Maelstrom?

[PoohsFan1]

I think a new Frozen upgrade makes perfect sense for Disney.

Think about it, the cost is minimal for a new FROZEN attraction that stars new very popular characters from a massive animated hit.

They already have the building and ride system built.
The current theming is dated and needs to be redone anyway.

They can market a "NEW RIDE IN EPCOT"
They can market Very Popular New Characters

No need for expensive new designs, ride systems and buildings, Just new theming.

And the ride dumps right into a gift shop full of toys and a Character Meet n' Greet!

It would actually be crazy if they don't do it.

...let's all just hope this comes to fruitation . My girls (ages 10 and 12) love Maelstrom, in fact they can't get enough of that ride. However, if it was rethemed to Frozen, I think they would like it that much better, especially if they had a Frozen themed store right after you get off. The only thing better would be if Olaf was doing a M&G along with Anna and Elsa .

 

[rrali33tt]

I really hope they don't change Maesltrom. I think the ride is educational in some ways and I feel that Epcot was supposed to be and "educational" park.
Plus, since the movie is so popular, there is no way the current que would be able to handle the influx of people.

The Little Mermaid is my favorite Disney movie of all time and i LOATHE the new ride. Yes, a four year old will love it because they won't notice all the design flaws, but I was expecting so much more and was very dissapointed when I rode it. I will only ride it now if there is no line whatsoever. It would be horrible for them to make the same mistake with such a new popular movie.

I actually haven't seen frozen yet but from what I can gather it seems like maybe a 3d motion ride like Star Tours might be better. Like you were on some giant sled or something.

OR ( a lot of people will hate what I am about to say) get rid of current version Soarin, and replace it with a new "Soarin over Norway" version LOL . (I think I am one of the very very few people who think that ride is super lame. )

 

[lockedoutlogic]

I really hope they don't change Maesltrom..)

Honestly...based on current management practices there is LITTLE chance of that happening.

Giftshops,
Meet and greets, and character meals...yes (even though Norway has a horrid 80's dining room and character meal...but it's already packed
Anyway)

Rides? No. Rides don't equal money...that is the lesson they learned since animal
Kingdom...when they build new things...they see only modest attendance increases (which are also suspect) and crowds shifting which park they're going to on their vacation whose average length has not significantly increased since the 90's...park cannibalization...we've seen it before and it can't really be denied... Based on Disney's own numbers after they went to four parks.

They seem to be on a "minimalist for PR" approach...and if you look at their 3 "big" projects from 2009-2018/19/20...it will consist:
1. Fantasyland - mostly a retrofit for
Capacity...definitely qualifies as PR
2. Downtown...a "mistake" correction that is specifically for developing third party vendor spots and merch sales.
3. Avatar...this is the most likely enhancement that can be labeled true "enhancement"...like Disney did almost annually in days of old. But I have my doubts (well documented) and I have serious doubts about the financials of both animal kingdom in general and what this will really mean.

It's not that they spend nothing... They certainly do... But they certainly also have drastically increased their internal red tape on both the funding and the construction schedules for new things.

I hate to make a Walt reference... But I will here.
Do you honestly think that if he and his boys were tinkering on a new ride/show concept in the WED warehouse back in 1962, that he would have reacted favorably to someone proposing "site prep will begin in 29 months..."?

Get out of here. I know times have changed, but Disney is in a financially better place than they have ever been in for investment (I'm still trying to figure out...as an aside... Why the proper course of action was to shoot a Russian communist... While the proper course is to build a magic kingdom for the Chinese communists and take them out for dinner at crystal palace... Maybe if Stalin had opened some toyfactories in 1946?...but I digress)

There's no way they can't do more for
The customers... This is deliberate...because they don't feel like they need to.

I tried to book fastpasses for feb/march last night... Coincidentally...and honestly I couldn't find 3 worth booking in 3 of 4 parks. Especially with this "tiering"...
I don't get it...you can make me book living with the land and imagination...but I'm not riding...so what's the point?

 

[LaidBackDad]

Ok, now with Frozen being the #1 animated movie of all time, and the popularity of the character meetings, don't you think the top brass will be almost forced into creating some type of attraction dedicated Frozen? It may take a few years; but, they may coincide perfectly with a sequel or re-release. It certainly could be done less expensively by refurbishing the existing ride.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

Ok, now with Frozen being the #1 animated movie of all time, and the popularity of the character meetings, don't you think the top brass will be almost forced into creating some type of attraction dedicated Frozen? It may take a few years; but, they may coincide perfectly with a sequel or re-release. It certainly could be done less expensively by refurbishing the existing ride.

