View Full Version : HCR Rates The Movies #13: SHREK
So, our next film, Classic or Crud, Hit or Miss, what say you ALL?
Our next film open for discussion, and ultimately an Overall RATING by you all:
SHREK
jxqQPrUomTc
Let the discussions flow. Likes, dislikes, classic film or overhyped trash, and DONT FORGET to place an Overall Rating when youre done.
Its easy, just give a Rating from 1 (Jaws 4:The Revenge) to 10 (Jaws), and thats it. Course I'd love to have you all give reasons as to why you feel it deserves this Overall Rating, and more than encourage discussions with us all about them.
So, what say you all?
Next Film: ??????
Rokk_Krinn
11/09/2005, 13:55
Sorry but I can't really vote on this one too kindly as we're voting on whether a movie is a classic, not just if it's good or not. Shrek is a perfectly fun movie but it is very much a product of its' time - even more so than many of the 80's films we've talked about being that way - in that so much of its' humour is contemporary for the time period. Ten years from now, it's not going to be quite the same to watch it. Yes, it's still amusing and does have enough "non-era-centric" bits to be a good movie, but it's not a classic. It's a fun "wink wink nod nod" film.
Rating: 3
hail_eris
11/09/2005, 17:07
Yep, this is the first movie on the list that fails the "channel surf" test. That is, would I watch it - at least for a little while - if I stumbled across it on cable? That would be no. As Rokk_Krinn said, it's topical to a fault. And, to be honest, Mike Myers and Eddie Murphy get on my nerves pretty quickly (they peaked in So I Married an Axe Murderer and Coming to America, respectively). The music is abysmal (deliver me lord, from the hell that is Smashmouth) and the animation... well, let's put it this way - the folks at Pixar aren't losing any sleep. By way of comparison, Shrek doesn't measure up to either Toy Story 2 (released the same year) or the traditionally-animated Iron Giant (released two years earlier). I'm going to echo Rokk's rating and give Shrek a dismal 3.
Comicstu
11/09/2005, 21:29
I think it deserves better than a 3. What made it bad was in that it was directed to kids: Smashmouth, all the groan worthy humor, etc. But the movie did have it's above average witty humor, and the animation wasn't so bad. But yeah, there are tons of problems: Eddie Murphy, expanding on everything because the story was so short, all that unfunny potty humor which we've all seen way too much (America's youth has really dumbed down over the years), redundancy, etc...
Rating: 5
Shrek isn't a classic only because it hasn't been out long enough. It's a kids movie at its core but it also appeals to adults. It also paradies alot of other classic movies that pays homage to them as much as it pokes fun at them. Then, you also have to look at Shrek 2. Now I know you can't judge a movie by it's sequals, but in this case I think you can. Most sequals fall flat and Shrek 2 had such a strong base going in, that it surpasses the origanal. Bad movies have worse sequals, but it takes rare gems to have sequals this good and that is a reflection of Shrek itself. It will be hard to sell this movie as a classic to anyone born before 1990 as they didn't grow up with it. They grew up then saw it. I grew up with Ghostbusters and Flight of the Navigator and many more, but there are kids who are growing up with Shrek and to them it will be a classic.
In the psuedo words of Adam West,
"I love this movie more than I love taffy, and I'm a man who enjoys his taffy. Mmmmmmm."
I give Shrek an 8.5/10
Great Cesears Ghost!! Shrek gets two 3s and a 5??? Wow, call me shocked and dismayed. :surprised
Sorry but I can't really vote on this one too kindly as we're voting on whether a movie is a classic, not just if it's good or not.
Actually this isnt so. These Rate The Movies threads arent seeing whether they are CLASSICs or not, and if not, giving them horrible ratings. Its basically a scale (your own personal scale) of 1 to 10 in the realm of movies weve all seen, where does Film X belong. Not to compare each one here to Citizen Kane, Gone With The Wind, and dare I say, Star Wars. :)
As for Shrek, Ive gotta give it a high score, as I truly enjoyed this film. A fun, adventurous and very enjoyable fairy tale film that constantly pokes fun at other fairy tale films, while still doing a great job at being one itself when all is said and done.
While Im not huge fan of Myers and Murphy (I like them both, but no huge fan) I do really enjoy them in these roles, and could easily see Shrek as one of the classic CGI animated characters of all time, and this movie holding its own with many of Pixars own CGI "classics".
Even the music I loved, a nice mix of old school fairy tale melodies with current day pop and energy. I really find this film to be one incredibly enjoyable piece of CGI cinema, which is certainly NOT solely directed towards kids (if anything it has loads of jokes so adult that kids wouldnt even get them).
