BrerJon
Well-Known Member
Bravo!
2-3 new countries might sound ambitious to some, but that's nothing compared to the scale of construction in the 90s, so if they put their minds to it they could easily make it happen.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Disney confirms 'Frozen' makeover coming to Epcot's Norway Pavilion
- Thread starter wdwmagic
- Start date
Bravo!
2-3 new countries might sound ambitious to some, but that's nothing compared to the scale of construction in the 90s, so if they put their minds to it they could easily make it happen.
BrerJon
Well-Known Member
World ends in Armageddon, population reduces, world returns to medieval roots with kings and queens.. there is an ice age.. the age of FROZEN...that is our.. FUTURE!
And for the corresponding attraction, Disney are proud to announce a new version of Horizons! Only the Horizons for this future just involves shoving guests down to the bottom of a sinkhole crater and letting them enjoy the view of the rocks.
AEfx
Well-Known Member
Precisely.
Although obviously I am not comparing the scale of the attractions, an example would be Potter = justifiable use of screens, MILF = ridiculous lazy use of screens.
AEfx
Well-Known Member
I don't think it's less relevant; however, it is far more obvious in our daily lives than it was in 1982, and moves so quickly that trying to capture the "bleeding edge" in a theme park attraction is destined to fail when it takes five years to build something and new technology comes out constantly. Epcot had this problem from the beginning. It's why Tomorrowland has become more of a "frozen" (so to speak) theme vs. really looking forward as originally intended.
It's also similar in some respects as to why both Universal and Disney have moved away from the "behind the scenes of movies" attractions and into "go into/experience the movies". The 80's/90's was sort of an explosion of "behind the scenes" info but you can only see so many green screen demonstrations or so many squibs going off before it's rote.
Eh, you'll pretty much find the same thing at any forum where fans of a specific brand congregate.
BrerJon
Well-Known Member
Lemme guess... you're too young to have been / never got to go to Epcot in the 80s or 90s, right?
AEfx
Well-Known Member
The main motivating factor was certainly merchandise - I mean, Disney always made bank with the Disney branded Star Wars merch traditionally, so I bet they are VERY happy now that they don't have to cut anyone else in.
The movies will collectively make billions, no doubt - but Star Wars has been a merchandising phenomenon for nearly 40 years, and except for a brief gap in the late 80's/early 90's, has really done nothing but grow consistently. It's like Michael Jackson's Thriller - Thriller is the #1 album of all time, and very likely will remain such for as long as records are kept (or anyone cares). It was the zeitgeist of several cultural moments rolled into one that really statistically can never be replicated due to changes in media consumption and technology. In the same vein, with so many different franchises vying for merchandising superiority, it's highly unlikely that there will ever be a more salable franchise than Star Wars.
EPCOTCenterLover
Well-Known Member
World Showcase is becoming a full scale walk through of "It's a Small World".
Victor Kelly
Well-Known Member
Cesar R M
Well-Known Member
people are still answering him?
Pretty sure he only listens to his stock value. lol
flynnibus
Premium Member
The disagreement can be summed up as... you can't fix stupid.
Some think if you just copy a part of something it will maintain it's greatness in isolation. It's the difference between copycats and artists. It's a mindset that completely discounts, ignores, and or just oblivious to, the actual design that resulted in Disney theme parks being as successful as they were.
Because they don't understand or care about that the result is a sum of the parts... they are more than happy to think you can just mix and mash stuff together and still get greatness. It's Disney.. of course it will be great!
You can't convince them otherwise because they have no interest in understanding HOW something resulted in a better outcome than something else... they just see Disney as making these things forever and so well... so as long as it's Disney and they repeat themselves... all will be swell!
It's blind faith mixed with ignorance (willingly or not) of how choices add or remove from the result.
It's the mindset that says "I don't care how it was made it.. just sell it to me". That works as long as you can trust the source as quality... and that's where the blind faith comes in.
Some think if you just copy a part of something it will maintain it's greatness in isolation. It's the difference between copycats and artists. It's a mindset that completely discounts, ignores, and or just oblivious to, the actual design that resulted in Disney theme parks being as successful as they were.
Because they don't understand or care about that the result is a sum of the parts... they are more than happy to think you can just mix and mash stuff together and still get greatness. It's Disney.. of course it will be great!
You can't convince them otherwise because they have no interest in understanding HOW something resulted in a better outcome than something else... they just see Disney as making these things forever and so well... so as long as it's Disney and they repeat themselves... all will be swell!
It's blind faith mixed with ignorance (willingly or not) of how choices add or remove from the result.
It's the mindset that says "I don't care how it was made it.. just sell it to me". That works as long as you can trust the source as quality... and that's where the blind faith comes in.
Cesar R M
Well-Known Member
with the amazing opportunity to throw a Disney Brand Magic embedded rock pellet down the hole for 50 USD per pellet.
AEfx
Well-Known Member
And what the heck would that matter? The Experimental Prototype Community of Tomorrow was never built, period. A lot of what folks are saying comes from stuff that never was that way to begin with.
In terms of edutainment, Epcot has been moving away from it since oh about 1988 - when Maelstrom was the first "fantasy" ride.
