Lilo & Stitch
Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures
Over the last decade, Disney has worked its way through nearly all of its animated classics, remaking them in live-action spaces, or at least using CGI that theoretically looks photo-realistic. Including Snow White, Pinocchio, Dumbo, Cinderella, Lady and the Tramp, The Little Mermaid, Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin, The Lion King, and Mulan, to name a few, Disney has ran through the gautlet of these projects and naturally, to keep making these often profitable remakes, have been pushed to start remaking their stories from the 2000s. Considering the wide appeal and love for the original, it makes sense that the company would decide to start with Lilo & Stitch. Directed by Dean Fleischer Camp (Marcel the Shell with Shoes On), the film plays many of the same beats of the original 2002 film, with only a handful of small changes made to simplify and clean up the story.
When it comes to live-action remakes, most projects start at an inherent disadvantage as they have to transfer the expression of animation into a live-action space. Animation allows for great control of tone and emotion, with 2002’s Lilo & Stitch being one of Disney's strongest animated features in that regard. While the remake doesn't come close to the emotions of the animated film, Camp's direction, particularly with the human drama, is a surprising point of success. The film goes deeper into the character of Nani (Sydney Agudong), who is drowning in her attempt to care for her little sister after the passing of her parents. She has had to choose between her dreams and being there for her family, and is constantly pulled to focus on being the caretaker of Lilo (Maia Kealoha), even when other opportunities, particularly being accepted to UC San Diego to study Marine Biology, present themselves. While the original relationship between these sisters shines brighter within the animated film, Nani's individual struggle gets a new depth and focus, which is appreciated. Agudong gives the strongest performance of the film, really bringing this struggle to life in a way that feels authentic and purposeful.
This is needed as, beyond the drama, the film drives on quite a rocky road. While the physical comedy of Stitch, once again voiced by Chris Sanders, has its successful moments, it is hard to claim this is truly impressive. Stitch is one of the easiest characters to display on the big screen, with both his decades of being one of Disney's most popular characters and his natural adorableness. When the film got the voice and visual design of Stitch down, it was basically a guarantee that his presence would work within the film. With this comedy, there really is no need for creativity or originality, as playing the hits works fine in delivering a safe yet effective form of entertainment.
When it comes time for the film to make drastic changes from the original, every decision feels like a step down from the original. The film recontextualizes the character of Jumba, brought to life by a possible career-worst performance from Zach Galifianakis, to make him the villain to replace the absent Captain Gantu, who was the main antagonist of the original film. The film strips Jumba of basically all of his personality, not only feeling like a weak villain but also an overall weak character. The film similarly adjusts the character of Cobra Bubbles (Courtney B. Vance), ridding his character of the clever angles he had in the original film. This doesn't mention the dozens of small changes that feel beyond questionable. Few other Disney remakes seem to have the same lack of understanding of what made the characters and plot work in the original film as Lilo & Stitch, with many of the smaller scenes being cut or tweaked being key for establishing these characters and building their relationships. Had the movie made a big swing to present something overall drastically different, these adjustments might have felt less noticeable and frustrating, but considering it is presenting the same story, every off-emotional beat stands out like a sore thumb.
While it is far from being a new takeaway, Lilo & Stitch is one of the clearest examples of why these live-action remakes are so dreadful. Even though the film overall connects with both its comedy and emotions, every piece of the puzzle feels dimmer than the original. The film neither presents a new take nor something on the same level as the original film, making it feel overall worthless. Not only is this frustrating in a time when cinema needs to be protected and one of the leading issues is the lack of quality control for the slop being released weekly by studios trying to make a quick buck rather than actually create something impressive, but it feels almost problematic to expect and try to entice families to spend a significant amount of cash to take their family to see something that, by design, is so much lesser than what is available at home.
Using AMC as an example, for a family of 4 to see Lilo & Stitch on discount Tuesday in standard format and buy a combo of a large popcorn and 2 large drinks, the price is over $100. To have a lack of interest in ensuring that the experience is going to be comparable to a film over 20 years old available on Disney+ for $11 is simply unimaginable. However, this is the standard practice for Disney at this point and, considering the box office results, is one that is not going to change anytime soon, even if it causes lasting damage both to the perception of the brand and the relationship between the consumer and the theatrical experience. More and more families will see going to the theater as an experience not worth the time or money, and the results will be lasting.
While in a vacuum, Lilo & Stitch is far from being the worst live-action remake, some of the emotions do connect, and the film is entertaining at times; there is still no logical argument that could make for recommending someone spend their time or money seeking the film out. Every piece of the film, even at its best moments, is a step down from the original, and the experience provides nothing new or worthy to establish its own identity or point of view. While one won't suffer through the film, that should not be enough to justify wasting 108 minutes on something that ultimately still ends up feeling more mediocre than anything else.
