PhotoDave219
Well-Known Member
That's essentially it. People are selfish and want the parks to be what it is in their mind. They forget that this is for the masses.
-
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
That's essentially it. People are selfish and want the parks to be what it is in their mind. They forget that this is for the masses.
Andrew C
You know what's funny?
Not sure he said that...
PhotoDave219
Well-Known Member
He's trolling. Ignore him.
PhotoDave219
Well-Known Member
misterID
Well-Known Member
Again, EPCOT right now is the park I think it is. Sorry, but it is...
Your argument or differing opinion is that you don't care about theme, or anything else, and you'll take anything they give you until you don't and you don't want to think that hard or at all. That's your right. Have fun with it. Like I've said to you before. But you seem to have the most problem with others disagreeing with your opinion, because you keep on...
And again, and again, and again, EPCOT is a theme park, with shopping, over priced merch and food. They go hand in hand. I hold it to the standard Disney claims to represent and hold themselves to. If you don't that is your opinion. And you're entitled to your own, not anyone elses.
Andrew C
You know what's funny?
This could be a good point of discussion. Do people discuss EPCOT the way they truly remember it, or only the way they want to remember it? Was it ever as some perceive it to be and did it ever reach its original/perceived purpose? Maybe, maybe not. Just something to think about.
BigTxEars
Well-Known Member
Certainly not in a 3 minute European themed ride located in Florida where I am promoted to buy cheap plastic viking horns and a sword when I exit the ride. That kinda kills the whole respect for the base society for me
If it were at a historic site or even museum I could see the difference. But not at a theme park where a talking mouse rules the kingdom. I give great relevance to real history and historical sites but Norway at WS is not a historical site IMO.
BrerJon
Well-Known Member
Hey I've seen the pictures at the front of the park - of all those creepy family pictures carved into the gravestones.
The gravestones are great because even though people didn't die in real life, and just wanted to see what they looked like on a tombstone, it does represent what Epcot is about, which is being the place where your family's (and Walt Disney's) dreams come to die.
BigTxEars
Well-Known Member
And you are not "keeping on"? Is there a difference with you or me on that I am missing?
The rest of your post is the same thing you have posted before which I have already replied to. It's still not accurate IMO...full of your opinion that you seem to think is facts about what and how I think. I already posted where this week I reacted by canceling ADRs in Norway because they changed the package for dinner. Not the largest thing in the universe, but more substantial than posting rants on the internet I would say.
BigTxEars
Well-Known Member
I think a lot of people have ideals of what they want it to be while others have ideal of what it is currently and wheres it is headed. I think both sides want a great park, just a disagreement on what means in reality.
Kinda like the two major political parties in this country
AEfx
Well-Known Member
It would be, if folks were interested in a discussion - as you can see by this latest spate of "This is a slap in the face of Epcot! END OF STORY!" posts - you see they aren't interested in having a discussion. You even have someone like me, who is the opposite of a pixie duster, being dismissed as one because they simply have this religious furor over WS that you just can't reason with.
The truth is, the WS they remember (or pull from 1975 annual reports - which again, doesn't even fit with what opened in 1982, let alone have relevance now) is pretty much the same as it is now (minus entertainment which just got cut). The issue is, they were under the impression back then that it was more than it actually really was - and have clung to that despite zero evidence to support it in 30 years. It's also highly ironic that all this is coming up over Maelstrom of all things - as Maelstrom was once seen as a departure to begin with as it has fantasy elements.
You are also seeing a combination of folks who don't agree but are fighting the same fight - you have ones who hate Frozen and think it's a flash in the pan, those that like Frozen but think it deserves it's own stand-alone attraction (which I agree with, but that's the broader issue of WDW at the moment, and while I wish it was more, it is what it is - at least we are getting a ride and it won't take five years to be here), you have ones that simply want WS to remain the stagnant glorified shopping mall/travel booth that it has been.
When you take all that, and add the rhetoric like "If you don't see the problem, you are the problem!" nonsense, it's really useless. These folks are gonna hate and rant - it's like the situation in the Middle East - no matter what, they hold dearly to their religious beliefs that no matter what they will find another angle to hate on, and anyone who doesn't agree is a dissenter and against them and their ultimate goal of getting exactly what they want with zero compromise.
I'm going to miss Maelstrom, but I don't think it changes anything about Epcot aside from things are going to get busier over at WS. I too am concerned about capacity issues, but considering that Maelstrom hasn't run at full capacity this century, and we don't even know if that ride system will remain (I think it will, but we simply don't know) those concerns are unknown until we have more data and know what Disney's plan is for handling it.
space42
Well-Known Member
I think a lot of people have ideals of what they want it to be while others have ideal of what it is currently and wheres it is headed. I think both sides want a great park, just a disagreement on what means in reality.
