Toon Tuesday : "Shrek the Third" artists & technicians tried hard not to ogre-compensate

re: Toon Tuesday : "Shrek the Third" artists & technicians tried hard not to ogre-compensate

Leo N. Holzer — Tue, 01 May 2007 03:32:18 GMT

i have no desire in seeing this movie.

looks like dreamworks can not come up with anythingnew anymore. soon we will see shrek the eight with the same lame fart, burp and throw up jokes and just a bunch of rehashed gags.

re: Toon Tuesday : "Shrek the Third" artists & technicians tried hard not to ogre-compensate

Leo N. Holzer — Tue, 01 May 2007 05:13:42 GMT

They've changed and improved the animation but it isn't really visible? Well, I guess it still looks like crap than.

"“It’s very similar in tone to ‘Shrek’ and ‘Shrek 2.’ That’s not to say there isn’t a ton of humor to go along with it, but it feels a little more rooted in the story this time around,” he said."

Sure, dream on. "Shrek" movies have never been worked around a story, only around one stupid joke after another. And this movie is stuffed with stupid jokes, annoying parodies etc etc etc.

And those voice actors, it's like the characters don't matter, but only the actors behind them. The only reason I'm going to see the movie is because I want to see if it is an improvement over the seriously bad "Shrek 2" and to hear Julie Andrews(:D !!). I'm definitely not going to see the movie because it has such a strong story and superb animation.

Sigh, they should hire new screenwriters at DreamWorks and send the animation staff back to school. Why can't they just do what Pixar is doing? Develop a movie that is actually *good* and has mind-blowing animation!

re: Toon Tuesday : "Shrek the Third" artists & technicians tried hard not to ogre-compensate

Leo N. Holzer — Tue, 01 May 2007 05:59:11 GMT

Whoo boy!

This film ain't even out and your dissin it already? Man, that's just harsh there.

What ever happened to seeing something before passing judgement?

I may not be interested in this movie or any of the other ones, but I would at least want to speak from experience before giving the thing the bum's rush.

Is that just too hard for folks any more? Guess some of us just really want to be Jerry Beck, Al Lutz or Harry Knowles.

re: Toon Tuesday : "Shrek the Third" artists & technicians tried hard not to ogre-compensate

Leo N. Holzer — Tue, 01 May 2007 06:18:09 GMT

Micky,

You're rushing to judge ...

Now, I'm a major fan of good animated films -- "Shrek" was a delightful little surprise; but, except for the introduction of Puss in Boots, I was disappointed with "Shrek 2."

Truthfully, I haven't seen enough of "Shrek the Third" to decide if it's good or not.

What I have seen of "Shrek the Third," scenes from various points in the story, looks promising. And that was the consensus of about a dozen journalists, including myself and AP's entertainment writer, had after seeing the clips.

I went into this assignment thinking "Shrek the Third" might be something my wife and I could wait to see on home DVD. Now, I'm looking forward to seeing the completed film in the multiplex. Maybe not as much as "Ratatouille," "Spider-Man 3" or "PotC: At World's End," but it's made it to my list of want-to-see summer films.

I can assure you that if "Shrek" is to continue as a viable franchise ... it won't do so with "the same lame fart, burp and throw up jokes and just a bunch of rehashed gags."

These are smart, creative, caring and driven film-makers ... They know the obvious.

re: Toon Tuesday : "Shrek the Third" artists & technicians tried hard not to ogre-compensate

Leo N. Holzer — Tue, 01 May 2007 06:21:57 GMT

I didn't actually say anything constructive about the movie, most of what I said could have been concluded without seeing the film you know.

re: Toon Tuesday : "Shrek the Third" artists & technicians tried hard not to ogre-compensate

Leo N. Holzer — Tue, 01 May 2007 09:12:55 GMT

“The hard thing about rebuilding Shrek is he had to be better, but look the same,” Modesto said.

Yes, that must be a hard thing to do, since the original designs are so awkward and unappealing. It's really too bad they couldn't overhaul the entire look of the film, but I guess they're stuck with those ugly character designs.

I still believe that trying to design so realistically only results in characters that pale in comparison to live actors. Also, there is an appalling sameness to most of the human characters. Just look at that still of Fiona and her Princess pals - the girls all look exactly alike, save for their hair-dos. Cinderella and Rapunzel are indistinguishable, and they all seem to look just like Fiona's mom, too. (And if that ain't bad enough, so does Artie!)

