The current animation trend is digital movie-making, and it pulls in the big bucks. But Disney’s new approach in cutting their budget can ultimately keep traditional animation lucrative. “Lilo & Stitch” reportedly cost the Mouse House well under $100 million.

Last year, Disney’s “Atlantis” cost the company $125 million to make, but the movie only ended up with $83 million in theaters, according to published estimates. “The Emperor’s New Groove” costed even more, but earned about the same. This under whelming trend for traditionally animated movies has caused other bigwig companies to cut back and concentrate on CGI projects instead. And that’s a damn shame.

“Lilo & Stitch” is an excellent movie—the story remains strong throughout, only slightly losing steam near the end. It’s my favorite animated Disney flick since “The Lion King.” Yes, I think it’s that good. Watching it in the theater made me yearn for the days where the animation was that simple and the story that fun. I’m tired of the plastic almost-real look of computer-animated flicks. I had high hopes for Disney’s latest effort going in, and I wasn’t disappointed. “L&S” is packed with such hilarious moments that it’s hard not to like it.

The animation is different compared to today’s standards. The watercolor backdrops will remind many of “Dumbo,” and it works extremely well. It allows viewers to sit back and enjoy the story and the characters rather than marveling at “ooh-ahh” technological advances. That isn’t to say the animation is inferior—you won’t feel like this is straight-to video fare. No way.

The music for the movie, as most have probably heard, includes many Elvis songs. That’s fine and well, but the other stuff shouldn’t be overlooked either. The island songs fit the movie perfectly and I didn’t mind them at all. Usually, the parts when characters in movies sing are the parts where my eyes begin to roll in frustration. But I don’t think “Lilo & Stitch” contained more than a minute or two of the characters actually singing. Huge plus!

As reported in the Buzz-Wire, other studios have already given up on hand-drawn animation in favor of computer-generated imagery. Twentieth Century Fox is now concentrating solely on CGI films after "Ice Age" appeared out of nowhere to become a huge hit. Jeffrey Katzenberg, the main man at DreamWorks and a former Disney executive is focusing on digital animation as well. At the very least, he says, fans will see a blend of 2-D and 3-D ala "Spirit: Stallion of the Cimarron." "What happens with 'Lilo & Stitch' is not relevant to me. We don't make those anymore,” he was quoted as saying.

And it’s unfortunate. I think studios are missing the point, but it’s too late to reverse the trend, at least for the time being. Audiences simply feel that digital animation is better because of what they have been given in recent times. Look at it this way: “Shrek,” “Monsters Inc.,” “Ice Age” and both “Toy Story” movies all had compelling plots and characters. “Spirit,” “Atlantis,” “Emperor’s New Groove” and “The Iron Giant” did not.

“Lilo & Stitch” will remind people how great traditional animation is, and hopefully, enough people will see it to prove the detractors wrong. It’s cute … It’s funny. It’s vintage Disney and it’s completely new Disney.

Trust me. “Lilo & Stitch” is “Lilo & AWESOME.”

-Chris Douvalas