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

Figments Friend

Well-Known Member
Alice or Mary in the UK would be welcome by me. A flying ride starring Mary and an elaborate dark ride starring Alice. Sigh. If only.

Your wish was granted some years ago ...well, sort of -

Alice and Mary Poppins both appear regularly in the UK area of World Showcase at EPCOT.
Not a full blown *Attraction* per say, but their presence is a welcome addition.
Disneyland out in happy Anaheim, CA has a wonderful classic dark ride for *Alice* which recently had a nice upgrade in it*s interior.
Sure, it*s not at WDW....but all the more reason to head West !
;)

And that *flying ride* based on Mary Poppins...
A famous Imagineer we all know and love designed a Attraction called *Mary Poppins Jolly Holiday* back in the late 1960s before he was hired at WED.
It was never built ( at least, not yet! ) but it was ahead of it*s time.
:)
 
Last edited:

Kman101

Well-Known Member
Oh, I know about Mary's ride that was imagined. It's why I mentioned it. And I've ridden Alice in DL. Always liked Alice in Wonderland. I can't wait to ride it again now that they've plussed it. I'm bummed they never bothered to add a Wonderland themed area to New Fantasyland in the MK.
 

Haymarket2008

Well-Known Member
Oh hey, just stumbled on some old B-Roll footage of Maelstrom from the 80s with COMPLETELY DIFFERENT DIALOGUE FROM THE THREE HEADED TROLL on YouTube. Fascinating and now I want more.


It almost looks like the trailer of a horror movie at how fast paced all the shots are. So cool though! Look how vibrant the colors are on the mural. Wow I miss it.
 

imagineer boy

Well-Known Member
It's like Stitch all over again. I liked Lilo and Stitch and I liked the Stitch character. But when Disney marketed the living hell out of him back in 2003/04, teepeeing the castle, putting him on the monorails, and replaced my all time favorite attraction with him, I started to HATE him. Now I liked Frozen (but no, I don't think it's anywhere near as amazing and groundbreaking as the 90's films were like people make it out to be) but the same thing is happening. The over-marketing of it is making me REALLY start to hate everything having to do with it. When it comes to good marketing, sometimes a little less is more.
 

yepitsandy

Active Member
It's like Stitch all over again. I liked Lilo and Stitch and I liked the Stitch character. But when Disney marketed the living hell out of him back in 2003/04, teepeeing the castle, putting him on the monorails, and replaced my all time favorite attraction with him, I started to HATE him. Now I liked Frozen (but no, I don't think it's anywhere near as amazing and groundbreaking as the 90's films were like people make it out to be) but the same thing is happening. The over-marketing of it is making me REALLY start to hate everything having to do with it. When it comes to good marketing, sometimes a little less is more.

Understandable, but businesswise it is a whole different world. Stitch brought in $273 million lifetime worldwide box office, #382 worldwide all-time, and never even hit #1 movie for a week. Frozen just as a box office ticket sales alone has raked in 1,274,219,009 worldwide, a difference of a billion dollars higher than Stitch. #5 worldwide all-time. That's not including merchandise, plus the soundtrack, which will hit one year on the charts next week and is still at #18 (with a second version also charting at #28).

So while it may seem like Stitch-levels of oversaturation to you, demand is definitely more than there for the Frozen girls... way more than it ever was for Stitch, despite him being plastered everywhere.
 

Haymarket2008

Well-Known Member
It's like Stitch all over again. I liked Lilo and Stitch and I liked the Stitch character. But when Disney marketed the living hell out of him back in 2003/04, teepeeing the castle, putting him on the monorails, and replaced my all time favorite attraction with him, I started to HATE him. Now I liked Frozen (but no, I don't think it's anywhere near as amazing and groundbreaking as the 90's films were like people make it out to be) but the same thing is happening. The over-marketing of it is making me REALLY start to hate everything having to do with it. When it comes to good marketing, sometimes a little less is more.
And luckily the Stitch madness fizzled out REAL fast. Hopefully the same happens with Frozen, despite both films being very good. I just hope it brings in a great attraction, unlike Stitch's mess.
 

Cesar R M

Well-Known Member
Understandable, but businesswise it is a whole different world. Stitch brought in $273 million lifetime worldwide box office, #382 worldwide all-time, and never even hit #1 movie for a week. Frozen just as a box office ticket sales alone has raked in 1,274,219,009 worldwide, a difference of a billion dollars higher than Stitch. #5 worldwide all-time. That's not including merchandise, plus the soundtrack, which will hit one year on the charts next week and is still at #18 (with a second version also charting at #28).

So while it may seem like Stitch-levels of oversaturation to you, demand is definitely more than there for the Frozen girls... way more than it ever was for Stitch, despite him being plastered everywhere.
the 273 million was including merchandise?
Lets also not forget that a lot of movies during that decade were "forgettable".
I mean.. how many people know about treasure planet?
 

yepitsandy

Active Member
the 273 million was including merchandise?
Lets also not forget that a lot of movies during that decade were "forgettable".
I mean.. how many people know about treasure planet?

Both the 273 million for Stitch and a billion more for Frozen are just movie ticket sales alone, "domestic" and "non-domestic" combined. They are not including merchandise, DVD/VHS sales, anything outside of tickets to see the movie in a theatre. Stitch was in theaters from June 21, 2002 to its final closing date of November 26. Frozen debuted November 22, 2013 and closed in theatres July 17, 2014, including the "sing-a-long" re-release.
 

Tony Perkis

Well-Known Member
Exactly. I also hate when people criticize someone for not experiencing Disney in it's heyday (I did, I was just very very very young). So someone can't appreciate older rides and the way the parks were if they didn't live through it? Especially in today's world with Youtube, etc. How can you NOT want to research this stuff?

I'm sort of surprised Disney hasn't replaced Tarzan with their 1999 Tarzan. I'd love to just hear the music playing as we pass through the scene. They could do so much with Great Movie Ride. Lion King and Tarzan have some fantastic music.
I'm against Tarzan because it stole a Best Original Song Oscar from South Park.
 

Belowthesurface

Well-Known Member
I'd be surprised if that happens. Aside from reconfiguring the load/unload to open up the current load area into a new scene, I imagine that any track extension into another part of the building would add only a few dozen feet at most. That would be very expensive, especially if they were to expand into an elevated space (like the Norway lounge) that wasn't designed to hold up a flume full of water, and would probably require a lot of structural reinforcement. At some point you have to wonder when it just would've been more feasible/economical to just build a new ride.

The old load area is being used for an additional show scene.

Other than that, the layout is the EXACT same.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom