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

sedati

Well-Known Member
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.

Good point about Kane... though you should remember the film was about a man who, despite spending both a very long lifetime (years of development) and an incredible fortune (humongous E-ticket) could not rekindle the only fond memories he has, (the Disney of your youth) playing with his (SPOILER!) sled. If only Disney had a property that featured a sled (two in fact, as one explodes.)
I was hoping they would do this right, but reading the second half of your response tells me they did not (which is weird as from where I am in time, the original Maelstrom is still open and all that's been announced is an overlay. Are you a Timelord? Budget, effort, and over-ratedness hasn't even happened yet. How may pages is this thread in your time (2016?) I already have five more to slog though.
 

Matt_Black

Well-Known Member
Oh I hope they don't. But if they do please not a direct to DVD sequel, those suck most of the time. The movie has legs enough to carry a ride for decades. Heck LM just got her ride and it was not because of crappy DVD sequels to the original IMO.

The animated series was pretty awesome, though. There was an episode where Mark Hamill voiced a submarine-driving Hans Christian Andersen!
 

BigTxEars

Well-Known Member
Disney has had no issue crowing about their quarterly profits on a regular basis, with the current lineup (pavilion, entertainment, and attractions) at EP playing no small role.

And if they wanted a true ROI, let them build a proper land, with multiple rides and the like. But this is not the case, no matter how anyone wants to justify it, or insult those who don't agree....

What business says..."you know we have enough profit, lets not try and earn anymore".......just because they are doing well does not mean they should or would stop trying to do better.

Who am I insulting now?

What is the ROI on the Frozen move at WS vs the ROI on a new proper land? I don't know, but I would guess WDW does. Thus they choose to place Frozen in WS instead of a new build. Is that because they are cheap? I would guess if the ROI was that much greater on a new proper land than a build at WS then it has nothing to do with being cheap as they would earn their cost back and then some. Can't be greedy and cheap in the case of ROI at WS vs ROI in a new land. Which do you think it is?
 

BigTxEars

Well-Known Member
Good point about Kane... though you should remember the film was about a man who, despite spending both a very long lifetime (years of development) and an incredible fortune (humongous E-ticket) could not rekindle the only fond memories he has, (the Disney of your youth) playing with his (SPOILER!) sled. If only Disney had a property that featured a sled (two in fact, as one explodes.)
I was hoping they would do this right, but reading the second half of your response tells me they did not (which is weird as from where I am in time, the original Maelstrom is still open and all that's been announced is an overlay. Are you a Timelord? Budget, effort, and over-ratedness hasn't even happened yet. How may pages is this thread in your time (2016?) I already have five more to slog though.

Timelord.....oh please please introduce me to....

t5t6pv.jpg


Heck I will chain myself to the front of Norway like a hippie tree hugger to stop Olaf if someone did that :)
 
Last edited:

wm49rs

A naughty bit o' crumpet
Premium Member
What business says..."you know we have enough profit, lets not try and earn anymore".......just because they are doing well does not mean they should or would stop trying to do better.

Who am I insulting now?

What is the ROI on the Frozen move at WS vs the ROI on a new proper land? I don't know, but I would guess WDW does. Thus they choose to place Frozen in WS instead of a new build. Is that because they are cheap? I would guess if the ROI was that much greater on a new proper land than a build at WS then it has nothing to do with being cheap as they would earn their cost back and then some. Can't be greedy and cheap in the case of ROI at WS vs ROI in a new land. Which do you think it is?
No one said they shouldn't try to earn more, now did they?

And spare me the attempts at playing the innocence card. You haven't been shy at degrading those who continue to disagree with you.

And yes, a company can be both cheap and greedy. Cheap for not building a new land to begin with, and greedy for trying to introduce one where it doesn't exist, along with introducing it to the other parks as well through shoddy measures.

However, at the end of it all, I'm through with this topic and the incessant need to defend the magic of the brand....
 

BigTxEars

Well-Known Member
The animated series was pretty awesome, though. There was an episode where Mark Hamill voiced a submarine-driving Hans Christian Andersen!

I just think of all the animated sequels and they just don't "do it" for me. I can't imagine a storyline where Frozen would work as a sequel.

In fact I am having issues thinking of any sequel that was animated that was worth seeing, not coming up with any really. Dragon 2 was OK, Panda was OK, I did not care for the Minions Part 2, Pixar sequels sucked IMO. I guess Shrek was the only one I can come up with right now that I enjoyed like the original, although even that got long in the tooth towards the end.

Puss In Boots was sweet though :)
 

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
It still amazes me how much one can post about something without caring about it.

Epcot did not get great reviews when it opened and many even said it was "boring." You all can keep glorifying it all you want: but having a park geared towards adults and families with small kids, compared to a park geared only towards the older crowd, makes good business sense.

Keep complaining and seeing it fall on deaf ears: Disney lives by the laws of supply & demand not the laws of what the hardcore fans want.
This is just not true. EPCOT Center did just fine.

