May 17, 2004, 7:22 a.m. CST
Disney seem to stick to the same formula every year but apply it to a different theme eg. bugs, monsters, fish etc. Hopefully this will change now Pixar have split from the house of mouse.
May 17, 2004, 7:41 a.m. CST
by Amy's Flat Rat
I'm a bit worried about him directing Lion, Witch, Wardrobe. He has'nt done a live action movie before just the two Shreks, but I like his casting so far(Tilda Swinton=White Witch & James McEvoy=Mr. Tumnus)fingers croseed it wont turn out like that recent Peter Pan movie(Hook flying!)
May 17, 2004, 7:48 a.m. CST
The biggest problem that I have with most animated projects these days -- even the ones I love -- is the bludgeoning we all get with variations of the message "Be Yourself". Even the best of them -- Ariel tries to be human, Aladdin tries to be a prince, The Beast has to prove he's not really a beast. Brother Bear, Lilo & Stitch, Treasure Planet, The Emperor's New Groove, Hunchback & HB2, Peter Pan 2, Cinderella 2 (okay, those last three were cheap shots)... Shrek. All more about acceptance, getting along, finding the Nice Person inside, than actually telling a story. Memo to Hollywood: WE GOT IT, OKAY!? Howzabout WRITING something for a change? Jeez! Disney closed its frickin' line animation studio in Florida, effectively blaming the medium for the message. It isn't that 3D animation is intrinsically superior to 2D -- it isn't even that the Pixar films have pretty much the SAME message as the other films -- it's that the people at Pixar WROTE interesting stories with great characters, convoluted plots, great surprises, and just the right number of cultural references. Disney used to be able to do this; The Little Mermaid, Beauty & The Beast, and Aladdin rejuvenated Disney for exactly those reasons, finally breaking away from the "Oliver & Co." mentality. But they've sunk back into the quagmire, and it's gonna take something titanic to drag 'em out.
May 17, 2004, 8:03 a.m. CST
Even so, it does not necessarily mean that it's actually good...
May 17, 2004, 8:21 a.m. CST
I'm with Harry on the recent Peter Pan movie. It was one of the most charming and engaging films i saw last year and my partner and daughter loved it as well. Everybody came out of the theater with a smile on their face. I'm also glad that someone is willing to 'big up' Antonio. He has a real talent for comedy and he has been in some of my most enjoyable movies. Can't wait for Shrek 2!
May 18, 2004, 3:29 a.m. CST
it'll probably get great reviews and everything but I just can't get myself interested in it. Well, whatever.
May 18, 2004, 4:30 a.m. CST
This has got to be one of the most overated pieces of shit I've ever seen. And to think Monsters Inc lost out at the Academy's for this crap... Crap CG, crap Dialogue, Crap gags, equals a crap fucking film. I hope $hrek 2 tanks at the Box Office and all the little kiddies run out of the theatres crying their shitty little faces off. I'm just waiting for that moment where Shrek pulls down his pants and violates that fucking Donkey.
May 18, 2004, 6:13 a.m. CST
Unlike a bunch of people here, I liked SHREK-- but I also agree that I don't remember hardly anything from the first film (except when they ripped into the ridiculously huge Disney parking lots and long attraction lines). However, I dare anyone who watched MONSTERS INC. to forget Boo attempting to pronounce Mike's full name ("Mike Kakowski" being my favorite version). But I have to admit I almost did I spit take when I heard Antonio Banderas announce himself as "Puss... in Boots!" on the SHREK 2 trailer... So maybe Dreamworks has finally fashioned a character as memorable as Pixar's Boo.
"I know many people who were put off by the idea that Fiona had to remain
May 19, 2004, 7:05 p.m. CST
King of the recent comedy animations.
May 19, 2004, 8:23 p.m. CST
This movie was so CONTRIVED and CALCULATED. It had a few clever touches, but for the most part, it was by-the-numbers. Low IQ people and teenagers will enjoy it, but anyone with a brain who is over 30 will be bored and see right through all the calculation...I kind of expected this, but I had a popcorn craving, so I suffered through it.
May 20, 2004, 9:26 a.m. CST
Is it really so awful that it merely aspires to being "fun"? (and succeeds)
May 20, 2004, 9:47 a.m. CST
Did you really expect it to change your lives? It was a good night out for my family. We all laughed, shared popcorn, and my 4 year old sat still for the whole thing. I call that a good movie. But then again... maybe I have different standards.
May 20, 2004, 7:23 p.m. CST
I don't really care if a 4 year old likes a movie that I'm thinking of seeing...I'm sure Parent Trap appeals to little kids too, but that doesn't mean that it is good for everyone. A film like Star Wars or E.T. appealed to all age groups from small children to the elderly. Shrek 2 only appeals to little kids, dumb teenagers, and twenty-something with stunted emotional and intellectual development. If you are in your 30s and like this film, I doubt your IQ is very far north of 100.
May 20, 2004, 9:14 p.m. CST
Sometimes I wonder if some of you guys don't understand the meaning of the word "Popcorn flick." It's as if you think the only worthwhile movies are those heavy-handed weepers which come out of an arthouse theater, and end with a bitter-sweet resolution. Guys like you are why comedies rarely get recognized at awards ceremonies. Granted, I wouldn't nominate this for Best Picture. But this is by far the most entertaining film I've seen this year in terms of laughs. People who brought kids at the showing I attended didn't seem dissappointed with their kids reactions either. If you aren't the type that appreciates movies designed to be appreciated by parents and kids then perhaps you should stop going to them. As for stupid cracks about IQ levels, grow up! Sometimes people don't want to think when they're in the mood for pure id-stimulating entertainment. I loved Shrek 2. It was clever in parts. I felt they did an excellent job of using farcical elements in conjunction with plot to drive an extremely entertaining film. I will be seeing this film again.
May 21, 2004, 8:28 a.m. CST
Probably too late, but definitely a movie that's better if you've avoided spoilers (and trailers for that matter).
May 22, 2004, 4:42 a.m. CST
'Cause "E.T." and "Star Wars" are in the same category as "Shrek." ya fuckin' moron. Get off your pretentious intellectual high horse and remember what it was like to enjoy life. Ass.
May 23, 2004, 5:25 p.m. CST
I just looked on Yahoo box office and it looks like Shrek 2 is going to be the king of summer 2004. More than 125 million dollars in five days. Beat that Spider-Man. I live in Holland and I have to wait and see if it's any good, but I think it is going to be a lot of fun.
May 23, 2004, 6:10 p.m. CST
104 million openening weekend. and not too syrupy sweet. rock on shrek.
June 9, 2004, 7:48 p.m. CST
This had to have been one of the dumbest movies ive seen lately. It had no story, and once again showed us that the writers had no clue what they were going to write about, so they just threw something together about how important the inside of a person is. HELL IVE NEVER HEARD THAT ONE BEFORE! I dont think they deserve money for this crap. It took them about a month to animate all this on a computer and now theyre making millions on a generic movie thats been overmarketed to death. If you want to have a good time at the theaters this summer, see anything but this.