 |
Other NonAnime Reviews Iron Giant Review* The Emperor's New Groove Review Jackie Chan Adventures Review* Final Fantasy Review Titan A.E. Review* |
Dreamworks’ Shrek reflects much of what is right – and wrong – in current American-produced animated movies. On the positive side, there’s some fine voice acting to listen to (courtesy of Eddie Murphy and Mike Myers), and some computer animation so good we run the risk of taking it for granted. On the negative side is the almost total lack of freshly imagined ideas, particularly disturbing from DreamWorks, which gave us the stunning Prince of Egypt a few years back.
Shrek tells the story of Shrek, a good-natured ogre (Mike Myers) annoyed that his swamp has become the refuge of fairy-tale characters. (Myers is oddly subdued as Shrek, who has none of the zip or irreverent snap of previous Myers characters such as Austin Powers, Wayne Campbell, Dr. Evil, or Linda Richman). The fairy-tale characters (all of whom are from Disney films but resemble Rankin-Bass puppets) are no longer welcome in Lord Farquad (John Lithgow)’s kingdom. If Shrek can win the fair hand of Princess Fiona (Cameron Diaz), then Farquad will relocate the characters elsewhere. Shrek sets forth on his adventure accompanied by his talking Donkey (Eddie Murphy) and the plot is set.
The first third of Shrek gives producer Jeffery Katzenberg (a former Disney honcho) the chance to rail at his former employer. Oddly enough, despite Katzenberg’s beef with the Disney Empire, the multiple anti-Disney jokes could have come from anywhere or anyone and don’t pack much of a personal punch. The remainder of the film, in sharp contrast, is often extremely funny, courtesy of Eddie Murphy and John Lithgow. Shrek successfully manipulates the clichés and conventions of fairy-tales, and when the film relies on Shrek’s persona (rather than the Disney references), it’s as good as any recent animated film. I’d like to have seen more of Shrek and his oddball fellow characters and less of the Disney parodies. The relationships among all the characters are better developed than in most American animated films (including Final Fantasy and The Emperor’s New Groove) and it’s a shame that DreamWorks didn’t play to this strength instead of the endless in-jokes.
In-jokes and self-references are funny when incongruous (as in Mel Brooks’ better films), but films that lean too heavily on them reveal their writers’ creative fatigue. Over 30 writers collaborated on Shrek, yet the film’s constant self-referencing suggests that the writers only look to other films (instead of life) for their creative inspiration - and that can be a deadly path to take. Despite the belly laughs, there’s nothing in Shrek to rival the fresh perceptions in rival computer animations like Monsters, Inc or Toy Story. Some might argue that Pixar-like innovation is an unreasonable expectation for every new animated film. But computer animation is too young to fall prey to the mannerism that Shrek is most comfortable with. Pixar’s animators seem to have spent a lot of time examining plastic toys prior to making Toy Story, and looking at blades of grass for A Bug’s Life, but DreamWorks animators seem to have looked no further than previous computer animation for their inspiration, and that’s our loss.
Shrek isn’t a bad movie by any means, just not an essential one. In much the same way that A Bug’s Life overshadowed Antz, Monsters, Inc. outclasses Shrek. The verdict? While in no way the best animated film of 2001, Shrek is a good enough movie to entertain animation buffs for many rainy afternoons to come.
|
Other NonAnime Reviews Iron Giant Review* The Emperor's New Groove Review Jackie Chan Adventures Review* Final Fantasy Review Titan A.E. Review* |
Get your ownFree Home Page