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

[Prince Thomas]

A hardcore Disney fan on this site started a thread about Disney not doing a celebration for Epcot's 25th anniversary that blew up so much it actually made Disney change their plans and make a big event.

Isn't that right, @Figments Friend?

#WERK

 

[Bocabear]

I don't know about everyone else, but I have ALWAYS thought the Princess dining at Norway was misplaced and ridiculous... At least now if they changed it to reflect a Royal Coronation for Anna and Elsa...it would at least thematically tie in to the pavilion....VS random princesses for no other reason than people don't understand/like what Norway offers for food... Adding the overlay to me is not as big an offender as the randomness of Princess Dining ... While I was not initially behind the change, I am hopeful that they will do a great job to a rather lackluster (though bafflingly popular ) attraction.

 

[Travel Junkie]

In a Pavilion that already HAD a princess M&G meal set up. Where was the protest for that?

The original Frozen meet and greet was considered temporary. It was actually paid for by the studio as a promotional tool, not TDO. I didn’t feel it was appropriate at the time, but it was easily removable. This involves rides and new structures that permanently alter EPCOT’s thematic integrity.

 

[SnarkyMonkey]

The original Frozen meet and greet was considered temporary. It was actually paid for by the studio as a promotional tool, not TDO. I didn’t feel it was appropriate at the time, but it was easily removable. This involves rides and new structures that permanently alter EPCOT’s thematic integrity.

Phicinfan was talking about the princess character meal at Arkershus, not the temporary Frozen M&G.

 

[networkpro]

The randomly inserted Princess Storybook Dining was all about managing the availability of capacity. Akershus (funny choice itself as it means "fortified house of the district of Aker") wasn't fully booked prior to its conversion , but Cindy's always was. So it met two goals, decrease the availability of open seatings and draw another demographic to the park.

Its dollars to doughnuts, 30-60 dollars a head guaranteed vs random ala carte orders. X number of people order X amount of Y and Z. much more predictable revenue and inventory.

But that caused more issues... now that the kids are being steered in this direction what do we do with them ?

 

[Mike S]

At some point, folks that are truly against this need to open their eyes here some. Maelstrom was in desperate need of a revamp, and this is one way to do it, and pay it off by converting it to a very popular theme. Again, they are NOT closing and revamping the whole Norway pavilion. They are adding a new M&G and restaging a ride that is "loosely" based on that area. I don't see anyone complaining on the M&G meals they have been having in the pavilion so far. For those saying the Pavilion is now based on a non-existing land...it is not. It is based on Norway, with an added updated ride and M&G.

So do the refresh that was planned and put Frozen somewhere else where it can be a truly major expansion that can handle the large crowds it would attract and what a $1 billion movie that also made a killing in merchandise deserves. But no, Frozen just had to be done in the cheapest way possible.

Again, I disagree here. I have not seen the whole movie, only bits and pieces of it. But the focus of the movie I believe is care of the world and conservation, which is the main focus of AK. To me, I am hoping this is taking Avatar land and making it the AK of the future, or what a Alien AK would look like. That would be a great addition, I still wonder how dino land in AK fits in, and no one has issues with that.

DinoLand fits because Animal Kingdom is about three kinds of animals: living, extinct, and mythical.

 

[Sage of Time]

Also, we are all just speculating about what this attraction will look like, if done well it could still honor the theme of Norway and provide an up close look at some aspects of Norwegian culture while still providing entertainment though the characters and story of Frozen.

Disney has essentially stated from day 1 that the ride will be a musical romp through the movie. It's a Fantasyland ride. Not an EPCOT one. Not a World Showcase ride.

 

[DisDan]

Disney has essentially stated from day 1 that the ride will be a musical romp through the movie. It's a Fantasyland ride. Not an EPCOT one. Not a World Showcase ride.

Yes, Disney has said that a Ride about Frozen will feature the characters of Frozen and some of the music of Frozen. It wouldn't be a ride based on Frozen if it didn't. That doesn't mean it can't at the same time show what makes Norway a beautiful land and integrate aspects of Norwegian culture into other areas of the attraction. We just don't know yet.

 

[wdisney9000]

Expressing an opinion is a page 1 through 20 kind of thing. Repeating that same opinion for 263 page is obsession not expression. And every time you hit "post" a little baby sheds a tear. Stop making the baby cry!

