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

[englanddg]

This is what some of you folks just cannot wrap your heads around.

YES! WE WOULD ALL LOVE EVERYTHING TO GET A DEDICATED 300M ATTRACTION!

No one has said otherwise. So why constantly folks harp on it like no one agrees is really perplexing.

Saying that was the "alternative" simply is uneducated. Because it's not what Disney does at WDW, it hasn't been for a very long time (if it ever really was aside from initial build-outs, and not even then - hello AK!), and holding on to the fantasy that somehow this will all magically change is naive, at best.

Let's say you really really want a steak dinner. You are starving. You haven't eaten in days. Are you going to spit at the cheeseburger you are offered? It may not be what you want, but it's food - it's sustenance - it's better than going hungry.

Truth be told, if they were putting a $300M Frozen attraction at WDW, at least half these folks would STILL be complaining because "ugh how can they be putting all that money into Frozen, flavor of the month!" Also mostly the same people who complained that Disney didn't have something ready to go when the movie came out. Essentially, no matter what they did with Frozen, many of the same folks would be complaining just as heavily.

This is the groupthink on this - which completely ignores that to the outside world, this is FABULOUS NEWS - Maelstrom has reportedly been among the lowest rated WDW rides in terms of guest satisfaction ever, it's being replace by what sounds like a lovely little ride with some neat effects on a theme that appeals to MILLIONS in ways that Maelstrom never did.

Now, capacity issues? Sure, that's a valid concern. It's going to be an issue. But this community is clearly completely ignoring the fact that this is not "bad news" to anyone but them.

So, you didn't read the comments section on the Disney Park Blogs...did you.

I'd hardly say the concerns / comments are limited to this thread/forum alone, at least not in the FAN community at large.

 

[AEfx]

So, you didn't read the comments section on the Disney Park Blogs...did you.

I'd hardly say the concerns / comments are limited to this thread/forum alone, at least not in the FAN community at large.

Precisely. And I said "community" - I was referring to the Disney fan community, though this site is the nexus of these beliefs quite often.

It's people that sit on that blog they "hate" all day and wait for things to be posted so they can be disgruntled. Silly me, I think the blog is full of crap but I've been doing it wrong - I just don't read it!

Just like when an article shows up anywhere, within minutes a half-dozen folks have seen a twit about it and run to complain.

No one in the "FAN community" is in any way representative of the greater public that visits WDW. I guarantee you no normal person is going to walk into WS and go "OMG!!!!!! WHY IS FROZEN HERE??!! THEY RUINED THE THEME OF THE PARK!" Not a single one.

This is the seedy side of "social media" - and for whatever reason people seem to think that people who follow a certain topic religiously somehow speak to the general public, and not what they really are - a specialized group with an agenda.

If you add up all the complaints, there are what, 5,000 disgruntled people? 10,000? They are not even the tiniest molecule in the bucket of WDW guests. Perspective has been totally lost on this issue.

 

[Matt_Black]

Did you actually have any sort of rebuttal or counter-argument to what I posted, or are you content with flashy trends popular on the internet that reinforce style over substance which, ironically, is why some don't want Frozen in Epcot?

 

[englanddg]

Precisely. And I said "community" - I was referring to the Disney fan community, though this site is the nexus of these beliefs quite often.

It's people that sit on that blog they "hate" all day and wait for things to be posted so they can be disgruntled. Silly me, I think the blog is full of crap but I've been doing it wrong - I just don't read it!

Just like when an article shows up anywhere, within minutes a half-dozen folks have seen a twit about it and run to complain.

No one in the "FAN community" is in any way representative of the greater public that visits WDW. I guarantee you no normal person is going to walk into WS and go "OMG!!!!!! WHY IS FROZEN HERE??!! THEY RUINED THE THEME OF THE PARK!" Not a single one.

This is the seedy side of "social media" - and for whatever reason people seem to think that people who follow a certain topic religiously somehow speak to the general public, and not what they really are - a specialized group with an agenda.

If you add up all the complaints, there are what, 5,000 disgruntled people? 10,000? They are not even the tiniest molecule in the bucket of WDW guests. Perspective has been totally lost on this issue.

The average consumer doesn't spend nearly, per capita, what the mature fan does on those parks and experiences. They don't return as often, and they don't keep up with news, because, as you said, they don't care.

