Disney’s latest trend of recreating their animated movies into live action films has come to a head with its newest release of their beloved classic, Lilo and Stitch. Announced in October of 2018, fans were excited to see how Disney would adapt this loved story. Excitement only grew when the first preview of Stitch was shown at Disney’s convention, D-23, as audiences grew excited at the accurate depiction of Stitch in live action. Though mixed reactions were held when the first trailer was released, many fans were voicing their hesitancy online to the inaccuracies shown seldom in the original movie. Released in theaters on May 23, fans entered wary to see how Disney would adapt this beloved movie only for many to be left disappointed and with a bad taste in their mouths.
Much of the charm from the original film was lost in the unnecessary changes made for the live action. Removing the simplicity from the animated movie, the live actions additions work to only make this retelling feel bloated and complicated. The film clearly tries too hard to differentiate itself from its predecessor while trying to adapt this long loved school. What results is a clearly unfaithful retelling that clearly doesn’t understand its own themes and characters.
The most obvious changes were the recharacterizations of the characters Pleakley and Jumba and the complete removal of Gantu. Rewritten to replace Gantu as the primary antagonist, Jumba is turned into the villain of the story who hunts Stitch and bullies Pleakely. Much of his character is rewritten to align with the characteristics of one that is a villain. His charm is lost with the removal of his Russian accent, obvious care for Stitch and his visual design diverging from cute to disturbing.
This is where we run into one of the first problems of the movie. With the complete tear down of Jumba’s character, the original theme of ohana (which is a Hawaiian phrase used in the movie that captures the meaning of all family, related or chosen) is changed as his character is never redeemed in the end. This goes against the theme of a found family as Jumba is never able to be a part of Lilo and Nani’s family with Stitch. This also completely rewrites the ending as without the character of Gantu, Jumba is the one who takes Stitch and instead of his character helping to rescue Stitch, the responsibility falls completely to Lilo. This integral moment is lost along with the message that Lilo is not alone, that she has others who are willing to help her, which reinforces the message of ohana. All of this is cut, unwarranted might I add.
The theme of unnecessary changes follows like a bomb through the entire film with changes that feel very out of place in the film. The ugly duckling character arc that Stitch goes through, which is essential to his development as someone who longs for a family, is cut. This storyline is cut with a CIA plot line that features Cobra Bubbles, another character that is completely rewritten. His intimidating but secretly soft interior is changed to a CIA operative who is following the new alien life on Earth. The change from a CPS worker to CIA agent is indicative of the writer’s lack of understanding of Bubbles as a character, removing much of the tenderness he had in the original film. The addition of his storyline is both needless to his character and the story, clearly made to pad the run time.
Many characters are added and changed, often at the expense of the story. And due to these rewrites, some characters serve no purpose in the film, so badly you could remove them and the story would stay the same. A victim of this is David, who was Nani’s love interest in the original film. Instead, he is turned into a friend to Nani who is played for cheap laughs and turned into a dumb hunk. Which completely goes against his original character. In the movie, David was deeply empathetic and caring for both Lilo and Nani. His character is also important to Nani’s character as her refusal to date him signals to the audience Nani’s sacrifice to raising Lilo and the difficulties of becoming the sole caretaker of her. Her choice to be with him in the end is the representation of her family growing and no longer being alone. Even his original scene of cheering up Nani and Lilo through surfing is completely rewritten to Lilo finding a poster to a surfing instructor needed and giving it to Nani. The scene no longer holds the same emotional connection as it did in the original film, and makes David completely unneeded to the plot.
But the most egregious character assassination in the film goes to none other than Nani herself. In the live action, Nani is written almost bitter and annoyed with Lilo, lacking the fundamental softness and care the original Nani had. In almost every scene she is in, she seems annoyed with Lilo and is quick to anger and blame towards the girl, which feels far from her animated counterpart. There is even a scene where she blames her parents for dying and leaving them behind, which is something Nani would never say. But what comes as the most disgusting retake of her character is allowing another family to take Lilo so she may pursue her dream of becoming a marine biologist. This completely goes against the message of ohana, in which Nani is actively leaving her own sister behind for her own desires. In the movie, the message of ohana is seen more as a joke than a heartfelt motif from the original movie.
The writers completely misunderstand Nani’s character. Even the choice to have Nani want to become a marine biologist seems so lazy, when if they really did want to give her a deep desire, they could’ve given her surfing. A small background detail of Nani from the original movie is all the surfing trophies she had, and it can be assumed she gave all of that up to raise Lilo. It seems like a missed opportunity and a clear sign of the lack of care put into the story.
Of course, the writers were able to handle some characters well, for example the titular characters of Lilo and Stitch. For the most part, they were kept to their animated counterparts and were accurate to their characters and motivation. The only flaw I could make out was the rapid relationship that developed between the two. Stitch is quick to attach and like Lilo, unlike in the original story, it was clear he was only using her for his protection. In the new movie, his character is played more as mischievous instead of his true destructive manner. This quick liking to Lilo doesn’t hit the same emotional resonance as it did in the original movie, overshadowing Stitch’s active effort to be good for Lilo. And they cut many scenes of Nani bonding with Stitch, which misses much of the original theme of Stitch becoming a part of their family, instead of just bonding with Lilo.
As a movie, the film’s story and plot works well but it quickly falls apart when you put it under the lens of an adaptation of a movie. Though it could’ve changed its direction, it doesn’t do it well and adds very little to the original source material, doing nothing to improve it or adds changes that enhance the themes and its story. Instead, the film only works in misunderstanding its character and messages.
In short, this movie shouldn’t have been remade. . It wasn’t made with the intention to revive a beloved franchise and improve upon its original story, but for the sheer purpose to make a profit from an already successful film. It felt like it wasn’t about caring for details, but to produce a generic movie and change it enough to be seen on merchandise. It was not made with the love of artistry, but the pull of greed, just like what Disney has been doing with every single one of live action movies and sequels.