Frozen Attraction Coming to Epcot - Replaces Maelstrom

Tekneek;2433934 wrote: It is dull because the park has been in decline thematically and in sheer number of attractions for many years. Not because of the lack of attractions involving movie characters, but because Disney is largely incapable of driving the concepts the park was built on. It is also pretty universally recognized that they struggle with Tomorrowland as well. They're good at Fantasyland and are, in a way, turning everything into that.

I do agree with you here, but I think I've sort of given up hope that they'll ever be able solve this problem with the current situation in WDW.

At this point, I'm going to be accepting if they do something well. Anything.

When I broke the news to my family at dinner last night, they were not happy campers. We all love Frozen the movie, but we all share in the feeling that EPCOT World Showcase pavilions should be true to their source, in this case Norway. That is what we enjoy so much about EP/WS, is learning about other countries and their FACTUAL culture and land. This move will set precedent for Disney to reinvent how other countries in the WS will be represented in the future. "Back back over the falls..." :mickey::minnie2::balloon::balloon:

Terra said add philly cheesesteaks in the American pavilion! More genius then the frozen ride!!!

Ian;2433971 wrote:
At this point, I'm going to be accepting if they do something well. Anything.

That's probably the rational thing to do.

This kinda feels like the prisoner's dilemma game.

Too bad Frozen wasn't a thought on their radar when they redid the New Fantasyland, and instead of the Journey of the Little Mermaid, and they could have done a beautiful Frozen attraction there. Fresh and new, with all the themeing that we have come to love.

Just my opinion though....
I do enjoy the Little Mermaid attraction, just kind of think a Frozen attraction belongs over in Fantasyland.
Julie:mickey:

DH wrote an email just to get it off his chest. Thought I'd share the canned response here.

"We appreciate your feedback about the Frozen attraction and understand your concern for Epcot’s Norway Pavilion. We are fortunate to have so many passionate fans like you and we don’t take that for granted. Walt Disney himself always intended for our parks to evolve, and we regularly find ourselves balancing the things Guests have always loved about the park with continuing to provide new experiences. We use the feedback we get from our Guests to help us make those decisions.

Frozen is extremely popular with our Guests and now they will be able to experience and immerse themselves in many of their favorite moments and music from the film. This attraction will keep with our focus and tradition of providing our Guests with the best possible experiences rich in Disney storytelling.

We think it’s appropriate to locate the Frozen attraction at Epcot’s Norway Pavilion, since this is the country that inspired the film. Norway will remain open during construction, and we plan to continue to offer authentic Norwegian food, architecture, and exhibits that so many Guests like you enjoy.

We respect your opinions and appreciate the continued enthusiasm you have for our products & services.

Thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts with us."

PirateLover;2433999 wrote: DH wrote an email just to get it off his chest. Thought I'd share the canned response here.

"We appreciate your feedback about the Frozen attraction and understand your concern for Epcot’s Norway Pavilion. We are fortunate to have so many passionate fans like you and we don’t take that for granted. Walt Disney himself always intended for our parks to evolve, and we regularly find ourselves balancing the things Guests have always loved about the park with continuing to provide new experiences. We use the feedback we get from our Guests to help us make those decisions.

Frozen is extremely popular with our Guests and now they will be able to experience and immerse themselves in many of their favorite moments and music from the film. This attraction will keep with our focus and tradition of providing our Guests with the best possible experiences rich in Disney storytelling.

We think it’s appropriate to locate the Frozen attraction at Epcot’s Norway Pavilion, since this is the country that inspired the film. Norway will remain open during construction, and we plan to continue to offer authentic Norwegian food, architecture, and exhibits that so many Guests like you enjoy.

We respect your opinions and appreciate the continued enthusiasm you have for our products & services.

Thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts with us."

It may be a canned response, but I don't think it is that bad of a response. They are capitalizing on the film's popularity and give people what they want. May not be what Disney traditionalists like, but at the end of the day they are for profit business.

It also seems like the shops will still be there, so I think that is good. I've always thought that WS was there to just give people a "taste" of the representative countries. It should not be a replacement for actual world travel. For example, I love strolling through the France pavilion. I realize, though, that if I am able to find a decent airfare to join my sister in Paris in November it will be much more than what I see in the pavilion. The pavilion just whets the appetite.

John;2433896 wrote: Rumored budget is around 70 million. Doesn't sound like part 2 to me....

Wow!! Now I'm really excited to see the results! Combine that with the projected open date and it definitely doesn't sound like they're planning a lame overlay. :thumbsup:

I could see where Fantasyland would be a better fit for this, but they've just done a huge expansion there that I, for one, am impressed with. I can understand why they wouldn't add another ride there right now. Maelstrom never struck me as overwhelmingly educational. It will be great though if the new ride has some real info about life in Norway as well.

And, I agree with Hammer. For a canned response, that's pretty good! It's tailored, detailed and is not condescending or dismissive. It also accurately points out that there will still be the rest of the Norway pavilion.

I also agree that those pavilions are more like a taste of the countries. We've been to France, Germany, Italy and England and you're not exactly getting an immersion in these cultures in WS.

Hammer;2434006 wrote: It may be a canned response, but I don't think it is that bad of a response. They are capitalizing on the film's popularity and give people what they want. May not be what Disney traditionalists like, but at the end of the day they are for profit business.

Yeah, I actually thought it was was pretty honest.

For profit is right. One thing I haven't mentioned yet in this thread is that a mere 24 hours before this announcement was made, my in-laws decided not to renew their APs, and cited the Maelstrom rumor as one of their reasons. They actually received a phone call and were assured in no uncertain terms that there was no truth to the rumor! In that call she did not address any of the other concerns they listed; it was a direct response to the Norway rumor. Now, obviously, the lower cogs on the wheel probably aren't in the loop, but it still left a bad taste in their mouths to be told something in an attempt to hang onto their AP dollars that less than a day later turned out to be untrue.

I've been thinking about this and I think they might try and reuse some parts of the ride. Here is some Armchair Imagineering

The water will be drained and the ride will become an omnimover, like most of Fantasyland. The facade will change, with the waterfall and stone work going away. An extension of the building would be desirable since Maelstrom it a tight fit but the theorized budget seems kinda small for that. We shall see where construction walls start popping up during the end of the year.

It would be beneficial to flip the ride; this way the theater and surrounding space can be turned into a better queue. This will allow for changes to the fishing village to look more like the town from the movie (the kingdom was Arendelle did we get the name of the town?). Here you will get in sleighs which will take you to the coronation.

Not sure what scenes will be chosen. The oil rig room has space for two scenes. One nice scene would be at the top of the first climb (remember the ride is reserved in this sketch) you see Elsa loose control of her powers, your vehicle does a quick 180 as if you were running away. After the turn you see ice shards creeping towards you. Then another vehicle turn and you would continue on in the chase after Elsa.One of the Polar Bears could easily morph into Marshmallow. I should stop speculation.

Was there any reason that the ride had the hill climb beyond there being a drop? I can't think of what would be below the ride except the exit queue.

Ian;2433890 wrote: I'm sort of surprised so many folks have a hard time with the addition of characters to World Showcase.

While I understand that historically Epcot hasn't had characters, let's remember that it's not like Epcot is Walt's creation or something. There's no history here beyond just what the Imagineers came up with in the absence of Walt's leadership. Walt wanted Epcot to be a real live city, so I mean if you want to nitpick the park has never been what it was supposed to be according to the vision of the company's founder.

All I know is today's Epcot is dull. While I enjoy it for the atmosphere, it desperately needs some life. I'm just glad Disney is putting some money into it.

Although, I'm hesitant to get too excited until I see the finished product. I have a bad feeling we're going to get The Three Caballeros Part II.

I love the WS but I also have to agree - Epcot is kinda dull. Especially where my kids are concerned. There are 2 things they like in Epcot - Nemo and Imagination. Everything else they are fine with skipping. Now that they've added the Agent P Adventures that does help some and we got to spend some significant time in Germany and China the last trip. But to them the WS means food and shopping. Which equals BORING. The last trip we did manage to work in some of the character greats as a way of entertainment but while my daughter loved it, there was nothing of interest to my son. Epcot needs some life in it.

I know I'm late to the party, but I have to say I'm not upset about this one. DH and I love the world showcase, but we skip every ride there. We've done them before, and weren't super thrilled with any of them (although my five-year-old likes to see Donald in Mexico).
My girls will be thrilled with the Frozen ride, and will be pacified enough that DH and I can continue to visit the pavilions for little while longer.
The meet and greet doesn't bother me either, since there's a character in almost every country already, and maybe this will lessen the wait time in the MK. (And didn't Anna and Elsa start out there anyhow)?
Actually I like the movie, with its different take on the definition of true love. Hopefully they will keep some of the history of Norway in the ride, but I will wait to cast judgment until I see the ride.

I cringe a little whenever they invoke Walt for a park that he had zero to do with. He reluctantly agreed to build a "Disneyland type park" in Florida to appease the bankers in a compromise. He was not really interested in repeating himself regardless of how in demand it might have been.

I'm confused as to which park at WDW that would be?

Walt's idea of Epcot - as I understand it - sounds a little creepy and a lot expensive to me. A prototype community of tomorrow where people are actually living doesn't sound fun for the folks living there. What works as a community for one group wouldn't for another. Keeping the infrastructure current with progress would be cost prohibitive.

Our whole extended family love Epcot. It's far and away our favorite park, even with the dumbing down, which society as a whole required*, else Disney wouldn't be making money there. If we want to do our bit to preserve the idea of Epcot - as it was when it opened, should we not spend our time conversing with the CMs from other countries? They're usually quite happy to oblige.

Which pavilion, aside from the CMs, actually represents the present day country? The food is barely representative. At best it can be said to bring back memories of having actually had meals in that country. But, that said, we still like to eat supper at WS restaurants as much as possible.

From what I hear, Frozen has increased Norway tourism considerably, despite a tenuous actual connection. What would Norway not like about having an old, oft-broken ride replaced by something that might continue to generate tourism? While the government might seem to distance itself from both the movie and the pavilion, the average Norwegian, aware of the situation, seems happy to get the new interest.

Jan

* case in point: a comment on another subject entirely in another web location had "wala" in it. Voila' - dumbing down.

Janmac;2434094 wrote: I'm confused as to which park at WDW that would be?

I don't understand the confusion, but pretty obviously that is the MK. That's why it was the only park for a decade. Roy O. Disney lived long enough to get that part of his brother's Florida Project completed.

By all accounts, they found the original EPCOT idea to be unpractical without Walt's leadership, so they came up with some other ideas. The problem is they've largely walked away from their own focus and concepts for the park (and even the property as a whole) over the ensuing decades.

I'm not saying that everybody needs to care about those details, but there are books out there that talk about aiming for a lot more than just lowest-common-denominator park offerings and timeshares. The ideals espoused in those books have largely been dispensed with in exchange for cash (whatever sells the quickest with the masses).