Blizzard Beach Construction

[Santa Raccoon 77]

What's irritating here is how incredibly narrow and inadequate Disney's understanding and use of IP is, a fairly major issue for a company that exists largely as an IP silo. IPs are not created only by films, and film-to-theme-park is not the only direction a successful transmedia exchange can occur. Blizzard Beach is an IP. Why not produce a Disney+ movie or series about the tropical community that received a freak snow storm? That expands your fundamental stock of IPs rather then narrowing it by making it another iteration of Frozen.

Personally, I prefer more unique, site specific IPs largely because they make individual locations and experiences more unique - and that goes for the merch related to those sites, as well. I'm a lot more likely to buy an Ice Gator figure then another piece of Frozen stuff since the former is tied more closely to a specific location and experience, the whole point of a souvenir.

Not to be monotone, but Universal has shown a real understanding of this principle. They have been working hard to create IPs related to their seasonal events. HHN has produced a plethora of highly marketable IPs - the icons - who move bushels of merch and build guest loyalty. This year they added Lil' Boo, a more family-friendly icon. For the resort's holiday events, they have taken the figure of Earl the Squirrel from an esoteric inside joke to a major figure plastered on merchandise year-round, appearing as a costumed meet n' greet, and peppered throughout the park. Universal thus uses its parks to grow its stock of IPs rather then to narrow them, as Disney is doing here. You would think the resort that saw massive lines for a Figment popcorn bucket might grasp this.

Finally and most subjectively - the Frozen franchise, despite massive overexposure, has not been managed well. Frozen 2 was garbage, one of the worst animated films Disney has ever produced. The appearance of the off-putting little snowball men doesn't charm me, it reminds me of how badly they dropped the ball on the franchise

Can agree with most of this except frozen 2. I thought it was a much better film than the first by a country mile.

 

[castlecake2.0]

I can deal with snowgies and Olaf, this is the issue, why is child Anna at a Florida ski resort? Why is she interacting with snowgies that, according to the movie short, didn’t exist till she was a grown up? It all just seems put together with no thought.

 

[Bocabear]

Now if they rethemed the entire Blizzard Beach to "Frozen The Waterpark", that could be something interesting.... A complete Arrendelle overlay throughout the park.... Or is this supposed to be Elsa goes to Florida and this is what happened? Still the young Anna doesn't make sense... I think it is just "Throw some fiberglass Frozen stuff around Blizzard Beach"...

 

[DisneyDreamer08]

View attachment 674974
I can deal with snowgies and Olaf, this is the issue, why is child Anna at a Florida ski resort? Why is she interacting with snowgies that, according to the movie short, didn’t exist till she was a grown up? It all just seems put together with no thought.

This I can actually agree with. I feel like there many things like this that grownups notice that kids don’t. Like how Rapunzel cut her hair and it turned brown at the end of the movie but it was long and blond again when she would meet in the parks (which I believe they tried to rectify with the series). That always bugged me
Or how certain villains die in their movies but then appear for meet and greets in the parks. We as adult say hey, that’s not right. Kids say, hey look baby Anna is at Blizzard Beach! And they think it’s awesome

 

[flynnibus]

I’m not sure what you mean by “up to speed.” Understanding your position? Because I really do understand and appreciate it, I just don’t feel the same way toward Disney. That doesn’t make me unqualified to interject my opinion.

I think you attached to one line and have lost sight of the conversation. The comment wasn’t about an opinion but about missing disney’s demonstrated pattern. Go back to this post

Blizzard Beach Construction

There is a fair argument that this one isn't that offensive. Kind of like the Alice water play area at Grand Floridian. But, it does show a disregard for the setting and its theme. And in a way that blurs it. If it was a new story, then fine. But, it's just conflicting stories. I would...

forums.wdwmagic.com

Then read the responses to that post. It’s about thinking ’oh this is just one little isolated thing, the established stuff doesn’t need touching…’ — which is oblivious to what has been the steady pattern of change happening.

 

[LittleBuford]

View attachment 674974
I can deal with snowgies and Olaf, this is the issue, why is child Anna at a Florida ski resort? Why is she interacting with snowgies that, according to the movie short, didn’t exist till she was a grown up? It all just seems put together with no thought.

Why do we have to be so literal about it? The parades and nighttime shows routinely combine characters that have nothing to do with each other. No-one seems to mind that Sorcerer Mickey finds himself fighting Maleficent, or that a parade float features princesses from several distinct movies.

 

[Patcheslee]

I've never been to Blizzard Beach and have zero attachment to anything there, but I have to say those new mini snowman things are pretty creepy.

Wait till little kids notice the snowmen are spitting on them... sure they'll attempt the same lol

 

[lazyboy97o]

Why do we have to be so literal about it? The parades and nighttime shows routinely combine characters that have nothing to do with each other. No-one seems to mind that Sorcerer Mickey finds himself fighting Maleficent, or that a parade float features princesses from several distinct movies.

