TT77
Mouseketeer
- Joined
- Mar 10, 2015
- Messages
- 108
How many people who are "against Frozen in Norway" are also against Aladdin and Jasmine in Morocco? Because Morocco is in north west Africa, 3000 miles away from the Arabian peninsula in eastern Asia where the Aladdin myth originated from, not only is it the wrong country, it's the wrong continent. So why isn't anybody opposed to Disney's Aladdin meeting and greeting in Disney's Morocco pavilion, at Disney's Epcot theme park, in Orlando Florida, U.S.A.? Aladdin and Jasmine have been hanging around the Morocco pavilion for a few decades now along with all the other Disney characters in World Showcase, so it's not like this is something new
The Frozen movie is at least influenced by Norwegian culture, language, and architecture, which would lead most rational people to the conclusion that the fictional city of Arendelle is supposed to be set in the country of Norway, the same way most people seem understand that Batman's fictional city of Gotham, and Superman's fictional city of Metropolis, are both supposed to be in the United States of America. I mean has anyone ever been confused as to whether or not Superman was pro America? So pretty please people, stop acting like Disney's fictional Frozen ride, can't in any way ever be a part of Disney's artificial Norway, located in Disney's Orlando Florida theme park, when in "the real world" the Frozen movie has been so popular it increased tourism to the actual country on Norway
I liked Maelstrom, although I liked at lot more when they bothered to keep all the special effects up and running, but I highly doubt anyone ever went to Epcot just to see Maelstrom. No one ever waited an hour and a have to ride it like they do to ride Soarin', when it was new I waited 45 mins to get on Maelstrom, but even then it wasn't one of Epcot's greatest rides, it was simply "something to do in World Showcase". The only thing wrong with Maelstrom is that it got old and it was as popular as it used to be, but there's no reason to believe that spending $75million on Maelstrom would some how restore its original popularity, which only lasted for a few years anyway
The Frozen movie is at least influenced by Norwegian culture, language, and architecture, which would lead most rational people to the conclusion that the fictional city of Arendelle is supposed to be set in the country of Norway, the same way most people seem understand that Batman's fictional city of Gotham, and Superman's fictional city of Metropolis, are both supposed to be in the United States of America. I mean has anyone ever been confused as to whether or not Superman was pro America? So pretty please people, stop acting like Disney's fictional Frozen ride, can't in any way ever be a part of Disney's artificial Norway, located in Disney's Orlando Florida theme park, when in "the real world" the Frozen movie has been so popular it increased tourism to the actual country on Norway
I liked Maelstrom, although I liked at lot more when they bothered to keep all the special effects up and running, but I highly doubt anyone ever went to Epcot just to see Maelstrom. No one ever waited an hour and a have to ride it like they do to ride Soarin', when it was new I waited 45 mins to get on Maelstrom, but even then it wasn't one of Epcot's greatest rides, it was simply "something to do in World Showcase". The only thing wrong with Maelstrom is that it got old and it was as popular as it used to be, but there's no reason to believe that spending $75million on Maelstrom would some how restore its original popularity, which only lasted for a few years anyway