Ive gotta give it a 8.75 / 10. (a dated film?, only as dated as fairy tales themselves can get, which is not at all)
Rokk_Krinn
11/10/2005, 11:02
Sorry but my vote on it doesn't change because what I'm rating on is whether or not the movie is going to stand the test of time and I really don't believe it will do so. The "witty moments" and "great adult humour" in it - and I do agree, this is as much for adults as it was kids - are very topical and in twenty years, topical jokes for the early 2000's won't seem as funny. Things like the "Mission: Impossible" wire stunt, the Matrix slow-fu, or Michael Jackson just aren't going to age well as jokes and that's a large part of the humour on which Shrek relies.
Inbetweener
11/10/2005, 11:33
Shrek is an example of a fun movie that markets itself exceptionally well but manages to be quite forgettable. It has heart and it is a kids movie for sure. It's definitely not the worst film on DTMs list so far, so I'll be troubled to see it get a lower rating than say Flash Gordon. Nevertheless, I'm not going to allow that to curve my personal feelings on this movie and others like it.
Rating: 7
Current HCR Member Rating:
SHREK - 5.88 / 10 (I say again, ....ouch)
Sorry but my vote on it doesn't change because what I'm rating on is whether or not the movie is going to stand the test of time and I really don't believe it will do so. The "witty moments" and "great adult humour" in it - and I do agree, this is as much for adults as it was kids - are very topical and in twenty years, topical jokes for the early 2000's won't seem as funny. Things like the "Mission: Impossible" wire stunt, the Matrix slow-fu, or Michael Jackson just aren't going to age well as jokes and that's a large part of the humour on which Shrek relies.
So youre giving it a 3 (putting it in the realm of some of the worst movies in cinema history) because some of its humor could be a bit dated? So in 20 years people arent going to get the Matrix stop motion/bullet time jokes? (Oh and the MI wire scene was Shrek 2, not this one :) ) People arent going to get a kick out of his wrestling with the Lord's goons in a make-shift ring? (chances are WWE will be alive and strong in the future) And what about its references and poking funs to past fairy tales and Disney films? (Most well over 20 years old yet they scored huge laughs in this film from most anyone.)
Im sorry, I just dont see a vast majority of its humor to be solely topical and dated, if anything it was a funny and fresh take on a fairy tale film and all of its trimmings.
As for the animation not being up to par, again Id hold this certainly on the level of most Pixar films in that dept. (sure its not super ultra detailed, but I dont think it was supposed to be and neither was the Incredibles or a Bugs Life)
Its not that easy to create a film that has things enjoyable and funny for the young kids as well as the adults that must take them to such films equally so, and Ive gotta say this is one prime example of this right here.
Im really not trying to change your vote RK, but one of the things I tried to get going with these threads is to not just post your rating and leave, but have others talk and possibly even debate about a score or opinion from another member was given. Your score is easily as valid as any other one here, no doubt, I just find it a bit shocking that anyone could rate this film overall a 3 on a scale of 1 (complete garbage) to 10 (timeless classic).
(not to mention you and Hail are two of the members here that I respect the most)
ReZourceman
11/10/2005, 19:58
I actually didnt like this movie either. I found it bland, and very ....animational slapstick funny...which I dont find funny. And EVERYONE else loved it...which only grew my hatred of it. Although Mike Myers does a great job, I have to give this movie a
5.
ReZourceman
11/10/2005, 20:01
Im retracting...I needed to think about it and I really REALLY hate this film.
Yeah....
3.
Comicstu
11/10/2005, 20:26
I'll change my vote to a 7.
A very fun movie I thought, and at the time I would have rated it highly. I don't think the movie pretends to be anything other than fun entertainment and that's ok, it does a good job. I would rate it 7.5 at this stage.
Inbetweener
11/11/2005, 12:01
This movie is not as bad as some are saying...I can see where it would rub some people the wrong way but when I think of 3 movies, I think of like horror movie rip-offs and 2 or on occasion 1 ratings are for their sequels...films that are rarely seen. Mac and Me for example is a solid 1, Jaws 4 as DTM suggests falls into the 1 rating category. When talking about bad movies, it's important to note the degree of bad we are talking about.
The friday the 13th movies are a good example to help me illustrate. Part I and perhaps II are arguable 5-8 rated movies with the rare outliar. If someone suggests that part V or VI are better than a 3 rating they have a tough case ahead of them...part VIII, Jason Takes Manhattan is classically bad...it gets a rare 1 rating from this movie-goer and other than for purely "intentionally comedic" reasons (an angle I feel is pointless and undefendable), it's almost impossible to give Jason Takes Manhattan a higher rating than 2 or 3...even that's a stretch.