Why were they so literal about Frozen? Why doesn’t it just have Mickey and Maleficent in it?

 

[Chi84]

I think you attached to one line and have lost sight of the conversation. The comment wasn’t about an opinion but about missing disney’s demonstrated pattern. Go back to this post

Blizzard Beach Construction

There is a fair argument that this one isn't that offensive. Kind of like the Alice water play area at Grand Floridian. But, it does show a disregard for the setting and its theme. And in a way that blurs it. If it was a new story, then fine. But, it's just conflicting stories. I would...

forums.wdwmagic.com

Then read the responses to that post. It’s about thinking ’oh this is just one little isolated thing, the established stuff doesn’t need touching…’ — which is oblivious to what has been the steady pattern of change happening.

No I’m not missing anything. There are many cases where I think the established stuff is worn and outdated and could use some change.

Disney isn’t going to put Malificent or Woody into Blizzard Beach. It’s just doing a bit of re-theming to modernize the place. Touches of Frozen fit in just fine and the kids will love it.

 

[Disney Analyst]

Why do we have to be so literal about it? The parades and nighttime shows routinely combine characters that have nothing to do with each other. No-one seems to mind that Sorcerer Mickey finds himself fighting Maleficent, or that a parade float features princesses from several distinct movies.

They’ve never been literal in the parks. It’s just arbitrary rules put out when some see fit on here.

Ariel sometimes has legs… sometimes doesn’t… dead villains are alive. Rapunzel grew her hair back… beast is back to being a…. beast.

But statues of kid Elsa and Anna is the issue…

 

[LittleBuford]

Why were they so literal about Frozen? Why doesn’t it just have Mickey and Maleficent in it?

Doesn't it make more sense to compare Disney's approach to these matters in the context of the theme parks (where characters from different IPs have always feely intermingled) rather than in the context of the films?

 

[HauntedPirate]

They’ve never been literal in the parks. It’s just arbitrary rules put out when some see fit on here.

Ariel sometimes has legs… sometimes doesn’t… dead villains are alive. Rapunzel grew her hair back… beast is back to being a…. beast.

But statues of kid Elsa and Anna is the issue…

"Snowgies" did not exist until Frozen 2, but somehow here, with young Anna and Elsa, they do?

 

[LittleBuford]

"Snowgies" did not exist until Frozen 2, but somehow here, with young Anna and Elsa, they do?

The post you're replying to lists similar examples of technically illogical character portrayals. How is this example any different or worse?

 

[J4546]

Lol Jesus, are people here really upset about kid princess characters in a splash pool? And the timelines of when tiny snowmen were introduced? I think some of yall are addicted to being upset

 

[HauntedPirate]

Lol Jesus, are people here really upset about kid princess characters in a splash pool? And the timelines of when tiny snowmen were introduced? I think some of yall are addicted to being upset

Details matter. Sorry if you think that's too high of a standard to have, but... not really sorry. At all.

 

[flynnibus]

not sure why Disney hasn't just opened Super Smash Bros style attractions... after all it seems it's what customers here say they want. Just give me the characters....

 

[castlecake2.0]

Why do we have to be so literal about it? The parades and nighttime shows routinely combine characters that have nothing to do with each other. No-one seems to mind that Sorcerer Mickey finds himself fighting Maleficent, or that a parade float features princesses from several distinct movies.

This is not to argue, I enjoy these discussions, but it just feels off, similar to how we discussed the font on the painted signage in Morocco. Sometimes things make sense in a theme park and other times it catch’s your attention and makes you question the reality of the fantasy you’re experiencing.

 

[LittleBuford]

Disney can’t win. The initial criticism was that they had inserted the characters unchanged, without any thematic consideration. Now people are complaining because the characters defy Frozen’s internal timeline, even though the result—which has the young Anna and Elsa playing with Snowgies—is actually responsive to the purpose and intended audience of the area in question.

 

[flynnibus]

Why do we have to be so literal about it? The parades and nighttime shows routinely combine characters that have nothing to do with each other. No-one seems to mind that Sorcerer Mickey finds himself fighting Maleficent, or that a parade float features princesses from several distinct movies.

Mickey has nightmares about the villians and ultimately fights that. It's not random - it's supported by the whole storyline of the show and doesn't conflict it. Mickey is also a character that has been made into a persona that is not tied to a single story/setting. Much like all of the fab5 have been through the decades. Those characters were not set to a single story.

Your parade example is not a conflict because it's not a singular topic parade... You don't see the wrong character on the wrong float.. you see a series of DIFFERENT floats that are each consistent within themselves to their concept. What we have here is more akin to having Mickey show up on the ratatouille float in the Pixar Play parade... justified by.. well Mickey does parades, they're both rodents, and parades are for kids!

None of your examples are the same thing where we are talking about a singular setting/story/justification that ties the elements together.. and then those elements are just ignored by throwing something in that just happens to share snow and a common audience (toddlers).

 

[castlecake2.0]

Silly us for trying to hold Disney to the very standards they created