Kinda like the two major political parties in this country
Perhaps - On one hand we have Horizons, World of Motion, Living Seas, Spaceship Earth, The Land, Imagination!, Universe of Energy, Wonders of Life, Communicore,WorldKey, Maelstrom, El Rio, TONS of entertainment, etc etc
On the other hand we have. Test Track, Mission Space, Dumbed down versions of Seas, Spaceship Earth, Energy and Imagination, Soarin', Closed wonders of life, closed Odyssey, Closed Millenium village, major cuts to entertainment, a duck in Mexio, and princesses in Norway. I'm sorry if some long time Disney fans are a bit skeptical based on the park's current state and where it is headed.
Question for you - did you happen to visit Epcot Center before 1996?
Edit - one was a great park and one is a shell of it's former self.
Last edited:
Wow! This is so perfect and it's just what I wanted to say, but in a more genteel way! I was going to write a response tonight but now I really don't need to!
Monkee Girl
Well-Known Member
Great idea! TDO can jam all three of them into the Theater and save a TON of cash!!!!!
AND make a lot of it too because....popular!
spacemt354
Chili's
Hate?
I've never once said I "hated" anything. Have a criticized? Yes. Hated? Nope.
People mistake criticism for hate. Especially when the criticism is pointed at their viewpoint. I don't wish to change anyone's mind. You or @BigTxEars or anyone else who's opinions have "clashed" with mine and others.
This is not a heavyweight title match. It is only that when both side provide evidence to support their argument. Not one-side and the other simply doesn't care to believe it.
People will belittle the significance of the Epcot plaque and sarcastically offer conjecture that people will throw one-liners quoting Epcot ideologies that you don't believe in or don't care to believe ever existed.
Whether or not you or anyone else chooses to believe that world showcase used to (and still does to an extent) stand for something more than a retail-mart is immaterial.
But just because it's immaterial, doesn't mean that it still isn't true. And just because a country's tourism increases due to a film's success does not mean that the film is based on the country. (See New Zealand and Lord of the Rings)
Correlation does not equal causation.
The reason why people are checking out is not because of @Captain Chaos 'a remarks as you claim, but it's actually because people don't want to waste their breath anymore stating facts that people either don't wish to believe or don't care to believe actually existed.
End of story.
Monkee Girl
Well-Known Member
HA, that cartoon was a mistake. I was going to use it as a response to another post but decided not too...I hate how this reply box doesn't delete your stuff when you go to a new post. Ah well, it's a cute cartoon anyway so I will leave it up.
BigTxEars
Well-Known Member
You summed it up, the "once was" Epcot is long gone. Some have issue with the new Epcot, overall I don't although there are things I wish were different. But it does not keep me from enjoying what Epcot and WS has to offer. I don't see Olaf changing much of anything with the current WS as I have said.
I was at WDW starting in the early 80s to answer your question. I'm an old guy
In the end, fans on both side of the argument are getting short changed by TWDC.
Fans of WS loose Norway and fans of Frozen get an attraction far short of what Disney is capable of producing (and in the wrong place).
Fans of WS loose Norway and fans of Frozen get an attraction far short of what Disney is capable of producing (and in the wrong place).
AEfx
Well-Known Member
Oh Gosh, you just brought out the '10's equivalent of the 90's "Isn't it ironic?" - "Correlation does not equal causation." That thing that fresh college kids trot out that they believe is a profound statement but really is not accurate nor substantive.
No, correlation does not equal causation - but it also does not invalidate causation, either.
I've quoted news articles (and there are more should you care to look) in which quite a few folks (you know, from Norway, who might know?) who are crediting it to Frozen, and the visitors want to see the places that inspired the design of the locations and some of the themes within (Arendal which inspired Arendalle, Stave Churches, etc.). They have started Frozen-themed tours. So in this case, there is more than "correlation" - it's as absurd to argue that a 37% of increase in tourism isn't to do with Frozen.
The LOTR comparison that folks keep thinking is profound isn't. You guys keep trotting out the same rhetoric like somehow if you say it enough times it's relevant. Those films don't have any basis in New Zealand, the director of the films simply chose that place to film them and no one has ever claimed that elements of the story itself have any basis in New Zeland. Yet, just like Norway has, New Zeland has rightfully capitalized on it - but this has absolutely nothing at all to do with Epcot.
If you would like to know how Frozen is connected to Norway, here are some great links to get you started:
Norwegian Connections in Frozen
Where is Arendelle?
The folks who have checked out have been those that are putting this in proper perspective - because the "This is the end of Epcot!" folks sure are keeping that breath going - they keep stating their "facts" over and over like it makes them true, when they really have nothing to back it up other than a religious-like passion that uses abstract if best arguments with almost no actual facts to be found, just dismissive "This is a slap in the face of Epcot no matter what anyone says!" and things like "End of story."
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
Even as retailtainment Frozen is an uninspired idea. The foods mentioned in the film are chocolate and sandwiches. There is no defined Arendelle townscape to replicate. The merchandise is available at Walmart.
What does that have to do with your repeated attempts to remove the attraction from the larger experience, which is pretty much the characteristic that distinguishes a theme park from an amusement park? Even then, Disney has already said the attraction will focus on the characters and music, not the Norwegian influences.
According to you the China Pavilion also includes fantasy architecture, so would Avatar be an even replacement for Reflections of China?
The difference is that you have already said you do not know or care.
Last edited: