Disney confirms 'Frozen' makeover coming to Epcot's Norway Pavilion

BigTxEars

Well-Known Member
I'm sorry but that's such a load of hooey.

I stand by my original statement - if you blindfolded someone and brought them to the load area, took off their blindfold, let them ride the attraction, and then when they get off the ride ask them what it was about - I doubt the vast majority of folks would say "Norway" unless they spied the murals in the queue, which are as close as one is going to get (and even then there are several Scandinavian countries it could also be about).

It would be akin to claiming it would be capturing the "American" spirit by having a ride with a scene about the Salem Witch Trials, a scene showing Jack'O'Lanterns, and at the end dropping folks into a flume that takes them around various tech company structures in Silicon Valley before dropping you off at unload.

In the end, though, there are two facts which are consistently ignored: one, more folks are going to enjoy riding Frozen than Maelstrom, which reportedly has one of the worst guest satisfaction ratings in WDW, and two, the general public seems to disagree as to Frozen having nothing to do with Norway, as tourism has increased an incredible 37% since the film.



ROFL, that's a terrible comparison for many reasons, chiefly:

One, the obvious - it is "fantasy based" according to the 80+% of folks in the world that do not subscribe to the Catholic religion.

Second, that said, at least the Vatican is an actual historical landmark with some significant ties to world events. Norway in Epcot is a facade of cement and is entirely "pretend".

That's the part that I think folks miss. If you step out of the Disney bubble, WS is actually an example of what folks in the real world say about things being "Disney-fied" in a pejorative sense. It's like claiming Mohegan Sun in CT is a "Native American" experience because they have rock work and scattered images of Native Americans spread about the Casino/mall atmosphere.


37% up, that's impressive and honestly borderline incredible. They have not seen an influx like that in Norway since 1940, but I think this one is a welcomed one.

I agree this entire concept of WS being some type of educational or edutainment is a great ideal but is not has not been the reality for years and years if not longer. It's about the sale of food and merchandise by having a awesome theme to do so in. A Olaf ride is not upsetting the balance in that regard.
 

misterID

Well-Known Member
37% up, that's impressive and honestly borderline incredible. They have not seen an influx like that in Norway since 1940, but I think this one is a welcomed one.

I agree this entire concept of WS being some type of educational or edutainment is a great ideal but is not has not been the reality for years and years if not longer. It's about the sale of food and merchandise by having a awesome theme to do so in. A Olaf ride is not upsetting the balance in that regard.
Sure it will be upsetting the balance, because it will be the first ride to do so.

They could have added more rides years ago, and when they decided to, they decided to kill the theme of the park... With the little thought given to this project, they've confirmed the belief of many of us here as to how they feel about EPCOT.

It will look tacky. For anyone who actually cares about the park. And I do, and find it incredibly disappointing.
 

Cesar R M

Well-Known Member
There was a lot of behind the scenes negotiations going on with the Norwegian Gov't prior to the Frozen phenom. Maelstrom has the lowest guest satisfaction rating in the park. The tourism film is painfully dated and the Norwegian Gov't refused to fund an upgrade. This is a not so subtle message to the other WS countries to "cooperate" with Disney.
Hang on, Didn't the Norwegian government offered a new video to replace the older one? I remember that Disney also wanted a very inflated sum to "fix" the pavilion from the Norwegian Gov..
I swear I did read that note somewhere....
 

Mike S

Well-Known Member
I'm sorry but that's such a load of hooey.

I stand by my original statement - if you blindfolded someone and brought them to the load area, took off their blindfold, let them ride the attraction, and then when they get off the ride ask them what it was about - I doubt the vast majority of folks would say "Norway" unless they spied the murals in the queue, which are as close as one is going to get (and even then there are several Scandinavian countries it could also be about).

It would be akin to claiming it would be capturing the "American" spirit by having a ride with a scene about the Salem Witch Trials, a scene showing Jack'O'Lanterns, and at the end dropping folks into a flume that takes them around various tech company structures in Silicon Valley before dropping you off at unload.

In the end, though, there are two facts which are consistently ignored: one, more folks are going to enjoy riding Frozen than Maelstrom, which reportedly has one of the worst guest satisfaction ratings in WDW, and two, the general public seems to disagree as to Frozen having nothing to do with Norway, as tourism has increased an incredible 37% since the film.



ROFL, that's a terrible comparison for many reasons, chiefly:

One, the obvious - it is "fantasy based" according to the 80+% of folks in the world that do not subscribe to the Catholic religion.

Second, that said, at least the Vatican is an actual historical landmark with some significant ties to world events. Norway in Epcot is a facade of cement and is entirely "pretend".

That's the part that I think folks miss. If you step out of the Disney bubble, WS is actually an example of what folks in the real world say about things being "Disney-fied" in a pejorative sense. It's like claiming Mohegan Sun in CT is a "Native American" experience because they have rock work and scattered images of Native Americans spread about the Casino/mall atmosphere.
Actually everyone would say Norway. "Those who seek the spirit of Norway......." Or will you stick ear plugs in their ears too to help prove your point? Oh wait that wouldn't work either, Vikings being associated with Norway and all. Might as well blindfold them the whole ride :rolleyes: @Tahu is completely right.
 

BigTxEars

Well-Known Member
Sure it will be upsetting the balance, because it will be the first ride to do so.

They could have added more rides years ago, and when they decided to, they decided to kill the theme of the park... With the little thought given to this project, they've confirmed the belief of many of us here as to how they feel about EPCOT.

It will look tacky. For anyone who actually cares about the park. And I do, and find it incredibly disappointing.

WS is evolving no doubt, so is Epcot. But WS itself is an evolution of Epcot and the original plan right? Evolution is not always a bad thing :)

I care about the parks, I intend to go for the next 40 years and invested thousands and thousands of dollars this year in DVC to do so. You can imply that anyone who does not object to this as you do does not actually care for the parks but that is simply not true. People have different opinions about the parks, what's wrong with that? They belong no more to me than they do to you in that regard, with 40 million guest a year Disney is never going to make everyone happy.
 

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
I'm sorry but that's such a load of hooey.

I stand by my original statement - if you blindfolded someone and brought them to the load area, took off their blindfold, let them ride the attraction, and then when they get off the ride ask them what it was about - I doubt the vast majority of folks would say "Norway" unless they spied the murals in the queue, which are as close as one is going to get (and even then there are several Scandinavian countries it could also be about).

It would be akin to claiming it would be capturing the "American" spirit by having a ride with a scene about the Salem Witch Trials, a scene showing Jack'O'Lanterns, and at the end dropping folks into a flume that takes them around various tech company structures in Silicon Valley before dropping you off at unload.

In the end, though, there are two facts which are consistently ignored: one, more folks are going to enjoy riding Frozen than Maelstrom, which reportedly has one of the worst guest satisfaction ratings in WDW, and two, the general public seems to disagree as to Frozen having nothing to do with Norway, as tourism has increased an incredible 37% since the film.
Attractions in a theme park are not supposed to exist in a vacuum. The Pavilion is intended to work as a whole. If people do not recognize the content then maybe they will learn something. Theme parks do not work best when only repeating known references. That is the opposite of detail and what made the Disney experience famous. The obsession with only referencing is a big part of why Walt Disney World has been neglected, because the brand reference is more important than anything else.

More people will not enjoy the attraction because the low capacity will still be present.

Tourism doesn't mean anything. It's been trotted out endlessly. Lord of the Rings did not suddenly become about New Zealand and its culture because the film's were shot there and tourism increased as a result.
 

BigTxEars

Well-Known Member
Good to know I'm not the only one thinking that.

The comments, plus the overuse of smiling, the blatant disregarding of logic, disregarding others opinions in a negative way then going into defensive overdrive when someone critiques her. Made me suspicious.


1. "plus the overuse of smiling" It a theme park thread, not one on life and death get over it.

2. "the blatant disregarding of logic" Logic or opinion? Lots of difference on opinion of here but not on logic. Some folks are getting the two confused.....

3. "disregarding others opinions in a negative way" oh brother.....really? Maybe you should go back and see who is disregarding anyone who does not object to this move as being on pixies dust, and apologist, does not understand what they are saying, does not understand WS, does not care about the parks.......

4. "defensive overdrive when someone critiques her" by defending my opinion, just as everyone on here is doing? Are we all in overdrive then?

5. "Made me suspicious" of what, please don't break out the tired old "you must be a Disney plant" accusation...cause that would be just like #3 which you seem to not care for. And I'm a he BTW.


oh yeah :)
 

Cesar R M

Well-Known Member
Attractions in a theme park are not supposed to exist in a vacuum. The Pavilion is intended to work as a whole. If people do not recognize the content then maybe they will learn something. Theme parks do not work best when only repeating known references. That is the opposite of detail and what made the Disney experience famous. The obsession with only referencing is a big part of why Walt Disney World has been neglected, because the brand reference is more important than anything else.

More people will not enjoy the attraction because the low capacity will still be present.

Tourism doesn't mean anything. It's been trotted out endlessly. Lord of the Rings did not suddenly become about New Zealand and its culture because the film's were shot there and tourism increased as a result.
Agree on the Lord of the Rings.

LOTR did in fact show how beautiful New Zealand was, with their cinematographic shots.
It also helped that they transformed the shire set into a real tourist attraction.

Norway in the other hand, has beautiful fjords and stunning nature as well.
Disney Cruise Line started to exploit the trips very well (just like they have done with Alaska)
 

wm49rs

A naughty bit o' crumpet
Premium Member
37% up, that's impressive and honestly borderline incredible. They have not seen an influx like that in Norway since 1940, but I think this one is a welcomed one.

I agree this entire concept of WS being some type of educational or edutainment is a great ideal but is not has not been the reality for years and years if not longer. It's about the sale of food and merchandise by having a awesome theme to do so in. A Olaf ride is not upsetting the balance in that regard.
You mean, during World War II?

And tourism to a country due to a fictional film doesn't make that film any more factually relevant to the pavilion....
 

Mike S

Well-Known Member
WS is evolving no doubt, so is Epcot. But WS itself is an evolution of Epcot and the original plan right? Evolution is not always a bad thing :)

I care about the parks, I intend to go for the next 40 years and invested thousands and thousands of dollars this year in DVC to do so. You can imply that anyone who does not object to this as you do does not actually care for the parks but that is simply not true. People have different opinions about the parks, what's wrong with that? They belong no more to me than they do to you in that regard, with 40 million guest a year Disney is never going to make everyone happy.
I would say it's devolving to meet the standards of the lowest common denominator. "I don't want to learn anything at Disney, that's what school and the Internet is for!!!!! Just shove character rides in my face"!!!!! I would LOVE to see how Disneyland would have turned out if Walt had the same beliefs. Probably dark rides based on his movies everywhere with no Frontierland, Adventureland or Tomorrowland which actually tried to show what the future will probably hold for us, a kind of precursor to EPCOT Center's Future World. Not to mention rides like Haunted Mansion and Pirates of the Caribbean never would've been built because all they would focus on is Disney movies and characters.
 

AEfx

Well-Known Member
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.

I don't disagree that the films are likely going to be the profit driver in the shorter term - but the entire Lucasfilm company traditionally made the lion share of ongoing income on the merchandise (which is how it stayed independent for so long, and could have continued to do so had Lucas not wanted out). Star Wars commands (and gets) the highest licensing rates in the industry (and really the entire history of mass produced media tie-in products).

