First Look at Scale Model for Tokyo Disney's Fantasy Springs

If it is anything like the previous projects at Tokyo Disney it'll be far superior to anything we ever get at Disney World.

I think for the money they spend on that Star Wars crap they could have build all of this. That would be so better as this is all Disney, not stuff they bought and mistreated.

The Neverland section is very cool, but poor Rapunzel continues to get short shifted with just a lonely tower prop (let's hope there's more than just a bathroom in the adjacent village building). The Arendelle section looks very generic, and is lacking in Norse ornamental details that are more identifiable as Scandinavian. Tall-sloped roofs aren't enough, and there certainly isn't enough snow/ice/frost to make the connection of this area with Frozen.

I just love Imagineers pointing out "you can have all the fancy 3D computers you want but nothing beats old-fashioned models to show how something truly looks and works in real life."

And do agree with Russell on Arendelle. The mountain part look okay and the big moat gates but otherwise, Norway at Epcot looks better as a setting.

@O T: To which "they" do you refer? Tokyo Disney Resort is owned and operated by a Japanese company (Oriental Land Company), which (a) has no role in corporate acquisitions by Disney (Marvel, Lucasfilm, etc.), and (b) makes independent decisions about capex priorities.

If you mean "Disney could've differently allocated resources among its divisions (studio, networks, parks and resorts, consumer products) to make its U.S. parks more impressive" that's true, but water under the bridge.

@Russell Meyer: A "generic" determination is premature, IMHO. This video is limited: there's one 2D rendering of Arendelle (at 1:01, where the castle *does* seem to have detail similar to the movie), but the corresponding part of the 3D model is low-res (1:04, 1:09) -- hand-sculpted clay, or simply clay-colored because it's usefully non-descript?

A model at 1:50 scale probably *could* have more detail (color-printed laser-cut appliqués, etc.) but this version doesn't; since the degree of surface detail varies from point to point, it's clearly preliminary in some aspects, possibly intended to plan sightlines and brief executives. Maybe the cliffs and stone-built Arendelle waterfront benefitted from generic materials in the Imagineers' toolkit?

TDR, doing it better than all the others!
FYI, the model is not showing all the detail that will be a part of each mini land. Watch the POVs of their Beauty and the Beast/Fanatsyland expansion and you’ll get an idea of what to expect from Fantasy Springs.
See you in 2023 TDR!

You're right Lexomatic, but the Neverland and Tangled sections had some pretty distinct details that made them instantly identifiable with those franchises. There are always changes from initial designs/models and the final executed projects, but critical details are always present in these early visualizations, which just aren't widespread in the Arendelle section. It's entirely possible that Imagineers have more planned for the area, and wanted to put this model together for other reasons (as you say for sightlines, layout, promotional purposes, critical feedback, etc...), but that doesn't change the fact that these depictions of the Arendelle area are rather generic.

Let's not forget that Disney is ALWAYS very careful about what they release publicly, and are very guarded about their development/brainstorming processes before the completion of a project. It's altogether possible that they wanted to see the reaction to these designs to gather public input/feedback so Imagineers have ammunition to bring to executives trying to trim their budgets.

@Russell Meyer: The Imagineers love to talk on the scores of original sketches, etc just lying around the vaults and "you can build an entire park out of the unused ideas for a single ride."

And Disney is careful, especially in later years. They got burned promising scores of stuff in the "Disney Decade" that never came close to coming true so smarter holding back a bit more until they can be certain it will be built.

Am I imagining it or is there supposed to be a coaster of some kind in Arundel? I was looking for more details of this but didn't see anything that could even possibly be such an attraction. Am I missing something?

@ David, you're thinking of Hong Kong's Frozen land.

Ah, I got mixed up on that myself, thought the coaster was here. Seems to be a working of both Everest and the old plans for a "Mt Figi" at Japan's Epcot pavilion.

Proving once more that Imagineers never toss anything out but just wait for the right time later.