Frozen ride replacing Maelstrom?

[Matt_Black]

The issue is that Frozen, and characters in general do not belong in World Showcase.

In your opinion. There are many here who don't feel the same. It's a moot point anyway; the genie has been out of the bottle for years. Unless WDW in general and Epcot in particular suffers a massive dip in attendance, that's not going to change anytime soon.

 

[lazyboy97o]

In your opinion. There are many here who don't feel the same. It's a moot point anyway; the genie has been out of the bottle for years. Unless WDW in general and Epcot in particular suffers a massive dip in attendance, that's not going to change anytime soon.

How so? Gran Fiesta Tour is hardly the marquee attraction of the park and there are only a few meet and greets. Seems World Showcase would continue to do just fine without more unrelated characters. Why should adisney be praised for thinking its customers a bunch of dolts with no interest in the world at large?

 

[Mike S]

Again, the issue IS NOT with replacing Maelstrom. We know what Maelstrom is. It's a mediocre C-ticket boat ride. Yes, people like it but it's by no means an irreplaceable attraction. The issue is that Frozen, and characters in general do not belong in World Showcase. I think the vast majority of people on here want to see Frozen get a major attraction. They just don't want that to be in Epcot.

I agree it's a C-Ticket and not really amazing but I wouldn't say it's mediocre. It could use a facelift to bring it into the 21st century but it's still an enjoyable ride IMO.

 

[RSoxNo1]

In your opinion. There are many here who don't feel the same. It's a moot point anyway; the genie has been out of the bottle for years. Unless WDW in general and Epcot in particular suffers a massive dip in attendance, that's not going to change anytime soon.

That's totally fair, but that's what the objection is by the masses.

 

[RSoxNo1]

I agree it's a C-Ticket and not really amazing but I wouldn't say it's mediocre. It could use a facelift to bring it into the 21st century but it's still an enjoyable ride IMO.

I feel that you contradicting yourself here. By being a C-ticket and "not really amazing" wouldn't that also make it mediocre?

 

[Mike S]

I feel that you contradicting yourself here. By being a C-ticket and "not really amazing" wouldn't that also make it mediocre?

So there can't be any middle ground between amazing and mediocre? I would say it's a good ride.

 

[Fox&Hound]

I think there's a reason why Magic Kingdom is the #1 theme park in the world: awesome attractions and beloved characters. It's what people think of when they think Disney. People can argue all they want that "that's not the vision of EPCOT" or "AK is not for cartoons" but guess what: Disney is cartoons. They are synonomous. Yes, is Disney more than just cartoons: absolutely. But to many adults and their kids, when they think Disney, they think beloved characters. Personally, I say bring it on to Frozen in Norway, Ratatouille in France, etc. Bring some new life to a stale park. And I know someone will respond and say something like "you clearly don't understand Walt's vision" or something about watering down the parks' purpose. Here's an idea: maybe the idea of EPCOT is changing. Maybe 20 years ago it worked and maybe now people want something different out of the experience. If in 30 years all of the parks looked more like Magic Kingdom (because not every animated character can fit into Fantasyland) I say bring it. What a great park to emulate...

 

[lazyboy97o]

I think there's a reason why Magic Kingdom is the #1 theme park in the world: awesome attractions and beloved characters. It's what people think of when they think Disney. People can argue all they want that "that's not the vision of EPCOT" or "AK is not for cartoons" but guess what: Disney is cartoons. They are synonomous. Yes, is Disney more than just cartoons: absolutely. But to many adults and their kids, when they think Disney, they think beloved characters. Personally, I say bring it on to Frozen in Norway, Ratatouille in France, etc. Bring some new life to a stale park. And I know someone will respond and say something like "you clearly don't understand Walt's vision" or something about watering down the parks' purpose. Here's an idea: maybe the idea of EPCOT is changing. Maybe 20 years ago it worked and maybe now people want something different out of the experience. If in 30 years all of the parks looked more like Magic Kingdom (because not every animated character can fit into Fantasyland) I say bring it. What a great park to emulate...

Disney being cartoons would only be a very recent development.

 

[The Empress Lilly]

I have had articles I have written cited as proof here before. And let me tell you, I am not a credible source!

Often when I'm in an argument I just write something in some other thread here then link to it as proof. Works nearly every time!

I think there's a reason why Magic Kingdom is the #1 theme park in the world: awesome attractions and beloved characters. It's what people think of when they think Disney. People can argue all they want that "that's not the vision of EPCOT" or "AK is not for cartoons" but guess what: Disney is cartoons. They are synonomous. Yes, is Disney more than just cartoons: absolutely. But to many adults and their kids, when they think Disney, they think beloved characters. Personally, I say bring it on to Frozen in Norway, Ratatouille in France, etc. Bring some new life to a stale park. And I know someone will respond and say something like "you clearly don't understand Walt's vision" or something about watering down the parks' purpose. Here's an idea: maybe the idea of EPCOT is changing. Maybe 20 years ago it worked and maybe now people want something different out of the experience. If in 30 years all of the parks looked more like Magic Kingdom (because not every animated character can fit into Fantasyland) I say bring it. What a great park to emulate...

But...but why would you want WDW to consist of the MK, MK, MK and MK?

That is like wanting McDonalds to swap out every item on their menu for a Big Mac because kids associate McD with it. Like the MK, the Big Mac is my fav too, but I like variation even more!


Disney is not synonymous with cartoons. Disney, if anything, is synonymous with Disneyfication, with a certain friendly, sentimental, positive tone. Which is applied to almost anything. Disneyfication of often grim fairytales into cartoons is Disney as much as Disneyfication of often grim countries into WS countries is. EPCOT's Norway is to the real thing (ain't nobody shooting 90 teenagers on an island in WS!) what Frozen is to HC Andersen. WS Norway already is the Disneyfied version of the real thing.

 

[Kman101]

So Pirates of the Caribbean is a cartoon? Haunted Mansion is a cartoon? Big Thunder Mountain is a cartoon?

When I think of Disney, I think of the great theming they do, I think of the rides I listed above, I of course think of the animated films, but it shouldn't been cartoons everywhere.

I do agree that the parks (DHS and Epcot) are very stale. They still have very solid rides. Tower of Terror isn't a cartoon. Rock 'n' Roller Coaster isn't a cartoon.

Very few attractions were actually based on cartoons. There used to be a time Disney made a quality attraction that was loosely based off of something (or original in design). Not needing to suddenly shove Frozen into Malestrom to entice the kidlets to enjoy it more. I don't think parents give their kids enough credit. All of sudden now it's not interesting enough because it's not containing "cartoons"?

I've said it before and will keep saying it, Magic Kingdom should not be dismissed by a large group of adults and teens as a "kiddie park" and yet ... it frequently is. They're missing the boat by trying to appeal to the kid demo. Not that they shouldn't be the focus, of sorts, but how did MK survive so long before and Disneyland does just fine without having to cater to the kids. I mean, gosh, heaven forid they can't ride EVERYTHING. I personally am not the target audience for a lot of things but you know what, it is what it is and I enjoy what I can.

 

[Kman101]

And not trying to be rude to Fox&Hound, and I understand what they are getting at, I do, but I struggle to understand nowadays why all of a sudden it's become character character character character. The parks should appeal to all demographics, not just one ("little kids") or two ("princesses"). JMO. Since people like to say "what Walt would want" ... even he didn't think you should build it for just kids. I can't remember the exact quote ...

 

[Matt_Black]

To quote the man himself- "I do not make films primarily for children. I make them for the child in all of us, whether we be six or sixty." And the characters, by extension, are also not just for children.

 

[Mike S]

And not trying to be rude to Fox&Hound, and I understand what they are getting at, I do, but I struggle to understand nowadays why all of a sudden it's become character character character character. The parks should appeal to all demographics, not just one ("little kids") or two ("princesses"). JMO. Since people like to say "what Walt would want" ... even he didn't think you should build it for just kids. I can't remember the exact quote ...

"You're dead if you aim only for kids. Adults are just kids grown up, anyway"
-Walt Disney

 

[lazyboy97o]

The difference is that Walt did not think it right to talk down to children or the child in adults. Making everything into cartoon kiddie land is doing just that. I find it hard to believe that children have suddenly stopped being curious. How did they see Frozen if they're so terrified of new and different things?

 

[Magenta Panther]

The people defending Malestrom as some sort of remotely quality ride are funny.. Personally, I like the World Showcase the way it is, so if they were to add the Frozen layover to it, I wouldn't be upset, but I would shake my head at the laziness aspect of it. As of right now though, that ride needs anything to help it out. By far, the dumbest thing at WDW proper, well, right behind Captain EO.

Maelstrom is not an E ticket by any stretch - but it has real character, real atmosphere, an eerie Nordic touch of magic, and is unique. It tells a simple story, but it tells it well. It is not a poor quality ride - it's well done for its budget and for what it is. It certainly is not "dumb".

 

[Magenta Panther]

Often when I'm in an argument I just write something in some other thread here then link to it as proof. Works nearly every time!
But...but why would you want WDW to consist of the MK, MK, MK and MK?

That is like wanting McDonalds to swap out every item on their menu for a Big Mac because kids associate McD with it. Like the MK, the Big Mac is my fav too, but I like variation even more!


Disney is not synonymous with cartoons. Disney, if anything, is synonymous with Disneyfication, with a certain friendly, sentimental, positive tone. Which is applied to almost anything. Disneyfication of often grim fairytales into cartoons is Disney as much as Disneyfication of often grim countries into WS countries is. EPCOT's Norway is to the real thing (ain't nobody shooting 90 teenagers on an island in WS!) what Frozen is to HC Andersen. WS Norway already is the Disneyfied version of the real thing.

Agreed. Walt didn't limit his studio output to just cartoons, so why should his parks do that?

 

[Admiral01]

I think they are on the right track with Frozen. And the neat things they could do with WS after Illuminations still exist. And I have not even mentioned anything about FW. That has a lot of potential as the part of Epcot that has more thrills. Even the most spiteful person would return.

Maybe. For thrills, I personally find them boring and un-engaging. The classic EPCOT dark rides were much more thrilling to me than the current slate, save for The Land and SSE... They engaged my emotions, not just a cheap thrill. Additionally, I don't want to have to wait until after Illuminations to enjoy EPCOT as I used to. EPCOT isn't meant to be another MK. That is why I like it.

I get what you are saying - that you see things getting better, and a high-quality, well funded Frozen attraction replacing Maelstrom is a step forward. I know people who think Nemo was a good addition to The Living Seas. I know people who think Horizons was boring and love Mission:SPACE. I simply don't agree.

I don't want to lose Maelstrom, even if Frozen is a great IP. If they want to ADD Frozen somewhere, they should. I don't see why we have to lose Maelstrom in the process. I don't buy that a company with assets in excess of $81B can't afford to build a new ride without demolishing/"downgrading" an old one.

 

[roj2323]

I had a guest relations person tell me yesterday that fast passes are not being issued after august 24th for malestrom. Can anyone confirm this?

 

[Matt_Black]

That's totally fair, but that's what the objection is by the masses.

What masses? I've only seen grumblers here. Other people don't care or they think it's a good idea. Don't assume you speak for everybody.

 

[Mike730]

What masses? I've only seen grumblers here. Other people don't care or they think it's a good idea. Don't assume you speak for everybody.

This thread is 135 pages long, rivaling pretty much only the Spirit thread. And most of it is people objecting. Thats masses.

He's also not speaking for everybody, he's speaking for those that object. If you cared to read the thread instead of just picking a fight, you would see that he's clarifying the purpose for objection, not making just making some broad assumption.