Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Disney’

Get Out of My Swamp (and Into My Heart)

Posted in General Comments, Movie Review, Movies, Reviews, tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on November 23, 2025| 4 Comments »

“Shrek” (2001) – movie review
Today’s review is for the animated fairy tale satire “Shrek” (2001), starring Mike Myers as Shrek (a reclusive ogre with a Scottish accent and a surprisingly tender soul), Eddie Murphy as Donkey (a fast-talking, emotionally needy sidekick with boundless enthusiasm and zero boundaries), Cameron Diaz as Princess Fiona (a royal with a secret, whose sarcasm masks longing), and John Lithgow as Lord Farquaad (a diminutive tyrant with delusions of grandeur and a taste for authoritarian landscaping).  Directed by Andrew Adamson and Vicky Jenson, “Shrek” redefined animated storytelling by blending irreverent humor, pop culture references / music, and genuine emotional beats.  Released by DreamWorks Animation, the film won the inaugural Academy Award for Best Animated Feature and became a cultural touchstone — spawning sequels, memes, and a Broadway musical.  But beneath the layers of onion jokes and Smash Mouth soundtracks lies a story about identity, acceptance, and the power of chosen family.
Background:  I first saw “Shrek” shortly after its release in 2001, and I remember being struck by how different it felt from the Disney-dominated animation landscape.  It was cheeky, self-aware, and oddly moving.  I wouldn’t claim to watching this film every year, but I’d wager I’ve watched it well over a half-dozen times, not including the “see-it’s-on, watch-the-rest-of-it” times.  LoL.  Watching it again now, I’m reminded of how much it changed the genre.  “Shrek” wasn’t just a hit — it was a pivot.  It proved that animated films could be subversive without being cynical, and heartfelt without being saccharine.  The film’s success helped establish DreamWorks as a serious competitor to Pixar and Disney, and its legacy continues to ripple through animation today.  It’s also one of the few animated films to be preserved in the National Film Registry for its cultural significance.
Plot:  Shrek lives alone in a swamp, content in his solitude and feared by all.  When Lord Farquaad banishes fairy tale creatures to Shrek’s land, the ogre is forced to confront the chaos — and the companionship — he’s long avoided.  To reclaim his swamp, Shrek agrees to rescue Princess Fiona from a dragon-guarded tower so Farquaad can marry her and become king.  Along the way, Shrek is joined by Donkey, whose relentless optimism and chatter slowly chip away at Shrek’s emotional armor.  Fiona, once rescued, proves to be more than a damsel — she’s funny, fierce, and hiding a curse that transforms her into an ogre at night.  As the trio journeys back to Farquaad, bonds form, secrets unravel, and Shrek begins to question whether solitude is strength or fear in disguise.  The film builds toward a wedding interruption, a dragon-assisted climax, and a final kiss that redefines beauty and belonging.
So, is this movie any good?  How’s the acting?  The filming / FX?  Any problems?  And, did I enjoy the film?  Short answers:  Yes;  vibrant and committed;  inventive and textured;  a few;  absolutely.
Any Good?  Yes.  “Shrek” is a rare blend of parody and sincerity.  It mocks fairy tale tropes while honoring their emotional core.  The humor is broad — fart jokes, pop songs, visual gags — but it’s anchored by a story about self-worth and vulnerability.  The film’s message — that love isn’t about appearances, and that monsters are often mislabeled — is delivered with warmth and wit.  It’s a film that invites laughter, but earns its well deserved affection.
Acting:  Mike Myers gives Shrek a distinct voice — literally and emotionally.  His Scottish accent adds flavor, but it’s the subtle shifts in tone that make Shrek feel real.  Eddie Murphy is electric as Donkey—his comedic timing, vocal inflection, and emotional openness elevate what could have been a one-note sidekick into a scene-stealing co-lead.  Cameron Diaz balances sass and sincerity as Fiona, and her chemistry with both Myers and Murphy feels organic.  John Lithgow leans into Farquaad’s absurdity with theatrical relish — his villainy is more bureaucratic than brutal, and that’s part of the joke.  The voice cast works because each actor commits — not just to the humor, but to the heart.
Filming / FX:  The animation, while not as polished as today’s standards, was groundbreaking in 2001.  The textures — mud, fire, fur — were richly rendered, and the character expressions conveyed nuance.  The dragon sequences are still a highlight — kinetic, funny, and visually dynamic.  The film’s use of music — from Smash Mouth’s “All Star” to Rufus Wainwright’s “Hallelujah” — is bold and effective, blending irony with emotion.  The cinematography (yes, even animated films have it) uses framing and movement to enhance character dynamics — Shrek’s isolation, Donkey’s intrusion, Fiona’s duality.
Problems:  Minor.  Some of the humor hasn’t aged well — pop culture references that once were fresh now feel a bit dated, but most of the banter is so quick, they (the culture references) barely register.  The animation, while strong for its time, shows its age in crowd scenes and background details.  Farquaad’s villainy is more comedic than threatening, which limits dramatic tension.  And while the film subverts many tropes, it still leans on a few — like the “true love’s kiss” resolution.  But these are very minor points in an otherwise terrific movie.
Did I Enjoy the Film?  Yes!  “Shrek” is funny, touching, smarter than it first appears and bears up under multiple viewings over the course of decades.  It’s a film that rewards rewatching — not just for its jokes, but for its emotional layering.  The friendship between Shrek and Donkey, the romance between Shrek and Fiona, and the film’s central theme — that we are more than how others see us — all resonate across ages.  It’s a comfort film with soul.
Final Recommendation:  Very highly recommended. “Shrek” is more than a fairy tale spoof — it’s a story about identity, acceptance, and the messy beauty of connection.  If you’ve never seen it, you’re in for a treat.  If you have, it’s worth revisiting — not just for the laughs, but for the heart (particularly if you have grand-children you’ve read fairy tales to or watched films with).  Rated PG for mild language and crude humor, but largely family-friendly.  It’s a film that speaks to kids, adults, and anyone who’s ever felt like an outsider.
Final Thought:  Shrek may live in a swamp, but his journey is anything but murky.  In the end, “Shrek” isn’t just amalgamation of fractured fairy tales or just about breaking curses — it’s about breaking walls, letting others in, and discovering that love, like ogres, has layers.
.
Click here (23 November) to see the posts of prior years.  I started this blog in late 2009.  Daily posting began in late January 2011.  Not all of the days in the early years (2009-2010) will have posts.

