Tom Cruise is Mr. Movies. He came to the forefront of pop culture in the 1980s, becoming a bona fide movie star with hits like “Top Gun” and “Days of Thunder,” and, despite a few dips in popularity here and there, he’s pretty much remained on his perch ever since. During an era where studios are more concerned with intellectual property than creating movie stars, Cruise has remained persistent. We can debate all day as to whether actors like Glen Powell are true movie stars, people whose names alone put butts in seats, but there’s no denying that Tom Cruise is Hollywood’s last great action star.
That said, Cruise’s box office dominance has been foiled both times he’s gone up against a little blue alien named Stitch. In 2002, a Tom Cruise movie opened opposite the original animated Disney film, and in 2025, the same thing happened yet again. And in both instances, audiences made it clear they’d rather see Stitch get into mischief than watch Cruise perform whatever death-defying stunt he most recently filmed.
Why is Tom Cruise seemingly unable to utilize his star power effectively against the all-powerful might of “Lilo & Stitch?” What is it about this movie that stops Cruise’s star power in its tracks? We’ve taken the time to analyze this phenomenon, and below we present the entire story of the rivalry between Tom Cruise and Stitch — two chaotic forces for good, saving movie theaters one film at a time.
Tom Cruise ruled in the early 2000s
In the early 2000s, Tom Cruise was on top of the world, coming off two critically acclaimed films — 1999’s “Magnolia” and “Eyes Wide Shut.” “Mission: Impossible 2” debuted in 2000, and while it’s often deemed the worst “Mission: Impossible” film, it solidified him as an action star. Even a project somewhat off the beaten path like 2001’s “Vanilla Sky” still managed to gross over $200 million globally, proving that Cruise’s name alone was enough to carry a film.
Everything seemed to fall into place for 2002’s “Minority Report” to be a huge movie. The sci-fi action film was Cruise’s bread and butter, and when you threw in Steven Spielberg as the director, it had all the makings of a massive hit.
This was a few years prior to Cruise’s (temporary) downfall. 2005 saw him infamously jump on Oprah’s couch while declaring his love for Katie Holmes, and the actor also made controversial comments concerning postpartum mothers using antidepressants, insisting they should take vitamins instead. The statement drew backlash from many, including Brooke Shields, who insisted that proper medication has helped plenty of women stabilize their mental health. Cruise would eventually apologize to Shields, but he was viewed by Hollywood as damaged goods throughout much of the 2000s. That was later, though; in 2002, Tom Cruise’s new action movie was a slam dunk to be the runaway top hit at the box office — which it was, but a little Disney animated film stole some of its thunder.
Disney was in its flop era in the early 2000s
The late 1980s and early ’90s are typically seen as the Disney Renaissance. Though the company spearheaded Western animation with classics like “Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs,” they hit some rough patches in the decades that followed. Eventually, the studio managed to hit its stride again with a new batch of beloved animated films, including “The Little Mermaid,” “Beauty and the Beast,” and “The Lion King,” but the resurgent Disney floundered at the start of the 21st century, releasing several films that didn’t resonate at the box office.
“Fantasia 2000,” a sequel to the original “Fantasia,” grossed $91 million worldwide on a budget of $80 million. “The Emperor’s New Groove” had plenty of jokes for adults to enjoy, but its $170 million haul wasn’t all that impressive when compared to its $100 million budget. 2001’s “Atlantis: The Lost Empire” may have developed a cult following years after its release, but with a $120 million budget, its final theatrical gross of $186 million showed how little it resonated with audiences at the time.
Regardless of how one feels about the quality of these films, people just weren’t turning up to see them in theaters. These numbers were a far cry from “The Lion King” making over $770 million during its initial theatrical run a decade earlier. Disney was in charge of distribution for Pixar movies at this time, but it didn’t acquire the studio until 2006. Therefore, it’s hard to count films like “Monsters Inc.” or “Toy Story” as “Disney successes.” That meant there was a lot riding on a little blue alien with a penchant for mayhem.
Minority Report vs. Lilo & Stitch
On June 21, 2002, audiences were presented with a choice. They could either go see “Lilo & Stitch,” an animated Disney film about a chaotic alien who crashes on Earth and forms a family with two Hawaiian girls. Or, they could buy a ticket to “Minority Report,” a science-fiction action flick that takes place in a world where law enforcement can see what crimes will be committed in the future and prevent them from happening.
Considering that “Minority Report” is a PG-13 action movie starring Tom Cruise and directed by Steven Spielberg, logic dictates that it would have decidedly been the winner of this box office showdown. But while one could argue that “Minority Report” won the battle, “Lilo & Stitch” undeniably won the war. Domestically, the Disney film grossed $146 million, while “Minority Report” only took in $132 million, but Cruise won out globally, as the final gross for “Minority Report” ended up being $358 million, while “Lilo & Stitch” topped out at around $275 million in its worldwide haul.
When you account for budgets, the perspective changes, but just a bit. “Lilo & Stitch” cost $80 million to make, roughly $20 million less than the $102 million that fueled “Minority Report.” That means both movies earned about 3.5 times their budget, a win for both movies, both studios, and audiences, who had two great movies to watch in theaters at the time. If anything, we could call this match-up a draw — which is still a disappointment for Cruise. Given his star power at the time, he should’ve run away with this, but he was no match for Stitch.
Lilo & Stitch kicks off an empire
“Lilo & Stitch” wound up being one of the biggest hits Disney had seen in years, and the company didn’t waste time capitalizing on the world’s newfound fascination with the ill-tempered, fuzzy alien. In 2003, just a year after the film’s release, Disney released a direct-to-video sequel, “Stitch! The Movie.” This also served as a pilot for “Lilo & Stitch: The Series,” which ran for 67 episodes on ABC Kids and the Disney Channel.
In 2005, the film received another sequel, “Lilo & Stitch 2: Stitch Has a Glitch,” and the franchise spawned some pretty bizarre Disney spin-offs, too. There was an anime titled “Stitch!” as well as a Chinese show called “Stitch & Ai.” The alien also received one of Disney’s highest honors: his own theme park attraction. Stitch’s Great Escape! opened in Walt Disney World in 2004 and remained a popular ride until its closing in 2018. Stitch also became a video game star with appearances in games like “Kingdom Hearts II” and “Disney Infinity.”
Stitch eventually became a Disney mascot alongside Mickey Mouse, Donald Duck, and other classic characters, and Stitch-mania hasn’t slowed down in the decades since his debut. In 2024 alone, the “Lilo & Stitch” franchise brought in $2.6 billion in merchandise sales, an increase from the roughly $200 million it earned just a few years earlier. When looking at those numbers, it’s no wonder Disney wanted to keep the good times rolling with a live-action “Lilo & Stitch” installment that was destined to sell even more merch.
The 2020s: The Tom Cruise resurgence
As mentioned previously, Tom Cruise didn’t do too hot in the latter half of the 2000s. He jumped on Oprah’s couch, called Matt Lauer “glib” in an awkward interview, and rallied against therapy and medications, a stance stemming from his affiliation with the Church of Scientology, which frequently gets wrapped up in its own controversies. It wouldn’t have been a shock for Cruise’s acting career to nosedive — and yet, his workload never really dropped.
Cruise continued to shoot movies during this time, even if it was taking on roles in smaller dramas like 2007’s “Lions for Lambs” or popping up in a profanity-laden cameo in “Tropic Thunder.” But something began to click again around the time “Mission: Impossible — Ghost Protocol” came out in 2011. Cruise made headlines for doing his own stunts, most notably climbing the Burj Khalifa, which remains one of the most dangerous stunts pulled off in the “Mission: Impossible” franchise. It wasn’t the first time Cruise did his own stunt work, but thanks to the internet’s growing influence on pop culture, more people were aware that the actor actually climbed the second-tallest building in the world.
From that point on, Cruise primarily dedicated himself to action roles. By the time the 2020s came along, Cruise was known for putting his well-being on the line for the sake of filming really cool action sequences, which likely helped 2022’s “Top Gun: Maverick” become a huge hit, grossing just shy of $1.5 billion. Suddenly, no one cared about Cruise’s unusual personal beliefs because who has time for that when you can watch him jump out of a plane wearing a burning parachute in “Mission: Impossible — The Final Reckoning?” By 2025, Cruise was back on top and ready to try to best Stitch once more.
Disney struggles in the live-action department
In the post-pandemic world, Tom Cruise’s reputation has never been better — but the same can’t really be said for the copious live-action remakes of Disney’s animated properties. For a while, this subgenre was working really well for the studio, with “Aladdin” and “The Lion King” each making over $1 billion globally in 2019. However, 2020 brought COVID-19 lockdowns, meaning most movie theaters had to temporarily close their doors. Disney tried to continue releasing projects that were already in the pipeline, resulting in “Mulan” and “Pinocchio” going straight to Disney+, bypassing theaters entirely.
Even after the studio was able to release films in theaters again, the response was a far cry from 2019’s results, and 2023’s live-action “The Little Mermaid” brought in $569 million worldwide against a reported $240 million budget. 2024’s “Mufasa: The Lion King” earned a respectable $722 million at the box office, but that’s still less than half of “Lion King’s” $1.6 billion gross five years earlier. This all led up to what’s arguably the biggest box office bomb of the Disney live-action trend: 2025’s “Snow White.”
The film barely grossed over $200 million worldwide amid various reshoots and controversies, including the use of CGI to create the dwarfs. It had become clear that the live-action Disney remake trend had suffered diminishing returns over the last few years, but “Snow White” completely tanked. It seemed that people were finally done spending their hard-earned money on unnecessary versions of animated classics — but the world was about to learn an important lesson: never bet against Stitch.
Tom Cruise vs. Stitch: Round 2
When May 23, 2025, came around, it brought yet another Tom Cruise and “Lilo & Stitch” face-off at the box office. This time, Cruise stars in “Mission: Impossible — The Final Reckoning,” and even if it doesn’t wind up being the last “Mission: Impossible” movie, it does feel like the end of an era. The action franchise has evolved from tense spy stories into a showcase where Cruise risks his life in increasingly entertaining ways. And the studio knows it, judging by how the marketing focused so strongly on the star’s latest death-defying stunts.
Meanwhile, the live-action “Lilo & Stitch” is … “Lilo & Stitch.” It’s largely a recreation of the original with a few notable changes, like a new ending that completely undoes the message of the original film by sending Nani (Sydney Elizebeth Agudong) away from Lilo (Maia Kealoha) to attend college in California. But even this change couldn’t hurt the film’s profits; it currently stands at $773 million worldwide against a $100 million budget, completely eclipsing the original film’s gross.
“Final Reckoning,” meanwhile, has presently brought in around $450 million — which is fine until you consider its reported $400 million budget. But even if the film had been less costly to make, it doesn’t hold a candle to Disney’s little guy. Unlike the previous showdown, there’s no nuance here; “Lilo & Stitch” has triumphantly beaten Tom Cruise in the second round. Perhaps the moniker of “Mr. Movies” needs to go to Stitch, seeing as how he enticed millions of people to head out to the theater this summer.
Why does this keep happening?
It may seem odd that both times “Lilo & Stitch” has debuted in theaters, it’s gone up against a Tom Cruise film scheduled to premiere on the same day. However, this actually makes sense if you consider the studio practice of counter-programming.
When it comes to film distribution, studios naturally want to make as much money as possible. Because of this, it doesn’t make sense to release two films that target roughly the same demographic in the same opening weekend, so usually, studios release different kinds of films so that they don’t cannibalize each other’s profits. Everyone thought Barbenheimer was a cute meme opportunity when, in reality, it was typical counter-programming with one studio offering a colorful comedy on the same weekend that another dropped a dramatic biopic.
The same logic holds true with “Lilo & Stitch” and Tom Cruise movies. The Disney film is meant to provide fun for the whole family, while both “Minority Report” and “Mission: Impossible — The Final Reckoning” are PG-13 action projects. One targets children and families, while the other is geared toward teenagers and people who want to see something a little more grown-up. Families could even split the difference between these two movies, with one parent taking younger children to “Lilo & Stitch” while the other takes the older kids to the new Cruise flick. Historically, these two types of movies complement each other well, so it’s not the wildest occurrence that Cruise has had to face Stitch twice now.
Is Cruise vs. Stitch Round 3 in the works?
When looking at the scoreboard in the battle between Tom Cruise and Stitch, it’s clear that “Lilo & Stitch” has come out on top. The best-case scenario for Round 1 is to interpret it as a draw, but Round 2 has a definitive winner, and the fuzzy blue guy landed the knockout blow, at least financially. But before declaring an ultimate victor, Cruise really needs at least one more round to try and prove his mettle — and there’s a distinct possibility it could happen.
Nothing’s been confirmed regarding whether the live-action “Lilo & Stitch” will get a sequel, but executives at Disney seem optimistic. Ahead of the remake’s release, Alan Bergman, co-chairman of Disney Entertainment, told The Wall Street Journal, “It feels like (‘Lilo & Stitch’ is) going to work very well, and it’s the kind of property that lends itself to more.” Given the franchise’s merchandising success alone, a sequel would undoubtedly be a profitable endeavor, especially if it introduces more aliens to turn into plushies. And Cruise, of course, has plenty of projects in the works, like “Top Gun 3.” If that film is crafted with the same care as its predecessor, there’s no reason why it couldn’t also make $1 billion as well. The actor also has a “Days of Thunder” sequel lined up as well as a movie that will reportedly be the first ever to film in space.
Tom Cruise and Stitch may very well be destined to do this dance again, or perhaps Cruise will make a point to ensure his next film doesn’t line up with a “Lilo & Stitch” sequel, should one materialize, but our message to him is simple: Embrace this rivalry, keep doing more wild stunts, and see if he can figure out what it takes to defeat Stitch once and for all.