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

[sedati]

Am I wrong in thinking that the goal of World Showcase is similar to what Disney sought to do with Fantasia? Was Walt wrong to bring his wildly popular Micky Mouse (who I don't believe is German) into the tale of the Sorcerer's Apprentice? Couldn't Disney just have created a character truer to what Goethe wrote in his poem. What's wrong with creating something new and original for this film, why the need to constantly shove Mickey in our faces? Did we need animation at all to appreciate classical music? My kids tell me constantly that they love sitting and listening to the Dukas piece and don't need "stupid moving colors" to help them enjoy this master work.
Mickey was used as a familiar guide into what for many was an unfamiliar and daunting world, that of classical music. Fantasia did create many wonderful original characters as well, but Mickey is clearly the draw (I first saw Fantasia in a free outdoor showing in Boston and most people left after the Sorcerer's Apprentice segment, which I'm glad I didn't as Night on Bald Mountain is my favorite.) Even still Fantasia has had a rough time connecting with most people. Even Tokyo Disney Sea (haven't been there, but really want to go) has seen the need to add more familiar characters. I just saw Frozen this week and loved it. I don't think it's the best thing they've ever done, but I can certainly see why it caught on, and I'm proud that it feels very much a Disney film with modern sensibilities. More importantly it proves Disney works and will work well into this seemingly cynical century. “Never cruel or cowardly. Never give up, never give in.” That's from Doctor Who, but seems similar to what Disney is trying to hold itself to. Personally I'll be happy if there's at least a small tie to Norway, and I think there are many ways to give it a big connection. (The girls have been basically shut-ins all their lives, so maybe it's time they see the lands and people around them.) Their home may be fictional, but so is Derry Maine, and I think most Stephen King fans and people here in the northeast recognize it all the same. I've been to the real Italy and went to the balcony and grave of the fictional Juliet in Verona. Having fictional Disney characters in World Showcase (but not overwhelming it I do agree) can be seen as having a friend or pen-pal in that land. Adding a bit of immediate familiarity and friendship can really ground a place and people, especially for children.
Sorry for the ramble, but after 161 pages I felt the need. Can't wait to see what's actually planned.

 

[Matt_Black]

Am I wrong in thinking that the goal of World Showcase is similar to what Disney sought to do with Fantasia? Was Walt wrong to bring his wildly popular Micky Mouse (who I don't believe is German) into the tale of the Sorcerer's Apprentice? Couldn't Disney just have created a character truer to what Goethe wrote in his poem. What's wrong with creating something new and original for this film, why the need to constantly shove Mickey in our faces? Did we need animation at all to appreciate classical music? My kids tell me constantly that they love sitting and listening to the Dukas piece and don't need "stupid moving colors" to help them enjoy this master work.
Mickey was used as a familiar guide into what for many was an unfamiliar and daunting world, that of classical music. Fantasia did create many wonderful original characters as well, but Mickey is clearly the draw (I first saw Fantasia in a free outdoor showing in Boston and most people left after the Sorcerer's Apprentice segment, which I'm glad I didn't as Night on Bald Mountain is my favorite.) Even still Fantasia has had a rough time connecting with most people. Even Tokyo Disney Sea (haven't been there, but really want to go) has seen the need to add more familiar characters. I just saw Frozen this week and loved it. I don't think it's the best thing they've ever done, but I can certainly see why it caught on, and I'm proud that it feels very much a Disney film with modern sensibilities. More importantly it proves Disney works and will work well into this seemingly cynical century. “Never cruel or cowardly. Never give up, never give in.” That's from Doctor Who, but seems similar to what Disney is trying to hold itself to. Personally I'll be happy if there's at least a small tie to Norway, and I think there are many ways to give it a big connection. (The girls have been basically shut-ins all their lives, so maybe it's time they see the lands and people around them.) Their home may be fictional, but so is Derry Maine, and I think most Stephen King fans and people here in the northeast recognize it all the same. I've been to the real Italy and went to the balcony and grave of the fictional Juliet in Verona. Having fictional Disney characters in World Showcase (but not overwhelming it I do agree) can be seen as having a friend or pen-pal in that land. Adding a bit of immediate familiarity and friendship can really ground a place and people, especially for children.
Sorry for the ramble, but after 161 pages I felt the need. Can't wait to see what's actually planned.

 

[MerlinTheGoat]

As much as I love that Citizen Kane meme (and far moreso the movie which I saw long before it was made into one), i must admit it's kind of ironic how it has come to be used given the context of the scene in the movie-
http://usvsth3m.com/post/60436953054/the-orson-welles-clapping-reaction-gif-is-everywhere

In this instance, I will take this opportunity to use the scene's proper context to describe people who applaud decisions such as Frozen at Norway. Those stubbornly and angrily clapping and singing praise because they've invested too much of their pride and emotion into something to admit the truth of the matter- who and what they're applauding just isn't any good (not anymore anyways).

There's a rather huge difference between including Mickey in a Fantasia short and gutting Maelstrom to replace it with Frozen. The story of the Sorcerer's Apprentice was kept intact and pretty faithfully represented and celebrated. Despite Mickey taking the place of the main character.

And even more glaring is the disparity of quality between the Frozen overlay and Fantasia. Fantasia and the Sorcerer's Apprentice were created with the maximum level of quality generally delivered during the Walt Disney era of animated feature films (it's considered by many as a classic and a true piece of art). Mickey himself was basically an actor in a story, familiar as a face yes but taking on a completely different role from what we were used to. That in itself was a rather novel and unique idea. And his role in the short was respectful of the story, his Mickey identity didn't detract from it.

Frozen at Norway is being created with the cheapest of budgets and the least amount of effort possible in order to cash in on a decent but massively overrated movie. A movie that despite my initial enjoyment of, is fast beginning to overstay its welcome.

 

[Disneyhead'71]

Am I wrong in thinking that the goal of World Showcase is similar to what Disney sought to do with Fantasia? Was Walt wrong to bring his wildly popular Micky Mouse (who I don't believe is German) into the tale of the Sorcerer's Apprentice? Couldn't Disney just have created a character truer to what Goethe wrote in his poem. What's wrong with creating something new and original for this film, why the need to constantly shove Mickey in our faces? Did we need animation at all to appreciate classical music? My kids tell me constantly that they love sitting and listening to the Dukas piece and don't need "stupid moving colors" to help them enjoy this master work.
Mickey was used as a familiar guide into what for many was an unfamiliar and daunting world, that of classical music. Fantasia did create many wonderful original characters as well, but Mickey is clearly the draw (I first saw Fantasia in a free outdoor showing in Boston and most people left after the Sorcerer's Apprentice segment, which I'm glad I didn't as Night on Bald Mountain is my favorite.) Even still Fantasia has had a rough time connecting with most people. Even Tokyo Disney Sea (haven't been there, but really want to go) has seen the need to add more familiar characters. I just saw Frozen this week and loved it. I don't think it's the best thing they've ever done, but I can certainly see why it caught on, and I'm proud that it feels very much a Disney film with modern sensibilities. More importantly it proves Disney works and will work well into this seemingly cynical century. “Never cruel or cowardly. Never give up, never give in.” That's from Doctor Who, but seems similar to what Disney is trying to hold itself to. Personally I'll be happy if there's at least a small tie to Norway, and I think there are many ways to give it a big connection. (The girls have been basically shut-ins all their lives, so maybe it's time they see the lands and people around them.) Their home may be fictional, but so is Derry Maine, and I think most Stephen King fans and people here in the northeast recognize it all the same. I've been to the real Italy and went to the balcony and grave of the fictional Juliet in Verona. Having fictional Disney characters in World Showcase (but not overwhelming it I do agree) can be seen as having a friend or pen-pal in that land. Adding a bit of immediate familiarity and friendship can really ground a place and people, especially for children.
Sorry for the ramble, but after 161 pages I felt the need. Can't wait to see what's actually planned.