Good point about Kane... though you should remember the film was about a man who, despite spending both a very long lifetime (years of development) and an incredible fortune (humongous E-ticket) could not rekindle the only fond memories he has, (the Disney of your youth) playing with his (SPOILER!) sled. If only Disney had a property that featured a sled (two in fact, as one explodes.)
I was hoping they would do this right, but reading the second half of your response tells me they did not (which is weird as from where I am in time, the original Maelstrom is still open and all that's been announced is an overlay. Are you a Timelord? Budget, effort, and over-ratedness hasn't even happened yet. How may pages is this thread in your time (2016?) I already have five more to slog though.
Budgets and design don't happen after the ride closes.
 

BigTxEars

Well-Known Member
No one said they shouldn't try to earn more, now did they?

And spare me the attempts at playing the innocence card. You haven't been shy at degrading those who continue to disagree with you.

And yes, a company can be both cheap and greedy. Cheap for not building a new land to begin with, and greedy for trying to introduce one where it doesn't exist, along with introducing it to the other parks as well through shoddy measures.

However, at the end of it all, I'm through with this topic and the incessant need to defend the magic of the brand....

Your the one implying they are doing well enough when I brought up their ROI. I pointed out that from a business persecutive ROI is never good enough for any business.

Go ahead and link where I have degraded others, you say there are many examples so you should not have a hard time finding them and posting them. I'll wait.....

And you can't be cheap and greedy on ROI in this matter. You can only be too cheap to build a new land or greedy enough to build a new land based on projected ROI.
 

Matt_Black

Well-Known Member
I just think of all the animated sequels and they just don't "do it" for me. I can't imagine a storyline where Frozen would work as a sequel.

In fact I am having issues thinking of any sequel that was animated that was worth seeing, not coming up with any really. Dragon 2 was OK, Panda was OK, I did not care for the Minions Part 2, Pixar sequels sucked IMO. I guess Shrek was the only one I can come up with right now that I enjoyed like the original, although even that got long in the tooth towards the end.

Puss In Boots was sweet though :)

Brother Bear 2 has the dubious distinction of being the only Disney direct-to-video sequel having a higher rating on Rotten Tomatoes than the original.

Rescuers Down Under is pretty much superior in every way to the original. That's the only exception I can think of.
 

BrerJon

Well-Known Member
Maelstrom had a 50 minute wait today at 7pm, while Soarin' was 45 mins. What kind of ride has that long wait in the evening? Man, those Norwegians have become very popular.

70 minutes tonight for Maelstrom... lots of people getting one last ride in. The co-ordinators were shambolically trying to get the single rope queue to wrap around so that it didn't completely block the entrance to Akershus, eventually the line wrapped around three times before the entrance... Maelstrom was not designed for these sorts of crowds.

Anyone going next week for the last rides needs to be prepared to wait a looong time!
 

Mike S

Well-Known Member
70 minutes tonight for Maelstrom... lots of people getting one last ride in. The co-ordinators were shambolically trying to get the singal rope queue to wrap around so that it didn't completely block the entrance to Akershus, eventually it was three lines... Maelstrom was not designed for these sorts of crowds.

Anyone going next week for the last rides needs to be prepared to wait a looong time!
Can't imagine what it'll be like when it "reopens".
 

BrerJon

Well-Known Member
Can't imagine what it'll be like when it "reopens".

I've no doubt that the back third of the gift shop will be part of the new queue, and it will be rebuilt for the expected enormous crowds, so I think they'll be OK on that one. It's just the existing configuration that doesn't really support it.

The main problem is the Fastpass+ line sitting empty and unused while everyone in standby spills out into the street. Most people tonight were riding spontaneously long after Fastpasses had run out, but nobody was in the Fastpass line, so I think many people who booked a Fastpass in the morning couldn't be bothered when the time came around eight hours later as they were busy with Food and Wine. So you have a situation where there's one line that can only use half the space it was designed for.

That's why in the 80s when Maelstrom regularly had a 60 minute wait it didn't spill outside because there was no Fastpass then.
 

YodaMan

Well-Known Member
Skip to about 13:40:

Today in Backlot they were working on some things and I noticed giant Anna and Elsa head sculptures (they're reddish and on either side of the table at the 13:40 mark). Do these have anything at all to do with the Maelstrom redo? Not sure what kinds of things they do in that room, but just thought I'd ask. If not for a ride, any clue what they'd be for?
 

BigTxEars

Well-Known Member
Brother Bear 2 has the dubious distinction of being the only Disney direct-to-video sequel having a higher rating on Rotten Tomatoes than the original.

Rescuers Down Under is pretty much superior in every way to the original. That's the only exception I can think of.

Forgot about Rescuers, good call.

I have yet to find a time in my life where I was so bored I wanted to watch BB2 :)
 

BigTxEars

Well-Known Member
Skip to about 13:40:

Today in Backlot they were working on some things and I noticed giant Anna and Elsa head sculptures (they're reddish and on either side of the table at the 13:40 mark). Do these have anything at all to do with the Maelstrom redo? Not sure what kinds of things they do in that room, but just thought I'd ask. If not for a ride, any clue what they'd be for?


Makes me think parade, no ideal why but it does.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom