Frozen ride replacing Maelstrom?

[dadddio]

I'd love a huge eticket. A transformers-like ride system that sends you through the movie would be awesome. But that's not apparently going to happen. If we end up with a ride that my kids like in return for a ride that was 'nediocre', I'll be good.

 

[lebeau]

It certainly doesn't make it a bad idea.

No. But the point I was making is that "my kids would like it" is about the least compelling argument you can make.

 

[Matt_Black]

For those saying that Epcot did fine when it was boring, times change. For instance, in the 1984 presidential election, Mondale received only 35% of the white vote and lost, BADLY. It was a landslide victory for Reagan. In 2012, only 39% of white voters voted for Obama, and he won.

Yes, educational Epcot with no characters did great in the 1980s. That was 30 years ago. Social values and demographics have changed considerably.

 

[dadddio]

Fundamentally altering World Showcase is removing what many people have stated as the prime attraction. It is also the stated intention of the creators. Your response has been "Tough, I don't like it and it has to change for me." I'm not too keen on Finding Nemo: The Musical, so I go see something else instead of whine how I don't care that people like it because I am proof that people don't like it. You and your family are free to skip World Showcase. You would also be able to enjoy a Frozen attraction built elsewhere without it altering the more real world focus of World Showcase, but instead you harp for the solution where only you win.

You continue to misstate my position to make your argument.

I'm not the one arguing for Frozen replacing Maelstrom. The guy who started this thread is as is the self-styled 'insiders' who claim that it's going to happen.

My position on the issue remains as follows:

I think that Frozen is a pretty good fit for the Norway pavilion.
My kids would like this.

 

[dadddio]

No. But the point I was making is that "my kids would like it" is about the least compelling argument you can make.

I don't know. It seems that plussing the enjoment of the park for my kids is the most compelling argument, for me.

 

[Matt_Black]

I really liked Frozen but have reservations about its ability to work as themed entertainment. I think the setting was of little consequence and setting is what makes an environment. Interpersonal relationships aren't the sort of think that involves a crowd either (unless it's daytime television).

I feel just the opposite. When I left the theater, I was thinking, "Man, I want to run a D&D game in Arendelle." I thought the setting of the various nations combined with the metaphysical possibilities make it one of the richest settings in Disney history. Certainly it's in the top for ones from just one film.

 

[lebeau]

For those saying that Epcot did fine when it was boring, times change. For instance, in the 1984 presidential election, Mondale received only 35% of the white vote and lost, BADLY. It was a landslide victory for Reagan. In 2012, only 39% of white voters voted for Obama, and he won.

Yes, educational Epcot with no characters did great in the 1980s. That was 30 years ago. Social values and demographics have changed considerably.

When was Epcot ever boring?

I'm not even going to touch your voting analogy.

The original concept for Epcot could work as well now as it did then. But Disney isn't willing to maintain it.

I don't know. It seems that plussing the enjoment of the park for my kids is the most compelling argument, for me.

I highlighted the key part of your comment.

If I'm thinking selfishly, I would change a lot of things at WDW. I want a Quentin Tarrantino land complete with Jack Rabbit Slims sit-down restaurant and $5 shakes. But I realize, that probably isn't the best idea.

 

[Matt_Black]

The original concept for Epcot could work as well now as it did then. But Disney isn't willing to maintain it.

The original concept? Possibly, but not the execution. Simply because the culture of education has changed thanks to media proliferation and access to technology and information.

 

[dadddio]

I don't know. It seems that plussing the enjoment of the park for my kids is the most compelling argument, for me.

When was Epcot ever boring?

I'm not even going to touch your voting analogy.

The original concept for Epcot could work as well now as it did then. But Disney isn't willing to maintain it.



I highlighted the key part of your comment.

If I'm thinking selfishly, I would change a lot of things at WDW. I want a Quentin Tarrantino land complete with Jack Rabbit Slims sit-down restaurant and $5 shakes. But I realize, that probably isn't the best idea.

My purpose here is not to argue what's the best for society or the company. My only concern when discussing rumored changes to WDW in this thread is how the rumored changes will hypothetically effect my family.

 

[lazyboy97o]

For those saying that Epcot did fine when it was boring, times change. For instance, in the 1984 presidential election, Mondale received only 35% of the white vote and lost, BADLY. It was a landslide victory for Reagan. In 2012, only 39% of white voters voted for Obama, and he won.

Yes, educational Epcot with no characters did great in the 1980s. That was 30 years ago. Social values and demographics have changed considerably.

The original concept? Possibly, but not the execution. Simply because the culture of education has changed thanks to media proliferation and access to technology and information.

The most growth in the field of themed entertainment has been the descendants of educational experiences pioneered by the EPCOT Center. Similar appreciations for curiosity and learning are exemplified throughout our culture, including pop culture. It is outdated and irrelevant if you listen only to today's Disney. Even if the world had changed to so hate what EPCOT Center was built on, does that not mean there is a greater need than ever for places that inspire such a curiosity? EPCOT nor the EPCOT Center was about what was easy and already accomplished, but pushing boundaries and challenging what can be in our world.

 

[lebeau]

The original concept? Possibly, but not the execution. Simply because the culture of education has changed thanks to media proliferation and access to technology and information.

Well, that's the problem isn't it? Disney needed to keep updating to keep the concept relevant. They thought that was more work than adding characters and thrill rides.

My purpose here is not to argue what's the best for society or the company. My only concern when discussing rumored changes to WDW in this thread is how the rumored changes will hypothetically effect my family.

Why would you think anyone would have a vested interest in discussing what your kids want?

If that's really your entire point, just post "my kids would like this" and move on. No one will care one way or the other and we can all move on.

My kids would like it too. But that's not enough reason for me to endorse it. Eventually, my kids will grow up. And when they do, they might think changing the World Showcase into the International Magic Kingdom wasn't such a good idea.

 

[FigmentJedi]

Remember, things can easily go wrong when you embrace this mindset

 

[lazyboy97o]

Why should Disney even consider a massive E-Ticket or even land when so many will be ecstatic over a Maelstrom overlay?

 

[FrankLapidus]

Why should Disney even consider a massive E-Ticket or even land when so many will be ecstatic over a Maelstrom overlay?

Its sad to see just how much the expectations of some of their fanbase have changed. I think you're spot on, the contentment of some to just accept whatever TDO gives them allows them to cut corners when they should be going all out.

 

[Matt_Black]

Really? So, in the midst of all they're doing right now, people can still accuse TDO of coasting?

 

[EpcoTim]

Really? So, in the midst of all they're doing right now, people can still accuse TDO of coasting?

Yes.

 

[FrankLapidus]

Really? So, in the midst of all they're doing right now, people can still accuse TDO of coasting?

In this case, yes. We're talking about a genuine global phenomenon here, a film that has made them a ton of money and is going to go on doing so in the years to come. The wait time to meet the characters is hours long, the songs are everywhere, the merchandise is flying off the shelves quicker than Disney can replace it.

They have a global phenomenon on their hands and plenty of room with which to give it a presence at WDW. Any Maelstrom overlay will be as temporary as Chester and Hester has been. It will be extremely popular because the film has such a huge fanbase and that will allow them to coast; why go on and build a bigger attraction or land when the inexpensive little overlay is pulling in the crowds?

Frozen deserves more and it is not at all unreasonable for anyone to expect more than a cost-saving overlay of an existing attraction in this case.

 

[wdisney9000]

Really? So, in the midst of all they're doing right now, people can still accuse TDO of coasting?

But what exactly are they doing? Avatar is years away and we have no idea if it will be value engineered or not, FLE is nice, but look at what Uni just churned out for half the cost and in half the time they almost are forced to coast now thanks to budgetary restrictions from MM+.

 

[Matt_Black]

There's also the new theater for FOTLK, which folks here have been very impressed with. New nighttime entertainment is coming to AK. Disney Springs seems to be coming along nicely. The 7DMT and FOF parade just debuted, and people seem very pleased with those.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Really? So, in the midst of all they're doing right now, people can still accuse TDO of coasting?

Not all that much is happening. Disney Springs is finally happening after years of bumbling and mess making. Avatarland was conceived and dictated in Burbank and has failed to inspire widespread excitement. Star Wars is and has been painfully obvious since before Disney bought Lucasfilm.