When you enter the realm of movies that are so bad their being awful is the only reason you've seen them or remember them at all (Jack Frost I or II, Catwoman, Monsturd, Batman and Robin, Sleepaway Camp, Boat Trip, Gigli etc.) we are talking about 1 ratings, and 3 is really not too far away from that...
With that said Shrek is a spirited effort regardless. There is some talent behind it, and yes some cultural aspects are trendy and perhaps less than timeless, but a 7 rating is appropriate for a decent movie that is not necessarily memorable in the long run. Does anyone really remember films like Ordinary People or Shakespeare in Love? I don't but I remember them as smart, unique and fairly enjoyable...those are 6s or 7s.
Current HCR Member Rating:
SHREK - 5.91 / 10
hail_eris
11/11/2005, 15:01
So youre giving it a 3 (putting it in the realm of some of the worst movies in cinema history) because some of its humor could be a bit dated?
I guess my 3 is different from other people's 3. The way I see it, a 6 or a 7 is a movie that is definitely watchable - possibly more than once. Might even have some memorable scenes or characters. I'd put stuff like Phantom Menace (yes, it's getting a couple of points *just* for Darth Maul) or Mallrats in that category. A 4 or a 5 is totally unremarkable, the kind of movie that you forget almost as soon as it's over. I'm thinking stuff like the first Banderas Zorro movie or Daredevil (go ahead and try to remember a single line of dialogue from it). A 3 means that I'm actually hitting the remote with a breath of relief that I didn't pay to see said film in the theatre. And that's where I put Shrek. Not quite in Catwoman land (that's a 2) or direct to video Ernest Goes to Somewhere range (my personal definition of a 1), but below average. Admittedly, overexposure to the storm of cross-marketing that accompanied Shrek didn't boost my opinion of it (probably cost it a point). And I'm a child of early MTV and Miami Vice, so soundtrack is important to me. To have one that's as grating as Shrek's is going to cost it a point or two as well. So you start with an average movie (5) and dock it for annoying external factors and end up with a 3.
EmperorNorton
11/11/2005, 15:10
Daredevil (go ahead and try to remember a single line of dialogue from it).
"Das ist nicht das Licht am Ende des Tunnels, das ist die U-Bahn."
I have only seen the translated version...it's the line Daredevil says before that guy is run over by the subway.
Anyway, I'll give Shrek a 7. I enjoyed it. It's not a timeless classic, but it doesn't have to be to entertain.
And as far as the soundtrack goes, I like "My beloved monster".
Mallrats in that category. A 4 or a 5 is totally unremarkable, the kind of movie that you forget almost as soon as it's over.
Oooh, you had to bring mallrats into it. I've tried to block that movie from my mind. I may only be able to pull a few things from it... Stan Lee being one of them and that guy from Clerks......... and the stoner who couldn't see the "eye candy" display...... I really can't remember anything else from that movie; is that bad?
I give Shrek a 5. it's cute, funny, and yes it's dated but still funny. In Disneys Aladdin flick with Robin Williams, some of the genies jokes are dated as well. Some of the Bugs Bunny cartoons are also dated with contemporary characters; James Cagney, Bing Crosby, Xavier Cugat, etc etc.
Shrek 2 is cute but the same, forgettable.
In 10 years these will be about as popular as Disneys Pocahontas.
A 4 or a 5 is totally unremarkable, the kind of movie that you forget almost as soon as it's over. I'm thinking stuff like the first Banderas Zorro movie....
OUCH again my friend, as I personally LOVED the first of the new Zorro films, and cant wait for its sequel to open here in New Zealand. I thought it was a phoemonial overall action/adventure movie, very cool story, excellent heroes and villains, and even the soundtrack (though James Horner can be a bit repeatitive with his scores) added alot to the film, and this was also one of my favorite "Batman" films to date. Loads of fun this film was to me, no doubt at all. (and to think I held you in such high regards before this :):))
hail_eris
11/12/2005, 02:25
(and to think I held you in such high regards before this :):))
Ah! I am wounded! Seriously, I didn't think Zorro was a bad movie. I enjoy Banderas as an actor (he - and everyone else in the cast - are far better than they have any right to be in the Spy Kids movies) and Hopkins was solid enough (I compare all of his roles to his performance in Titus). But was it memorable? Eh, that's where I start having my reservations about it. I saw it as a matinee on a day that I was playing hooky from work, with the girl I was dating (she picked the movie) and a big ol' tub of popcorn. And in that context, it was a great flick. But if you put it up against, say, the latest version of The Count of Monte Cristo, I just feel that it comes up short. Okay, on further review, I'll give Zorro a solid 6, but I'm sticking with my 3 for Shrek.