Read Full Post »

Second Of Four

Posted in Movie Review, Movies, Reviews, tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on July 26, 2022| Leave a Comment »

“I Am Number Four” (2011)   —   movie review
In this Sci-Fi action movie, Alex Pettyfer stars as John Smith (aka:  Number Four), Dianna Agron as Sarah Hart (the love interest), Teresa Palmer as Number Six (another good alien), Timothy Olyphant as Henri (an alien without super-powers who is supposed to raise / protect “Four”), Callan McAuliffe as Sam Goode (a human who’s dad was somehow tied to the good aliens), Kevin Durand as Setrakus Ra, the Mogadorian commander (the bad / evil aliens), and Jake Abel as Mark James (a human who is just in the movie to add “earth” drama – high school bully / Sarah’s ex-boyfriend).
Basically, a race of good aliens (Lorians) is attacked and conquered by a race of bad aliens (Mogadorians).  Just before being destroyed, they send nine kids with latent super-powers to another planet (Earth) to grow until they are strong enough to come back and destroy the bad guys.  The kids are each provided with a pair of guardians – one humanoid appearing warrior (Henri) and one a “chimera” – a shape-shifting creature.  “Four’s” chimera is a small lizard when he is in Florida and it becomes a dog (beagle) when Four and Henri move to a small town in Ohio.
Anyway, the bad aliens are pursuing the kids to kill them.  For some unexplained reason, they must be killed in numerical order.  The movie starts with the death (trap and execution) of “Three”.  There is also no explanation of where “Five” is in while “Six” is looking for and helping “Four”.
There is a lot of blah, blah, blah about high school cliques, growing up angst, “ex’s”, love, pre-digital photography, etc.  Somehow Henri is lured to, and then captured by some humans who are working with the bad aliens.  (The humans are killed and Henri and John are blamed as terrorists.)  Like I said:  blah, blah, blah.
And, then, FINALLY there is a big battle at – wait for it – the high school football field!!
Good guys win, kisses and good-bye’s:  sequel to be announced soon…  Well, maybe not so soon.  Despite being “ok”, the film cost $60M to make and made just under $150M.  Sequels cancelled…
I saw this movie on original release with my daughter.  My review from Feb. 2011 is still pretty accurate:  “Not a MUST see movie, but a very enjoyable way to while away a couple of hours with your daughter in harmless entertainment.”  Olyphant was the only recognizable actor (to me) at that time, but I have since seen Palmer in at least one other film (the live-action remake of “The Sorcerer’s Apprentice“) and Durand has made the rounds as a bad guy in other films.
My daughter did not participate in this second viewing.  I still enjoyed it on second viewing.  This is simple entertainment.  It does NOT bear up to much afterthought.  It is a “Disney” movie (“simple entertainment”), but not up to the better “Marvel” / Disney standards.  The movie is periodically available on my cable for free, but it IS Sci-Fi with decent FX, so I spent the $5 to add it to my VUDU film library.  The bummer is there are no extras.  (Oh, well…)  And, yes, this viewing is me falling for another memory tug by YouTube.  Final recommendation:  moderate to good.
.
Click here (26 July) to see the posts of prior years.  I started this blog in late 2009.  Daily posting began in late January 2011.  Not all of the days in the early years (2009-2010) will have posts.

Read Full Post »

Practically Worthless In Every Way

Posted in Family and Friends, Humor, Poems By Me, Poetry, tagged , , , , , , , on September 7, 2021| 2 Comments »

A friend posted this word on Facebook and I (jokingly) replied I’d have to use it in a future poem.  He replied:  He would look forward to it.  So (okay), then I had to write a poem / ditty…  It’s a joke people!  It’s just a joke…  (Apologies to Disney and Mary Poppins.)

Floccinaucinihilipilification*
I knew a few Republicans
When I was just a lad,
They would call me Democrat
And tell me I was bad.
And then one day
I learned a word
That ended their derision,
The biggest word
They’d ever heard
And this is how it’s said…
Floccinaucinihilipilification
Oh, hum dil a lay ly,
Hum dil a lie
Hum dil a lay ly,
Hum dil a lie
I traveled all around the states
And every where I went
I’d describe Trump Republicans
With never a dissent
They labeled me Antifa
Because we disagreed
But they could not pronounce my word
Because they could not read
Oh, hum dil a lay ly,
Hum dil a lie
Hum dil a lay ly,
Hum dil a lie
They’re killing their supporters
By saying not to mask
They say we can be great again
By living in the past
Their candidates are laughable
Their policies bad jokes
They’re labeling us as communists
And trying to stop our vote
Oh, hum dil a lay ly,
Hum dil a lie
Hum dil a lay ly,
Hum dil a lie
Oh, floccinaucinihilipilification
Floccinaucinihilipilification
[spoken]
Over course they could try to say it backwards
Which would be…
Cation – pilifi – hili – ni – nauci – flocci
But that would be as ridiculous as expecting Faux News or The (Donald) Biggest Loser to tell the truth…
Now, wouldn’t it?
*   (pronounced:)  fläksəˌnôsəˌnīˌhiləˌpiləfiˈkāSHən/
Noun:  the action or habit of estimating something as worthless.
I believe the word is actually a combination of latin roots which mean (roughly translated):  hairs or fibers of little substance gathered together (like a pilling or a ball of lint).
.
Click here (7 September) to see the posts of prior years.  I started this blog in late 2009.  Daily posting began in late January 2011.  Not all of the days in the early years (2009-2010) will have posts.

Read Full Post »

Design a site like this with WordPress.com
Get started