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

[Travel Junkie]

Please god do.

Perhaps the difference is not blind faith, but the hope for the better. Obviously you jaded experts know more....oh wait. No, you don't. It just gets ridiculously negative here, no one, or very few can look for the silver lining, just your craptastic expectations.

Famous saying if you don't have anything nice to say, don't say it. Would be a much better place.

You do realize an internet forum is a place where individuals debate multiple sides to the same issue. It would be a pretty boring place if everyone agreed with each other. If all you want to do is hear about how great Disney is, perhaps this isn’t the place for you.

Many of us are experts in the very fields we are discussing. So in many cases yeah they do more than you, especially when the extent of your contributions are stop being so negative Disney is a business. Yeah we know and in our view they are making mistakes.

Disney prides itself and talks endlessly about attention to detail and creating immersive thematic environments. Disney created these standards. Right now they are selectively living up to the standards they and their founder created. Some people do not appreciate this. Placing fictional places in a park designed and built to be non-fiction is not thematically appropriate. If you think that is fine with this, then so be it, that is your opinion. Please make your case why Disney can selectively enforce their standards. Others are not and you are welcome to debate the issue in a civil manner.

 

[danlb_2000]

You do realize an internet forum is a place where individuals debate multiple sides to the same issue. It would be a pretty boring place if everyone agreed with each other. If all you want to do is hear about how great Disney is, perhaps this isn’t the place for you.

Many of us are experts in the very fields we are discussing. So in many cases yeah they do more than you, especially when the extent of your contributions are stop being so negative Disney is a business. Yeah we know and in our view they are making mistakes.

Disney prides itself and talks endlessly about attention to detail and creating immersive thematic environments. Disney created these standards. Right now they are selectively living up to the standards they and their founder created. Some people do not appreciate this. Placing fictional places in a park designed and built to be non-fiction is not thematically appropriate. If you think that is fine with this, then so be it, that is your opinion. Please make your case why Disney can selectively enforce their standards. Others are not and you are welcome to debate the issue in a civil manner.

Seems like we have been down this road before.

 

[H2O_Mouse-Ears]

Again, does that make it right simply for a lack of proper placement being available right now? Or just because Maelstrom was old? Epcot is not MK. MK is not Epcot. Its the differences they have that make them unique. Blurring those lines will only hurt that effect in the long run. If making kids more interested is such a factor, then we should just have 4 MK parks. Kids would also be more interested in eating cookies for breakfast, or not going to school. that doesnt mean its the best option.

Eating cookies for breakfast is not healthy and not going to school hurts their future. Families go to WDW for pleasure and enjoyment and a means to spend time with one another at the same time. Along these lines, I feel creating an attraction kids will enjoy is not that big of a deal. In cases like this, I feel there is nothing wrong with Disney catering to what children want and gaining some profits at the same time (profits need to be made as it is a business). I understand the argument made from a purist point of view in how this attraction will "not fit" the country and there are other places in WDW where kids can go for enjoyment but is it so bad that Disney is creating a kid-friendly attraction to an area that is not too popular to begin with? It's not as if it is completely out of left field.

 

[ABQ]

@Phicinfan , I cannot dispute that there is "expansion" going on. But in terms of "so much" I think outside of Pandora and the RoL, that's all I'd consider expansion. I can't look at the closed status of Backlot Tour and no sign of a drill or Sawzall yet building the new tracks at Toy Story as current expansion. Nor the state of the Hub, that's not expansion either.
I also cannot dispute that, regardless of my dislike of it, the Meet and Greet planned for WS is an expansion of sorts.
However, you state that we cannot expect TWDC to rehab all of Epcot while all this other work is being done. Trouble is, what I did expect, and what everyone should expect, was for TWDC to not let any park run into disrepair as they did with Epcot, which would have avoided it needing so much at one time.
A little pre-planning would have gone a long way. Some risk taking too, as was so eloquently pointed out near the end of that Huff Post article ripping Iger, he has no clue what his clients care for or don't, unlike his predecessor and Walt himself. They may have had a clue to plan for a legitimate Frozen attraction, rather than a shoehorn, knee jerk one.

 

[H2O_Mouse-Ears]

@Phicinfan , I cannot dispute that there is "expansion" going on. But in terms of "so much" I think outside of Pandora and the RoL, that's all I'd consider expansion. I can't look at the closed status of Backlot Tour and no sign of a drill or Sawzall yet building the new tracks at Toy Story as current expansion. Nor the state of the Hub, that's not expansion either.
I also cannot dispute that, regardless of my dislike of it, the Meet and Greet planned for WS is an expansion of sorts.
However, you state that we cannot expect TWDC to rehab all of Epcot while all this other work is being done. Trouble is, what I did expect, and what everyone should expect, was for TWDC to not let any park run into disrepair as they did with Epcot, which would have avoided it needing so much at one time.
A little pre-planning would have gone a long way. Some risk taking too, as was so eloquently pointed out near the end of that Huff Post article ripping Iger, he has no clue what his clients care for or don't, unlike his predecessor and Walt himself. They may have had a clue to plan for a legitimate Frozen attraction, rather than a shoehorn, knee jerk one.

Does Disney Springs count as an expansion? I do like what they are doing there. Also, I feel Pandora is a pretty big expansion and they did just complete New Fantasyland. I feel there is only so much you can do at a time. However, having said that, I do agree Epcot is in need of attention/expansion/improvement.

 

[Mike S]

Again, does that make it right simply for a lack of proper placement being available right now? Or just because Maelstrom was old? Epcot is not MK. MK is not Epcot. Its the differences they have that make them unique. Blurring those lines will only hurt that effect in the long run. If making kids more interested is such a factor, then we should just have 4 MK parks. Kids would also be more interested in eating cookies for breakfast, or not going to school. that doesnt mean its the best option.

 

[Gomer]

Eating cookies for breakfast is not healthy and not going to school hurts their future. Families go to WDW for pleasure and enjoyment and a means to spend time with one another at the same time. Along these lines, I feel creating an attraction kids will enjoy is not that big of a deal. In cases like this, I feel there is nothing wrong with Disney catering to what children want and gaining some profits at the same time (profits need to be made as it is a business). I understand the argument made from a purist point of view in how this attraction will "not fit" the country and there are other places in WDW where kids can go for enjoyment but is it so bad that Disney is creating a kid-friendly attraction to an area that is not too popular to begin with? It's not as if it is completely out of left field.

Couldn't they create a kid friendly attraction, that is also adult friendly, and thematically relevant to the area in which it is placed?

I don't have an issue with kids having something to do in WS, as long as it fits. Attractions don't need to be based on the most recent fad in order to attract kids. Rides like Pirates and Haunted Mansion and Imagination were exciting children long before IP's became the only way rides get built.

Disney now treats theme parks as tie in merchandise for their movies as opposed to a product in and of it self. Their primary motivation at all times seems to be in cross promotion rather than the quality of the themed attractions themselves. Quality will attract guests, be it IP related or not. Even if the Frozen ride is of the greatest quality, by diluting the theme of WS the quality of the park overall has been diminished and will lead to long term issues in guest retention. But that is the crux of the issue with WDW these days. Long views are thrown by the wayside in favor of short term wins.

But from an optimistic standpoint, maybe the meet and greet isn't all bad. In ten years when people don't care about Frozen anymore, they'll have a building structure sitting there primed for retheming into a new pavilion. Maybe, over time, this is how we finally get a new country in WS. Just have to wait a decade or so.

 

[ABQ]

Does Disney Springs count as an expansion? I do like what they are doing there. Also, I feel Pandora is a pretty big expansion and they did just complete New Fantasyland. I feel there is only so much you can do at a time. However, having said that, I do agree Epcot is in need of attention/expansion/improvement.

OK, I'll give you Disney Springs, but though it's as unique as a fancy pants shopping mall can be, it's not one of the parks, it's just located near them. It would be like a whole new resort hotel complex being built. I may stay there, but it's not in the top 10 things I would think of when thinking of WDW.

 

[wdisney9000]

is it so bad that Disney is creating a kid-friendly attraction to an area that is not too popular to begin with? It's not as if it is completely out of left field.

By what standards was it not popular? I always see a line for the restaurant and as old as Maesltrom was it was hardly ever a walk on. The bakery always has people there as well. Should they place Anna and Elsa in the hall of presidents? There is hardly ever a wait for that and its far from the most popular attraction. Would making it more kid friendly do the trick? Should the history of our presidents be secondary as long as its kid friendly?

 

[Gomer]

By what standards was it not popular? I always see a line for the restaurant and as old as Maesltrom was it was hardly ever a walk on. The bakery always has people there as well. Should they place Anna and Elsa in the hall of presidents? There is hardly ever a wait for that and its far from the most popular attraction. Would making it more kid friendly do the trick? Should the history of our presidents be secondary as long as its kid friendly?

I think you are on to something. Maybe they should have the presidents sing "Let it Go". It will bring in tons of kids so that can't be bad. Disney is a business after all and has to think of the bottom line.

They can call it....America Sings.

 

[H2O_Mouse-Ears]

By what standards was it not popular? I always see a line for the restaurant and as old as Maesltrom was it was hardly ever a walk on. The bakery always has people there as well. Should they place Anna and Elsa in the hall of presidents? There is hardly ever a wait for that and its far from the most popular attraction. Would making it more kid friendly do the trick? Should the history of our presidents be secondary as long as its kid friendly?

Guess we can agree to disagree. Always felt Maelstorm was a walk on (almost every time I went it was a less than 10 min wait and many times not even a line at all) and seemed to be one of the least popular areas in my opinion. Considering the amount of people Epcot gets, there will always be people somewhere. And as Frozen is at least inspired by Norway, I feel that the hall of presidents argument is just off base. As I said, Frozen being in Norway is not completely out of left field. And yes, I do feel there should be something kid-friendly added to the Hall of Presidents area considering it is pretty unpopular. Not saying they should get rid of Hall of Presidents or anything but something can be added to the area to draw in more families with children. Again, I understand Epcot is not MK but does not need to be children-averse. I feel it does not need to be a complete adult-oriented museum style area. But again, I have no issue to agree to disagree. Just my own opinions.

*Edit
I got mixed up with American Adventure in Epcot. I was referring to American Adventure in Epcot. Hall of Presidents is in Liberty Square and that area has attractions for everyone so no issue with that area in any way.

 

[wdisney9000]

And as Frozen is at least inspired by Norway, I feel that hall of presidents argument is just off base.

Hall of Presidents is 'inspired' by heroic and great leaders. The Frozen twins fall into that category. See, there is always a way to make it seem relevant, as backwards as it may be in reality.

 

[H2O_Mouse-Ears]

Hall of Presidents is 'inspired' by heroic and great leaders. The Frozen twins fall into that category. See, there is always a way to make it seem relevant, as backwards as it may be in reality.

lol I guess....
just saying the architecture and landscape was based off Norway....I guess it is what it is and understand you feeling that way if that is what you think

 

[Mike S]

Guess we can agree to disagree. Always felt Maelstorm was a walk on (almost every time I went it was a less than 10 min wait and many times not even a line at all) and seemed to be one of the least popular areas in my opinion. Considering the amount of people Epcot gets, there will always be people somewhere. And as Frozen is at least inspired by Norway, I feel that the hall of presidents argument is just off base. As I said, Frozen being in Norway is not completely out of left field. And yes, I do feel there should be something kid-friendly added to the Hall of Presidents area considering it is pretty unpopular. Not saying they should get rid of Hall of Presidents or anything but something can be added to the area to draw in more families with children. Again, I understand Epcot is not MK but does not need to be children-averse. I feel it does not need to be a complete adult-oriented museum style area. But again, I have no issue to agree to disagree. Just my own opinions.

Something added to Liberty Square? I know!!!!!

 

[DisDan]

Well there is the argument of the "I want it now" folks which is basically saying they want their kids to have a Frozen attraction now while they are still young and look at attractions differently then when you are a teenager/adult. If we waited for Disney to build a proper land/attraction for frozen, kids will be 10 years older by the time that's done (at least).

 

[Travel Junkie]

Please see my other response as to why what they are doing makes sense. With all the other expansion going on, this was the only move they could probably make fiscally to get traction in early, and also gain the benefit of draw for young folks in that area.

You can try and paint me in a corner if you like, but you just make yourself look more silly and petty.

Therein lies the problem. The company used to make decisions based on a numbers of factors but thematically integrity was at the top. Now that is at or near the bottom of the list.

They had other choices as to where this should go that would make fiscal sense as well. This was far from the only place. In fact DHS makes the most financial sense because the park is worse off financially and attendance wise. It could use the capacity and any future plans they have for the DHS are far from set in stone.

For the record, Frozen belongs in MK. You can argue however that Frozen actually should go into DHS if all you care about is numbers.

 

[H2O_Mouse-Ears]

Something added to Liberty Square? I know!!!!!
View attachment 80795

Actually sorry, I made a mistake. I got mixed up with the American Adventure in Epcot. I was referring to American Adventure. Liberty Square is what it is as it does have its own attractions for everyone.

 

[pmaljr]

Since we're all giving opinions, here's mine: You folks can spin it however you like but the bottom line is that this doesn't belong in Epcot/WS. I know it. You know it. Even Yellow Dog knows it. Is "Magic World Showcase Kingdom" going to be the new name? Don't answer that.

 

[H2O_Mouse-Ears]

Since we're all giving opinions, here's mine: You folks can spin it however you like but the bottom line is that this doesn't belong in Epcot/WS. I know it. You know it. Even Yellow Dog knows it. Is "Magic World Showcase Kingdom" going to be the new name? Don't answer that.

I understand I am in the minority here as I know the majority feel Epcot should remain character-free except in select meet and greet areas. I just feel something needs to drastically change/improve in both Future World and World Showcase as I feel this park has no direction. I, personally, have no bright ideas but do feel something definitely needs to change.

 

[lazyboy97o]

This whole Frozen in WS move was very smart on Dinsey's part. If you look at it from a purely business move, Frozen fans will flock to EPCOT, EPCOT will certainly see a HUGE bump in attendance and Disney did not have to spend much to do it.

It isn't a smart business move. People don't like long lines and over crowding.

First and foremost, I have not seen ONE, not ONE person who says you have to eliminate the foriegn lands aspect altogether, but instead enhance it to make it more small children prefered.
Second, IF you have had or have small kids, and by this I am stating 10 and under, and they are really fascinated by learning about foreign lands....then good for you, my guess is they didn't get it from you though.

Only having a snack counter left is eliminating the foreign lands aspect. Follow the masses is a sure fire way to kill a creative enterprise.