Compare this with the wonderful character designs in both "The Incredibles" and the upcoming "Ratatouille". By taking a more fun, caricatured approach, Brad Bird has once again created a cast of characters that are distinct personalities, helped considerably by their contrasting face and body types. In short, these characters, though caricatured, come off as being more human than the realistic mannequins that inhabit the world of "Shrek". I must admit, I've never understood the mass appeal that the "Shrek" films seem to have to today's audiences. No accounting for taste, I suppose...

re: Toon Tuesday : "Shrek the Third" artists & technicians tried hard not to ogre-compensate

Leo N. Holzer — Tue, 01 May 2007 10:03:59 GMT

Not that I was a HUGE fan of Shrek 2 (I agree that it was a downhill step from the first one), but there are a few things they're being wrongly criticized for, here:

"They've changed and improved the animation but it isn't really visible? Well, I guess it still looks like crap than."

Pixar did the same thing between Toy Story and Toy Story 2... while most people wouldn't notice the difference (because the character model itself looks very much the same), the internal structure of the main characters was totally recreated for more variety in facial poses and gestures. Seasoned animators will notice the difference, but most people watching the movie won't even have it cross their mind.

"Yes, that must be a hard thing to do, since the original designs are so awkward and unappealing. It's really too bad they couldn't overhaul the entire look of the film, but I guess they're stuck with those ugly character designs."

I personally like the designs of the non-human characters, and the fact that the human characters are so realistic (while unappealing to some of us) probably has helped much more than hurt. There are still too many moviegoers who have the equation of "animated = cartoon = kids" stuck in their head, and the more adult something looks (storyline aside), the more of those moviegoers might consider seeing it.

"Cinderella and Rapunzel are indistinguishable, and they all seem to look just like Fiona's mom, too. (And if that ain't bad enough, so does Artie!)"

Artie looking much like Fiona's mom actually makes some sense, storywise... aren't they supposed to be related for him to have the opportunity to take the throne? I know if I was creating an animated movie with the volume of new characters Shrek 3 will have, I'd probably do the same thing to save some time... and it will be the way the characters act that will help distinguish them (look at Violet and Kari in The Incredibles, for instance).

Look, I'm not particularly stoked about seeing Shrek 3... it's just that the majority of comments here were negative and somewhat undeserved.

re: Toon Tuesday : "Shrek the Third" artists & technicians tried hard not to ogre-compensate

Leo N. Holzer — Tue, 01 May 2007 12:42:23 GMT

Artie looks more like Prince Charming, actually.

re: Toon Tuesday : "Shrek the Third" artists & technicians tried hard not to ogre-compensate

Leo N. Holzer — Tue, 01 May 2007 12:51:56 GMT

I plan to see this for one reason - DRAGON IS BACK. The second-coolest dragon in the animated universe (next to Maleficent from Sleeping Beauty). Not that I don't like Shrek - he's got real personality, and so does Donkey. Heck, I like the Puss too. The only thing I'm dreading is if the film turns into a Disney slamfest - I've had it with that stuff. When Fiona threw the Little Mermaid to the sharks - well, that kind of killed that second film for me. I like parody and satire - I'm a big fan of South Park - but the second film made me want to say "Jeffrey Katzenberg, you got shat on at Disney. We know that. I suggest you deal with it one-on-one with a therapist and stop trying to get even on film". Jeez!

re: Toon Tuesday : "Shrek the Third" artists & technicians tried hard not to ogre-compensate

Leo N. Holzer — Tue, 01 May 2007 13:01:53 GMT

gigglesock said:

"Jeffrey Katzenberg, you got shat on at Disney. We know that. I suggest you deal with it one-on-one with a therapist and stop trying to get even on film"

LOL!

re: Toon Tuesday : "Shrek the Third" artists & technicians tried hard not to ogre-compensate

Leo N. Holzer — Tue, 01 May 2007 13:33:21 GMT

Geez you guys sure are coming down harsh on something nobody's seen in full yet.

What's the deal?

How come the harsh words for a movie (Shrek2) that made almost a billion dollars worldwide?

I don't get it. The Shrek story is hugely popular, otherwise we wouldn't be seeing even be talking about the third installment.

Sure, they've poked fun at some "Disney" characters/stories. But, in reality, a lot of the characters/stories aren't even "Disney", they're Mother Goose and Grimm.

re: Toon Tuesday : "Shrek the Third" artists & technicians tried hard not to ogre-compensate

Leo N. Holzer — Tue, 01 May 2007 13:40:21 GMT

Why is *** starred out?

re: Toon Tuesday : "Shrek the Third" artists & technicians tried hard not to ogre-compensate

Leo N. Holzer — Tue, 01 May 2007 13:58:35 GMT

GrumpyFan said:

"How come the harsh words for a movie (Shrek2) that made almost a billion dollars worldwide?"

