Shrek 2 (2004) Poster


User Reviews

Review this title
498 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
More Shrekervescence!
Dan Franzen (dfranzen70)8 November 2004
I know what you're expecting me to say. "If you liked Shrek ..." And it's so true. Fans of the first will be ga-ga over the second. The gang at Dreamworks was smart enough not to monkey around with a winning formula, so you have all the wit and charm of Shrek (Mike Myers), Fiona (Cameron Diaz), Donkey (Eddie Murphy), and all the fantastic fairy-tale creatures.

At the beginning of 2, Shrek and Fiona have been invited by Fiona's parents (John Cleese and Julie Andrews) to the family castle. Imagine their surprise when the honeymooning ogres show up! Seems the king and queen haven't heard that a) Fiona's an ogre and b) that her husband is one, too. Naturally, this doesn't sit particularly well with the king, and soon he's hired a hit man - Puss in Boots, no less, voiced by Antonio Banderas - to bump off his new son in law. Meanwhile, a Fairy Godmother (Jennifer Saunders) offers help to Fiona. And quickly, the main question of the film - conveniently, it was the main question of the first film - is whether love conquers all. Oh, perhaps it's a bit more complex than that - perhaps it's whether Fiona would love Shrek, no matter what he looked like. Come to think of it, that was the theme of the first one as well.

Shrek and Fiona journey to the land of Far, Far Away, where the stuffy king and the queen mum live. Far, Far Away is a clear knockoff of Hollywood itself (complete with the sign on the mountain), and the journey includes a pass through what looks like Beverly Hills. The attention to detail is marvelous, as always.

As with 1, 2 drops all sorts of Disney references, most resulting in full-out belly laughter. I was in stitches, although perhaps - just perhaps - some of the humor will zoom over your tiny tot's tiny head.

Shrek 2 is a beautifully done movie, perhaps even more entertaining than the original. Sure, at the end you know your emotions have been manipulated somewhat, but in the end you really don't care. Outstanding voice performances, flawless animation, and a crisp, moderately adult (but not mature, definitely not mature) script reign supreme.
66 out of 80 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
nowmann10 November 2004
The first time I watched this movie was in my living room with my husband, daughter, and mom. We all laughed so hard we had to watch it again to see what we missed (which turned out to be a lot!). Antonio as Puss was genius! As was Jennifer Saunders as the fairy godmother. Kudos to the casting director. Once again Eddie Murphy as the annoying and talkative donkey was perfect and even much more lovable. And Mike Myers as Shrek, what can I say? A perfect grumpy ogre. Cameron Diaz once again lets her personality shine through even in animation. Oh, and Rupert! With that voice being the narcissistic Prince Charming. I could go on and on about the characters in this movie but instead I implore you to watch it for yourself. I loved this movie as did my entire family. The jokes in this movie were absolutely delicious! For those naysayers who hated this movie, I say go buy a sense of humor!
83 out of 104 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Respectable effort with a tough act to follow
mstomaso23 April 2005
Shrek 2 has as much humor, talent, and fun as the original classic, and almost as much heart. The film picks up where Shrek left off, with Fiona and Shrek celebrating their marriage, but they are immediately cast into a new adventure when summoned to the land of Far Far Away (a clever parody of Hollywood), to the court of Fiona's mother and father, for a surprise royal wedding ball. The only problem, as it turns out, is that Fiona has married the wrong guy - according to everybody but Shrek, Fiona, and their friends.

The plot, revolving around this central problem, is helped along by nearly constant allusions to virtually every fairy tale in the English canon, and satirical references to many recent popular films. Unsatisfied with the combination of romantic comedy, Hollywood satire and self-parody, the film-makers' also went all out with a clever original soundtrack, making Shrek 2 as much of a musical as anything else.

The voice talent is just as essential as it was in the first film, and there's more of it, with John Cleese and Antonio Banderas giving very memorable performances. And the animation is, unsurprisingly, lovely.

