Why isn't Disneyland making a Frozen ride?

Since Disneyland does have that limited space to work with, Star Wars is the most profitable way to go. It's a franchise that's so large, content will always be there. Frozen, like many of Disney's animated movies, cannot spit out sequels and offshoot movies like Star Wars. That's why they wanted to take advantage of hype of Frozen when they still could by transforming Maelstrom. I predict that their Star Wars attractions being updated with new content every year. Unfortunately, they cannot do that with Frozen.

I don't think a Frozen ride is necessary for Disneyland to cash in on that franchise. The Frozen merchandise the park has sells well regardless if there's an actual physical attraction.

DL has / had a large Frozen presence already in the park (Frozen fever). While a ride could technically empty out "into the giftshop". Disney could pretty much just build the gift shop & get the same result.

While the sequel is in the works, many have complained that there's already "too much" of it in the parks.

I understand the financial reasoning behind it, but they are already succesfully milking that franchise quite well at DLR. That isn't meant to be negative, just pointing out a physical ride at this point wouldn't do anything more than what's already being done.

I think the main reason Disneyland does not have a Frozen ride in the plans is because of space limitations and the new Frozen show planned for California Adventure. You don´t get to see two of the same IPs have a prescence in both parks. That would be too much, as if it isn´t already with all the Frozen merchandise sold at the parks. With the new Frozen show replacing Aladdin, it should be enough of a worthy Frozen attraction for the DLR.

Everyone makes a valid point. Frozen is well represented at the parks. I've noticed this quite often when I visit Disneyland. Though, I still believe a Frozen attraction would be a good addition to the parks. I'm sure the new Frozen show will be very good, but still doesn't seem as exciting as opposed to an actual ride.

I know the main reason is probably due to lack of space. But I've read that Disneyland is planning on purchasing more land in the area. Also, they plan on knocking down the Paradise Pier parking lot? In order to expand.

A Frozen theme land would be pretty cool at Disneyland. They could make it similar to the "Wizarding World of Harry Potter," at Universal. I'm sure Disneyland could easily replicate the ride being constructed in Disney World. I hope it happens someday...

Frozen is not Disney's most successful movie of all time. That would go to the Star Wars franchise. The most successful film made by Disney itself is actually Snow White. And there are plenty of films that did better than Frozen.

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/adjusted.htm

That question on if Disney should make a Frozen attraction is if it could be made into a good attraction. Cars is Pixar's least liked franchise, but Carsland is still incredibly popular. And that's because it translates into an amazing theme park experience. Mr Toads Wild Ride is very popular, despite being based off of a character from a largely forgotten movie. Popularity isn't the deciding factor in making an attraction. Because if it were, most of Disney's greatest rides wouldn't exist, because they are not based off of anything. That's not to say it's not an influence. But jumping on the bandwagon to support something that is currently popular can be very dangerous. Disney could of made a High School Musical or Hannah Montana ride using that logic.

Here's a few things to consider:

-The Disneyland Resort already has several Frozen themed attractions at DCA and is adding a new one next year.
-The new Frozen ride at Epcot, Frozen Ever After, is just a retheme of an existing unpopular attraction.
-The Frozen Land is being added to Tokyo DisneySea, a park which has plenty of room for expansion and is located in a country where Frozen is a bigger phenomenon than the United States.
-Fans of the US parks have complained that there is already an excess of Frozen and Frozen Ever After received the most reserved response at D23 this year.
-There is no evidence that Frozen's popularity will last long-term. It is possible that it will remain popular indefinitely, but it is also popular that very few will care about it in five years' time.

At the moment, it doesn't make sense for Disneyland to invest in a Frozen ride. They have gone nearly two decades without a major new attraction (and a decade without a completely new attraction period), so investing in what will have the widest appeal is the way to go. No matter how popular a Frozen Land may be, Star Wars Land will probably attract ten times as many visitors.

Will there ever be a Frozen ride at Disneyland? Possibly. I have heard that development has begun on a Frozen dark ride for Fantasyland and that it will be the next project for the park after Star Wars Land. I do not know how true this is and I think the reaction to Florida's attraction next year will probably be a contributing factor as to whether the park moves forward with this project, but if the popularity of Frozen endures it will likely happen. Due to space constraints, I highly doubt Disneyland will ever give Frozen a full land (unless they bulldoze Toontown for it, which wouldn't be a bad move), but a single ride is a definite possibility at some point in the future.

Randy Keith, and AJ Hummel, you both make some valid points. Star Wars Land is going to be very successful and popular. However, I don't foresee Frozen just disappearing in five years. It was too much of a success for Disney, in fact, it's the highest grossing animated film of all time. Honesty, do you see "Let It Go," not being around in five years? Somehow, I don't think so. Little girls will be singing that song until the end of time. They are making a Frozen 2 as well, so the legacy will continue to children for years to come.

Since Disneyland does not have the space, they probably won't be able to build a Frozen Land, on the other hand, I agree with AJ, in a sense, that a ride is a possibility at some point in the future. I like Aj's idea of bulldozing Toontown, in order to build a Frozen theme land. Aside from the Roger Rabbit ride, there's not much in Toontown.

Randy, I understand what you're saying, I think you're being a little bit silly about High School Musical, and Hannah Montana. But, I do see the logic behind what you are saying.

To get back to Star Wars, I think they should have started building the land already, and should have been finished, in order to coincide with the new movie. I also think kids will be more into Frozen, as opposed to Star Wars. For example, my nieces would much rather watch Frozen than Star Wars. Star Wars requires more of an older crowd - teens to adults. That's why I believe Frozen would be a better idea at the parks as opposed to Star Wars. I know Disney bought the Star Wars Franchise, however, when I think of Star Wars, I don't automatically think Disney. When I think of Frozen, Disney instantly comes to mind. A Frozen Land belongs in Disneyland...not Star Wars.

I have a perfect spot for a Frozen ride. Just north of the Matterhorn and in the former motor boat cruise area. They might have to remove a third of the Autopia ride to get the space. It is time to use the trackless technology. A beyond E-Ticket experience to visit Arendale and see Elsa, Anna, Olaf, and Kristoff.

I agree with you Anon. Yes, that would be a perfect spot, I know exactly where that is. Disneyland should have a trackless ride, like in Tokyo Disneyland, and Disneyland Paris. Disneyland needs a trackless Frozen ride, it would be a great addition to the park!

In addition to the comments above, with the river, RR, and TSI closing and rumors of a long Jungle Cruise re-fit, it isn't surprising that Disney doesn't want to put up more construction walls right now.