-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Frozen ride replacing Maelstrom?
- Thread starter ryan1
- Start date
- Status
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
Disney's Animal Kingdom isn't World Showcase. They're built around different concepts.
luv
Well-Known Member
I've always loved Maelstrom and have said so many times before Frozen came out or there was talk of changing Maelstrom.
I never liked the movie, but have always loved the ride. If they change it into this snowman/princess thing, I'll consider it a major loss.
tl77
Well-Known Member
But do you think people care or even acknowledge the difference between those 2 parks. Nemo is a fish so he's now in the Living Seas, Lion King is set in Africa, Frozen is set in some place vaguely resembling Norway... and is already home to a princess restaurant
I know when Disney Animation was working on Tangled, they studied the look buildings in DL's Fantasyland, and I kind of get the impression the set Frozen some place vaguely resembling Norway so they would have a reason to add it in to EPCOT
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
This line of thinking will never maintain a quality product.
englanddg
One Little Spark...
Frozen was a decent movie. I would love to see them do a fantastic dark ride for it. But, World Showcase isn't (or should I saw wasn't) all about shilling Disney product lines, it was about a semi-immersive cultural experience.
I don't like the concept in any way, shape or form. But, I suspect it will happen.
I don't like the concept in any way, shape or form. But, I suspect it will happen.
luv
Well-Known Member
They have tons of empty space into which they could stick Frozen. That old Drew Carey thing that was so unpopular - put it there. That Revue thing in Frontierland where they I serve food like one day a year and have dance parties during MNSSHP and MVMCP. I've (sadly) forgotten the name of it, but that's a fine place for all-day M&Gs (doesn't fit thematically, but whatever. I'm feeling desperate.)
Any of the available places in Epcot.
Kick out a corner of that Rafiki area in the AK, whatever it's called now. Or add it to Avatarland.
They could do a Frozen Meet & Greet at Blizzard, but I realize not everyone goes there.
Just don't ruin Maelstrom. Please!
Any of the available places in Epcot.
Kick out a corner of that Rafiki area in the AK, whatever it's called now. Or add it to Avatarland.
They could do a Frozen Meet & Greet at Blizzard, but I realize not everyone goes there.
Just don't ruin Maelstrom. Please!
Matt_Black
Well-Known Member
What a convenient rationalization.
Magenta Panther
Well-Known Member
Agreed!
I think the best place for a Frozen attraction is naturally New Fantasyland (although I haven't the geographical knowledge of the park to suggest exactly WHERE it could go).
As far as DHS is concerned - if a Frozen attraction were to go anywhere there - then replace the Muppet Theater with a Frozen show. Think of it - you walk into the courtyard, and instead of the Muppet fountain, you see a Frozen fountain - all in ice. The whole area could look frozen, with icicles and snow on the roofs, perhaps with occasional snowfall, just in that area. And then the theater could have a 3D show, with an AA of Olaf the Snowman and the reindeer (say, maybe they could re-use the old Max AA head that's been moldering under the Haunted Mansion:
You know, re-skin it or something. Okay, I'm kidding about that part.)
But since that Muppet area is so enclosed, I think it could work for a Frozen area. And it'd actually be kinda neat. The nearby gift shop could be rethemed too. Anyway that's my suggestion.
Funmeister's Delight
Active Member
NIGHTMARE FUEL!!!! To be fair he looks nothing like Sven.Agreed!
I think the best place for a Frozen attraction is naturally New Fantasyland (although I haven't the geographical knowledge of the park to suggest exactly WHERE it could go).
As far as DHS is concerned - if a Frozen attraction were to go anywhere there - then replace the Muppet Theater with a Frozen show. Think of it - you walk into the courtyard, and instead of the Muppet fountain, you see a Frozen fountain - all in ice. The whole area could look frozen, with icicles and snow on the roofs, perhaps with occasional snowfall, just in that area. And then the theater could have a 3D show, with an AA of Olaf the Snowman and the reindeer (say, maybe they could re-use the old Max AA head that's been moldering under the Haunted Mansion:
You know, re-skin it or something. Okay, I'm kidding about that part.)
But since that Muppet area is so enclosed, I think it could work for a Frozen area. And it'd actually be kinda neat. The nearby gift shop could be rethemed too. Anyway that's my suggestion.
The Visionary Soul
Well-Known Member
The kingdoms in Tangled and Frozen represent what Fantasyland should be more than any other Disney films, except maybe Pinocchio. If only WDI could have waited until now to re-theme Fantasyland. In an alternate universe Disney would already have a successful Star Wars Land at Hollywood Studios and would be able to create a New Fantasyland that is much more timeless and imaginative with less reliance on that 1980's mermaid.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
Only if you believe a DisneyPark is a DisneyPark and ignore the work that went into them.
tl77
Well-Known Member
I think "popular" product is what they're aiming for though, that tends to maintain itself. WDW isn't about art it's about commerce, and quality products like Horizons that are popular get torn down
michmousefan
Well-Known Member
Actually, "Inside Out" seems like a better fit for a re-do of Imagination. After seeing Pete Docter's presentation at D23, my friends all agreed that it could serve as the base for a crazy-cool Imagination fix. Gut what you need to remove and install the first trackless ride in WDW right there.
aladdin2007
Well-Known Member
It never use to be about that, but it sure is now.
MonorailLover
Well-Known Member
Horizons was made to show you what was going to happen in the 21st century...... 99% of what was in the ride hasn't yet happened*, and its 1.4 decades in, I think if they didn't close they should have redid horizons, but going into the 21st century, it didn't make sense.
I believe it was the 1939 worlds fair where they said by the 70's, all cars would be autonomous, which still hasn't happened, and people waited in a 2 mile long line to see them.... Thinking to the future is great, but once we learn that it wont happen by the set date, its time to accept our losses and move on..... The show must always come to an end.
Believe me, I loved horizons, I just bought all of the limited edition shirts for the 30th anniversary a couple months back, but it was time for anew.
*the 1% being able to farm in the desert, going on in Dubai (I think its Dubai) as living with the land specifies.
tl77
Well-Known Member
I think a big part of the problem is just that world is different now than when EPCOT was first built. If you want information on the History of Transportation or the country of Norway today, you can get that on Google for free.
As much as I loved EPCOT when it first opened, the concept of isn't really relevant anymore. It really doesn't make sense to build giant pavilions of education, and then charge $80 to learn about these different subjects when you can get "information" lots of different places. It's the same problem that the MGM 2 hour backstage tour had, when DVD's came out with all kinds of bonus features on how movies are made, the MGM Backstage tour simply wasn't special anymore because you can get that information else where, this is also the same reason Disney Institute Resort failed.
People go on vacation to have fun, people go to the movies to have fun, but people don't generally go to a movie theater to watch documentaries. The Studios have slowly become a place where you "ride" the movies instead of learning about how they are made, and EPCOT and AK are both slowly becoming places where you ride the movies as well, because Avatar-land at AK and Nemo at the Living Seas is exclusive content you can get anywhere else and it's a safer bet. They could spend time and money coming up with original content that "might" be popular, like Beastly Kingdom or Sea Base Alpha version 2, but why take the risk when you know that Avatar and Nemo already are extremely popular are more or less guaranteed to draw an audience.
I'm personally not crazy about his strategy, but it's really hard to argue against it
tl77
Well-Known Member
The original plan with the Future World was to redo them every 15 to 20 years, because that's how long the sponsor contracts lasted. Horizons was just too big to maintain, especially after GE stopped sponsorship of it, and apparently that's why it got torn down instead of getting a 15 year make over like all the other FW pavilions did
steamboatjosh
Well-Known Member
Agreed!
I think the best place for a Frozen attraction is naturally New Fantasyland (although I haven't the geographical knowledge of the park to suggest exactly WHERE it could go).
As far as DHS is concerned - if a Frozen attraction were to go anywhere there - then replace the Muppet Theater with a Frozen show. Think of it - you walk into the courtyard, and instead of the Muppet fountain, you see a Frozen fountain - all in ice. The whole area could look frozen, with icicles and snow on the roofs, perhaps with occasional snowfall, just in that area. And then the theater could have a 3D show, with an AA of Olaf the Snowman and the reindeer (say, maybe they could re-use the old Max AA head that's been moldering under the Haunted Mansion:
You know, re-skin it or something. Okay, I'm kidding about that part.)
But since that Muppet area is so enclosed, I think it could work for a Frozen area. And it'd actually be kinda neat. The nearby gift shop could be rethemed too. Anyway that's my suggestion.
They wouldn't do that. Muppets have gotten popular again, so there's no way they would get rid of an already existing attraction based on them.
RSoxNo1
Well-Known Member
Right now the biggest thing that Universal is willing to leverage is a willingness to build attractions tied to intellectual properties quicker than Disney. I don't know if it's an inability to do this on Disney's part or if it's the mindset that every attraction tied to an intellectual property has to be a classic. Regardless, it's giving Universal easily marketable attractions that quickly boost attendance. There are those that will argue that all of these things are flash in the pan type attractions, but that remains to be seen. Moreover, they're not putting out half a$$ed attractions tied to this IP, they're putting out attractions that are deeply rooted in the IP, but are also of a high caliber.
Like many on here, I have no problem with intellectual property being used in Disney parks. I wish it would be confined to certain areas, but that ship has already sailed. So with that said, if Disney builds a fantastic Frozen attraction and it happens to be in Norway, I would very likely be ok with it. Yes, my preference would be Fantasyland, but a quality attraction will supersede it's placement in Walt Disney World.
Like many on here, I have no problem with intellectual property being used in Disney parks. I wish it would be confined to certain areas, but that ship has already sailed. So with that said, if Disney builds a fantastic Frozen attraction and it happens to be in Norway, I would very likely be ok with it. Yes, my preference would be Fantasyland, but a quality attraction will supersede it's placement in Walt Disney World.
- Status