It's 263 pages of people discussing Disney's decision to place Frozen in Norway pavilion. Some love it, others think its the wrong place. Either way, its a discussion about Disneys DECISION, not obsessions. If you choose to label it that way, that is your issue. And if its so repetitive, why continue to participate in it?

 

[Communicore]

For me, I am all for absolutely anything that they do to Epcot theme park. I am all for anything at this point, since there is no more EPCOT Center therefore it's free for all what they want to do to Epcot theme park. Pixar-izate it, Frozen-izate it, Disney Channel-izate it, I don't care any more. Just leave the 80's bathrooms alone lol. My old EPCOT Center ain't coming back, so why not let the new generations enjoy their Epcot theme park. There's no use pining for the EPCOT Center of old, there are videos and pics out there to reminisce, it had it's time, we all had a ton of fun in there but now I am just willing to let them do what they want to it.

 

[Bocabear]

And this is where the whole Project Gemini was so brilliant... Using what was there to add more atrractions and ride capacity all over the entire park... It would have been amazing. nothat I loved every single facet of it, but the spirit of it would have been better than knee jerk reactions to the latest movie debut...it would have all had a plan...

 

[Phicinfan]

So do the refresh that was planned and put Frozen somewhere else where it can be a truly major expansion that can handle the large crowds it would attract and what a $1 billion movie that also made a killing in merchandise deserves. But no, Frozen just had to be done in the cheapest way possible.

yes, it could be done that way, but what better way to draw folks in?

DinoLand fits because Animal Kingdom is about three kinds of animals: living, extinct, and mythical.

So why is someone questioning why Avatar doesn't fit in AK?!?!?! Pretty sure it does with its conservation point of view and new forms of life it shows....just saying

 

[mp2bill]

That stinks that they're putting a M&G in the open lot between two pavilions. I know this is a long, long, long, long, long shot...but I was hoping that they'd add more countries at some point. I guess they still have, what, 8 more spots?

 

[Magenta Panther]

yes, it could be done that way, but what better way to draw folks in?



So why is someone questioning why Avatar doesn't fit in AK?!?!?! Pretty sure it does with its conservation point of view and new forms of life it shows....just saying

1. Avatar is not a Disney creation, plus it was a stupid Iger-generated kneejerk reaction to Universal's Potterland, plus it was a flash-in-the-pan movie fad, plus there are actual Disney adaptations and creations that much better deserve a land of their own, like, say, The Lion King and The Jungle Book. PLUS the AK sign includes a dragon silhouette, not a Banshee or whatever Cameron called his stupid flying lizard things. Mythical creatures like dragons, unicorns, griffins, etc. are creatures that have appeared in literature and art for centuries, people all over the world are familiar with them, and wouldn't have to be aware of a movie in order to enjoy them. THAT'S why Avatar doesn't fit in at AK, and why I for one am questioning it. Just saying.

 

[wdisney9000]

Disney has essentially stated from day 1 that the ride will be a musical romp through the movie. It's a Fantasyland ride. Not an EPCOT one. Not a World Showcase ride.

It comes down to the fact that its a slippery slope. The vague connections people and Disney use to justify Frozen/Norway could be applied in the same manor to any movie/attraction. This Frozen overlay will be embraced thus allowing any aspect of the parks to become a target for a budget friendly overlay/remake when the next hit movie comes along.

 

[Rodan75]

1. Avatar is not a Disney creation, plus it was a stupid Iger-generated kneejerk reaction to Universal's Potterland, plus it was a flash-in-the-pan movie fad, plus there are actual Disney adaptations and creations that much better deserve a land of their own, like, say, The Lion King and The Jungle Book. PLUS the AK sign includes a dragon silhouette, not a Banshee or whatever Cameron called his stupid flying lizard things. Mythical creatures like dragons, unicorns, griffins, etc. are creatures that have appeared in literature and art for centuries, people all over the world are familiar with them, and wouldn't have to be aware of a movie in order to enjoy them. THAT'S why Avatar doesn't fit in at AK, and why I for one am questioning it. Just saying.

Avatar's creatures are just as mythical as unicorns and dragons. Books are an entertainment medium just like movies. Disney has had licensed IP in their parks since the good ole days.