Current HCR Member Rating:
SHREK - 5.98 / 10
As for comparing the Count Of Monte Cristo (new version) and the Mask Of Zorro, besides both containing sword fights of the similiar period in time they really are two very different films. Zorro is more of a fun as hell Action/Adventure popcorn flick (but unlike many other popcorn films that one was a great film overall as well and really delivered the goods). Monte Cristo wasnt really an action adventure, but a Drama again with the occassional bits of swordplay thrown in. Not to put anything against Monte Cristo, I thought it was a very enjoyable film, and as a movie overall would for me be in the same level as Zorro, but as for which one I enjoyed more and had more fun watching, hands down when the films themselves are roughly comparable to one another, the popcorn Action/Adenture will win out over the well done and exciting Drama in that dept. :)
I love Shrek. It's fun, funny and very clever and had some very good lines. Shrek 2 was a piece of ####, but the original, it gets a 7.5
Inbetweener
11/14/2005, 10:53
(I compare all of his roles to his performance in Titus).
I can't figure out if this is a knock on Titus or not...I'm almost afraid to say that it's my favorite Hopkins performance.
hail_eris
11/14/2005, 11:39
I can't figure out if this is a knock on Titus or not...I'm almost afraid to say that it's my favorite Hopkins performance.
Oh, it's most definitely praise. Titus has got to be one of my favorite Shakespearean film adaptations and not just for the amazing look that Julie Taymor gave it. The entire cast was fantastic (I'm always glad to see Colm Feore and Alan Cumming get work), but Hopkins stood out. He did just the right amount of scenery chewing to capture the character, without devolving into the self-parody of some weak Hannibal Lechter retread. I like him in the Merchant Ivory stuff, but he's at his best when he's playing over the top.
Inbetweener
11/14/2005, 12:09
Being a big movie buff, I selfishly hope Taymor makes more films. Titus's set direction is so unique and smart. Her application of it to films is almost as exceptional as her theatre work. Hopkins seems to understand exactly what is expected of him and more...he was perfect in a performance that no doubt required some imagination to tackle just right.
d_knight7
03/31/2006, 17:04
6.5/10, wears on you.
coyotejack
04/17/2006, 16:15
Shrek was funny, but not THAT funny. It was cute at times, but not THAT cute. It was a little edgy in places, but not THAT edgy.
That's the movie for me...had moments, but not enough for me to bother watching again.
I give it a 5/10.
Antipathy
04/17/2006, 16:24
I actually found the movie very enjoyable. There were some very funny segments in this movie.
8.5/10
Antipathy
04/17/2006, 16:24
Oops, I meant 7.5
Aeturnus
04/17/2006, 18:16
Ah Shrek, the most overrated animated film of all time.
5/10, because I like my Eddie Murphy.
Gargantua
04/19/2006, 22:01
Shrek was pretty decent. Not a great movie from any standpoint. The humor was mainly on the juvenile side, the animation was nothing to complain about, but not breathtaking. The performances were fun. Topical and dated, okay yes, I'll grant that, but I do think it'll stand up to the test of time well enough and still be funny 20 years from now. There was enough non-topical humor for that. Compare it to any of Pixar's offerings and it's going to pale, and not just from the animation standpoint. They have heart and character-driven humor that makes them true classics, every one. Shrek ain't no Pixar movie, but it's fun.
6.5 of 10.
krusticlese
04/20/2006, 00:22
This movie has been a pet peeve of mine since I first saw it.
The characters were good, but the writing was running the gambit from children's humor to very adult humor, which isn't appropiate for the genre. Many other companies have pulled off the trick of making a film or cartoon work on both levels so that there will be jokes that the children won't (and shouldn't) get, while it keeps the parents entertained. Warner Brothers cartoons suceeded in this in many of their cartoons for years while never getting dirty about it.
Shrek was the first in a line of recent children's films where the adult jokes were more geared towards in-your-face raunchy comedy that had become popular in recent years (in adult comedies), rather then including very subtle references to pop culture and politics, which children would never possibily get. The Cat in the Hat was another prime example of this, or The Pink Panther. Entirely to raunchy for the targeted age group.
It takes far more skill as a writer to keep both the children and the parents entertained with two completely different levels of jokes. In Shrek's case, the writers failed entirely too much in that goal and too often during the film I felt that a majority of the jokes were geared for the wrong age group.
I was also quite disturbed at the scene where the princess eats some live birds for no apparent reason at the time, or (prehaps it's the same scene) where some animals blow up. The computer animation is a little too life-like for effects like that for the target audience.