The reaction of the general public is "Oh, Frozen, that's nice. Oh, and how do we get to Harry Potter World? Oh, that's not here. Well, I guess we'll just head back to Disney World now that the kid has ridden this Frozen ride...this place is expensive and boring."

If you even get that much out of them. The fact is, the general public has no voice (note, voice, I do not mean influence, I mean vocal statement) in this because the general public DOES NOT CARE.

 

[englanddg]

Did you actually have any sort of rebuttal or counter-argument to what I posted, or are you content with flashy trends popular on the internet that reinforce style over substance which, ironically, is why some don't want Frozen in Epcot?

I have plenty to say about it. I'm just not sure you will like what I have to say. So, I contented myself with rolling my eyes.

 

[aladdin2007]

This is what some of you folks just cannot wrap your heads around.

YES! WE WOULD ALL LOVE EVERYTHING TO GET A DEDICATED 300M ATTRACTION!

No one has said otherwise. So why constantly folks harp on it like no one agrees is really perplexing.

Saying that was the "alternative" simply is uneducated. Because it's not what Disney does at WDW, it hasn't been for a very long time (if it ever really was aside from initial build-outs, and not even then - hello AK!), and holding on to the fantasy that somehow this will all magically change is naive, at best.

Let's say you really really want a steak dinner. You are starving. You haven't eaten in days. Are you going to spit at the cheeseburger you are offered? It may not be what you want, but it's food - it's sustenance - it's better than going hungry.

Truth be told, if they were putting a $300M Frozen attraction at WDW, at least half these folks would STILL be complaining because "ugh how can they be putting all that money into Frozen, flavor of the month!" Also mostly the same people who complained that Disney didn't have something ready to go when the movie came out. Essentially, no matter what they did with Frozen, many of the same folks would be complaining just as heavily.

This is the groupthink on this - which completely ignores that to the outside world, this is FABULOUS NEWS - Maelstrom has reportedly been among the lowest rated WDW rides in terms of guest satisfaction ever, it's being replace by what sounds like a lovely little ride with some neat effects on a theme that appeals to MILLIONS in ways that Maelstrom never did.

Now, capacity issues? Sure, that's a valid concern. It's going to be an issue. But this community is clearly completely ignoring the fact that this is not "bad news" to anyone but those clinging to rose-colored memories and the old company PR about the company and Epcot in general that they bought into hook, line, and sinker as kids and haven't been able to rationally see for what it was.

Doesn't justify kicking Norway to the curb, and I find it hard to believe Maelstrom had the lowest ratings of all WDW rides....

 

[Matt_Black]

I have plenty to say about it. I'm just not sure you will like what I have to say. So, I contented myself with rolling my eyes.

This is the internet. Nobody likes what anybody else has to say.

 

[englanddg]

This is the internet. Nobody likes what anybody else has to say.

Whatchu talking bout Willis!?

 

[Matt_Black]

Whatchu talking bout Willis!?

Kiss my grits!

 

[AEfx]

The average consumer doesn't spend nearly, per capita, what the mature fan does on those parks and experiences. They don't return as often, and they don't keep up with news, because, as you said, they don't care.

The "mature fan"? You really think that the people who are middle-aged and still obsessed with WDW like us enough to write on the Internet about it are anything but a tiny sliver of a minority?


Regardless of who you think should "have a say" - the parks are not designed for us. They are designed for the general public guests. The general public is going to react far more positively to having Frozen than Maelstrom, which again, has consistently been one of the lowest rated WDW attractions of all time.


These parks were not designed for obsessive super-fans like us. Really, they aren't, and never really were.

 

[englanddg]

Kiss my grits!

I actually have some spicy sausage and grits...maybe I'll make that with an Omelet for dinner.

<trundles off>

 

[AEfx]

Doesn't justify kicking Norway to the curb, and I find it hard to believe Maelstrom had the lowest ratings of all WDW rides....

The point has flown right over your head. The only people that need it "justified" are obsessive internet Disney fans who make up a tiny minority of WDW guests.

In any case, several insiders have previously confirmed it - though after this I doubt many of them will come forward due to the groupthink going on. But go back and see what people said about Maelstrom before this announcement - you'll see.

Do you really doubt that a musty, confusing little dark ride with only broadly esoteric connections to a history that no one really relates together (trolls and gods and oil rigs?) was among the lowest-guest-satisfaction earners?

Hey, I love mustly little dank creepy dark rides. I'll miss Maelstrom. But to think the general public was enamored with it (most just walked away confused) is really wishful thinking and completely ignoring reality.

 

[englanddg]

The "mature fan"? You really think that the people who are middle-aged and still obsessed with WDW like us enough to write on the Internet about it are anything but a tiny sliver of a minority?


Regardless of who you think should "have a say" - the parks are not designed for us. They are designed for the general public guests. The general public is going to react far more positively to having Frozen than Maelstrom, which again, has consistently been one of the lowest rated WDW attractions of all time.


These parks were not designed for obsessive super-fans like us. Really, they aren't, and never really were.

No, by "mature" I mean not a child. I mean someone with money to spend, families (or selves) to take. A target demographic. And, I never said we are not the minority of visitors. However, we are a vocal sliver of a group of repeat and regular visitors (they wouldn't be selling so much DVC if that group didn't exist).

If you read the comments section on the blog, or on news articles, etc...some of them are obviously part of a rabid fan "hit squad", but many of them are not. Read them, parse them. The concerns and complaints are not limited to a vocal sub-community alone.

Also, a "super fan", using your term, is not averse to change. They just want things done right.

I strongly disagree that the parks were not "designed for super-fans". Mickey, from day 1 at Disneyland, invited you to "join his club". They WANT you obsessed, they WANT you coming back, and they WANT you to spend money.

The trade off, in the past, has been they've given you stuff to be excited about to make you do so.

A Frozen ride isn't going to get John Q. Public (if she/he's even aware of it) to suddenly max out the credit cards and fly to Florida. But, an immersive Cars Land certainly got a lot of WDW fans to fly across country just to see it.

Just like the immersive Harry Potter 1.0 and 2.0 expansions are doing for Universal.

Also, not sure where you are getting the "lowest rated ride" thing from. I doubt people would rate (staying in park), say Universe of Energy higher... And, it was rarely a walk on, though it hasn't pulled hour long waits in a while, it's akin to <insert non-Dumbo spinner ride here>, but with a better ride experience.

 

[aladdin2007]

The point has flown right over your head. The only people that need it "justified" are obsessive internet Disney fans who make up a tiny minority of WDW guests.

In any case, several insiders have previously confirmed it - though after this I doubt many of them will come forward due to the groupthink going on. But go back and see what people said about Maelstrom before this announcement - you'll see.

Do you really doubt that a musty, confusing little dark ride with only broadly esoteric connections to a history that no one really relates together (trolls and gods and oil rigs?) was among the lowest-guest-satisfaction earners?

Hey, I love mustly little dank creepy dark rides. I'll miss Maelstrom. But to think the general public was enamored with it (most just walked away confused) is really wishful thinking and completely ignoring reality.

your the one that missed the point! Its not about maelstrom, its about Norway. Any attraction put in there should have been about Norway, not frozen in fictional kingdom. You dont seem to understand this is, or was anyway, the Norway pavilion. You talk like its ok to shove whatever in there no matter what. I can guarantee you Norway is not happy about a frozen takeover but nothing they can do about it now and had their chance. Still Disney could have done this in a way the frozen characters presented Norway, but they arent.

 

[Mike S]

The "mature fan"? You really think that the people who are middle-aged and still obsessed with WDW like us enough to write on the Internet about it are anything but a tiny sliver of a minority?


Regardless of who you think should "have a say" - the parks are not designed for us. They are designed for the general public guests. The general public is going to react far more positively to having Frozen than Maelstrom, which again, has consistently been one of the lowest rated WDW attractions of all time.


These parks were not designed for obsessive super-fans like us. Really, they aren't, and never really were.

Disneyland and Walt Disney World were designed for the general public, correct, and for many years they weren't just places where anything goes without a care for theme and placement and they were pretty darn successful for all that time. Walt still got mad when a cowboy walked through Tomorrowland, whether the public cared or not. The problem is that modern corporate Disney doesn't care anymore.

 

[AEfx]

Also, a "super fan", using your term, is not averse to change. They just want things done right.

And we are back to that, again.

That's what it really all boils down to.

What folks cannot wrap their heads around is that the idea of "done right" - what we think of as "done right" and what the Disney company things is "done right" and what the public thinks is "done right" - these are all different ideals.

I strongly disagree that the parks were not "designed for super-fans". Mickey, from day 1 at Disneyland, invited you to "join his club".

Absolute, 100%, Prime Grade-A example of what I am talking about.

People bought into the PR of the day and haven't let go. Same with EPCOT. When folks were kids/younger they accepted everything Disney said at face value, assumed the purest of intentions, and like a lot of things drilled into young people, it's very difficult to see through such long-held beliefs. I mean, we still have people under the delusion that DHS was ever a real working movie studio. They can't let go.

Ironically, not being able to let go of the old is about the most anti-Disney Parks thing imaginable, but I know with this topic - no matter what is said, people hold on to those childhood beliefs and notions so dearly that reality could fall down and smack them in the head and they'd still cling to them for dear life.

 

[AEfx]

your the one that missed the point! Its not about maelstrom, its about Norway. Any attraction put in there should have been about Norway, not frozen in fictional kingdom. You dont seem to understand this is, or was anyway, the Norway pavilion. You talk like its ok to shove whatever in there no matter what. I can guarantee you Norway is not happy about a frozen takeover but nothing they can do about it now and had their chance. Still Disney could have done this in a way the frozen characters presented Norway, but they arent.

I'm not going back there again..."Norway" isn't upset at all. The one news item people can find from Norway is an interview with a CM who returned home after working on the attraction.

Frozen has increased tourism incredibly to Norway - they love Frozen, it's bringing them buckets of money. And they are getting the last laugh - Norway tourism dropped out of supporting Epcot a decade and a half ago, and now they don't have to do anything and Disney is building a monument to the film that has given them record tourism profits. They are laughing their way to the bank. News flash: no one in Norway cares about a small set of buildings in the swamp in Florida. This is all Disney Internet Fan propaganda.

The truth is - WS is not some bastion of cultural elite experiences. It's a collection of themed shops and restaurants that bring the income into Epcot. It's actually anti-cultural, in some views, because it's a bastardization and Disney-fication of cultural stereotypes.

I know we were raised to think about it differently, but that was just Disney PR. Really.

 

[englanddg]

And we are back to that, again.

That's what it really all boils down to.

What folks cannot wrap their heads around is that the idea of "done right" - what we think of as "done right" and what the Disney company things is "done right" and what the public thinks is "done right" - these are all different ideals.



Absolute, 100%, Prime Grade-A example of what I am talking about.

People bought into the PR of the day and haven't let go. Same with EPCOT. When folks were kids/younger they accepted everything Disney said at face value, assumed the purest of intentions, and like a lot of things drilled into young people, it's very difficult to see through such long-held beliefs. I mean, we still have people under the delusion that DHS was ever a real working movie studio. They can't let go.

Ironically, not being able to let go of the old is about the most anti-Disney Parks thing imaginable, but I know with this topic - no matter what is said, people hold on to those childhood beliefs and notions so dearly that reality could fall down and smack them in the head and they'd still cling to them for dear life.

You are right. DHS never was a real working tv and movie studio. MGM was.

Did it take off? Nope. Was it short lived? A few years. Mickey Mouse Club filmed regularly there, for example, and the Animation Division operated a bit longer even after other production had ceased. It wasn't a huge success, by a long shot, but it was as accurate (at the time) as Universal's offering (which was what it was meant to compete with). Now, though, Universal actually has the upper hand as it still films on it's Florida Property (a few TV shows, iirc), Disney has abandoned the concept completely.

I think you are building a straw man of an "uber purist" who can't see the business and marketing decisions over their fanaticism for the parks.

If you actually READ the posts, instead of responding to your straw man, you'll see that is far from the actual course of the discussion.

 

[AEfx]

You are right. DHS never was a real working tv and movie studio. MGM was.

No...it wasn't. And that is why our discussion is fruitless, because we simply don't see the same reality.

 

[AEfx]

Disneyland and Walt Disney World were designed for the general public, correct, and for many years they weren't just places where anything goes without a care for theme and placement and they were pretty darn successful for all that time. Walt still got mad when a cowboy walked through Tomorrowland, whether the public cared or not. The problem is that modern corporate Disney doesn't care anymore.

He also was stringently against making the place a museum.