Lately, Disney has been remaking its popular films, such as “Lilo & Stitch” and “Moana,” into live action. This has been a continuous theme, but many say it’s just a scheme to make money, not a real chance to continue the magic
Animated movies are our personal preference, but nostalgia is the most likely reason for their success. Despite both being movies, animation and live action can’t portray the same things and have different specialties. Live actions have to mold the original content into something that can be done by real people, yet many see issues with “Lilo & Stitch” because of these changes. The most prominent is the lack of care for ohana, giving Nani (Sydney Elizebeth Agudong) a different ending where she gives up Lilo (Maia Kealoha). Although I always want remakes to stay as consistent as possible, especially with plot, I understand the desire to let Nani escape her role as an older sister to care for her sister before she was ready.
On a stranger side, there’s the hair controversy over “Moana”. The actress (Catherine Lagaʻaia) has curls similar to the animated character originally, but for the film it was much easier and many mention how it erases Polynesian identity. Furthermore, there also seems to be comments about Maui (Dyawne “The Rock” Johnson) and his uncanny wig. In addition, many are exhausted from the consistent remakes like Mean Girls, Snow White, The Little Mermaid and countless others.
Which is why Disney producers should be very careful when remaking animated movies into live action to both accurately reproduce the film while remaining as unproblematic as possible. If the pizazz of a classic animated movie can’t be replicated well in live action, it just shouldn’t happen, in my honest personal opinion.