I do think you will find over the next year or two the merchandise as a "notable contributor" is going to become much more of a factor because of the specifics of what has been going on the past 2-3 years where Star Wars merchandise (particularly toys) have had severe issues due to both the cancellation of the 3D re-releases and the Disney purchase.

Brief history of current situation: merchandise (toy, collectable, etc.) takes 1 - 2 years from someone drawing a sketch on a piece of paper (or on a computer) to the item actually being on store shelves. Because the decision to drop the 3D releases was made so late in the game, the product to support them was already on the boat from Asia and on it's way for sale, or at least far enough along in manufacturing to not be feasible to drop, depending on the particulars of each product - and they didn't have anything else to replace it with, either.

So 2012-2013, this product clogged the shelves because there was no media supporting the huge glut of PT merchandise that was expected to drive kids into stores, and the core Star Wars collectors largely prefer OT merchandise over PT merchandise, and at the same time were told to drop their most popular products (Hasbro in particular had to stop the massively successful The Vintage Collection, because Disney wanted the format held back to be used for Episode VII). What then happens is that a wave of unpopular product sits on the shelves, so even newer product that would be more popular can't come into the store because the old product hasn't gone yet. All this corporate change in direction of the franchise had a major impact on sales.

Now, all that said, this is rather an appropriate topic to bring up right now, because Disney has just thrown it into second gear, and will have it in third by the end of this year, ramping up to full throttle by next Fall when we are on the heels of the first of the ST.

The truth is, while they had the IP of all time, Lucasfilm wasn't actually very good at merchandising - they relied way too heavily on the manufacturers and while they had a say as to what was represented thematically, they never got involved in the distribution side and Hasbro especially floundered a bit particularly after the course change. That's why Disney/Lucasfilm was a match made in heaven, because Disney is far more involved in merchandising versus just cashing the check when it comes in.

If you go to Toys R Us, for example, you'll see a stunning sight - for the last several years, Star Wars and Marvel have each had about 4-6 feet of shelf space max, Star Wars being on the lower end of the scale, due to the sales glut described above of mostly PT merchandise. TRU has just done it's "Fall Reset" - and you'll find most stores have a brand new dedicated Star Wars/Marvel department - two full aisles and several smaller shelving units in between. And they are putting them in the front of stores, right next to the electronics/video game departments. Disney apparently got directly involved with the merchandising and store relationships (which Lucasfilm never did before), and brokered some incredible deals to make sure there is a ton more merch and it's front and center.

So really, it has just barely begun - while I am sure the one-shot boost of profits each film will bring in will be staggering, it's the merchandise that is traditionally the blue-chip of the Star Wars franchise, and with Disney's unquestioned expertise in the area it's going to be quite something over the next year to watch develop.
 

misterID

Well-Known Member
WS is evolving no doubt, so is Epcot. But WS itself is an evolution of Epcot and the original plan right? Evolution is not always a bad thing :)

I care about the parks, I intend to go for the next 40 years and invested thousands and thousands of dollars this year in DVC to do so. You can imply that anyone who does not object to this as you do does not actually care for the parks but that is simply not true. People have different opinions about the parks, what's wrong with that? They belong no more to me than they do to you in that regard, with 40 million guest a year Disney is never going to make everyone happy.

Evolution is moving forward, developing into something better, I don't see how this is WS moving into something better... more crowds doesn't mean better. Like TSM at DHS, the crowds actually can show a more significant problem with the overall park. I don't see how this is WS evolving, but perhaps transitioning, but what it's transitioning to is the question, as there are no grand plan for WS overall, says this is just a hodgepodge addition because of convenience not some master plan of updating EPCOT.

I'm not opposed to a Frozen ride.

I'm not opposed to Maelstrom replacement.

I'm opposed to this.

You don't have to agree. You can be completely blasé about the parks. If I didn't voice what I strongly disagree with, and the more I think about it, the stronger those feelings get, I would be doing a great disservice to this park that I do care about.

As people in WDI have said, the biggest problem WDW has is its fans who don't speak up.
 