So, you don't feel that the phenom that is Frozen will in any way overwhelm the message highlighting the actual culture and history of Norway? Or will it simply become the defacto "Frozen" pavilion?

 

[danlb_2000]

Am I wrong in thinking that the goal of World Showcase is similar to what Disney sought to do with Fantasia? Was Walt wrong to bring his wildly popular Micky Mouse (who I don't believe is German) into the tale of the Sorcerer's Apprentice? Couldn't Disney just have created a character truer to what Goethe wrote in his poem. What's wrong with creating something new and original for this film, why the need to constantly shove Mickey in our faces? Did we need animation at all to appreciate classical music? My kids tell me constantly that they love sitting and listening to the Dukas piece and don't need "stupid moving colors" to help them enjoy this master work.
Mickey was used as a familiar guide into what for many was an unfamiliar and daunting world, that of classical music. Fantasia did create many wonderful original characters as well, but Mickey is clearly the draw (I first saw Fantasia in a free outdoor showing in Boston and most people left after the Sorcerer's Apprentice segment, which I'm glad I didn't as Night on Bald Mountain is my favorite.) Even still Fantasia has had a rough time connecting with most people. Even Tokyo Disney Sea (haven't been there, but really want to go) has seen the need to add more familiar characters. I just saw Frozen this week and loved it. I don't think it's the best thing they've ever done, but I can certainly see why it caught on, and I'm proud that it feels very much a Disney film with modern sensibilities. More importantly it proves Disney works and will work well into this seemingly cynical century. “Never cruel or cowardly. Never give up, never give in.” That's from Doctor Who, but seems similar to what Disney is trying to hold itself to. Personally I'll be happy if there's at least a small tie to Norway, and I think there are many ways to give it a big connection. (The girls have been basically shut-ins all their lives, so maybe it's time they see the lands and people around them.) Their home may be fictional, but so is Derry Maine, and I think most Stephen King fans and people here in the northeast recognize it all the same. I've been to the real Italy and went to the balcony and grave of the fictional Juliet in Verona. Having fictional Disney characters in World Showcase (but not overwhelming it I do agree) can be seen as having a friend or pen-pal in that land. Adding a bit of immediate familiarity and friendship can really ground a place and people, especially for children.
Sorry for the ramble, but after 161 pages I felt the need. Can't wait to see what's actually planned.

I would agree with this IF they integrate the Frozen characters into Maelstrom in a way that they have them telling the story of the real Norway. I have a feeling that this isn't what is going to happen, I have a feeling that the ride is going to be just a retelling of the story of Frozen with no direct references to the real Norway.

 

[wm49rs]

Am I wrong in thinking that the goal of World Showcase is similar to what Disney sought to do with Fantasia? Was Walt wrong to bring his wildly popular Micky Mouse (who I don't believe is German) into the tale of the Sorcerer's Apprentice? Couldn't Disney just have created a character truer to what Goethe wrote in his poem. What's wrong with creating something new and original for this film, why the need to constantly shove Mickey in our faces? Did we need animation at all to appreciate classical music? My kids tell me constantly that they love sitting and listening to the Dukas piece and don't need "stupid moving colors" to help them enjoy this master work.
Mickey was used as a familiar guide into what for many was an unfamiliar and daunting world, that of classical music. Fantasia did create many wonderful original characters as well, but Mickey is clearly the draw (I first saw Fantasia in a free outdoor showing in Boston and most people left after the Sorcerer's Apprentice segment, which I'm glad I didn't as Night on Bald Mountain is my favorite.) Even still Fantasia has had a rough time connecting with most people. Even Tokyo Disney Sea (haven't been there, but really want to go) has seen the need to add more familiar characters. I just saw Frozen this week and loved it. I don't think it's the best thing they've ever done, but I can certainly see why it caught on, and I'm proud that it feels very much a Disney film with modern sensibilities. More importantly it proves Disney works and will work well into this seemingly cynical century. “Never cruel or cowardly. Never give up, never give in.” That's from Doctor Who, but seems similar to what Disney is trying to hold itself to. Personally I'll be happy if there's at least a small tie to Norway, and I think there are many ways to give it a big connection. (The girls have been basically shut-ins all their lives, so maybe it's time they see the lands and people around them.) Their home may be fictional, but so is Derry Maine, and I think most Stephen King fans and people here in the northeast recognize it all the same. I've been to the real Italy and went to the balcony and grave of the fictional Juliet in Verona. Having fictional Disney characters in World Showcase (but not overwhelming it I do agree) can be seen as having a friend or pen-pal in that land. Adding a bit of immediate familiarity and friendship can really ground a place and people, especially for children.
Sorry for the ramble, but after 161 pages I felt the need. Can't wait to see what's actually planned.

