>>1173874454. Lilo is a CHILD. Expecting children to have a perfect, or even GOOD moral compass is unreasonable and stupid. EVERY child takes their parents for granted. Part of being a parent is dealing with that. And no, it is not fair that Nani has to deal with filling a parent role when she's so young but that's part of the story.
5. and this is probably the most important one: "Perfect" role models are not good role models, and Superman is not a role model. Superman is a paragon, an ideal to strive towards, not to emulate, because striving is noble but emulating him is impossible. And fiction needs both paragons and role models. Honestly I don't think Lilo is either, she's just a character who has an adventure and learns a little bit about responsibility, but if you think a version of Lilo who does not have typical child emotional responses would make a good role model for children, then perhaps you think that marathon runners make good role models for people in wheelchairs; they've never had problems running after all. In fact, making your role models perfect makes the message ring hollow and untrue; how can you compare the morals of someone unrealistic to the real world?
6. When telling a story that isn't just a straight-up moralistic fable, telling a good story should ALWAYS come before preaching to the audience. I don't think that Lilo and Stitch is "a story telling a positive moral", I think it is a story that HAS a positive moral, which is completely different. And better, because it means that the audience is not being preached to, which audiences rightfully hate. Lilo has the flaws she has because a realistic character makes for a better story than a moral character, and saying that she's written badly because of this is a flawed argument.
Seriously though it's a good movie, and whoever wrote this needs to think about how their own personal experiences may have colored their critical eye.
