6/26/2023

Risk vs Reward: Tomorrowland Cabanas and Starcruisers

June 26, 2023

If you’re reading this, chances are that you are a fan of Walt Disney World. I don’t really put this blog out there to the general public. I’m always willing to give my fellow lunatics a peek behind the curtain. However, we tend to keep the unwashed masses out of our craziness. But I’m not here to talk about our propensity to disappoint family members and tempt friends to hold interventions on our behalf; I’m here to discuss the willingness and sometimes unwillingness of the Walt Disney Corporation to take chances with their products.

Some years it feels like Disney is afraid to step out of the box at all. Attraction cloning from other parks. Uninspired eateries. A “that will be good enough” attitude toward experiences in the parks. But on other occasions they swing for the fences and create mind-blowingly innovative attractions. Shatter glass ceilings with excellent “theme park food”. And at times, really go the extra mile for outside the box guest adventures. Why are they so inconsistent?

Ask ten Disney people that question and you will get ten different answers. Current stock prices, Imagineering hires, top brass philosophies, and retaliation toward competitors can all contribute to the quality or lack of quality of the offerings. All of these things factor into Disney’s Risk vs Reward mindset. I’ve heard people say that Disney just doesn’t take risks like they used to, and I disagree completely. Not all of the risks pay off, and not all of the risks were the right thing to do at the time, but WDW has pulled the trigger on pretty innovative and unique offerings in the last few years. Sure, sometimes they play it safe. Bringing over cloned attractions from other parks presents little risk. Tron Lightcycle Run, Ratatouille, and Alien Swirling Saucers are a few that are either based on or exact copies of existing attractions at other parks. These types of attractions can still garner major anticipation and excitement, especially if the attractions are popular in their other locations.

However, some of the most innovative, technologically advanced, and state-of-the-art experiences have come about in the last ten years. Have some of these unique ideas turned out to be steaming garbage? You bet. The Tomorrowland Cabanas were installed to try to lure in those vacationers that wanted to relax whilst in the Magic Kingdom. Not only is the very idea of “relaxing” in Magic Kingdom a farce, but it flies in the face of how Disney fans vacation. My idea of relaxing isn’t a mildly uncomfortable chair, under a tent, set up on blistering concrete, listening to a harried mom threaten to rain down sulfur and brimstone on two hollow-eyed exhausted toddlers who just want to swim at the hotel. And all for the price of $650 a day. Poorly conceived, poorly executed, and out of touch with its fanbase, these things were disasters. Yet at the same time, over in Animal Kingdom, Joe Rhode was putting the final touches on the floating mountains of Pandora; a land that would open just five months later. They were also just two and a half years from unveiling Star Wars: Galaxy’s Edge.

Admittedly, both Pandora and SWGE were a direct response to the Wizarding World of Harry Potter down the road, but the two attractions that headlined these two lands (Avatar: Flight of Passage and Star Wars: Rise of the Resistance) were both heralded as the most forward thinking experiences in the theme park world. That the Tomorrowland Cabanas and Rise of the Resistance were being instituted in roughly the same time period shines a spotlight on how inconsistent Disney could be when going live with different experiences. Sometimes it’s “let’s shove some IP into an existing attraction” to attempt to liven it up, and occasionally it works. Whether you’re a fan of it or not, inserting Captain Jack Sparrow into Pirates of the Caribbean worked wonders for the attraction’s popularity. Other times it is abysmal. (Looking at you, Enchanted Tiki Room: Under New Management)

Some risks pay off, some do not. That is what makes them risks, right? So is it a matter of throwing everything against a wall and seeing what sticks? To some degree, yes. However, there are a WHOLE lot of bean-counters behind the scene doing research and determining what has a better chance of being successful. It’s hard to be overly critical when there is a lot of data backing up those decisions. I’m also not delusional enough to think that every new idea is going to cater to me (or even appeal to me at all). But I still want these things to succeed! The more Disney’s big risk endeavors succeed, the more likely they will be to continue to push the envelope.

I like Star Wars. I’m not a super fan. I enjoyed episodes IV through VI. I generally disliked episodes I through III (Star Wars Episode II: Attack of the Clones doesn’t rank as worse than the Black Plague in my book, but it does come in below fever blisters and OJ Simpson). I had no intention of visiting the Galactic Starcruiser and thought it was priced too high for the length of the adventure. However, I desperately wanted to see it succeed. It was ground-breaking, it was unique, and there wasn’t anything quite like it. Now that we know it is closing for good, I am worried that Disney won’t blaze the trail to that degree again. If enough of Disney’s risks don’t pay off there will certainly be a shying away, and if that happens, we all lose.

As Disney fans, we are vocal. We like what we like, and we hate what doesn’t appeal directly to us. That’s our culture as a whole right now, but let’s do our best not to yuck anyone else’s yum. And let’s try to support the times that Disney steps out in faith and does something unorthodox, even if it flies in the face of our nostalgia.

Except the NBA Experience. That was horrible. Don’t do that again Disney.