To their credit, Dreamworks kept the core talent in place, but created a somewhat different formula for this film. Even though I expect most fans of the first film to adore the second, I am not sure Shrek 2 is going to make the franchise any new fans. Though more clearly made for adult audiences than the original, Shrek 2 is still warm-hearted family fare. As much as I DO recommend this film, and as entertaining as I think it will be for just about anybody, I don't consider Shrek 2 to be quite the classic Shrek was. It's touching and goofy, to be sure, but it's much more of a Hollywood film than the original, and it doesn't quite reach the same levels. Nevertheless, it is one of the better sequels I have seen, and it was definitely worth both the price of admission and a third or fourth viewing of the DVD.
33 out of 40 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Wonderful solid fun
jomipira8 July 2004
Ok, I have to admit that the surprise is gone. The original Shrek was irreverent and made fun of all the children stories known to man... The second one is on the same line but by now you expect it. Still it's been a long time since I've seen an entire theater laugh from the start till the end of a movie. Wonderful new characters (you have to love the pussy in boots), superb animation and a all-round well made movie for everyone to enjoy. But please, whatever you do DO NOT read any comments (like this one) before you go see the movie, it can ruin it for you... And watch the credits until the end, there are surprises... Enough said, just enjoy the film, it's guaranteed to make any blues just fade away!
59 out of 76 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Why I Liked 'Shrek 2' Better
ccthemovieman-119 March 2006
I much preferred this sequel, even though I also liked the original, too, as millions of other viewers - kids and adults - did. This second edition, to me, was better than the first one for the following reasons:

1 - A faster-paced story; 2 - Better colors, just gorgeous with a 3-D effect in spots; 3 - another great combination of humor, adventure and romance; 4 - no one segment of the story overstayed its welcome; 5 - Eddie Murphy's character wasn't played up as much, meaning less abrasive shouting in this film; 6 - a genuine touching ending which left the viewer very satisfied.

Some of these qualities were all there in abundance in first Shrek, too, but the package was more complete here. It was softer, kindler, gentler Shrek film than the first. Murphy is a funny guy but his incessant talking can get on anyone's nerves, but with less to say, that didn't happen in this sequel.
67 out of 89 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
This second movie is very GOOD
Jessica Carvalho16 November 2005
Warning: Spoilers
I imagined this film to be a crap, because it is almost a rule with few exceptions,that second movies are always terrible in comparison with the first ones. But not this one. I cannot say that I liked Shrek2 more then the first, but the second one is very good too: New characters as the Fairy Godmother,Prince Charming,Puss In Boots and Fiona's parents are introduced to us, and a new reality comes, with Shrek and Fiona's relationship going to a deeper step,and new confusions because of their wedding.One of the good surprises, was that neither Shrek or Fiona changed to the human form;I was almost sure that they would,but I think that the movie would loose its magic. By the way: The voice of the new characters really rules! But Julie Andrews, John Cleese and Rupert Everett only could do a great job.:) I liked Antonio Bandeiras as Puss In Boots as well! He really surprised me! (Usually, I hate his strong accent)
15 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
It's a Puss in Boots world, we just all live in it
movieman_kev18 August 2005
Shrek the Ogre, Pincess Fiona, and Donkey are back in the sequel to the modern day fairy tale classic in this lesser, but still magical sequel. Shrek and Fiona are returning from their honeymoon, only to find a dejected Donkey who broke things off with Dragon apparently and the King's noblemen inviting them to Fiona's parents castle in Faf Far Away. Naturally the anti-social Shrek wants nothing to do with the invitation, but gives in to Fiona and Donkey's insistence. Needless to say the King is quite upset to find his daughter an Ogre and married to Shrek. Add the dastardly vain Prince Charming, a not so good Fairy Godmother and the delightful new addition of Antonio Banderas as Puss In Boots, and you get a fun, but ultimately unneeded sequel that treads to closely to the first plot-wise. However children will still love it. Parents will still chuckle every now and then, and it's still one of the better sequel's that I've seen.

My Grade: B-

Where i saw it: Cinemax on Demand (available till September 9th, 2005)
13 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Transcending the Genre
rserrano4 December 2004
In many ways, Shrek 2 is to fairy tales, what Kill Bill:Vol.2 is to the Kung Fu genre. Although these are very different movies, both spoof all previous movies of their type and are loaded with insider allusions (just look at the length of the IMDb trivia sections for each!). Both use latest technology to create a hyper-real quality which goes beyond their forerunners to create a feel that the viewer is seeing something that has not been seen before. But each also stays true to their genres' formula conventions of character and plot that, though seemingly worn out, we still love. As a result these movies are satisfying, meeting some deep rooted needs but in novel and refreshing ways.

2004 may signal a trend in this kind of treatment of well treaded genres, with Westerns and Film Noir as two other potential future candidates.
31 out of 45 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Possibly the funniest most fun filled animated movie ever made.
aymanrizk6 November 2004
I really did not like the original that much; I thought it was about 20 minutes too long and a bit disgusting for the intended audience. But the sequel was brilliant, very funny and just a pure pleasure to watch.

The DVD (Canadian version if it is different) was also well made and had a number of decent extra features. Even the starting menu is funny and a good introduction to the laughter that follows.

The songs chosen for the different scenes matched the purpose and the flow of the scene and tremendously enhanced the viewer's experience. And the animation was very realistic.

Well done DreamWorks.

Note: do not turn the DVD off as the credits start rolling. Wait for an appearance of one of the characters from the original movie.
53 out of 83 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Myers, Murphy, and Diaz do it again in SHREK 2!
GLPman13 November 2004
Warning: Spoilers
So, remember how long SHREK was in theaters? Remember how many times you laughed? Well, SHREK 2 brings back all the excitement and laughter! Myers stars again as Shrek, Murphy as the hilarious Donkey, and Diaz as Fiona.


After their honeymoon, Fiona asks Shrek to go with her to see her parents. At first, Shrek isn't sure if it's a good idea. But, whether he likes it or not, he is soon persuaded by Fiona to go to the kingdom of Far Far Away. Donkey asks/decides that he'll come along, and soon enough the three are on their way.

Once they reach the palace, Shrek and the King (Cleese) clash immediately. King soon takes matters in his own hands when he hires Puss In Boots (Banderas)to "get rid" of Shrek. In the meantime, Shrek and Donkey don't seem to be getting along so well. Puss fails, and becomes Shrek's new friend. Donkey gets jealous, but sticks with Shrek nonetheless.

The three then steal a potion from the potion factory to make Shrek and Fiona's marriage go on forever so that they can live happily ever after. Donkey tests the potion and then Shrek drinks it. The next day, Shrek wakes up to be human, and Donkey a stallion. The potion also affects Fiona, however, and she becomes her once beautiful self.

Seeing this as an excellent opportunity to get her son, Prince Charming, with Fiona, Fairy Godmother gives King a love potion. She tells King that the love potion is to be poured into a drink, then drinken by Fiona. The first man Fiona kisses at the Royal Celebration Ball, becomes her new love. King feels guilty and secretly puts the love potion into his drink, which is later on discovered.

Meanwhile, Shrek, Puss, and Donkey catch up with their old buddies after being arrested. Their friends free them and take them to see the Muffin Man. The Muffin Man builds a big gingerbread man to crash through the gates of the palace during the Royal Celebration Ball, giving Shrek a chance to see Fiona again.

Shrek makes it in time, but the giant gingerbread man falls apart. After Fiona kisses Prince Charming, Fairy Godmother realizes that King drank the love potion himself (because Fiona knocks out Prince Charming). Shrek and Fiona then turn back into ogres and leave Far Far Away, after forgiving King.
4 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Good Movie
jts040524 July 2006
I thought this movie would be worse than the first Shrek but it actually turned out to be really good. This is a tale of love and comedy. Mike Myers and Eddie Murphy star in this sequel. John Cleese and Julie Andrews are the parents of princess Fiona in this movie and I have to say they play that part well. They are perfect for each other. If you see Mike Myers, Eddie Murphy, and John Cleese were all raw comedians before and now they are in children movies and John Cleese works for the humor department on TBS. This movie is worth the money and worth your time if you are a Shrek fan or a Eddie Murphy fan this movie if for you.
25 out of 40 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Are you serious? I thought Shrek 2 was so much better than the first!
Kristine14 November 2006
As much as I enjoyed the first Shrek, I honestly almost died laughing and loving Shrek 2. The first Shrek was sweet and innocent, but the second took us to a different edge with terrific animation and just drop on the floor laughable jokes. Antonio Bandares as the cat was just such a great addition to the cast, he just killed me! I don't understand why Shrek 2 wasn't on the top 250, how could someone not enjoy this Shrek?

