
Why people are so mad about that Lilo & Stitch ending
Social Sharing
WARNING: This story contains significant spoilers for both the original Lilo & Stitch and its remake.
When it comes to dollars and cents, Disney's Lilo &Stitch live-action remake hasn't hit any speed-bumps. In fact, it's more like the little blue guy has hit the NOS.
But if you pay much attention to the Internet, things haven't been so rosy. Everywhere from X, to Instagram to TikTok, fans of the beloved Hawaii-set animated dramedy have had some pointed words about changes made to the story.
To be clear, that backlash isn't just from certain CBC reporters railing against the insipid evil of live-action adaptations. Instead, fans of the original are upset about both a dumbed-down story they say downplays important elements of Hawaiian culture, and a controversial ending that some believe acts as pro-colonial propaganda.
To understand the reaction, it's important to know the context. The original Lilo & Stitch was something of an accidental success: the 2002 animated feature about a little Hawaiian girl named Lilo who befriends an exiled alien named Stitch was an outlier, both as a 2D, hand-drawn film and for the culture it represented.
It was also beloved for both those reasons: its lush, beautiful art-style nearly revived traditional animation, while its subtly ironic depiction of bumbling, invading American tourists rang true enough to build up a huge fanbase.
The plot relied heavily on the concepts of alienation, home and family: Lilo was bullied by other children and relied on the concept of "ohana" — a communal sense of family — to find a sense of belonging with her elder sister, Nani, who cared for her after their parents died. Lilo also had a fascination with photographing tourists, a subtle dig at the islands' constant influx of them.
And the central theme of ohana is a grounding tenet of all the characters' interactions: in the 2002 original, Nani does everything in her power to keep custody of Lilo when an ex CIA agent-turned social worker threatens to split them apart.
In the end, Nani manages to retain custody of her sister, and all three — Stitch included — remain a family.
Erasure of cultural commentary
Part of the complaint, as critic Caroline Madden wrote for SlashFilm, is the removal of those messages; the 2025 remake "completely erases this cultural commentary," and instead "coasts purely on the aesthetics of beautiful beaches, hula dancing, and surfing."
That is largely apparent in its lack of engagement with or depiction of tourists, and the erasure of Lilo's habit of photographing them.
In the original, the pivotal scene in which Lilo states that their parents told them "Ohana means family, and family means no one gets left behind" causes Nani to reluctantly agree to keep Stitch. In the remake, Nani instead replies that this "isn't reality," and Lilo essentially needs to grow up and forget the concept.
To be fair, that's not where Nani and Lilo's story ends. But as culture writer and film critic Aparita Bhandari told CBC News, the subtly bitter and mature tone the original movie had about living in a perceived paradise that's been cannibalized by outsiders is all but absent in the remake.
"Hawaii is still the backdrop, but it's just a very different kind of a story," she said. "There is irony in there in a different way. But it's not quite that, you know, slightly pointed kind of critique that the original had."
But the change that has raised the most complaints comes right at the end.
In the 2025 version, instead of the family staying together, Nani relinquishes custody of Lilo to the state, which in turn grants guardianship to a neighbour and close friend. Nani proceeds to leave Hawaii to study marine biology in San Diego, with friendly CIA agent Cobra Bubbles (now no longer a social worker at all) staying behind to help care for Lilo and Stitch.
Remake aiming for widest audience possible
While Bhandari understands the criticism, she says the changes make sense considering how much money has been invested in the remake.
While the original was a scrappy sort of low-budget production with relatively few creators resulting in a more focused and passion-driven project, the remake is anything but.
It represents veritable bags of cash, as the original movie's bizarrely successful marketing campaign made Stitch into perhaps the most popular marketing tool Disney has on offer. Bhandari says the remake aims to reach an even wider audience to ensure profitability.
That's backed up by what Disney Entertainment co-chairman Alan Bergman told the LA Times in a recent interview.
"To do the kind of box office that I think we're going to do, you need to get everybody," he said ahead of the film's premiere. "And I do believe we will."
With the remake's creators seeking that kind of wide appeal and the "phenomenal" amount of money at stake, Bhandari says they likely only had one thing in mind.
"Are you going to jeopardize a whole bunch of that industry? I don't think so," she said, noting that the studio instead likely wants to make something that's generally more palatable, wholly inoffensive and accessible enough to appeal to the widest of audiences.
And to do that, she says, they perhaps had to tone down certain elements. "Or even if you're not toning down, making it even more kind of basic."
'Continual misrepresentation of Hawaii'
But according to University of Chicago assistant professor Uahikea Maile, that simplified approach to the movie falls in line with a particularly harmful tradition in real life.
Following America's annexation of Hawaii, he says the early 20th century saw a proliferation of media depicting native Hawaiians as "passive, without agency and benevolent." Those narratives, he says, helped to both assimilate Hawaiian people and validate mainland American immigration to the islands.
The subsequent depictions of Hawaii's luaus, "hula girls" and tourist activities became so overwhelming and pervasive, wrote California State University's Megan Medeiros in a 2018 study, that they completely obscured the islands' actual people and culture.
"The continual misrepresentation of Hawaii, specifically through Western media, is the reason why visitors often believe their tourist experience is authentically Hawaiian," she wrote.
Maile says that in the new film, Nani's departure to the mainland — followed by the state taking over care of her sister — only serves to prop up other more insidious tropes.
That includes what he calls the "sort of normalized narrative" that Native Hawaiians often make the choice to leave the islands at the expense of taking care of their families and the place that they call home. It's also a narrative that he says reinforces the idea that "Hawaii is an emptying space for non-natives to secure their own second homes and vacation properties to profit from."
Still, Maile says the disappointing choices on display in the Lilo & Stitch remake are far from the most pressing issue, as discussions around positive or negative media representation tend to distract from and obscure real-life issues, such as how native Hawaiians are organizing against and resisting oppression.
"The truth of the matter is, is that there is much the world can learn from Hawaii that exists beyond the dignified corporate mainstream media representations that we see today," he said. "I encourage people to meet us there, not in Hawaii per se, but in the alternative representations."
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


CBC
14 minutes ago
- CBC
Trump moves to block Harvard-bound foreign students from entering U.S.
U.S. President Donald Trump is moving to block nearly all foreign students from entering the country to attend Harvard University, in his latest attempt to choke off the Ivy League school from an international pipeline that accounts for a quarter of the student body. In an order signed Wednesday, Trump declared that it would jeopardize national security to allow Harvard to continue hosting foreign students on its campus in Cambridge, Mass. "I have determined that the entry of the class of foreign nationals described above is detrimental to the interests of the United States because, in my judgment, Harvard's conduct has rendered it an unsuitable destination for foreign students and researchers," Trump wrote in the order. It's a further escalation in the White House's fight with the nation's oldest and wealthiest university. A federal court in Boston blocked the U.S. Department of Homeland Security from barring international students at Harvard last month. Trump's order invokes a different legal authority. It stems from Harvard's refusal to submit to a series of demands made by the federal government. It has escalated recently after the Department of Homeland Security said Harvard refused to provide records related to misconduct by foreign students. Harvard says it has complied with the request, but the government said the school's response was insufficient. Dispute building for months The dispute has been building for months after the Trump administration demanded a series of policy and governance changes at Harvard, calling it a hotbed of liberalism and accusing it of tolerating antisemitism. Harvard defied the demands, saying they encroached on the university's autonomy and represented a threat to the freedom of all U.S. universities. Trump officials have repeatedly raised the stakes and sought new fronts to pressure Harvard, cutting more than $2 billion US in research grants and moving to end all federal contracts with the university. The latest threat has targeted Harvard's roughly 7,000 international students, who account for half the enrolment at some Harvard graduate schools. The order applies to all students attempting to enter the United States to attend Harvard after the date of the executive order. It provides a loophole to allow students whose entry would "benefit the national interest," as determined by federal officials. Trump's order alleges that Harvard provided data on misconduct by only three students in response to the Homeland Security request, and it lacked the detail to gauge if federal action was needed. Trump concluded that Harvard is either "not fully reporting its disciplinary records for foreign students or is not seriously policing its foreign students." "These actions and failures directly undermine the federal government's ability to ensure that foreign nationals admitted on student or exchange visitor visas remain in compliance with federal law," the order said. For foreign students already at Harvard, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio will determine whether visas should be revoked, Trump wrote. The order is scheduled to last six months. Within 90 days, the administration will determine if it should be renewed, the order said. A State Department cable sent last week to U.S. embassies and consulates said federal officials will begin reviewing the social media accounts of visa applicants who plan to attend, work at or visit Harvard University for any signs of antisemitism. In a court filing last week, Harvard officials said the Trump administration's efforts to stop Harvard from enrolling international students have created an environment of "profound fear, concern, and confusion." Countless international students have asked about transferring from the university, Harvard immigration services director Maureen Martin said in the filing.


CBC
39 minutes ago
- CBC
Trump signs order to ban visitors from 12 countries starting Monday
U.S. President Donald Trump is resurrecting the travel ban policy from his first term, signing a proclamation Wednesday night preventing people from a dozen countries from entering the United States. The countries include Afghanistan, Myanmar, Chad, the Republic of Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen. In addition to the ban, which takes effect at 12:01 a.m. Monday, there will be heightened restrictions on visitors from Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan and Venezuela. "I must act to protect the national security and national interest of the United States and its people," Trump said in his proclamation. Ten of the 19 countries under the bans and restrictions are in Africa, nine of those from majority Black African countries. Several of those, including Sierra Leone, Togo and Equatorial Guinea, are not known for hosting armed groups that pose a major threat to the West. The list results from a Jan. 20 executive order Trump issued requiring the federal departments of State and Homeland Security and the U.S. Director of National Intelligence to compile a report on "hostile attitudes" toward the U.S. and whether entry from certain countries represented a national security risk. Echoes of prior ban in 1st Trump term During his first term, Trump issued an executive order in January 2017 banning travel to the U.S. by citizens of seven predominantly Muslim countries: Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia and Yemen. It was one of the most chaotic and confusing moments of his young, first presidency. Travellers from those nations were either barred from getting on their flights to the U.S. or detained at airports after they had landed. They included students and faculty as well as businesspeople, tourists and people visiting friends and family. The order, often referred to as the "Muslim ban" or the "travel ban," was retooled amid legal challenges, until a version was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2018. The ban affected various categories of travellers and immigrants from Iran, Somalia, Yemen, Syria and Libya, plus North Koreans and some Venezuelan government officials and their families. Trump and others have defended the initial ban on national security grounds, arguing it was aimed at protecting the country and not founded on anti-Muslim bias. However, the president had called for an explicit ban on Muslims entering the U.S. during his first campaign for the White House.


CBC
2 hours ago
- CBC
Rock band Heart offering reward for instruments stolen ahead of U.S. tour
Two irreplaceable instruments owned by members of the rock band Heart were stolen from a venue in New Jersey last weekend, and the musicians are now offering a reward for information leading to their return. The band was set to kick off its U.S. tour, titled An Evening With Heart, at the Hard Rock Hotel & Casino in Atlantic City, N.J. on Saturday, and its gear had been set up the day prior to the show. Among the items stolen were a custom-built, purple sparkle baritone Telecaster guitar with a hand-painted headstock made for Nancy Wilson, and a vintage 1966 Gibson EM-50 mandolin that Paul Moak has played for over 25 years. "These instruments are more than just tools of our trade — they're extensions of our musical souls," Wilson said in a statement issued by the group. "We're heartbroken, and we're asking for their safe return — no questions asked. Their value to us is immeasurable." Heart is led by Wilson and her sister, Ann, who have made music together since the '70s and have released hits including Barracuda, Magic Man, Crazy on You and Alone. The Rock & Roll Hall of Famers were honoured with a Lifetime Achievement Award from the Recording Academy in 2023. WATCH | Heart performs Crazy on You on the Midnight Special in 1977: