Originally Posted By Inkan1969 #17 - WorldDisney, I was not talking about the TV Funhouse segments. Those segments have significant satirical points to make about problems involving Disney. I respect them as needed satire. "Shrek" is nothing like that. It's just bashing for its own sake. Other people have pointed out that this bashing comes mainly from Jeffrey Katzenberg's sour grapes. Personally, I find him as repugnant as Eisner ever was; where does he get off bashing us. "Shrek" is definitely not meant to be all in good fun. It's hurtful and pointless.
Originally Posted By Mr X Well, considering what a smash hit it was, I'd imagine any lingering sour grapes would be long gone by now. Anyway, I don't really agree. The point was it was funny...if it wasn't, the movies wouldn't have been so hugely popular would they? You keep saying "us"...do you work for Disney or something?
Originally Posted By Inspector 57 <<It's just bashing for its own sake.>> I disagree. I think it was "bashing" for the sake of being funny. After all, Shrek was a comedy. They were going after laughs. And, as we've posted here, several of us found the exploding bird and the send-up of Small World and other bits to be very funny. Why speculate about Katzenberg and Eisner or make assumptions about evil intentions? Why fear that the jokes will "damage" Disney? Just take them at surface level and appreciate them for what they are: jokes that are funny because there are elements of truth to them. The Disney product is strong enough to withstand a little ribbing -- even when it's right on target.
Originally Posted By vbdad55 ^^^^^^^^^^^^ I don't think there is any speculating -- of course Katzenberg is jabbing the Disney tradition... but it will withstand more than a few jokes from Jeffrey...so not to worry. He should worry if Disney decides to take a shot at the Dreamworks body of work though -- that could be really funny.
Originally Posted By gottaluvdavillains I liked all the Shrek's including the third - and Shrek makes fun of everyone (hello farbucks on either side of the stree) - in the third he makes fun of many stores and such - hello it's all in good fun - And by the way the Disneyland Princesses help save the day - after Repunzel turns trader on all the others...This franchise may make fun of other animated movies - but it's pretty much all animated movies not just Disney - My children are total Disney fans (5th trip this year right now). But, they have a good sense of humor (2 of the 4 could have helped write Shrek the Third) and have enjoyed all the Shrek's....Lighten up about this and let's all agree - if you don't like the material - don't pay to see it! And Smile it's only a movie....
Originally Posted By WorldDisney Inkfan, you seem to be the lone crusader in this. No one sees it. It's a 90 min. animated movie, seriously it's all in good fun! If Disney felt they were REALLY being slandered, they could sue (well, I guess not since it's satire). Besides, you KEEP saying 'we'. Are we part of some weird Disney cult just because we are fans? Unless you work for the company, there is no 'we' lol.
Originally Posted By ToonKirby I thought at the time of the first "Shrek" that the jokes that could be called "anti-Disney" were a bit mean-spirited, if not all that original. (For great, biting satires on Disney, look at "The Simpsons".) The 2nd and 3rd films don't have any obvious jokes about Disney (or any other animated movies) in particular, just fairy tales in general. As for any "damage" that "Shrek" may or may not have caused the animation medium: Frankly, a lot of viewers are tired with all the self-referential fairy tale, ironic pop culture referenced-to-death animated films of late (show of hands?), and where that all started WAS with "Shrek". But that isn't necessarily the fault of the movie (I know, how can a movie really be the blame for anything, but bare with me), but the animation studios themselves. The immensely popular "Shrek" films have come out and made tons of money, so of course the other animation studios have made more films like "Shrek" (including Disney with "Chicken Little") to, guess what, make tons of money. It takes a lot of money and time to make an animated film these days, so that's why the studios have trended toward what has been successful before, like the "Shrek"-style comedies. Pixar is the obvious exception, of course, but then "Finding Nemo" came out and was huge, so then the other studios started coming out with more films following the pattern of THAT movie (cute animal gets lost, we follow their perilous yet funny journey back home). So does that mean that "Finding Nemo" has damaged the animation medium? No, and really neither has "Shrek" per se. What is damaging the animation medium is short-sighted studios who follow the hot trend, photocopying the same stories over and over until the public grows disinterested and moves on to the next sparkly thing that catches their eye. (Again, as John Lassiter always says, its all about the *story* ...) The negative critical reaction to "Shrek the Third" may prove to be the end of this trend, of course, and rumor has it that Disney's upcoming "Rapunzel" has dropped the pop culture reference tone ... now THAT'S ironic, considering Rapunzel's role in "Shrek the Third".
