danlb_2000
Premium Member
We are all aware of that, it was just brought up to make a point in this debate.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
2015: The year of the EPCOT makeover?
- Thread starter PeterAlt
- Start date
We are all aware of that, it was just brought up to make a point in this debate.
MagicHappens1971
Well-Known Member
omurice
Well-Known Member
Blasphemy!
Haymarket2008
Well-Known Member
I actually have to agree. I am a total 100% Maelstrom fan and the ride was a major highlight for me when I was a kid and continued to be up until a few weeks ago. I am devastated by its' closure. Even though I am against the inclusion of Frozen into Epcot/World Showcase, I can see how this actually could be a really good change for the better. This is only a theory that will be proven right or wrong to me when I experience the upcoming attraction. But there is a part of me that hopes the Disney pulls through with this one. The arguments about "Captain America in American Adventure" are a bit extreme and are not equal comparisons to Frozen in Norway, in my opinion. Yes, Frozen ABSOLUTELY doesn't belong anywhere else except for Magic Kingdom, but if they go the Norwegian showcase route, it is okay in my book. Far from ideal, but could potentially be an informative experience. Again, this is just my opinion, but I have hope that the Frozen attraction could be a really classy homage to Norwegian culture. There is major room to fail, but this could be something good. Letting the whole fiasco settle in, it makes me a little less filled with despair and makes me hope for a silver lining in all of it.
Do you seriously go to World Showcase for an education? What do you expect to retain about Norway in less than five minutes? What did Maelstrom teach you about Norway? I don't think it was ever intended to be Schoolhouse Rock.
Remember, Walt's philosophy was too *entertain*, with the hopes of educating, instead of educate with the hopes of entertaining.
The Norway pavilion and really, all of World Showcase stand to benefit from the massive crowds that Frozen will bring in.
People will learn about Norway simply from exposure and word of of mouth, which in turn will be a catalyst for sparking curiosity and interest about the culture of Norway.
I totally acknowledge and respect your *opinion*.
This is apples and oranges. Maelstrom is not a historical account of Norway. Trolls are *not* real, they derive from myths and myths are stories. So, it is essentially one story replacing another story -- one and the same.
MerlinTheGoat
Well-Known Member
If Frozen was going to inspire any curiosity from people to explore and learn about the culture of Norway, the movie would already have done so. It has not. Nor is there any reason to suspect a low budget ride will either. No one cares about researching Norway or any other Scandinavin culture after watching a movie (or riding a ride) about a princess/queen with ice magic and her enchanted talking snowman who dreams of summer.
Riding Maelstrom as a child sparked in me an interest and fascination about Norwegian culture and history, both real and the mythological. Frozen was a good Disney princess movie (overrated but good), but it did not inspire any thoughts about Norwegian culture or history at all. It barely even kept the reminder that you were in a vague Scandinavian setting, this was almost entirely subdued and quickly brushed over.
Trolls are myths and stories derived from Norwegian culture. Just like dragons are a part of Chinese culture and mythology, or the Greek and Roman gods being a part of Italian culture and mythology. The concept of the Christian "God" is also used in the Declaration of Independence, the excerpt about men being granted certain rights by their God is read aloud American Adventure. Trolls are also not the only part of the ride either, the ride also features real viking characters and sets from factual Norse history. It mixes history with mythology, and for celebrating a culture it can be a good thing if done tastefully.
It does not mean Disney should run amok and toons-ify everything with overwhelming Disney IP presence, turning it into the spillover for what they refuse to build properly at Fantasyland. But historical takes on mythology have a place in a country's culture, many (actually most if not all) civilizations were founded on the principles of their religious beliefs and superstitions.
Last edited:
MerlinTheGoat
Well-Known Member
I think you're giving Disney WAY too much credit. It's pretty much unanimously agreed by insiders that this will be a low budget shoehorned in ride to cash in on the movie's success. Even the PR response that Tom Staggs put out stated that the ride was going to be about the characters and music, he brushed aside anything regarding Norway. And that to me is an excellent indication that they've no intention of celebrating Norway or its culture.
This whole affair stinks of cheap and lazy, a spit in the eye of both EPCOT and Frozen fans alike all at once.
Matt_Black
Well-Known Member
Can we still talk about Little Richard?
jakeman
Well-Known Member
I'll just leave all these here:
http://www.cnbc.com/id/101776203
http://www.theguardian.com/film/2014/jun/06/disney-frozen-boost-norwegian-tourism
http://time.com/2827339/frozen-tourism-norway/
http://www.travelweekly.com/Travel-...rozen-is-sending-tourists-packing-for-Norway/
http://www.travelweekly.com/Travel-...rozen-is-sending-tourists-packing-for-Norway/
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-e...-a-bonanza-for-norwegian-tourism-9497045.html
Is five enough? Because that's only part of the first page of a Google search.
Okkaayyyyyyyy.....
Haymarket2008
Well-Known Member
Yeah... I was just going to say... I believe that they announced the Disney Norwegian Cruise is seeing massive attendance and Norway is pleased about the tourism pull Frozen is bringing into their country.
Matt_Black
Well-Known Member
I reminded of the Phineas & Ferb where Doof gets a castle. "They just shipped it over here and- look, a moat! How do you ship a moat?"
MerlinTheGoat
Well-Known Member
Had you read your own links, you'd have noticed that they mention the increase in Norwegian tourism was not related to the viewing of the movie alone. It is mentioned in those articles that the tourism increase is due to Disney partnering with travel companies to promote Norwegian tourism using Frozen in their advertisements.
I'm quite sure Norway is satisfied to be able to get whatever tourism they can, even if they didn't care for the movie they're hardly going to complain when it helps boost the economy. But as I stated above, this was not an increase that I feel would have been achieved to anywhere close to the same degree had these advertisement partnerships not existed. The movie alone would not have been enough to substantially increase tourism had Disney and Norway not teamed up to promote it outside of the movie itself (with online advertisements).
Last edited:
jakeman
Well-Known Member
That's really splitting hairs.
So let me get this straight...people aren't going to Norway because of a movie by Disney with Elsa and Ana, they are going to Norway because of tourism being promoted by Disney with Elsa and Ana who were in a movie?
Here's an easy question, would tourism to Norway have increased if Frozen was not released?
MerlinTheGoat
Well-Known Member
It is quite fair and safe to say yes, and even your articles state that the tourism bump was because of massive external promotion from Disney and Norway promoting the movie in tourism advertisement. The movie alone definitely did not drive tourism, it took a major partnership with Disney and Norway promoting the film on tourism related websites to achieve this level of interest. So no it's not splitting hairs at all.
On its own, Frozen merely takes place in the fictional country of Arendelle with very vague Scandinavian influences. No mention of Norway is made. And the majority of people unfamiliar with Scandinavian cultures likely would not have made the connection to the real world based on a fantasy movie.
As for your question about whether tourism would have increased had Frozen not released, had Disney continued to neglect the Norway pavilion then probably not (though upgrading it and upping their promotion of Norway probably would have achieved a similar tourism bump even without the movie). But it's certainly also true that tourism wouldn't have increased substantially had the movie still been released, but WITHOUT the massive advertisement and promotion regarding Norway outside of the film. And there's the simple problem- the movie alone hasn't sparked curiosity about Norwegian culture. It's post-release advertisement based on loose real world connections that has.
Last edited:
jakeman
Well-Known Member
Yeah, it is kind of splitting hairs.
You're looking for a reason for the movie to not be a good fit for the Norway pavilion, which I get and I mostly agree with.
With that said, you're on some sort of convoluted witch hunt to prove that Frozen has not impacted Norwegian tourism. The bottom line is if Frozen did not exist Norway would not have a boost in attendance because the characters being used to promote Norway would not exist.
Honestly, the argument of "Frozen doesn't belong in Norway because Arendelle isn't a real place" is way easier to grasp and way more valid than this "technical it's a partnership, blah, blah, blah" mumbo jumbo.
MerlinTheGoat
Well-Known Member
Not at all. Tourism could have been increased in a variety of other forms without bringing a popular Disney movie into the mix. Updating the Norway pavilion logically (without Frozen) would have been one way. It would simply take more effort. Frozen was convenient because it already had a large following and vaguely (though unstated) Scandinavian influences, one that Norway's tourism industry saw an opportunity to exploit without having to put effort in themselves.
I am willing to say Frozen helped increase tourism in Norway, but there is a reason this happened and it wasn't solely because of the self-contained movie. The simple fact is that without that massive advertisement and promotion, the movie alone would not have granted a substantial increase in tourism. So my point stands, Frozen in of itself did not spark interest in Norway among its viewers. It took major promotion outside of the movie to achieve that interest, fans had to be informed that the connections were there.
And had these promotions not been made, the bump in tourism would have been negligible because so few people lacking prior knowledge of Norwegian culture would never have made the connection to the real world. It wasn't like Brave=Scotland, Mulan=China, Hercules=Greece and Hunchback=France (or even Ratatouille) where the countries of origin and their connections to the movie were obvious in the movies themselves (and no i'm not saying they should take over World Showcase but they're more explicit about real places where they fictionally took place). Even those articles you posted addressed that it was the partnership between Disney and various Norwegian tourism companies that achieved this.
Matt_Black
Well-Known Member
DunBroch wasn't a real place either, but that didn't stop Scotland from embracing the tourism bump from Brave, going so far as approaching Disney to be sponsors at the Food & Wine Festival.