Lilo & Stitch (2025) is another release in a long line of “reimaginings” of Disney animated features. Described as “live-action” they rework animations with humans and real-life settings (and the occasional animated character). These, for the most part, have been lucrative and successful for the studio. However, Disney’s mining of their own back catalogue has also yielded controversy and backlash.
Following the troubled release of Snow White earlier this year – a film that failed to recoup its $270m (£201m) budget – it was announced that the production of a live action version of Tangled had been put on hold. Could Lilo and Stitch reignite confidence in the commercial viability of Disney’s recent live-action trend?
The animated Lilo & Stitch (2002) was a hit when it was released, earning US$273m (£204m) at the box office on its $80m budget. Stitch has become a symbol of the Disney corporation in the decades since the film was released, rivalling Mickey Mouse himself as the Disney mascot most merchandised around the world.
Looking for something good? Cut through the noise with a carefully curated selection of the latest releases, live events and exhibitions, straight to your inbox every fortnight, on Fridays. Sign up here.
The film seems like an obvious candidate for a live-action rendition. The trailers show Stitch unchanged. He is roguish, naughty, lovable, hilarious and full of personality. This begs the question: what is the point, then? The cynical response to this is lucrative merchandise. But cynicism has no place in Disney films, so let’s dive in.
The live-action Lilo & Stitch recreates a lot of the charm of the original animated film from 2002. Stitch (the original creator and voice, Chris Sanders) is a chaotic monster, who, when exiled from his home planet, escapes to Earth where he joins Lilo’s family in Hawaii.
Recently orphaned, six-year old Lilo (Maia Kealoha) and her older sister and guardian, Nani (Sydney Adugong) struggle to maintain family life, and face the prospect of being separated by a social worker (Tia Carrere). Stitch’s arrival creates new upheaval as Nani attempts to keep the family together.
The film’s strengths lie in the ways in which it echoes the original film. Hawaii’s beaches and surf are stunning onscreen, and an animated Stitch blends flawlessly with his real-life surroundings as he creates a whirlwind of mayhem everywhere he goes.
Newcomer Maia Kealoha shines as Lilo, and there is magic onscreen when she shares scenes with Stitch. Their adventures together possess an undeniable charm, representing the film’s most compelling and memorable moments. Children will be delighted by Stitch’s hilarious naughtiness, and his journey to understanding and acceptance is heartwarming and well-paced.
The threat of familial separation is portrayed as nuanced, complicated and less apocalyptic than in the original animated film. The social worker played by Tia Carrere (who voiced Nani in the animation) is a warm and empathetic presence, and her interactions with Nani have gravity and credibility.
Although this is a welcome change, these scenes lack the energy of the Lilo and Stitch hijinks. They do add a degree of depth, but ultimately slow the story down, making the emotional moments feel unearned and somewhat lacking.
The other central adults in the film, two alien hunters posing as humans played by Zach Galifianakis and Billy Magnusson, feel out of place. The filmmakers’ decision to transform them from animated form into human form just doesn’t work in the world of the film. Their oafish and exaggerated physical performances are too jarring in a real-world setting, and would have been better remaining as vocal performances accompanying animation onscreen.
Their home planet, Planet Turo is spectacularly animated. Hannah Waddingham gives a wonderful vocal performance as the grand councilwoman and new a comedic character resembling a pink axolotl (an amphibious salamander), makes this film feel very of the moment, given the recent media interest in this strange little creature.
The film ultimately falls down in the final act as the strands of story come together in an overly complicated way. Changes to the ending create a sluggish finale which lacks the emotional payoff of the original.
Overall, though, the new Lilo and Stitch is a joyful summer adventure that offers plenty of fun for children. Every scene where Stitch is onscreen is delightful. A modern cinematic icon, he is largely unchanged from the original 2002 film. The film updates the original through masterful depiction of Stitch’s interactions with humans onscreen.
Stitch’s successes as a character in the original film are replicated here – his narrative arc, his design, his voice and his behaviour. The essence of what made Stitch an icon remains.
Where the film is lacking is in over-complication of plot. There’s nothing wrong with refreshing the plot, as long as the heart, pacing and charm of the original remain intact. Perhaps Disney should turn their focus to what audiences loved about the original films, and what made the stories and characters so memorable.
So, could the live-action Lilo and Stitch reignite confidence in this burgeoning genre? If Disney recognises that returning to source material with a modern touch means upholding the central elements key to these films’ enduring legacy, then maybe it can. Just don’t mention Snow White. And the merchandising opportunities can’t hurt them either.
Laura O'Flanagan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.