Originally Posted By Shooba I saw Shrek the Third and was not impressed. Should have listened to the reviews. There just wasn't anything about this movie that made the original so good. Mostly, it just wasn't as funny as the earlier films. There are quite a few funny bits, and the occasional laugh out loud moment, but nothing like the first movie. I did get to overhear a funny conversation of a family sitting down in the theater though... Young child: "This is too close" Dad: "No it's not" Young child: "Daddy, I want to sit farther back, we're too close" Dad: "If you don't like it, you can sit in the back by yourself" Ah, some parents...
Originally Posted By X5ty1985 I saw it today with my girlfriend and we both hardly laughed. The movie seemed stale this time around... sad, wanted to like it. Go see Shreck 4D at Universal.
Originally Posted By kennect X5ty1985, I saw the home version of Shrek 4D...I cannot imagine standing in line to see such at a theme park....
Originally Posted By ToonKirby >The negative critical reaction to "Shrek the Third" may prove to be the end of this trend< Well, so much for that: <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070520/ap_en_mo/box_office;_ylt=AveaynHVOeNcagnE4o_xDXvMWM0F" target="_blank">http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200 70520/ap_en_mo/box_office;_ylt=AveaynHVOeNcagnE4o_xDXvMWM0F</a>
Originally Posted By TDLFAN Well... of course a sequel will open with big $$$ numbers... especially since movie ticket prices have gone up since the previous Shrek came out.. Watch POTC3 blow the lid off some records as well...
Originally Posted By kennect Hope you are right TDL...BUT I also hope if it should break records that it is a film worthy of doing so....
Originally Posted By TDLFAN The only thing I am dreading is this: The success of POTC3 means that Disney will be shoving Pirate goo down our throats at the themed parks all over the World for the next... decade at least.
Originally Posted By Dlmusic <<The 2nd and 3rd films don't have any obvious jokes about Disney (or any other animated movies) in particular, just fairy tales in general.>> Don't agree. Remember the red haired mermaid in the first few minutes of Shrek 2? And what about the Fairy Godmother's very "Bibbidi-Bobbidi-Boo-esque" song? For Shrek 3 I would argue that the Snow White sequence is very similar to the Disney version, what with the operatic singing and everything.
Originally Posted By ToonKirby True ... but the first one did seem to be overloaded with them, so a joke here or there in the other 2 didn't seem to stick out for me.
Originally Posted By melekalikimaka I'm not exactly clear on how a movie that possibly pokes fun at Disney is mocking "us".
Originally Posted By NYthrillseeker I begrudgingly saw this movie because my wife and son wanted to see it. It actually amused me more than I thought it would but I can see the critics points clearly. This is not, and can not compare to a Disney-Pixar movie. The animation was spectacular, and the comedy was funny at times, but the overall movie just really doesn't go out of it's way for a moral. I never understood why the Queen couldn't rule the land after her husband's 'croaking'. Speaking of that, I don't think it was appropriate how they played out the prelonged death of the king. Many kids in the theatre were laughing because he was taking a long time to die. But actually, it's supposed to be a sad scene, and I can't see Disney making fun of a character dying. The word 'Hooters' does not belong in a kids movie, even if most kids probably won't notice or question it. I've noticed a lot of Dreamworks productions are done in bad taste this way. I'm not saying I didn't find the movie funny or entertaining, but it just doesn't give you the nice feeling you get after watching a Disney flik.
Originally Posted By fkurucz >>The only thing I am dreading is this: The success of POTC3 means that Disney will be shoving Pirate goo down our throats at the themed parks all over the World for the next... decade at least.<< Meybe they have now found the theme for the infamous 3rd park in Anaheim! (just kidding!)