Shrek and Fiona are now married and happy ogres, that is until Fiona's parents wish to see her and her new hubby. Fiona was supposed to marry Prince Charming, which ruined her fairy godmother and dad's plans, so her dad hires a hit-cat to slay Shrek, but fails, but since Shrek spars his life, the cat stays with Donkey and Shrek. Shrek wants so badly for Fiona to live happily ever after, so he and Donkey take a potion from the fairy godmother and have little time to make sure it stays permanent.

Like I said, the Cat was my favorite character, especially when he and Donkey since Livin' La Vida Loca, I thought that it was so cute. Also when he stops the guards in the palace and gives them the cute kitty look. I just don't understand why no one got into the sequel as much as I did, otherwise this would be higher on the rating, and probably above the first Shrek.

8 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Better then the original
christian12325 November 2004
Shrek 2 is a fun movie to watch for the whole family and it improves over the original. Shrek 2 continues the story with Shrek (voiced by Mike Myers) going with his new wife, Fiona (Cameron Diaz), to meet his in-laws, the King and Queen of the Kingdom of Far Far Away, which bears more than a resemblance to Beverly Hills. But are they ready for their new ogre son-in-law and their daughter's new look? The King (voiced by John Cleese) seems to have his own plans and he enlists the aid of the Fairy Godmother and Puss in Boots to get what he wants. They plot is good and the execution is pretty good considering that most animated sequels are pretty cheap. I thought the first Shrek was okay nothing special but this one was a lot more funnier. I think what makes this movie work better then the first is the additional characters. Puss In Boots voiced by Antonio Banderas is hilarious and I thought he was a good addition to the cast. Of course having Mike Myers as Shrek was funny too and Eddie Murphy is still to annoying and he was the only reason why I didn't give this movie a ten. Cameron Diaz is good too but I felt she didn't really do anything special. Rupert Everett, Julie Andrews, Jennifer Saunders and John Cleese are all great additions to the cast and make this movie charming. The movie is quick and short but is able to leave so many funny moments you wonder why other comedies don't try this hard. Shrek 2 is the best kids movie I have seen this year and proves that even with a simplistic plot you can still let adults enjoy it. The story, the characters, the direction and the dialog are all smart and funny. Rating 8/10 perfect movie except for Eddie Murphy and everyone should watch.
24 out of 47 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Blockbuster literacy cannot replace a plot
Raph7 August 2004
I am baffled. How can viewers say this is better than the original?! Its plot is thin, twists slow and few, characters hollow and underused... And most of the funnier moments come from the indispensable visual quoting of blockbusters (Alien, Lord of the Rings, etc., prompting a pathetic "did you spot them all" quest), in a poor display of cinema under-literacy. The only positive point is the technical improvement, but who cares about this? Shrek managed to be much, much funnier despite its matchstick people. The welcome infusion of new characters is a wasted effort, as none of them offer more than an inconsistent set of one-liners: the fairy godmother and Puss in boots are particularly disappointing, with only a couple of interesting scenes each, lost in a sea of contradicting and threadbare interaction. Key scenes are embarrassingly low on laughs (come on!, 5 minutes into the movie, the "are we there yet?/no" sequence felt like half an hour! I stopped laughing at such jokes when I was 3!). All in all, I'm very sorry to say that the few amusing moments are not worth the hour-and-a-half session. The original featured complex fun that made it very enjoyable for kids and grown-ups alike; I doubt children will even like this one (too slow, not exciting enough), and adults will hate it. I did. 3/10
19 out of 39 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Great sequel
Jawbox527 September 2015
It is never an easy task to follow up such a big hit as Shrek was, however Shrek 2 does a truly fantastic job and you would have a strong case to argue that it is even better than the original. Taking everything that was so enjoyable from the first film, it places it in a different situation and adds a new set of interesting characters to interact with. Whereas I felt that the original Shrek film was content with parodying fairy-tales and letting its characters craft the laughs, Shrek 2 ups the adventure and adds all different kinds of jokes in order to making everything seem bigger than before. This method can so easily fail, but I'm very pleased with how well it works here.

This story is nothing new as Shrek and Fiona are summoned to Far Far Away to meet Fiona's parents who are the king and queen, and unsurprisingly Shrek and the king don't get along. Even the beats and events are nothing we haven't seen before, but it does them with such strong wit and style that it breathes new life into these tropes. But it quickly turns out that the Fairy Godmother plans to have her son marry Fiona as was originally foreseen. This is more of the same, but the idea to do it is very inventive. Shrek drinks a potion that turns him and Fiona human, which causes all kinds of issues. That is so creative and also a commendably brave decision in having the main character take on a different look for a lot of the film.