Ask yourself three questions:

1. Is attendance at WDW strong as it currently stands?
2. Would retheming an older ride (new construction is out of the question...it takes five years to build a bathroom) cause a noticeable spike in attendance and/or merchandise sales?
3. Has the staying power of this particular movie been proven beyond a doubt?

unfortunately the answer to question #1 is "Yes" and the answers to #2 and #3 is "No"...which means that the answer to your question is also NO...they are not forced to do anything and it is against their pattern.

meet and greets and somekind of high priced dining integration...you can count on that...but nothing else.

sad but true

 

[xie]

Ok, now with Frozen being the #1 animated movie of all time, and the popularity of the character meetings, don't you think the top brass will be almost forced into creating some type of attraction dedicated Frozen? It may take a few years; but, they may coincide perfectly with a sequel or re-release. It certainly could be done less expensively by refurbishing the existing ride.

No. Disney has a lot of successful movies that don't have a presence at the parks, or only have a small presence via merchandise or a character M&G.

They've made it clear that they aren't interested in getting into an "arms race" with Universal to build new attractions. Translation: We have no plans to build very many new attractions.

The primary reasons Avatar is going in:

1. Disney needs some way to keep guests in AK past 3pm, and a "bioluminescent" glow-in-the-dark Avatar area fits the bill without exploding fireworks over the poor animals' heads.
2. Cameron undoubtedly contributed something financially.
3. Whatever agreement they have with Cameron, you can bet that there's an "out" and/or an end date. Disney can then re-theme the area to an IP they actually own, and re-use all that mechanical infrastructure.

Personally, I'd rather that they not do attractions at all, if the new Ariel ride is the best example of what the current Imagineering team can do. It's terribad. I mean we were there at New Year's... when decades old PoTC, HM and Peter Pan are running 90+ minute waits, the park is partially closed for capacity, and your brand New Fantasyland Ariel ride is a walk-on, you simply must know you have a problem.

Disney has a lot riding on the Dwarf Train ride, no pun intended. They haven't built a really *great* new ride in Florida in a number of years now. I hope it's good.

 

[LaidBackDad]

Ask yourself three questions:

1. Is attendance at WDW strong as it currently stands?
2. Would retheming an older ride (new construction is out of the question...it takes five years to build a bathroom) cause a noticeable spike in attendance and/or merchandise sales?
3. Has the staying power of this particular movie been proven beyond a doubt?

unfortunately the answer to question #1 is "Yes" and the answers to #2 and #3 is "No"...which means that the answer to your question is also NO...they are not forced to do anything and it is against their pattern.

meet and greets and somekind of high priced dining integration...you can count on that...but nothing else.

sad but true

All excellent points if not marginally cynical; however, I would like to answer the 3 questions from a slightly less misanthropic perspective. # 1) Yes, WDW is wildly successful; however, that does not mean they do not budget time and monies for continuous improvements projects (agreed, it is a completely insufficient amount). #2) is basically the same question as #1. My answer is yes, continuous improvements keep the parks from getting stale and new attractions keep them relevant and create excitement which draw new people to the park or encourage them to return sooner than they would have. You have to be honest, WDW is not lacking in name recognition. While other parks may attempt to utilize a new attraction as a marketing strategy, and use increased attendance as a measure of its success, WDW is merely content with maintaining its top spot. Keeping the parks fresh and relevant is essential to that goal. Without it, how do you explain improvements (if you want to call them that) like New Fantasyland and planned improvements like Avatarland. #3) the answer is an undeniable and emphatic YES!!! When is the last time a record setting movie suddenly faded out of relevance, let alone a Disney production with such huge success? Are you trying to say Monsters Inc. or Stitch has more “staying power” than Frozen will have? Like it or not, Frozen is here to stay. Redoing Maelstrom would be the cheapest and quickest option for a Frozen attraction. It would take too long to build a new construction attraction unless of course it could somehow be tied into a new DVC property; then I think we would see it go up faster than an Eagle Scout’s pop up tent.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

My point is that frozen has done fantastic...but it's Only been about 4 months...

Based on pattern, they need much more than that to approve for capital expenditures.

One might argue that there's no way that a movie that made THAT much won't have staying power...
Perhaps...but there have been movies than did excellent that went away rather quickly. I can think of one off the top of my head. The attention span of the human being isnt impressive and has been reduced greatly by the amount of options available.

And refreshing the parks is really what they haven't (but should) done in Orlando since AK opened.
The total capital investment...while a nice hefty price tag...hasn't strengthened the parks there as much as the other Disney sites around the world...I would contend.
They let things go into decay and close them without replacement. That's pretty much anti-Disney and unacceptable in my opinion.

But it's easily overlooked/and not highlighted because they are still resting on the Eisner/wells master plan that was formulated in the late 1980's and the lemmings keep pouring increasing amounts of dough into the place year after year.

It's like a casino where the house can't loose a dime...they openly tell the customers about it...and the place is packed anyway.

 

[DummbGiRL]

No. Disney has a lot of successful movies that don't have a presence at the parks, or only have a small presence via merchandise or a character M&G.

They've made it clear that they aren't interested in getting into an "arms race" with Universal to build new attractions. Translation: We have no plans to build very many new attractions.

The primary reasons Avatar is going in:

1. Disney needs some way to keep guests in AK past 3pm, and a "bioluminescent" glow-in-the-dark Avatar area fits the bill without exploding fireworks over the poor animals' heads.
2. Cameron undoubtedly contributed something financially.
3. Whatever agreement they have with Cameron, you can bet that there's an "out" and/or an end date. Disney can then re-theme the area to an IP they actually own, and re-use all that mechanical infrastructure.

Personally, I'd rather that they not do attractions at all, if the new Ariel ride is the best example of what the current Imagineering team can do. It's terribad. I mean we were there at New Year's... when decades old PoTC, HM and Peter Pan are running 90+ minute waits, the park is partially closed for capacity, and your brand New Fantasyland Ariel ride is a walk-on, you simply must know you have a problem.

Disney has a lot riding on the Dwarf Train ride, no pun intended. They haven't built a really *great* new ride in Florida in a number of years now. I hope it's good.

so well put...and what a perfect adjective... "Terribad"

 

[Suzanne74]

The problem is World Showcase is for the countries and I am not sure if changing the ride into a Disney Princess will work.

I feel like a show would be much better. Take over Indiana Jones or Beauty and the Beast.

Plus Epcot REALLY needs a new Soarin movie. I much rather them do that.

 

[Whatsthegoodword]

Some of you people continue to amaze me. Are you sure that you're Disney fans?

Yeah, the Little Mermaid ride is not new, thrilling or groundbreaking - but it is exactly what I expected: a Fantasyland dark ride in the tradition of Peter Pan, Snow White, Mr. Toad, Pooh, etc. The anamatronic figures, the projected images, etc, etc. If you hate LM, then you should hate Pooh & Peter Pan too.

No expenditures at WDW???? They've spent hundreds of millions of $$$ there recently, and continue to do so. New Fantasyland is awesome. The Big Top area, Be Our Guest & Storytime with Belle are all awesome - and the Mine Train LOOKS fabulous. I can't wait to ride it!

The Sorcerer's of the MK activity is cool, and the new Treasure Hunt in Adventureland is AWESOME. My kids wanted to do that more than the rides when we were there last week.

 

[Andrew015]

Some of you people continue to amaze me. Are you sure that you're Disney fans?

Yeah, the Little Mermaid ride is not new, thrilling or groundbreaking - but it is exactly what I expected: a Fantasyland dark ride in the tradition of Peter Pan, Snow White, Mr. Toad, Pooh, etc. The anamatronic figures, the projected images, etc, etc. If you hate LM, then you should hate Pooh & Peter Pan too.

No expenditures at WDW???? They've spent hundreds of millions of $$$ there recently, and continue to do so. New Fantasyland is awesome. The Big Top area, Be Our Guest & Storytime with Belle are all awesome - and the Mine Train LOOKS fabulous. I can't wait to ride it!

The Sorcerer's of the MK activity is cool, and the new Treasure Hunt in Adventureland is AWESOME. My kids wanted to do that more than the rides when we were there last week.

While I am not totally enamored with New Fantasyland, I do agree with your sentiments. Recently, it seems like a rash of people have come out of the woodwork and want to see every classic Disney ride torn down, spun off and regurgitated into whatever the current "flavor of the week" happens to be. Maelstrom is excellent "as-is", and it doesn't need help from Frozen to continue to fill its wait-queue. It is hands-down the most popular attraction in World Showcase (not that it has a ton of competition in terms of WS attractions). I've never seen it without a 30 minute+ wait, and I travel in "off seasons". I'm not against adding new attractions, but when it's done at the expense of a classic, "staple" attraction, I have a problem.

 

[Figment632]

I have seen several concept arts for this and other Frozen attractions.

To start think of a dated DHS show being replaced or an unused theater being utilized.

 

[LaidBackDad]

No. Disney has a lot of successful movies that don't have a presence at the parks, or only have a small presence via merchandise or a character M&G...

Wholly understatement! Frozen is not just a successful movie. It is the #1 animated movie of all time and now in the top 10 of all movies. That is rarefied air, bigger than any other classic Disney princess movie (I know, sorry, blasphemy) . It's not "John Carter". My point is, Disney fell in a pot of gold with Frozen. If you look at the list of the other top ten movies, most of them already have or are planned to have whole parks or areas themed after them. It's not a stretch to think Disney would want to capitalize on the success and that hardly means they are trying to get into an "arms race" with universal. It just seems to me a redo of Maelstrom would be the easiest and quickest way to accomplish it. I do agree the World Showcase is one of the most "adult" areas in all of WDW and a Frozen ride may seem somewhat out of place; but, I think the imagineers could make it work. I think the success of Frozen caught even Disney by surprise. My guess is we will see something Frozen related added to the parks sooner rather than later.

 

[Castle2Castle]

The problem is World Showcase is for the countries and I am not sure if changing the ride into a Disney Princess will work.

Maelstrom is excellent "as-is", and it doesn't need help from Frozen to continue to fill its wait-queue. It is hands-down the most popular attraction in World Showcase (not that it has a ton of competition in terms of WS attractions). I've never seen it without a 30 minute+ wait, and I travel in "off seasons". I'm not against adding new attractions, but when it's done at the expense of a classic, "staple" attraction, I have a problem.

When we have gone off season, we've often only had maybe a 10-15 minute wait tops for Maelstrom and the Caballeros in World Showcase. I imagine Disney would have a better idea of how attractions are stacking up against expectations for foot traffic, but if they felt Maelstrom was under performing, it might be reasonable to take an approach similar to how Disneyland incorporated characters into It's A Small World; keep the ride Norway in broader theme, with Frozen merely serving a small part.

I like the ride fine as it is and don't know that it needs anything to drive more traffic, but that kind of approach could make World Showcase a bit more attractive for families with children and wouldn't require the kind of capital expenditure as a new ride or an entire redo of an existing ride.

*Apologies if that's already been mentioned; I didn't read through the previous pages of discussion

 

[Magic Fanatic]

Wholly understatement! Frozen is not just a successful movie. It is the #1 animated movie of all time and now in the top 10 of all movies. That is rarefied air, bigger than any other classic Disney princess movie (I know, sorry, blasphemy) . It's not "John Carter". My point is, Disney fell in a pot of gold with Frozen. If you look at the list of the other top ten movies, most of them already have or are planned to have whole parks or areas themed after them. It's not a stretch to think Disney would want to capitalize on the success and that hardly means they are trying to get into an "arms race" with universal. It just seems to me a redo of Maelstrom would be the easiest and quickest way to accomplish it. I do agree the World Showcase is one of the most "adult" areas in all of WDW and a Frozen ride may seem somewhat out of place; but, I think the imagineers could make it work. I think the success of Frozen caught even Disney by surprise. My guess is we will see something Frozen related added to the parks sooner rather than later.

Isn't this title, "#1 Animated Movie Of All Time" kind of misleading. The only thing making a case for that case is box office revenue which is based on current ticket prices. If one were to go back to all of Disney's other movies and adjust for ticket price inflation and then factor in years of re-releases and DVD's coming in and out of "the Vault", would Frozen really be number one of all time? I have no idea, but it would be interesting to see results.

 

[Andrew015]

I like the ride fine as it is and don't know that it needs anything to drive more traffic, but that kind of approach could make World Showcase a bit more attractive for families with children and wouldn't require the kind of capital expenditure as a new ride or an entire redo of an existing ride.

One of the many allures of World Showcase (to me, anyways) is that it is geared more towards adults rather than children (not to say that it isn't "child-friendly", because it is). Rather, the intent of WS is to "showcase" the history and cultures of the various countries represented, not necessarily to "pimp out" Disney's latest and greatest animated kids movies.

Perhaps there is a "fit" - I have not yet seen the movie, so I'm not really in a position to comment on that. However, I am in a position to comment on the potential integration. What most here are suggesting is that you keep the ride "as-is" for the most part, with a hint of Frozen sprinkled in. How is that really accomplishing anything? So you hop into the Viking boat, ride past the troll, an oil rig.... "OHHH... look, there's the snowman from Frozen!"... How could that possibly be considered enhancing the ride for the better?

The history of Norway and the movie Frozen have (to my knowledge) nothing in common with each other, sans the whole "cold climate" thing. Is that really a sufficient link for integrating the movie into this particular ride? I do understand that Norway's landscape was used as inspiration for the animators, but to my knowledge, that is where the similarities end. The whole notion screams "after-thought" to me.

I'll admit it - I really dislike change, especially as related to WDW. Having said that, I understand that change is inevitable, and if the changes make "sense" and are well-executed, I usually find myself warming up to them. Air dropping a character or two from Frozen into the existing Maelstrom ride sounds nothing short of tragic. If a Frozen ride is destined to find it's way into WDW, I sure hope for it to be a completely new attraction altogether. Don't mess with the Maelstrom, please.

 

[yitbos96bb]

While I am not totally enamored with New Fantasyland, I do agree with your sentiments. Recently, it seems like a rash of people have come out of the woodwork and want to see every classic Disney ride torn down, spun off and regurgitated into whatever the current "flavor of the week" happens to be. Maelstrom is excellent "as-is", and it doesn't need help from Frozen to continue to fill its wait-queue. It is hands-down the most popular attraction in World Showcase (not that it has a ton of competition in terms of WS attractions). I've never seen it without a 30 minute+ wait, and I travel in "off seasons". I'm not against adding new attractions, but when it's done at the expense of a classic, "staple" attraction, I have a problem.

Interesting...every time I go during the off seasons, the wait is at most 10 mins but usually just a walk on.... I guess that's why anecdotal evidence isn't really Great evidence for statements about a ride's popularity. Luckily they have a department that does those measures... I'd be curious to see how many people the ride gets during most days.

I will say I'd rather see them put a ride elsewhere in World Showcase than spend the money on changing Maelstrom...

 

[doconeill]

Interesting...every time I go during the off seasons, the wait is at most 10 mins but usually just a walk on.... I guess that's why anecdotal evidence isn't really Great evidence for statements about a ride's popularity. Luckily they have a department that does those measures... I'd be curious to see how many people the ride gets during most days.

I agree...when I've gone during off-season since the start of the Fastpass Era, the ONLY times I've seen that wait stretch over 15 minutes is when it's been shut down due to an issue.

I will say I'd rather see them put a ride elsewhere in World Showcase than spend the money on changing Maelstrom...

I also agree...but if they were going to refurb vs. build new, I think it does at least make some sense. Maelstrom has been plagues by maintenance issues for years now. It needs heavy work, and the retheme wouldn't be too bad and replacement of the exit movie is WAY overdue.

 

[yitbos96bb]

One of the many allures of World Showcase (to me, anyways) is that it is geared more towards adults rather than children (not to say that it isn't "child-friendly", because it is). Rather, the intent of WS is to "showcase" the history and cultures of the various countries represented, not necessarily to "pimp out" Disney's latest and greatest animated kids movies.

Perhaps there is a "fit" - I have not yet seen the movie, so I'm not really in a position to comment on that. However, I am in a position to comment on the potential integration. What most here are suggesting is that you keep the ride "as-is" for the most part, with a hint of Frozen sprinkled in. How is that really accomplishing anything? So you hop into the Viking boat, ride past the troll, an oil rig.... "OHHH... look, there's the snowman from Frozen!"... How could that possibly be considered enhancing the ride for the better?

The history of Norway and the movie Frozen have (to my knowledge) nothing in common with each other, sans the whole "cold climate" thing. Is that really a sufficient link for integrating the movie into this particular ride? I do understand that Norway's landscape was used as inspiration for the animators, but to my knowledge, that is where the similarities end. The whole notion screams "after-thought" to me.

I'll admit it - I really dislike change, especially as related to WDW. Having said that, I understand that change is inevitable, and if the changes make "sense" and are well-executed, I usually find myself warming up to them. Air dropping a character or two from Frozen into the existing Maelstrom ride sounds nothing short of tragic. If a Frozen ride is destined to find it's way into WDW, I sure hope for it to be a completely new attraction altogether. Don't mess with the Maelstrom, please.

That is correct.... The Snow Queen is a Danish story... The only tie that I see is that they are all Scandinavian countries.