Last edited:

Cesar R M

Well-Known Member
I don't disagree that the films are likely going to be the profit driver in the shorter term - but the entire Lucasfilm company traditionally made the lion share of ongoing income on the merchandise (which is how it stayed independent for so long, and could have continued to do so had Lucas not wanted out). Star Wars commands (and gets) the highest licensing rates in the industry (and really the entire history of mass produced media tie-in products).

I do think you will find over the next year or two the merchandise as a "notable contributor" is going to become much more of a factor because of the specifics of what has been going on the past 2-3 years where Star Wars merchandise (particularly toys) have had severe issues due to both the cancellation of the 3D re-releases and the Disney purchase.

Brief history of current situation: merchandise (toy, collectable, etc.) takes 1 - 2 years from someone drawing a sketch on a piece of paper (or on a computer) to the item actually being on store shelves. Because the decision to drop the 3D releases was made so late in the game, the product to support them was already on the boat from Asia and on it's way for sale, or at least far enough along in manufacturing to not be feasible to drop, depending on the particulars of each product - and they didn't have anything else to replace it with, either.

So 2012-2013, this product clogged the shelves because there was no media supporting the huge glut of PT merchandise that was expected to drive kids into stores, and the core Star Wars collectors largely prefer OT merchandise over PT merchandise, and at the same time were told to drop their most popular products (Hasbro in particular had to stop the massively successful The Vintage Collection, because Disney wanted the format held back to be used for Episode VII). What then happens is that a wave of unpopular product sits on the shelves, so even newer product that would be more popular can't come into the store because the old product hasn't gone yet. All this corporate change in direction of the franchise had a major impact on sales.

Now, all that said, this is rather an appropriate topic to bring up right now, because Disney has just thrown it into second gear, and will have it in third by the end of this year, ramping up to full throttle by next Fall when we are on the heels of the first of the ST.

The truth is, while they had the IP of all time, Lucasfilm wasn't actually very good at merchandising - they relied way too heavily on the manufacturers and while they had a say as to what was represented thematically, they never got involved in the distribution side and Hasbro especially floundered a bit particularly after the course change. That's why Disney/Lucasfilm was a match made in heaven, because Disney is far more involved in merchandising versus just cashing the check when it comes in.

If you go to Toys R Us, for example, you'll see a stunning sight - for the last several years, Star Wars and Marvel have each had about 4-6 feet of shelf space max, Star Wars being on the lower end of the scale, due to the sales glut described above of mostly PT merchandise. TRU has just done it's "Fall Reset" - and you'll find most stores have a brand new dedicated Star Wars/Marvel department - two full aisles and several smaller shelving units in between. And they are putting them in the front of stores, right next to the electronics/video game departments. Disney apparently got directly involved with the merchandising and store relationships (which Lucasfilm never did before), and brokered some incredible deals to make sure there is a ton more merch and it's front and center.

So really, it has just barely begun - while I am sure the one-shot boost of profits each film will bring in will be staggering, it's the merchandise that is traditionally the blue-chip of the Star Wars franchise, and with Disney's unquestioned expertise in the area it's going to be quite something over the next year to watch develop.
let's not forget videogames and TV series!

The Clone Wars was excellent quality wise.
There have been some good games too!.
 

AEfx

Well-Known Member
And tourism to a country due to a fictional film doesn't make that film any more factually relevant to the pavilion....

Well, if you get down to it - that's why most entities from the host countries are part of the equation to begin with. To increase tourism to their country. They didn't just hand Disney millions to create some cement monument to their country for Americans to get "deep" cultural experiences - it was promotion.

Folks are so married to this concept of WS being some culturally ethereal experience, and putting forth declarative statements about what it is and is not without any actual statement of intention on the matter from Disney (and direct evidence of the opposite being true, as characters have been in WS for 30 out of Epcot's 33 years in existence), that's why this is all such drama because I think folks are having to face the realities that WS is not what they have decided in their minds all these years it is, and never really was.
 