Just because it made almost a billion doesn't say it's quality stuff ;) Not everybody likes "Titanic" (I did like it), even though it is the all-time highest grossing film. And don't even get me started on "Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire" which almost made $ 900 Million. God, seriously awful and flawed movie, worst yet in the series.

re: Toon Tuesday : "Shrek the Third" artists & technicians tried hard not to ogre-compensate

Leo N. Holzer — Tue, 01 May 2007 14:28:56 GMT

The quality of anything is ultimately an opinion shaped by personal preferences and knowledge.

re: Toon Tuesday : "Shrek the Third" artists & technicians tried hard not to ogre-compensate

Leo N. Holzer — Tue, 01 May 2007 14:32:04 GMT

I don't understand why Raman's last name is being printed as ***. I've never encountered anything like that. Pardon this attempt to see it in print: It's Raman H--u--i, without those dashes.

re: Toon Tuesday : "Shrek the Third" artists & technicians tried hard not to ogre-compensate

Leo N. Holzer — Tue, 01 May 2007 14:40:42 GMT

I agree with your comments on both "Titanic" and "Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire", but obviously, a few people thought them entertaining enough, flaws or not, to see at least once.

I guess it all boils down to what your definition of quality is. But, if you stop and think about it, when was the last time any major studio turned out anything of a quality movie? I can't remember when the last time was that I saw a good quality move.

re: Toon Tuesday : "Shrek the Third" artists & technicians tried hard not to ogre-compensate

Leo N. Holzer — Tue, 01 May 2007 14:49:32 GMT

GrumpyFan said:

"I guess it all boils down to what your definition of quality is. But, if you stop and think about it, when was the last time any major studio turned out anything of a quality movie? I can't remember when the last time was that I saw a good quality move."

You've got a point there. There are some good quality movies out there, but not as much as there used to be.

I mean, "Babel" was one of the strongest movies I saw in a long time, and in animation.. Well, that is harder.. Hmmmm.. "Wallace & Gromit: The Curse of the Were-Rabbit" was a fine piece of animation, one of the best. And I guess "Toy Story 2" was the best computer animated movie in recent past.

My personal favorite when it comes to quality in traditional animation is a lot older. In that field I have to say "The Little Mermaid" was what I consider the peak in traditional animation. But that's subjected to debate.

re: Toon Tuesday : "Shrek the Third" artists & technicians tried hard not to ogre-compensate

Leo N. Holzer — Tue, 01 May 2007 15:48:25 GMT

Thought I would chime in on the Dreamworks-bashes-Disney thing.

How anyone can honestly be either offended or surprised by that is beyond me. Disney & Pixar are the kings, the top-o-the-heap, the cream of the crop... and have been for a long time. Everyone beneath them will ALWAYS take pot shots up the food chain. It is a COMPLIMENT. I don't care how cheap the shot at Disney is, they wouldn't do it if it wasn't because they secretly (or not so secretly) admire/want to be like/ are jealous of Disney to begin with.

If people ignored Disney entirely I would be very worried.

The ability to not only laugh, but to laugh at oneself (aside from being very theraputic) enables you to keep things in perspective. Plus, some of the Disney jabs are stinking hilarious!!! Enjoy them. ;o)

re: Toon Tuesday : "Shrek the Third" artists & technicians tried hard not to ogre-compensate

Leo N. Holzer — Tue, 01 May 2007 15:52:34 GMT

My only observation - since there should be no Shrek bashing, lest I have to beg Jesse Jackson for forgiveness for my Dreamworks insensitivity - would be one of marketing. They invited press to the animation facility and it sounds like the theme of the presentations were "Shrek 3 - it was soooo HARD !" For now, the marketing should focus on seeing the characters again and how funny it will be. The presentations reported on, belong in a dvd extra, not pre-release hype.