This decision has nothing to do with Walt, or his vision....

 

[MerlinTheGoat]

I have a feeling that this isn't what is going to happen, I have a feeling that the ride is going to be just a retelling of the story of Frozen with no direct references to the real Norway.

Yup, we've been told by insiders what to expect, and Disney's own statements about the overlay indicates that it's not going to be used to celebrate Norwegian culture. They basically ignored a question about Norway potentially losing its identity in this, in brushing off the question they confirmed this fear. This is simple a blatant attempt to cash in on the movie, but they're too cheap and ignorant to build a new ride in an appropriate area so they're repurposing an existing ride instead.

 

[G00fyDad]

I would agree with this IF they integrate the Frozen characters into Maelstrom in a way that they have them telling the story of the real Norway. I have a feeling that this isn't what is going to happen, I have a feeling that the ride is going to be just a retelling of the story of Frozen with no direct references to the real Norway.

This is exactly what I think will happen. I get this sense of a middle aged mother dressing like a 20 year old so she can hang onto the last few drops of her youth instead of moving on and enjoying the next phase of life. Disney is tossing Frozen onto everything they can in hopes of hanging onto the last few drops of cash they can bring in from the movie. Yes, it was a good movie, but not good enough to stamp it on everything they can.

 

[Mike S]

This decision has nothing to do with Walt, or his vision....

But, but, but....... Walt wanted to make a Snow Queen movie!!!!!! Clearly he's tied to this and would approve!!!!!!!! /sarcasm

 

[lazyboy97o]

Am I wrong in thinking that the goal of World Showcase is similar to what Disney sought to do with Fantasia? Was Walt wrong to bring his wildly popular Micky Mouse (who I don't believe is German) into the tale of the Sorcerer's Apprentice? Couldn't Disney just have created a character truer to what Goethe wrote in his poem. What's wrong with creating something new and original for this film, why the need to constantly shove Mickey in our faces? Did we need animation at all to appreciate classical music? My kids tell me constantly that they love sitting and listening to the Dukas piece and don't need "stupid moving colors" to help them enjoy this master work.
Mickey was used as a familiar guide into what for many was an unfamiliar and daunting world, that of classical music. Fantasia did create many wonderful original characters as well, but Mickey is clearly the draw (I first saw Fantasia in a free outdoor showing in Boston and most people left after the Sorcerer's Apprentice segment, which I'm glad I didn't as Night on Bald Mountain is my favorite.) Even still Fantasia has had a rough time connecting with most people. Even Tokyo Disney Sea (haven't been there, but really want to go) has seen the need to add more familiar characters. I just saw Frozen this week and loved it. I don't think it's the best thing they've ever done, but I can certainly see why it caught on, and I'm proud that it feels very much a Disney film with modern sensibilities. More importantly it proves Disney works and will work well into this seemingly cynical century. “Never cruel or cowardly. Never give up, never give in.” That's from Doctor Who, but seems similar to what Disney is trying to hold itself to. Personally I'll be happy if there's at least a small tie to Norway, and I think there are many ways to give it a big connection. (The girls have been basically shut-ins all their lives, so maybe it's time they see the lands and people around them.) Their home may be fictional, but so is Derry Maine, and I think most Stephen King fans and people here in the northeast recognize it all the same. I've been to the real Italy and went to the balcony and grave of the fictional Juliet in Verona. Having fictional Disney characters in World Showcase (but not overwhelming it I do agree) can be seen as having a friend or pen-pal in that land. Adding a bit of immediate familiarity and friendship can really ground a place and people, especially for children.
Sorry for the ramble, but after 161 pages I felt the need. Can't wait to see what's actually planned.

They should add "Let it Go" into Fantasia. It is more familiar to people, more popular to the masses and is based on the same musical structures of notes and notations as the works featured.

Oh, and since it has been brought up a few times, the Duffy and Sinbad characters were created for Tokyo DisneySEA. Duffy only appeared elsewhere before if you count his failed American debut as The Disney Bear.

 

[Magenta Panther]

As much as I love that Citizen Kane meme (and far moreso the movie which I saw long before it was made into one), i must admit it's kind of ironic how it has come to be used given the context of the scene in the movie-
http://usvsth3m.com/post/60436953054/the-orson-welles-clapping-reaction-gif-is-everywhere

In this instance, I will take this opportunity to use the scene's proper context to describe people who applaud decisions such as Frozen at Norway. Those stubbornly and angrily clapping and singing praise because they've invested too much of their pride and emotion into something to admit the truth of the matter- who and what they're applauding just isn't any good (not anymore anyways).

There's a rather huge difference between including Mickey in a Fantasia short and gutting Maelstrom to replace it with Frozen. The story of the Sorcerer's Apprentice was kept intact and pretty faithfully represented and celebrated. Despite Mickey taking the place of the main character.

And even more glaring is the disparity of quality between the Frozen overlay and Fantasia. Fantasia and the Sorcerer's Apprentice were created with the maximum level of quality generally delivered during the Walt Disney era of animated feature films (it's considered by many as a classic and a true piece of art). Mickey himself was basically an actor in a story, familiar as a face yes but taking on a completely different role from what we were used to. That in itself was a rather novel and unique idea. And his role in the short was respectful of the story, his Mickey identity didn't detract from it.

Frozen at Norway is being created with the cheapest of budgets and the least amount of effort possible in order to cash in on a decent but massively overrated movie. A movie that despite my initial enjoyment of, is fast beginning to overstay its welcome.

 

[Mr Anderson]

Yup, we've been told by insiders what to expect, and Disney's own statements about the overlay indicates that it's not going to be used to celebrate Norwegian culture. They basically ignored a question about Norway potentially losing its identity in this, in brushing off the question they confirmed this fear. This is simple a blatant attempt to cash in on the movie, but they're too cheap and ignorant to build a new ride in an appropriate area so they're repurposing an existing ride instead.

What I don't understand is, why didn't they start planning a brand new ride way back when the film hit it's first huge milestone of $500 million so quickly after release? To be exact this milestone took only one month. In comparison, Tangled pulled in $591 million in its entire box office run. That is mind-boggling. Disney had to have known the hype train would keep on rolling, and it did, all the way to a $1.2 Billion box office. If they had started planning something new all the way back then (beginning of 2014) perhaps we wouldn't have this problem.

 

[MerlinTheGoat]

What I don't understand is, why didn't they start planning a brand new ride way back when the film hit it's first huge milestone of $500 million so quickly after release? To be exact this milestone took only one month. In comparison, Tangled pulled in $591 million in its entire box office run. That is mind-boggling. Disney had to have known the hype train would keep on rolling, and it did, all the way to a $1.2 Billion box office. If they had started planning something new all the way back then (beginning of 2014) perhaps we wouldn't have this problem.

From what @WDW1974 has said (and I fully believe his words on the matter after all that has occurred this year), Disney internally didn't have faith in the movie prior to release. Executives apparently didn't care for the film from what they saw of it during screenings and didn't expect it to perform that well or garner such critical praise. They were as a result caught off-guard by its popularity. That along with the absurdly thick layers of red tape and bureaucracy i'm guessing were to blame for their slow to respond to its success. They did what they could to hastily cobble together cheap park events to cash in on its popularity.

 

[lazyboy97o]

From what @WDW1974 has said (and I fully believe his words on the matter after all that has occurred this year), Disney internally didn't have faith in the movie prior to release. Executives apparently didn't care for the film from what they saw of it during screenings and didn't expect it to perform that well or garner such critical praise. They were as a result caught off-guard by its popularity. That along with the absurdly thick layers of red tape and bureaucracy i'm guessing were to blame for their slow to respond to its success. They did what they could to hastily cobble together cheap park events to cash in on its popularity.

The film lacks what are supposed to make it appeal to the "masses."

 

[Mr Anderson]

From what @WDW1974 has said (and I fully believe his words on the matter after all that has occurred this year), Disney internally didn't have faith in the movie prior to release. Executives apparently didn't care for the film from what they saw of it during screenings and didn't expect it to perform that well or garner such critical praise. They were as a result caught off-guard by its popularity. That along with the absurdly thick layers of red tape and bureaucracy i'm guessing were to blame for their slow to respond to its success. They did what they could to hastily cobble together cheap park events to cash in on its popularity.

Well, now I understand; that makes sense. That must be some insanely thick red tape to have a snail's pace response to a one month $500 million dollar box office draw from one film. If I were a fan of the film, like so many here, I'd feel cheapened by the lazy, cheap park events they tossed together.

 

[MerlinTheGoat]

Well, now I understand; that makes sense. That must be some insanely thick red tape to have a snail's pace response to a one month $500 million dollar box office draw from one film. If I were a fan of the film, like so many here, I'd feel cheapened by the lazy, cheap park events they tossed together.

When you think about it, it's not surprising how slow they have been. Even had they expected the film to be a success and prepared, they still probably would drag their feet. While a much more ambitious project, Avatar was announced almost exactly 3 years ago (September 2011) and has only just this year begun moving dirt (with still no vertical construction I gather and not opening until 2017 at the earliest, and Iger initially claimed it would be finished in 2015).

 

[BigTxEars]

Am I wrong in thinking that the goal of World Showcase is similar to what Disney sought to do with Fantasia? Was Walt wrong to bring his wildly popular Micky Mouse (who I don't believe is German) into the tale of the Sorcerer's Apprentice? Couldn't Disney just have created a character truer to what Goethe wrote in his poem. What's wrong with creating something new and original for this film, why the need to constantly shove Mickey in our faces? Did we need animation at all to appreciate classical music? My kids tell me constantly that they love sitting and listening to the Dukas piece and don't need "stupid moving colors" to help them enjoy this master work.
Mickey was used as a familiar guide into what for many was an unfamiliar and daunting world, that of classical music. Fantasia did create many wonderful original characters as well, but Mickey is clearly the draw (I first saw Fantasia in a free outdoor showing in Boston and most people left after the Sorcerer's Apprentice segment, which I'm glad I didn't as Night on Bald Mountain is my favorite.) Even still Fantasia has had a rough time connecting with most people. Even Tokyo Disney Sea (haven't been there, but really want to go) has seen the need to add more familiar characters. I just saw Frozen this week and loved it. I don't think it's the best thing they've ever done, but I can certainly see why it caught on, and I'm proud that it feels very much a Disney film with modern sensibilities. More importantly it proves Disney works and will work well into this seemingly cynical century. “Never cruel or cowardly. Never give up, never give in.” That's from Doctor Who, but seems similar to what Disney is trying to hold itself to. Personally I'll be happy if there's at least a small tie to Norway, and I think there are many ways to give it a big connection. (The girls have been basically shut-ins all their lives, so maybe it's time they see the lands and people around them.) Their home may be fictional, but so is Derry Maine, and I think most Stephen King fans and people here in the northeast recognize it all the same. I've been to the real Italy and went to the balcony and grave of the fictional Juliet in Verona. Having fictional Disney characters in World Showcase (but not overwhelming it I do agree) can be seen as having a friend or pen-pal in that land. Adding a bit of immediate familiarity and friendship can really ground a place and people, especially for children.
Sorry for the ramble, but after 161 pages I felt the need. Can't wait to see what's actually planned.

