Lilo & Stitch review – Disney’s latest unnecessary remake is a monstrosity

TruthLens AI Suggested Headline:

"Disney's 'Lilo & Stitch' Remake Critiqued for Lack of Charm and Depth"

View Raw Article Source (External Link)
Raw Article Publish Date:
AI Analysis Average Score: 5.5
These scores (0-10 scale) are generated by Truthlens AI's analysis, assessing the article's objectivity, accuracy, and transparency. Higher scores indicate better alignment with journalistic standards. Hover over chart points for metric details.

TruthLens AI Summary

Disney's latest remake of 'Lilo & Stitch' has been met with harsh criticism, as it transforms the beloved 2002 animated classic into a heavily CG-augmented quasi-live-action film that many view as unnecessary. The original 'Lilo & Stitch' is celebrated for its unique blend of hand-drawn animation and watercolor backgrounds, paired with a heartfelt story that combines elements of science fiction and humor. This new iteration retains the basic storyline of a young Hawaiian girl, Lilo, befriending the alien Stitch, but it fails to capture the essence and charm of the original. While the character of Stitch is successfully adapted into a three-dimensional environment, the film's execution leaves much to be desired. Critics argue that the new Lilo, played by Maia Kealoha, loses the depth and nuance of her animated counterpart, instead resorting to cutesy antics that detract from the emotional impact of the story. Director Dean Fleischer Camp's approach has been criticized for lacking the necessary technical support to bring the characters and story to life effectively, resulting in a film that feels disjointed and lacks the rhythm of its predecessor.

The remake also struggles with pacing and coherence, as evident in an opening sequence that fails to establish the film's tone and rhythm. As the story unfolds, the chaotic lives of Lilo and her sister Nani are presented without the emotional weight that characterized the original. Although there are moments of humor and sentiment as Stitch integrates into their lives, the film's attempts to recreate the original's poignant moments often fall flat. Critics point out that the expanded runtime does not enhance the narrative; instead, it adds unnecessary filler that fails to capture the original film's charm. The remake appears to prioritize superficial visual effects over the rich storytelling and emotional depth that made the original a classic. Ultimately, the new 'Lilo & Stitch' is seen as a hollow imitation, lacking the heart and artistry that defined its predecessor, leaving audiences longing for the authenticity of the original animation.

TruthLens AI Analysis

The review of Disney's latest remake of "Lilo & Stitch" presents a critical take on the trend of reimagining animated classics into live-action formats. The author expresses dissatisfaction with the new adaptation, arguing that it fails to capture the essence of the original film, which is praised for its unique blend of animation techniques and heartfelt storytelling.

Critique of the Remake Trend

The article emphasizes that while Disney has a history of reinterpreting its animated classics, "Lilo & Stitch" is an exception due to its originality and cultural significance. The review suggests that the new adaptation, described as a "quasi-live-action monstrosity," undermines the artistic integrity of the original film. This critique reinforces a broader conversation about the necessity and quality of remakes in the entertainment industry, urging audiences to reconsider the value of original storytelling versus nostalgia-driven adaptations.

Cultural Impact and Audience Reception

By focusing on the loss of character depth and emotional nuance in the new version, the review aims to resonate with audiences who cherish the original film and its cultural representation. The mention of the characters, particularly Lilo and Stitch, highlights the importance of authentic representation and the emotional connections viewers have with animated characters. This could foster a sense of community among fans of the original film, prompting discussions about authenticity in media.

Possible Concealed Agendas

There might be an underlying motive to critique the current trend of remakes, suggesting a preference for original storytelling that reflects diverse experiences. The review may also serve as a cautionary note against the potential commodification of beloved stories, encouraging readers to be more discerning consumers of media.

Manipulation and Reliability

The review carries a manipulative tone, particularly in its strong language describing the new film as "ghastly." This choice of words can evoke an emotional reaction from readers and may skew perceptions of the film before they see it. However, the review is grounded in a subjective experience, which can be understood as a valid expression of opinion rather than an outright deception.

In terms of reliability, the review reflects the author's personal views and is, therefore, limited in its objectivity. For readers familiar with the original film, the critique may resonate deeply, while others may have a different perspective based on their expectations of the remake. The overall impression is that the review aims to provoke thought about the trends in Hollywood, rather than simply reporting on the film.

Industry Context and Broader Implications

This review contributes to a larger discourse regarding Hollywood's reliance on nostalgia and remakes, which may impact the industry's future direction. It hints at a potential backlash against reboots, suggesting audiences may prefer new narratives that reflect contemporary realities. The implications for the film industry could be significant, as studios may need to reassess their strategies for engaging audiences.

Target Audience

The review likely appeals to cinephiles, animation enthusiasts, and those critical of corporate entertainment practices. It speaks directly to viewers who value storytelling and character development, encouraging a dialogue about the importance of preserving the integrity of original works.

Financial and Market Influence

While the review may not directly impact stock prices, it reflects a growing sentiment that could influence consumer behavior. If negative reviews accumulate, they might deter audiences from viewing such remakes, impacting box office performance and, consequently, the financial health of companies like Disney.

Geopolitical Relevance

There is no explicit geopolitical connection in this review, but it can be seen as part of a larger cultural conversation about representation in media, which is increasingly relevant in today's globalized society. The themes discussed may resonate with ongoing discussions about cultural appropriation and authenticity in storytelling.

AI Utilization

It is unlikely that AI was directly used in the writing of this review, as the emotional depth and subjective analysis suggest a human touch. However, AI tools in the editorial process may assist in drafting or editing. The review’s language and tone indicate a distinct voice that aligns with traditional critical analyses rather than automated content generation.

In summary, the review of "Lilo & Stitch" serves as a critical exploration of Disney's latest remake, urging readers to reflect on the value of originality in storytelling. It captures a specific sentiment towards remakes, and while it contains strong opinions, it provides insight into audience expectations and industry trends.

Unanalyzed Article Content

This year,Disneymay have gone too far, turning perhaps its single greatest animated film into a heavily CG-augmented quasi-live-action monstrosity. No, not the already-infamous box office bomb Snow White; the animated basis for that movie is a monumental achievement in the medium, but it’s ultimately a famous version of a timeless fairy tale that seems fair game for reinterpretation. Lilo & Stitch, however, is the rare sui generis piece of Disney animation – one that somehow emerged during a tumultuous time for the animation studio to become a substantial hit back in 2002.

The film has endured because it’s a triumph of mixing techniques: old-fashioned ultra-expressive hand-drawn animation and watercolor backgrounds; dashes of newfangled computer animation to assist with some of its sci-fi-heavier scenes; and a story about a stranded alien befriending a misfit little girl that crosses ET with Looney Tunes anarchy.

The story is still there in the new sorta-live-action reimagining of Lilo & Stitch. The story is almost always still there in Disney’s series of self-remakes, especially when it comes to their more modern classics. (Say what you will about that recent Snow White, but it’s not a slavish recreation.) Plenty of dialogue is retained, too, and the movie does a fine job of transferring Stitch into a three-dimensional live-action environment, not monkeying around with a near-perfect cartoon design. The fuzzy blue creature, his Muppet-with-teeth mouth and his alien-bunny ears intact, still endures. Kids will love him, as ever.

The movie around him, however, is ghastly. It’s not just that Lilo (Maia Kealoha), a six-year-old Hawaiian girl living with her older sister Nani (Sydney Elizebeth Agudong), loses the carefully detailed and collaborative “performance” given by animators and her original voiceover in favor of kid-actor mugging and cutesy wisecracks. That’s not little Kealoha’s fault, of course, and possibly unavoidable in making a live-action version at all. But far worse, director Dean Fleischer Camp (Marcel the Shell with Shoes On) doesn’t give either the poor humans or special-effects characters any kind of visible technical support in their impossible task.

That’s evident right away, in an opening sequence that serves as a model for how to lose the rhythm of a film even while following its blueprint nearly line-for-line. The scene where alien mad scientist Jumba (Zach Galifianakis) is brought before a galactic council to answer for his creation of Experiment 626, later named Stitch (still voiced by the character’s co-creator, Chris Sanders) biffs the timing on every beat, speed-running through the requisite exposition and Stitch’s subsequent escape in a jumble of barely-coherent cuts and stiffly rendered images of the earlier film’s whimsical designs. None of it really tracks unless you’ve already watched the cartoon.

Camp’s seemingly panicked strategy never varies, even as the story slows down to examine the hectic lives of Lilo and Nani, orphaned sisters threatened with social-services separation unless young adult Nani can get (and keep) a better-paying job. The arrival of Stitch, who Lilo mistakes for a dog and adopts, brings chaos into their lives, though less havoc overall than this movie brings to its source material.

Disney has allowed, maybe even encouraged, its film-makers to take a work known for its idiosyncratic beauty and humor, and cut it into a hash of coverage, where chintzy reaction shots are prioritized over the scenic beauty of Hawaii or how its residents might move through this world. When Jumba and his nerdier fellow alien Pleakley (Billy Magnussen) take human form to pursue Stitch on Earth (and also to save further on already cut-rate-looking visual effects), the movie can’t even be bothered to frame their funny walks clearly. Even more than some green-screen disasters, the actors feel as if they’re performing into a void.

As Stitch grows into his broken family, the movie manages a few affecting and funny moments. But does it deserve credit for recreating them all from the earlier movie, almost always making them a little bit worse in the process? With a running time expanded by more than 20 minutes (as these things so often are), there should at least be room for a substantial round of brand-new Stitch antics. Yet the bits and pieces of new material barely seem to understand Stitch’s initially malevolent personality, recoding him as the untrained party animal he’s pretending to be. Occasional new ideas, like a ray gun that opens up shortcut portals, are squandered with first-idea-best-idea roughness.

All told, there’s hardly a single smile in Lilo & Stitch ’25 not generated through the stolen valor of the earlier screenplay, and hardly a poignant moment that’s not more admirably raw in the G-rated version. That original film gave both Lilo and Nani some real anger and pain beneath their strife, with Stitch as a rampaging id not quite large enough to conquer the world. Camp’s remake wants to manage that pain more tidily, and give Nani in particular a more “correct”, entirely uninteresting ending. The 2002 film can stand comfortably alongside superficially similar but tonally distinct children’s stories like ET, The Iron Giant, and My Neighbor Totoro. Now, however, Lilo & Stitch steps forward from that crowd of modern classics – as the only one whose keepers didn’t bother to protect it from a cheap branded knockoff.

Lilo & Stitch is out on 21 May in the UK, 22 May in Australia, and 23 May in the US.

Back to Home
Source: The Guardian