Had the movie been marketed as a young-adult film, I'd have no issue with it. But the movie was marketed for a much younger audience, which seemed an inappropiate age for the film. In it's conception and execution the movie failed to deliver a timeless tale for all ages.
Overall rating:
2.0
I just dont get it, I really loved this film, and Shrek 2 as well. I thought they were great family films, that had plenty of the cutsey bits for the youngins, and loads of the more mature, adult humor for those in the older age brackets. I thought this really had something for everyone here. And the jokes are dated? Bah! Like people are going to know what bullet time is in 10 years? Or what WWE wrestling is? Or havent heard the Pina Colada Song? Or who Pinocchio, The 3 little pigs, the Gingerbread Man, or Tinkerbell are in 20 years? Dated humor, sorry but I dont buy it. Whether it be contemporary humor or fairy tale fun, this film had it all as far as I was concerned, and while I do like a few Pixar films more than Shrek, I certainly enjoyed Shrek more than several Pixar films in return. Shrek a strictly bargain basement CGI kids only film, not to me its not.
Prof. Aragorn
04/23/2006, 02:51
I prefer Beauty and the Beast.
Okay movie, but I've seen it four times, and that's three times too many.
6.37 out of 10
Funny movie, but kind of slow the second time around.
8.0
Gargantua
07/30/2006, 17:21
I just watched this again, and I want to upgrade my rating. It was better than I remembered it. Still some dated and topical references, but really it relied less on them than I thought. And the plot and character development was stronger too.
I'm upping my rating to an 8.
3/10 : a movie where the only character that made me laugh is the one dubbed by Eddie Murphy doesn't deserve more ... So 3 points thanks to Eddie (can't realize I said that ...), and 0 for the rest.
I just dont get the LOW ratings for this film.......to each their own, I guess.
Antipathy
12/22/2006, 14:43
Another movie that gave me a lot of laughs, but more than Shrek 2.
8.5/10
Smaug317
12/22/2006, 15:11
I just dont get it, I really loved this film, and Shrek 2 as well. I thought they were great family films, that had plenty of the cutsey bits for the youngins, and loads of the more mature, adult humor for those in the older age brackets. I thought this really had something for everyone here. And the jokes are dated? Bah! Like people are going to know what bullet time is in 10 years? Or what WWE wrestling is? Or havent heard the Pina Colada Song? Or who Pinocchio, The 3 little pigs, the Gingerbread Man, or Tinkerbell are in 20 years? Dated humor, sorry but I dont buy it. Whether it be contemporary humor or fairy tale fun, this film had it all as far as I was concerned, and while I do like a few Pixar films more than Shrek, I certainly enjoyed Shrek more than several Pixar films in return. Shrek a strictly bargain basement CGI kids only film, not to me its not.
I'll have to agree with that 100%.
9.75/10.
A true legend. Few animated movies will ever surpass Shrek.
I actually found the movie very enjoyable. There were some very funny segments in this movie.
8.5/10
Oops, I meant 7.5
Another movie that gave me a lot of laughs, but more than Shrek 2.
8.5/10
And look at what I noticed when I was redoing the overall scores for those that you voted on AP. :) Hard to make up your mind on this one, eh? :p
lensnart
02/23/2007, 02:13
When was it decided that all you had to do was pretend to be scottish and you would be funny? Mike Myers has done this same shtick in every movie so far and it hasn't been funny yet. There is not even one laugh in fact it was grumpy for days at having watched this and then shocked that it didn't leave the theatre in its first week. Even Eddie Murphy is awful.
0 out of 10 unless i can use negatives then it gets a negative 8
So you think Shrek is THE worst movie youve ever seen, and theres absolutely nothing, zero, zilch, nada, zip, bubkiss even remotely good in this film. Every single second was agony, with nothing (animation, music, etc.) of value in it at all? Again, because when you give a film a Zero, thats basically what youre saying.
lensnart
02/23/2007, 14:49
Yes that is what i am saying, other films may be equally as awful but none are worse.
petenbailey9
04/05/2007, 13:35
Great movie I'd give a 8.50, I could watch it again and again.
Granite Moose
06/13/2007, 12:32
I really liked this movie when it first came out and I still throughly enjoy watching it. My wife and daughter also love to rewatch this movie. It has a great message and has, to me, just the right amount of cultural and fairy tale messages to be funny and a little satirical.
I give Shrek a very solid 8.5.
I believe I have only watched this film one time. I enjoyed it but it really wasn't a film I would watch multiple times. I find Shrek 2 to be vastly superior.
6/10
vBulletin® v3.7.0, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.