Disney has a long history of using their characters as introductions to ideals, information and concepts. It has been successful for decades, it still can be IMO. Some of their work in WWII comes to mind. I think you point is well made and valid.

Some folks on here have their own vision of WS and it's not open to debate with them, anybody who see it differently is just too foolish to know better in their view. Some of these same people seem to be able to channel the sprit of Walt himself and they know without a doubt that he would not approve of this or many other moves at WDW. I don't have such a connection with Walt so I can only guess what he would say...

It seems to me that Walt wanted to build DL (and thus WDW latter) as place where families (i.e. adults and kids) could enjoy rides and attractions together. I would guess since Epcot is not what he originally intend and never has been that he would be fine with it serving the same purpose, bringing families together instead. Now in 2014 going into 2015 and beyond Frozen has the ability to do that to. IMO the building of Frozen at WS will do exactly like you posted, draw kids into an area they may or may not have wanted to visit before. I see it as a win for families who want to see WS together. And with the long lines that are sure to be part of the ride when it opens there will be lots of time to be together!

 

[wm49rs]

And some "folks" just don't see the connection between a fictional land and a real country. That doesn't mean they're channeling anyone, no matter how hard you try to portray them....

 

[Mike S]

Disney has a long history of using their characters as introductions to ideals, information and concepts. It has been successful for decades, it still can be IMO. Some of their work in WWII comes to mind. I think you point is well made and valid.

Some folks on here have their own vision of WS and it's not open to debate with them, anybody who see it differently is just too foolish to know better in their view. Some of these same people seem to be able to channel the sprit of Walt himself and they know without a doubt that he would not approve of this or many other moves at WDW. I don't have such a connection with Walt so I can only guess what he would say...

It seems to me that Walt wanted to build DL (and thus WDW latter) as place where families (i.e. adults and kids) could enjoy rides and attractions together. I would guess since Epcot is not what he originally intend and never has been that he would be fine with it serving the same purpose, bringing families together instead. Now in 2014 going into 2015 and beyond Frozen has the ability to do that to. IMO the building of Frozen at WS will do exactly like you posted, draw kids into an area they may or may not have wanted to visit before. I see it as a win for families who want to see WS together. And with the long lines that are sure to be part of the ride when it opens there will be lots of time to be together!

Except when Disney made those cartoons it was different. As was pointed out before while Mickey was used in Fantasia it was still true to the story of the Sorcerer's Apprentice. This Frozen ride will not be about Norway in any way. It will be about the characters and songs from the movie. But you'll probably still not see the difference here and insist on how "kids will like it so it's ok"!!!!!!

 

[danlb_2000]

Disney has a long history of using their characters as introductions to ideals, information and concepts. It has been successful for decades, it still can be IMO. Some of their work in WWII comes to mind. I think you point is well made and valid.

Some folks on here have their own vision of WS and it's not open to debate with them, anybody who see it differently is just too foolish to know better in their view. Some of these same people seem to be able to channel the sprit of Walt himself and they know without a doubt that he would not approve of this or many other moves at WDW. I don't have such a connection with Walt so I can only guess what he would say...

It seems to me that Walt wanted to build DL (and thus WDW latter) as place where families (i.e. adults and kids) could enjoy rides and attractions together. I would guess since Epcot is not what he originally intend and never has been that he would be fine with it serving the same purpose, bringing families together instead. Now in 2014 going into 2015 and beyond Frozen has the ability to do that to. IMO the building of Frozen at WS will do exactly like you posted, draw kids into an area they may or may not have wanted to visit before. I see it as a win for families who want to see WS together. And with the long lines that are sure to be part of the ride when it opens there will be lots of time to be together!

I went to Epcot in the mid 80's with my family and we didn't have any problem enjoying it together without the assistance of characters.