TheLittleSongbird The first "Lilo and Stitch" was a warm and entertaining animated feature, compensated fully by beautiful animation, a nice soundtrack and a superb script that was not only funny but taught morals without feeling slushy. "Stitch! The Movie" was merely okay, but it doesn't have the magic or the sense of fun the first film had. I will give some credit the voice work is very good, Daveigh Chase is very sweet as Lilo and David Ogden Stiers just as he did in the original was marvellous as Jumbaa. Hamsterviel is a good villain, sweet on the outside but quite dangerous really. I liked it that Gantu had more to do here, and there are some decent laughs mostly from Experiment 625. However, the film is too short, at merely an hour there isn't much character development consequently the characters and the relationships between them (Lilo and Stitch's especially) weren't as engaging or as poignant. In both this and the TV series Nani's personality seems somewhat distorted. Also the animation isn't as vibrant, colourful or as detailed as it was in the original, not helped by rushed editing, and the script felt rather shallow. By all means, this movie isn't bad, but it pales in comparison to the original. 5/10 for trying. Bethany Cox

MovieAddict2016 Watching "Lilo and Stitch" was like watching water boil: It was a long, tedious bore that finally started to heat up, only to evaporate. Watching Disney's latest straight-to-video cash-in sequel, "Stitch! The Movie," is even worse--its atrocities defy words. Okay, okay, it's not all that bad considering. I'm exaggerating. But I had a strong dislike for the first film, and "Stitch" is only more painful an experience.Our little Hawaiian pal, Lilo the little girl, is back, along with her older sister and new best friend, Stitch, who also happens to be a morphable alien who disguises himself as a dog to detract attention from the fact that he has razor sharp claws and teeth, a Hunchback of Notre Dame stance with a crooked arched back, and terrifying body and facial features.Lilo and Stitch also have two pals seen in the last film, one of whom has the distinct sound of a Russian fellow. The overweight Russian-voiced creature is repsonsible for Stitch; he was a mad scientist who created some 600 ill-fated experiments. Stitch was number 626, forty digits away from a very evil string of numbers. Does this number bear some subtle hint towards Stitch's evil side? Perhaps Experiment 666 will be delved into in the next installment, "Disney's Lilo and Stitch III: Apocalypse Now."The Russian alien is kidnapped from Lilo's home and held captive by another fearful creature, who is in search of the other experiments, all of which are dehydrated and being stored in Lilo's Hawaiin beachside resort, something hardly affordable for a low-salary working-class young adult such as Lilo's sister. But oh, well, it's a cartoon. Keep telling that to yourself as this film takes totally idiotic steps in idiotic directions. (Perhaps the kidnapper would have been so smart as to have checked the suspiciously-placed chest the Russian fellow was sitting on when he kidnapped him? He would have found what he was looking for without dragging him across half the outer reaches of the galaxy. With a sharp wit like that, it's any wonder the kidnapper alien knows how to fly a complex lightspeed ship through space.)New creatures are unleashed in "Stitch! The Movie," such as an electrical beast predating Stitch, but who bears an uncanny resemblance to his distant relative. But they're not any fun, and certainly not anything we haven't seen before. "Stitch" takes more than a few creative liberties--the entire premise is that of "E.T." (particularly the first film); Stitch rolls himself into a ball and travels across land (done by the similar-looking nibblers in "Critters"); and the dehydrated experiments are restored by adding water--something seen in "Gremlins." Of course, this is an animated film, so we are supposed to forgive Disney for totally cashing in on a money-making franchise, ripping off other films and their ideas, and so on and so forth.What we viewers put up with!To be honest, I come from a prejudiced standpoint--I didn't like the first film at all, as I have clearly stated above. With that in mind, fans of the first film will love "Stitch! The Movie," primarily because it stays very true to the original, both in story and animation -- the latter of which is usually ruined in straight-to-video sequels. In the end, that's the really sad thing about "Stitch!"--whereas most worthwhile straight-to-video Disney sequels lack everything that made the first a good film, including decent animation, "Stitch!" actually feels like a theatrical sequel. Too bad an opportunity such as this had to be wasted on such a bad movie.1.5/5 stars.John Ulmer

klchu I've never been too impressed with the Disney video sequels. And while "Stitch, the Movie" isn't as good as the original, it's still very good. Also, it sets up the Lilo and Stitch TV series which is even better than the movie! Both "Stitch" and the TV series share the same duel level of humor that make it attractive to both kids and adults. You will see the references and homages to works like Monty Python and other classic humor sources. I haven't enjoyed a cartoon like this since Animaniacs, and it's no wonder since some of the same voices (and maybe writers) are used.I've seen some negative references in reviews made to Pokemon. Well, that's only a tangental similarity in my opinion. The only negative opinions that I agree with are that Nani has turned into the stereotypical adult figure in kid's shows that doesn't believe the kid until it's too late. On the plus side, the characters of Pleakley, Jumba, Gantu and the new Hamsterviel are much improved.So, watch the movie, and then watch the TV show!

BlackRio The first Lilo and Stitch movie was amusing and entertaining and held my 2 year old's interest easily with the Elvis songs running throughout. Ten minutes into this one, however, and my son left the room. It was clearly not meant to be a stand alone movie as the first and fell into the trap as so many movies do today: strictly to set up the sequel. In this case, its the setup for their Saturday cartoon series. Not impressed at all. I agree that this could have been used as part of the actual series and not pushed as a true movie. No wonder I look forward more to Pixar's productions than Disney's nowadays.