My only other observation - has Fiona always been about half the size of Shrek? Can't some computer program - that is very hard to operate and understand - keep track of that kind of thing?

re: Toon Tuesday : "Shrek the Third" artists & technicians tried hard not to ogre-compensate

Leo N. Holzer — Tue, 01 May 2007 17:31:42 GMT

I don't care how good Shrek looks. It's still CRAP. Nobody needs to see this. When I get photoshop, I'm gonna make a picture of Jack Sparrow and Spiderman throwing Shrek off a cliff. Then that gets to be my desktop background. And when I saw the Shrek 3 trailer this past weeked, it doesn't look even as good as Meet the Robinsons. Oh, Burn.

re: Toon Tuesday : "Shrek the Third" artists & technicians tried hard not to ogre-compensate

Leo N. Holzer — Tue, 01 May 2007 17:36:28 GMT

I don't care how "good" shrek looks. shrek is CRAP. I am spelling shrek with a lowercase "s" because I want to show it the most disrespect I can while still writing about it. I hate shrek and dreamworks (same thing with the lowercase letters). I hope that shrek 3 makes no money and that dreamworks goes bankrupt. When I get Photoshop, I'm going to make a picture of Jack Sparrow and Spiderman throwing shrek off a cliff. I hate shrek. And anyway the animation didn't look that good in the trailer that I saw last week at the movie theater. Ratatouille's animation looked better on low-res on my computer screen on the 9-minute preview on Disney.com. Oh, Burn.

re: Toon Tuesday : "Shrek the Third" artists & technicians tried hard not to ogre-compensate

Leo N. Holzer — Tue, 01 May 2007 20:08:06 GMT

Hmm, funny how all that work was done behind the scenes just to keep it looking terribly mediocre. What with off-model character designs that would never, ever meet even the lowest grade Disney movie's standards you'd think they could have just left everything alone. Comparatively, you can see the difference in a Dreamworks film and a Pixar film. I will never buy the idea that Dreamworks animation looks that way because it want to keep a certain "style"...it's just sub par...watch any Pixar film and you'll see the difference.

The problem with Shrek is that Dreamworks gave us "just good enough" I mean really, just one look at the characters will tell you that...there is nothing endearing about any of the characters in any of these films. Look at Shrek's snow white and tell me they gave it their "best"...when I see these characters I want to walk up to them and say, "nope Sorry...take it back...TRY HARDER!"

Now I know there are lots of you saying "But I like the shrek movies" which is fine, but I think its the audiences duty to let the studios know that we don't want to shell out money for just mediocre. Take for example Madagascar...A cast FULL of hilarious comedians and big names to flash around. The problem is that none of the characters were allowed to be funny...Chris Rock and Ben Stiller are hilarious, but in Madagascar I could barely stomach anything they showed us...mediocrity in degrees...If Ben stiller cant be funny in his own way, then why cast him? To get audiences to think it's going to be like funny movies they've seen before. I could barely recognize his character when I heard the Lion in Madagascar, that's how bad it is...Now go watch Genie in Aladdin and look at the difference... You know what I mean...there is literally a quality fift between these two studios...and that's why I'll save my $10 when "Shrek the Mediocre" releases this summer...

re: Toon Tuesday : "Shrek the Third" artists & technicians tried hard not to ogre-compensate

Leo N. Holzer — Wed, 02 May 2007 03:51:03 GMT

Just a couple of points:

Yes, Fiona is smaller than Shrek and always has been ... one of the artists said Shrek could literally swallow Fiona's head.

Also, none of the artists grumbled about how hard their jobs were ... in fact, they seemed to delight in the refined software because it gave them more control for those important emotional moments and enabled them to create a better movie with more effective crowd scenes, etc.

And, getting back to that character model argument that curmudgeon mentioned and Baxter added to ... one of the advantages of computer animation is the modeling -- every character is ON MODEL. Now, you can have a beef with the way those characters were designed look -- and, I agree, that Pixar kicks butt in this aspect -- but thanks to the computer, they are on model.

Besides, it's simply not true that PDI/DreamWorks hasn't created great-looking characters for their movies -- with Donkey's girlfriend/wife the dragon and the awesome Puss in Boots simply being two well-drawn and conceived examples. Maybe you don't care for the more realistic (human) characters, but I'll take the ones in "Shrek the Third," over the soul-less dead-eye characters of motion capture animated films like "Polar Express" and "Monster House" any day of the week.

re: Toon Tuesday : "Shrek the Third" artists & technicians tried hard not to ogre-compensate

Leo N. Holzer — Wed, 02 May 2007 04:26:35 GMT

Ponsonby Britt said:

"Compare this with the wonderful character designs in both "The Incredibles" and the upcoming "Ratatouille". By taking a more fun, caricatured approach, Brad Bird has once again created a cast of characters that are distinct personalities, helped considerably by their contrasting face and body types. In short, these characters, though caricatured, come off as being more human than the realistic mannequins that inhabit the world of "Shrek". I must admit, I've never understood the mass appeal that the "Shrek" films seem to have to today's audiences. No accounting for taste, I suppose..."

