After a tumultuous—yet profitable—theatrical run at the box office, Disney's Lilo and Stitch may not advance to the sequel stage. The live-action adaptation filled some fan hopes for a grounded take on the 2002 tale. Although, Stitch's first outing left much to be desired.
One significant issue was the watered-down Pleakley. His live-action counterpart gave the impression that Disney was trying to cater to its more conservative audience instead of everyone. Otherwise, the studio wouldn't have prevented Lilo and Stitch's director from giving Pleakley his preferred attire. Dean Fleischer Camp reportedly campaigned to get Pleakley into a dress, except the studio didn't permit it to happen.
The only possible explanation for changing Pleakley in such a way is Disney's reluctance to upset conservatives. They've attempted to drag—pun intended—expressions of drag performances through the mud as if they're dangerous to young minds. There is a persistent narrative among conservatives that LGBTQ+ subject matter poses a threat to young minds, suggesting that children could be "indoctrinated" by simply viewing a drag show. Ironically, many of these conservatives are devoutly religious and often utilize fear and coercion tactics to manipulate individuals into adhering to their beliefs. The ideology of "pray, be faithful, and obey" is often employed to compel followers to adhere to what they perceive as the "Lord's word," threatening them with damnation if they do not comply.
Interestingly, conservative beliefs often overlook that Hell is never explicitly mentioned in the Bible. An abyss and an afterlife are spoken of, but the flame-ridden landscape described to Sunday school children doesn't exist. And yet, they frequently frame participation in LGBTQ+ activities as blasphemous—despite acceptance being one of the pillars of Christianity. "Love thy neighbor" isn't meant to be taken literally, although it applies to everyone when used properly. Discriminating against someone on the basis of who they are goes against goes against god's teachings.
What Can Be Done
Disney is well-positioned to turn things around—despite flubbing a perfect opportunity to confront bigotry the first time around. Because, while Lilo and Stitch had its shortcomings, a sequel can rectify these issues.
For instance, reuniting Nani and her little sister is a good starting point. Audiences witnessed in the post-credits sequence that they had to conceal their "secret hangouts" while under the watchful eye of Cobra Bubbles (Courtney B. Vance) when they shouldn't have to. In any case, his presence suggests the foster care arrangement was only temporary.
What Lilo and Stitch 2 needs to do is make the reunification official. The first film's conclusion already showcased the girls' chosen family rebuilding the home, similar to how the animated 2002 movie ended. And after witnessing Nani in the post-credits, the live-action sequel could solidify the new arrangement by placing Cobra Bubbles in charge. A CIA Agent would have more authority than a social worker, and then some.
In that scenario, Bubbles can override any CPS orders given out, bringing Nani back to the family's home. Plus, no one will contest Disney's decision to remove the foster care aspect of the story; it was entirely unnecessary in the first place.
Secondly, Disney should allow Pleakley to become the explorer that he is meant to be by removing his human disguise and male-centered expression. This aligns with the original storyline.
In the animated movie, Pleakley develops an interest in Earth culture, particularly women's clothing. The alien's affinity for them doesn't happen instantaneously like one might think. Over time, though, he becomes increasingly more comfortable in women's apparel. And there's nothing wrong with what he's doing. He could've found men's clothing equally interesting, but his preference became geared toward female attire.
The best possible solution is for Pleakley's cloaking device to malfunction—compelling him to operate in his own skin. Upon having to disguise himself through practical means, dresses could help preserve the illusion. The animated movie always purported that the "Clark Kent" effect helped maintain their disguises, and it's believable since no one ever called Jumba or Pleakley out for their bulbous alien eyes.
Lastly—and most fans can agree with this point—introducing Gantu (Kevin Michael Richardson) is essential. Making Jumba the film's villain was a terrible idea and completely ruined an opportunity for the mad scientist to redeem himself in the future. Because, now that he's back in the Galactic Federation's custody, he won't be alongside the Pelekai family to grow—the same way his animated counterpart did. That can still change, though the odds are Disney is sticking with Jumba.
In the long run, it may be to the studio's benefit. Assuming Disney plans to introduce the 625 other experiments, keeping Jumba as the villain makes the most sense. Releasing them during his second escape sounds like the ideal segue into a follow-up adventure.
Disney's Lilo and Stitch is currently in theaters.