 

[wdisney9000]

Avatar's creatures are just as mythical as unicorns and dragons. Books are an entertainment medium just like movies. Disney has had licensed IP in their parks since the good ole days.

I think its safe to say though that unicorns, dragons, griffins, etc are for more recognizable and have been used throughout time in everything from tales of old ages to new IMAX 3-D movies. Camerons creations for Avatar are extremely specific and only apply to that particular film. I wouldnt know if they would classify as mythical just because he created them. If I create an animal and write about it does it automatically qualify as a mythical beast worthy of being in the same category of others that have become popular throughout history?

 

[Magenta Panther]

Avatar's creatures are just as mythical as unicorns and dragons. Books are an entertainment medium just like movies. Disney has had licensed IP in their parks since the good ole days.

But Avatar's creatures are not nearly as well-known, and well-liked, and besides they're dippy.

The classic mythicals have been in books AND art AND movies AND television. They're much better-known and THEY were the creatures referred to when AK was being conceived.

Sure, Disney parks have always had licensed IPs, but most if not all of them were Disney adaptations. And therein lies the crucial difference.

 

[Mike S]

yes, it could be done that way, but what better way to draw folks in?

More fitting ideas could be a draw to World Showcase as well. I brought these up before and I'm doing it again.

The various Mountains are some of Disneys most popular rides in any of their parks. They would definitely work in World Showcase as well, no need for Frozen being put where it doesn't belong. Disney's just too cheap to build them and a proper Frozen expansion.

 

[Brian Swan]

Other than Magic Kingdom, I feel like all of the parks are suffering from serious issues. Disney doesn't seem to know what to do with the parks other than to throw in attractions based on the movies. Now, at least in Magic Kingdom most of the time it has made sense, albeit other times not, like Stitch's Great Escape (how the heck has that not been closed yet? Didn't the Stitch fad wear off?0

Definitely, EPCOT is having a major identity crisis. Future World is full of pavilions that need help. Most of them do not even reflect the original intents, and those that do desperately need updating, like Journey into Imagination and to a lesser extent Ellen's Energy Adventure. Now they are throwing Frozen into Norway where they know perfectly well it only very loosely fits, but they just had to cram it in. A meet and greet I'm OK with, and they could even make the ride something special by theming it as a tour of Norway guided by Frozen characters - we all know that's not gonna be the case.

Hollywood Studios is in a similar distressed position, they clearly do not know what to do with it at this point, closing the landmark Backlot attraction pretty much put the nail in the coffin for the concept of this park. They need to just start over with a new idea because honestly for the money you pay to enter the park there is not anything close to enough to do to justify it, and year by year, it becomes less and less. Again, many of the attractions have nothing to do with the park's concept or theme (Rock n Roller Coaster comes to mind).

Animal Kingdom, the one park that was relatively untouched with the "based on movie" nonsense (other than the Bug's Life show but at least that kind of fits), is getting Avatarland. I never saw Avatar, so I can't speak to whether it is a good movie or not. As far as I can tell though, it has absolutely nothing to do with Animal Kingdom in essence. They are just putting it where they have tons of room, it seems like, and to attract people to the park.

If all four parks are just going to be a mismosh of ideas, with no real theme and purpose, that's fine, but you may as well just call them Magic Kingdom A, B, C and D. I am tired of movie based tie-ins for every new attraction. What was the last attraction Disney opened that had nothing to do with a movie, recent or otherwise? Movie tie-in attractions have always been an important PORTION of their offerings, but it is no longer a portion, it's the whole pie.

If Disney wants to successfully continue to charge so much to enter their parks they need to set themselves apart and make the parks unique and special, not just a bunch of movie tie-in rides that scream "cash grab"! Inventing original stories to base attractions on is what Disney was known for. It was what set them apart. Iconic rides at the Magic Kingdom - Jungle Cruise, Small World, Carousel of Progress, to name a few, are based on nothing other than Disney's creativity and originality, not a movie tie in. Can we go back to that?

I don't want to turn this into another "I hate the Avatar idea thread" (there are enough of those already), but Avatar is a modern fable about commercial greed destroying ecosystems, and the interconnectedness of organisms within an ecosystem. Thematically, I think it is an excellent fit for AK. Discussions of whether someone liked the movie or not, or if it is an ideal IP for a Disney park is best left for other threads...