Oh Lee. I do wish we saw you post more in general, but I have to say reading this - anytime one starts a sentence with "Anyone in favor of this/that must..." and then make a broad, general assumption implying that folks are basically fools/idiotic, it should give you a pause because it comes across as rather childish and really doesn't support your point.
The Walt Disney Company builds theme parks. They build them not out of the kindness of their hearts, but to attract folks to spend money. That doesn't mean they can't aim higher, but it is the entire reason for them being.
As we all know, Epcot as we know it literally was born of two models of two different park proposals smashed together. To pretend that the place was built for altruistic cultural enrichment and not simply an elaborate vehicle to place restaurants and shops and to mash two concepts that weren't strong enough on their own for a park is more than a bit naive. That was the purpose for building all those buildings, and why they contain mostly retail and dining square footage as opposed to actual cultural experiences, extensive walk-throughs, displays and exhibits. Tiny bits of that stuff were there, but it wasn't the intent or purpose. They were ornamentation and not substantive.
That's why this hyperbole and general ire over this is about on the level of "OMG Walt Disney would roll over in his grave if he knew they were changing X, Y, Z!" with the obvious difference being that everyone knows full well that even if Walt was going to roll over in his grave, he's being doing it since 1982 when EPCOT opened in the first place.
AEfx
Well-Known Member
It's so clear Jim Hill got it, LOL. It's just that folks aren't listening, or choosing not to.
Maelstrom is a fantasy-based dark ride (trolls and Gods and snow) loosely based on concepts from not only Norway but many surrounding countries.
Frozen will be a fantasy-based dark ride (trolls and princesses and snow) loosely based on concepts and specific locations in Norway.
The difference is trading Gods for Princesses - and fantasies based on a general region, as opposed to fantasies based on specifically Norwegian locations (as a very informative post by someone pointed out the details of earlier in this thread).
It's so cut and dry. Not to mention the fact that I don't see how anyone can think that many, many more guests will want to enjoy a Frozen ride than will miss Maelstrom.
That doesn't make any of this ideal, or what I would pick if I were in charge of the world - however, I would postulate the exact opposite of what you said. I see all kinds of hyperbole about "original intent" and "how it used to be" and those are the folks that cannot come up with specific examples and are simply making declarative statements.
Actually, 75M for a refurb/overlay? That's actually more than I would have thought, to be totally honest. Maybe we just will get more than a paper head on a stick.
EPCOTCenterLover
Well-Known Member
It wasn't before the character invasion started.Always has been, you don't even need to ride to go shopping
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
That sum is for the entirety of turning Norway into Arendelle. You too keep trying to paint this as just the ride changing when much more is occurring.Actually, 75M for a refurb/overlay? That's actually more than I would have thought, to be totally honest. Maybe we just will get more than a paper head on a stick.
Last edited:
flynnibus
Premium Member
The thing is.. it's about scale and time. Merch is the gift that keeps on giving.. but at a much lower rate of gain vs the huge surge of revenue a film gets. Disney may be collecting a billion in income a year from a brand like Marvel - but only a tiny fraction of that would have been leaving Disney's pockets in the form of royalties and fees. So owning Marvel only recovers pennies on those dollars on revenue they would have been able to generate anyways.
Having a film gross 500+ million dollars.. and doing that multiple times... is entirely new, fully recognized revenue... that is in the hundreds of millions of dollars in releatively short periods of time.
Which represents more gain...
Saving .25c margin on a $10 toy...
Or adding $10 in new revenue...
Where the gain for merch comes is when you start selling things you did not sell before. But Disney was already selling a ton of Disney/SW stuff. The gain for merch comes from all the mainline starwars stuff.. the $3 billion in retail sales it was generating.. but again, the license owner is only getting a tiny fraction of that.
The valuation of the acquisition was justified in the media rights to the franchise.. and that's why Iger and company lead with that in their pitch to wallstreet.
And it's why Disney has not been able to use StarWars sales as notable contributors to their earnings since the announcement.
Andrew C
You know what's funny?
LOL i have been going to Disney starting in the 70's
also have been to DL and DLP
Good, because you are not allowed an opinion if your first trip was in 2000.
MerlinTheGoat
Well-Known Member
Well if you were looking to get a decent opinion about a movie (or book, game, song, TV show etc) you probably wouldn't look first and foremost at the opinions of people who have never seen it, would you? I certainly wouldn't, and i'd think most other rational people wouldn't as well. I don't go out and read movie reviews from people who admit they've never seen the movie in question...Good, because you are not allowed an opinion if your first trip was in 2000.
It's pretty much common sense not to take someone seriously who is mouthing off about something they've never experienced in regards to other forms of media. Theme parks shouldn't be any different in this regard.
Last edited:
Andrew C
You know what's funny?
Come on...it is not about having a decent opinion around here, which usually people on both sides of the argument do. The only decent opinion is one that matches your own opinion (not you personally, but in general). "If is does not fit into my opinion and understanding of the world (both real and Disney), it is not worth hearing."
This is an online forum about a theme park. Get off your high horse because I am not impressed. (again, not you personally).