World it's half kiddy monster movie stuff and non fun stuff. Putting Iron man in there makes this horrible in cohesive mess even worse. Please Disney stop the movie tie in stuff (except for your move park). We know you look with wide eyes to Universal but you need to offer something else.
I used to read the Iron Man comics ( I was there at the beginning so tp speak ) when I was a kid in the 60's so the theme has a nostalgic draw for me and the recent movies have been pretty entertaining too.
I also think Disney should leave the movie tie in for DHS and keep it out of the rest of the parks.
Avatar? Meh. Nothing to see here.
I guess I'm wishing for the impossible. I want theme parks to introduce attractions that are unique and NOT tied to some existing franchise. Show me something I've never seen before. I have no use whatsoever for Avatar. Beyond the predictable plot and politically correct content, the movie itself looked like a freaking cartoon. It was embarrassingly bad. I actually like the Iron Man movies. I just don't want to see an attraction based on them.
Can't understand, or agree with, some of the negativity here. These things are supposedly designed to be entertaining , fun and joyous . Seems to me that people are getting harder to please. Either of these proposed ventures will create something worth experiencing. We're just discussing which one might prove better than the other. You're 8 weeks too early for all this "Bah Humbug".
Yea, I personally agree with some other that Iron Man will only be one ride, while Avatar is going to be a whole land, so I had to go with Avatar.
I agree with previous comments that Animal Kingdom needs a few more additions. It still offers a very unique and amazingly detailed themed expereince. We have just returned from Orlando and in the october quieter month we managed to finish the park by 3.30pm Avatar is a welcomed addition although I think it isnt the best fit for the park. I would have prefered to see existing parts of the park expended, a
Obviously, Disney is on to something here: 75% of those polled would plan a special trip to see these new attractions. That's a pretty stellar number. I guess WDI is not as "out of touch" as some folks would like us theme park fans to believe!
This article has been archived and is no longer accepting comments.