Mike S

Well-Known Member
Well, if you get down to it - that's why most entities from the host countries are part of the equation to begin with. To increase tourism to their country. They didn't just hand Disney millions to create some cement monument to their country for Americans to get "deep" cultural experiences - it was promotion.

Folks are so married to this concept of WS being some culturally ethereal experience, and putting forth declarative statements about what it is and is not without any actual statement of intention on the matter from Disney (and direct evidence of the opposite being true, as characters have been in WS for 30 out of Epcot's 33 years in existence), that's why this is all such drama because I think folks are having to face the realities that WS is not what they have decided in their minds all these years it is, and never really was.
Yeah, meet and greets. Not major attractions.
 

flynnibus

Premium Member
I'm sorry but that's such a load of hooey.

I stand by my original statement - if you blindfolded someone and brought them to the load area, took off their blindfold, let them ride the attraction, and then when they get off the ride ask them what it was about - I doubt the vast majority of folks would say "Norway" unless they spied the murals in the queue, which are as close as one is going to get (and even then there are several Scandinavian countries it could also be about).

Are you and said person DEAF? Because obviously you haven't listened to a single word of the narration of the ride.

Your justification is that trolls make it a fantasy ride... the rest of the ride scenes all include representations of the nordic ancestors, the artic, and the modern oil industry. What if any of those things are 'fantasy'?

Honestly it seems your opinion is fed by self-centered ignorance that a pagan religion is 'fantasy' - which is why the Vatican analogy works. Just because someone else's religion includes gods that have been referenced in tons of fiction doesn't make their religion itself fiction.

Trolls are part of the folklore... just like Cowboys/Indians, larger than life heros, religious miracles, and more.
I feel dirty even having to explain the difference between folklore and it's significance to a culture vs fantasy fiction.

In the end, though, there are two facts which are consistently ignored: one, more folks are going to enjoy riding Frozen than Maelstrom, which reportedly has one of the worst guest satisfaction ratings in WDW, and two, the general public seems to disagree as to Frozen having nothing to do with Norway, as tourism has increased an incredible 37% since the film.

The points aren't ignored - they are aren't rehashed because they are garbage.

#1 - If you just want an attraction on an island... you are just steering the ship into the rocks. Sure you may enjoy success now.. but you are still heading towards the rocks.. and you will destroy what you are driving. Disney theme parks are not what they are because they built a handful of great attractions on their own! If you are too short-sighted to see that... it's probably why you aren't responsible for a long term successful disruptive product.

#2 - Do we really need to explain the difference between 'association' and 'being about norway' AGAIN? Do you need the idea of MARKETING explained to you and what exposures mean? Frozen's success brings visibility and interest to the topic of Norway - that doesn't make it about Norway, it's culture or people.

Unless you really think Captain America:Winter Solider should be incorporated into our school curriculum as a lesson in American History and DC geography.

So these points aren't ignored - they are dismissed.


One, the obvious - it is "fantasy based" according to the 80+% of folks in the world that do not subscribe to the Catholic religion.

You really think people label other people's religion and presentations about them as 'fantasy'??

I'm starting to feel that idiom about being dragged down to their level coming on...
 

AEfx

Well-Known Member
Actually everyone would say Norway. "Those who seek the spirit of Norway......." Or will you stick ear plugs in their ears too to help prove your point? Oh wait that wouldn't work either, Vikings being associated with Norway and all. Might as well blindfold them the whole ride :rolleyes: @Tahu is completely right.

Oh, sorry - I forgot about the audio once having to tell you what the ride was supposed to be about. And Vikings are not specific to Norway, they are Scandinavian and also have roots as far east as Britain and Scotland.

But actually, the ear plugs thing is interesting - if you wore ear plugs (or were deaf) - would you know what POTC was about? Or any other ride? That this one relies on it telling you it's supposed to be about Norway actually speaks volumes.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom