For some fans, all this Frozen has given them a brain freeze.
But for all the complaints, plenty of other Disney fans are lining up to enjoy whatever Frozen attractions the company offers. Frozen has earned more than $1.2 billion dollars at the box office worldwide, making it the highest-grossing animated film of all time. Given that, Disney's emphasis on Frozen is just good business. The question is, though... will the demand for Frozen last?
Some perspective: Even though Frozen is now the highest-grossing animated film of all time, those numbers are skewed by the inflation of ticket prices over time. According to BoxOfficeMojo's analysis of domestic ticket sales, adjusted for inflation, Frozen isn't even close to the top spot, trailing Monsters, Inc., Toy Story 3, Aladdin, Lady and the Tramp, Finding Nemo, Bambi, Pinocchio, Shrek 2, Sleeping Beauty, The Jungle Book, Fantasia, The Lion King, 101 Dalmatians, and the all-time inflation-adjusted champion, Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs.
Those are all valuable franchises, worthy of long-term presence in top theme parks. But that list should suggest that putting Frozen all over its parks isn't a guarantee of long-term success for Disney. What's the wait like for the Shrek show at Universal these days? Or the Monsters Inc. show at Walt Disney World? Those were wildly popular animated franchises once, too.
Yes, Frozen characters Anna and Elsa have drawn waits of four hours and more for their meet-and-greet at the Magic Kingdom. But if you take a few moments to look at those queues of waiting fans, you'll see a definite trend. Almost all the families waiting to meet the Frozen queen and princess include early-elementary-aged girls. You just don't see as much gender and age diversity among Frozen fans as you do for other animated and entertainment franchises. Frozen has a huge audience not because it has wide appeal, but because it absolutely dominates within a narrow demographic.
This isn't necessarily a bad thing — plenty of franchises prosper with demographically-narrow fan bases. But it does make creating a decades-long demand for the franchise more difficult than it would be if the franchise appealed to a broader base. That's especially true for a franchise that appeals to a demographic that is notorious not just for dropping its favorites as it ages, but turning on them.
I've already heard from several people anecdotes about girls in fifth or sixth grades hurling savage insults at other girls who come to class wearing an Elsa T-shirt. Middle schoolers can be vicious toward classmates whom they perceive to be acting like "little" kids. A few children's franchises have managed to retain their fans across the middle school-divide (Harry Potter is the gold standard here), but most need to attract new, younger fans as their growing fans "age out" of the franchise.
That's the challenge for Disney with Frozen. If you want an example of a franchise that has done this beautifully for nearly 50 years, look at Sesame Street. And if you want the counter-example of a franchise that crashed and burned over the same challenge, look at Barney.
For those who did not have kids around the turn of the century (it's still weird for me to type that in reference to the year 2000), Barney was huge back then, dominating kids' attention nearly as much as Frozen does now. And Barney appealed to both genders.
Obviously, Disney has resources at its disposal that the independent production company that ran Barney did not, including its own cable and television networks, film distribution channels, a radio network, publishing houses, and yes, theme parks. But even if Disney's new Frozen musical at DCA is a huge hit with critics and audiences, that alone won't do much to help Frozen endure. An excellent live show at Universal Studios Florida (and yes, it is a well-produced show, if you have not seen it) wasn't nearly enough to help that franchise become relevant to a new generation of fans.
Disney's clearly making bank on Frozen right now. But are its actions with Frozen in the parks reacting to the franchise's popularity, cashing in on a hot fad, or are they part of directing that franchise, to help ensure its popularity across future generations?
With so many fans turned off by the expansion of Frozen in the parks, it's clear that Disney has missed an opportunity to expand the franchise's appeal by making more fans feel welcomed within it. That's fueling concern that the Disney Parks are just riding this phenomenon, instead of helping to direct it. But even if the parks seem to be throwing Frozen all over the place, the rest of the Walt Disney Company has proven itself time and again to be able to recruit new generations of fans to replace the young ones who one day grow out of love for specific characters.
In other words, if Disney wants Frozen to be a franchise, and not a fad — and all of Disney is willing to do the work to make that happen — it will be.
If you would like to support Theme Park Insider's efforts to provide original coverage of the theme park industry, please consider becoming an Insider, or making a one-time donation to the site through PayPal. Thank you!
Tweet
I think Disney needs to make Frozen Mania hold out until Frozen 2 is released in like 4 or so years.
If it does that, Frozen merchandising is making 3 billion in sales.
If not...
Then Rodger, we would have a problem.
If you read my comment in the article where it was revealed Aladdin would be replaced then you know how I'm against Frozen's overexposure, but I'm not completely against it having a presence in the parks. I can accept a meet-and-greet (especially when the 2 actresses playing the princesses are awesome!), I can accept a ride, I can accept a parade appearance, and I can accept a show or 2. What I can't accept is the ride being in a horrible location (and taking out one of my favorite hidden gems), too many shows (especially when they replace an awesome show) and I definitely can't accept seeing advertisement posters for it everywhere!
Just my 2 cents.
Disneyland is the World Most Famous local Theme Park.
Basically from your argument it follows that The Beatles shouldn't have been popular long term because there was a frenzy around them when they were first popular without a huge marketing machine promoting them. I would counter that there is more substance and artistic quality in Frozen than in Shrek and more in Sesame Street than Barney especially (for Pete's sake what adult can watch that for more than 1 minute), just like there is more in The Beatles than New Kids on the Block. That substance and quality is what determines a franchise's longevity not fatigue from over exposure.
Meet and greets aren't really an investment and can follow the fads very well.
As for overlaying Norway, the risk (as already stated many times) is in the introduction of fiction to a park which has been more based in fact and science. I don't think there's any dispute that frozen, even as a fad, will prove to be more popular (not necessarily as good) than the Norway pavilion, so financially it will make sense.
Personally, I don't have an issue with the deterioration of Epcot's themeing. I would rather go to France than visit a Disney representation (the cost is much the same as going to Orlando from Australi), or read a book on the science behind something than see Disney's dated version of it. I think a theme park can serve a purpose in education, but only to those who are unlikely or unable to learn or experience things themselves.
Anyway, I understand Disney's want to make as much money as possible. After all, they are a corporation. However, I feel that they are risking future rewards for gains today.
This is not saying that Frozen is bad. It will rank as a Disney classic without a doubt, but look at the other classics. I feel that Disney did not try to squeeze the money out of them. We literally had to wait 20 years to get anything more than a musical for Beauty and the Beast. The Lion King only got a show and it is considered one of the best!
When it comes to IP-based attractions, you either need to create the tie-in immediately to capitalize on the popularity or wait to be certain that the franchise has longevity. This is something I worry about with Avatar Land and the opening in 2017, and it is also something that could be a problem with Frozen. If interest in the franchise dies out over the next couple years, or worse...if Frozen 2 is a major disappointment and kills the franchise, Disney could end up wasting a lot of money on attractions that wind up with a shortened lifespan due to short-sightedness.
Frozen is worthy of a place in the Disney theme parks, but I don't feel it is established enough to be worthy of everything Disney is currently doing with it. Start with one attraction, and if the result is long-term success then continue building from there. Additionally, don't focus solely on one property and exclude other viable options. Too much Frozen may turn visitors away who don't care for the property, and with the competition in today's theme park market it may be challenging to get them back.
If Disney would have build a miniland like the artwork for the Frozen expansion destined for Disney Sea I would actualy be excited. It looks stunning and should have a great ride. We would have to go quite a few years without any mayor Frozen in the parks but a float and meet and greet are cheap and could feed the anticipation. In the end a bigger demographic would be excited about the movie giving it legs and people will want to watch it before visiting it.
But what if Disney knows the movie isn't a clasic. That it's lucky it got where it got and has tocash as much money from it until the larger audiance sees for what it is. That is exactly what Disney is doing and they do it with great effect.
TH Creative Newly Certified Theme Park Insider responds: Um ... I think they keep making more of those ... So ...
This company is the very definition of over-saturatization, look at the Disneyfication of Time Square, and the exuberance of theme parks itself.
Frozen is here to stay, but will be replaced eventually.
Great article Robert, saying what many of us have no doubt been thinking.
This phenomenon isn't limited to Frozen. Every Disney feature will get its due over and over again.
Yes, Frozen caught DIS by surprise, in the sense that it has become its own $1B franchise. DIS always thought it would strongly reinforce the Disney Princess line.
As far as "over exposure"... the attractions (stage shows, 'Meet & Greets', parade floats, etc) if interpreted as cheesy, cheap or stale they will damage the Frozen brand.
Yes, the upcoming ride utilizes the same ride track and vehicles, but supposedly that's all. You have to admit, it's genius placing it in E.P.C.O.T. with the hope of boosting the parks attendance. It could also be said, it's the worst mistake, if it's perceived as the only 'cool' thing in E.P.C.O.T. or cheesy, cheap or stale!
As far as Monsters, Inc. WDW: Laugh/DCA: ride, Stitch, bringing back Capt. EO, Finding Nemo and other failed attractions/rides (every park has a few) often referred to as quick and very cheap overlays by park goers. It should come as no surprise, park management on both coasts agree! And have plans to replace them all.
Time will tell. Just not the over night make over being sought by theme park die hards.
I loved the Aladdin show too but I recognize that when you have something not just a movie but a full-fledged cultural movement, you hit it when it's hot. As others have pointed out, so many other Disney films of the past still resonate today because the kids who saw them have grown up and now showing them to their own kids and I believe "Frozen" (with its great themes of sisterhood and such) will follow that so I have some faith this will help out a lot in the long run.
This is such a predictable knee jerk reaction from Disney bigwigs. The movie's a smash? Time for an overdose of the movie in the parks! Frozen is clearly a flash in the pan because it doesn't have broad appeal, and the backlash has already begun.
At least Frozen represents a fairly new movie instead of something 25+ years old. I'm not going to buy Disney's outdated junk. Frozen is a small step forward.
This article has been archived and is no longer accepting comments.
Yet Frozen is less popular than Monsters Inc. in the domestic market. Monsters is actually a rank higher than Frozen domestically; however Monsters drops to #115 worldwide.
Let's say the domestic Disney fans have a case, but Disney theme parks are for all visitors and this is about winning foreign visitors that love Frozen. This also makes the case for Avatar in Animal Kingdom.