Bless you! Its good to know people with good sense and taste still exist.

re: Toon Tuesday : "Shrek the Third" artists & technicians tried hard not to ogre-compensate

Leo N. Holzer — Wed, 02 May 2007 12:35:56 GMT

Shrek's not about design, and they can't well implement a new design scheme on the third movie. They're a middle ground between Polar Express and the Incredibles: Better than the former, but is that really something to brag about?

I find it extremely telling how MGA has made appealing dolls out of the Shrek Princesses by using faces that don't look anything like the movie characters

re: Toon Tuesday : "Shrek the Third" artists & technicians tried hard not to ogre-compensate

Leo N. Holzer — Wed, 02 May 2007 18:38:08 GMT

Let me define off model...go to the Disneyland "Mickey and Friends" parking structure and look at the Characters all over the walls sometime...they are definitly Mickey Goofy and Minnie etc.. but they look off or like there's something wrong with them, as though they used the Disney's Golden childrens books from the 70's as a site example. That's what shrek reminds me of. I see the designs and think...Unacceptable...off model. I know this because I've seen Excellence, and I've seen mediocrity...and there isn't a shred of evidence that shows any sort of excellence in the Shrek Character designs. The point is, whether you have bad taste or great taste... it's not about TASTE at all...it's about us accepting just "status quo"...and Shrek appears to be... "Just bad..err..good enough" to make Dreamworks more money...It's a sinking ship friends....a sinking ship I say...not just for Dreamworks vision of things to come, but also in our expectations, and those who root for the Shrek movies to continue have been hooked... I believe Shrek speaks for all mediocrities... he is their patron saint.

re: Toon Tuesday : "Shrek the Third" artists & technicians tried hard not to ogre-compensate

Leo N. Holzer — Thu, 03 May 2007 01:39:16 GMT

i'm gonna see this movie because i like the Shrek movies. but it's no secret that Shrek is really Dreamworks' only saving grace. they have nothing else really and Katzenburg is milking Shrek. There's no doubt the movies will carry into the 8's, and that's fine, but in the end that's all Dreamworks will be known for.

if you think about it, Dreamworks is the ghetto version of Disney. mostly all of their "kid" movie are PG and full of fart/burp/booger jokes plus foul language (Donkey says "hell" in Shrek 1, and Shrek did that whole "I had to save my ass" in the same film). Disney's kid films have only had 1 PG rating, and that was for The Black Cauldron; however that movie was a little violent and did not once stoop itself down to foul language level.

in the end, Dreamworks has hits. Shark Tale, Shrek, and others have come and gone. but that's the thing, isn't it? they have come, but now are gone. where is Shark Tale or Robots now? rotting on the DVD shelf at Target. even the Shrek DVDs are out there collecting dust. these films are fine once, but they do not hold the magic and that extra timelessness that the Disney films do and therefore pale in comparison.

but where is Snow White, Cinderella, Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin, and a whole host of others? they're right here on my personal DVD shelf being watched over and over by my kids, their friends, my wife, and myself. those are true movies.

re: Toon Tuesday : "Shrek the Third" artists & technicians tried hard not to ogre-compensate

Leo N. Holzer — Thu, 03 May 2007 04:52:40 GMT

Uhm.. Linklewtt, you're incorrect about a few things. First of all, they have had several PG-rated animated films. "Home on the Range", "Lilo & Stitch", "Atlantis: The Lost Empire", "Treasure Planet", just to name a few. And second, "Robots" isn't from DreamWorks. It's a 20th Century Fox/Blue Sky Studios movie.

re: Toon Tuesday : "Shrek the Third" artists & technicians tried hard not to ogre-compensate

Leo N. Holzer — Thu, 03 May 2007 14:49:25 GMT

Wow, I hadn't realized so many people hated Shrek! While I could do without the fart jokes and the occasional cuss word, I enjoyed the first and second movies. The animation of the meadow in Shrek 2 was top-notch. I enjoyed the little bits of Disney-parody (bashing? maybe) from the moment Shrek and Fiona entered Far Far Away and were met at the gate.

I will see the third, and I hope I enjoy it. If I do, I'll let you know - and I suspect I won't be alone.

re: Toon Tuesday : "Shrek the Third" artists & technicians tried hard not to ogre-compensate

Leo N. Holzer — Thu, 03 May 2007 22:42:16 GMT

ok, Disney has had more than 1 PG film...but the point is that they never stooped to cussing like Shrek does. Home On the Range had that reference to boobs, but besides that it was mostly violence in those other films, right?