I certainly think the strong characters are what make Shrek 2 so good. Shrek (with Mike Meyers' fun Scottish accent) is still the angry ogre, but his kind heart shines through. Donkey is again the comedic highlight thanks to his naivety and accidental annoyance while Eddie Murphy is simply perfect. Puss in Boots almost steals the film by bringing so much energy and by being a lovable presence. Both villains are a ton of fun. The Fairy Godmother (an excellent Jennifer Saunders) is as charismatic as she is evil and gets a lot of laughs, while Charming is an enjoyably vain and snooty. John Cleese and Julie Andrews are both superb as usual as the king and queen.

As said the comedy is bigger and broader than before, with a great variety of jokes and nearly all of them work. The pop culture references littered throughout, the ironic use of fairy-tale heroines, all the villains hanging out at the 'Poison Apple' Inn and even the hilarious send up of Cops. Very few jokes fell flat and given how many there are that is quite impressive. The supporting fairy-tale characters, including Pinocchio and the Gingerbread Man, also make a welcomed return and provide plenty of laughs once again. The climax is outstanding. With nods to Ghostbusters and Mission: Impossible, it is both really funny and really exciting with some nice little twists thrown in too.

The romance between Shrek and Fiona was another strong point of the film. I genuinely cared about their relationship and wanted to see them happy, while the predicament they are faced with at the end is gripping and it does send out a very good message. The animation is very vibrant and energetic, fitting the fast paced comedy and even allows for some good atmosphere when needed. Even the smaller details such as the backgrounds are very well designed. I enjoyed the use of pop songs and all of the tracks used fitted in perfectly. The use of 'Holding Out for a Hero' in the climax and sung by the Fairy Godmother added even more drive to the scene.

Simply put Shrek 2 is a fantastic sequel. It continues in the same vein as the original and builds on to it as any good follow-up should do. It was smart to use a plot line that was familiar and could be altered just enough to make it feel fresh. The animation and music were uniformly excellent as usual from DreamWorks. Again though I think it's the characters that make the film work so well. The originals are great yet again, whilst all of the new characters fit in effortlessly and offer gravitas as well as comedy. Shrek 2 succeeds just like the original.
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
It's really a... romantic drama who tries to be funny.
Michael Paulin14 September 2004
By now most people who were fans of the first film has seen part two so I won't bother to tell the storyline. Anyway. I rented the first tilm this weekend without a clue that the sequel was just showing up on the moviescreen around here and I thought the first "Shrek" was just great (just like It was the other times I've seen it). So when a friend told me today that he was going to the movies to see Shrek 2, I gladly decided to tag along.

I was disappointed.

What I found on the screen was not a half-goofy comedy for all ages with great characters, a big bag full of charm and a wonderful storyline, as was the case with the first film, but a sort of romantic-drama that tries hard to be funny, but just does not cut it. (or did they try? Maybe It wasn't meant to be funny at all, hmm?) And the result? A sequel of a comedy (or "family entertainment" if you want) devoted almost entirely to drama and love trough tough times. Where did the comedy that was so clear in the first film go then? Well. It's scattered all over the film really, but its in such small dozes that you almost don't recognize them before they're gone. For example: When you look around you see a limousine-wagon, fast food restaurants, commercials and modern words. What happened to the fairy-tale?

Was there a point? (some people in the audience chuckled over those I admit)

Maybe they meant "Well. In the last film it was a fairy-tale, so lets make it a little more modern and spin some jokes on that, haha"?

As I sat there amongst the other ticket holders I sometimes noticed what they laughed at and what not as I was myself laughing quietly at a sentence made by "Donkey" (Eddie Murphy). Yes. It was mostly Donkey that made the humor in the film, but he wasn't as irritating-and-at-the-same-time-charming as he was in the first Shrek. Now he was more dull, gray and kinda irritating (without the charming-part, but still likable). I must say that Donkey ruled the first Shrek, but he did have a close competition from all the other main characters, Shrek, Fiona and Lord Farquaad. They supported each other well. Which brings me to my next point: I enjoyed Antonio Banderas roll as "Puss In Boots" and I was wondering during the film, where the introduction of the character would pay off.

It didn't happen. Well. Sure. He was a slick character (and for another thing the best character that was introduced in the film), but honestly without a real purpose. I mean, the story didn't rely on "Puss" in any way. You could easily scip him.., But I suppose they wanted another character to help Donkey out on the laughter-factor. Here we have Donkey and Puss and they both ram at each other with mean remarks as they try to be the one who's closest to Shrek.

When we turn to the star of the film: No other than Shrek himself. I can understand that he's having a rough time with his romantic issues and Fiona's fathers opinion of him, but I must say... He's not playing along. He's not even working with the other characters to make it entertaining. He's well... Grumpy, serious, angry and sad. Keep in mind that I already explained that I realize that he probably is that way because of the characters situation. That is not to say that he's incapable of action. Quite the contrary. He shows of with his seriousness of the situation at all time, but by the end I would just need a li-tt-le bit more (like the seriousness he showed off in the end of the first film) and I would've been going to sleep easier tonight,

But seriously. Somebody please tell me that I'm not way out on this. I realize that most of my opinions are reflected on the difference between the first film and the sequel, and I understand if people tell me "Its not the same film! It's a new film. Get over it! Its not suppose to be an identical film. Things are suppose to change in a sequel that makes the difference between the first film and the new one, wheater its a location, characters or plot." Darn tutan I say and I assure everyone that I'm merely trying to point out my feelings on the film by using the first one as a sketch for a how a good movie of that kind and for that audience should be made and I'm not suggesting or badgering it's content, but rather the structure of it.

I mean... Really... Shrek is a great film.

Well... On with the character analysis. I didn't really like Fiona (Cameron Diaz) part in this film. Merely because she's so cut off I think. She was much more of a character in the first film. She smiled, she burped, she sang, she fought and had a real temper. Tough you got to learn more about her emotions, which is a good thing, she was more like a secondary-figure in this film after the point when Shrek went of with Puss and Donkey to try and solve their situation. She merely glimpsed by now and then just for us to know thats she's still alive and is bothered with the situation.

(oh, god! I'm getting a headache. It's almost 5 AM, but I feel I must do this while the film is still fresh in mind. Please excuse possible misspelling.)

There's so much things in the film that could have been made a lot better, landed on the clipping-floor or just not been made at all...

If I dare say such a thing about a movie people probably have been working their asses off while producing (sigh). It kinda makes me feel bad for having an opinion,

Well anyway- Let's just settle the matter with the fact that I don't think I'll be buying the DVD, ... but perhaps the first Shrek so I don't have to rent it anymore,

Tough my statements here about the movie I DO recommend that If you're really a fan of the first SHREK It could be very interesting for you to know the whole story nonetheless. Besides, this might just be a film YOU'D enjoy.

... even if I didn't.
12 out of 25 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
A grave disappointment
H20 December 2004
The original Shrek is one of my favourite films and one which I have enjoyed many times with my family. This movie is banal and unoriginal. The premise is weak and does not provide sufficient scope for plot development. The characterisations have not developed, the cast appears to be cruising and using Jennifer Saunders was a big mistake which shows how poor British character acting is compared to American. The movie references which worked before are unsurprising, un-entertaining and VERY self-indulgent. In short, this movie appears to have been developed by a committee which sought to work within the requirements of the formula of the first movie as it saw it and in its lack of understanding, produced something totally lacking the magic of the fist movie. This is the old, old story of art vs. commerce and this film is a salutory example of what can go wrong. Don't bother.
12 out of 26 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
A Dream World by DreamWorks
Flagrant-Baronessa28 September 2006
Shrek has now vanquished the fire-breathing dragon, eradicated the evil Lord Farquaad and married his Princess Fiona. But now he is facing his biggest challenge yet – meeting Fiona's parents in the Land of Far, Far Away. Dreamworks' second animated installment in the Shrek series was the surprise of the year for me, because it really is every bit as funny as its predecessor – but perhaps not as original or novel, and therefore not as memorable.

The animation, on the other hand, is perfected this time around. Dreamworks always go all the way in this aspect and the result is top-notch and easily exceeds that of its peers (Pixar, Blue Skye Studios). The greatest showcase for this manifests itself in the beginning of the film as Shrek, Fiona and Donkey set out to the Land of Far, Far Away in a horse-driven carriage and travel across mountains, fields, woods and passes – this journey features such gorgeously striking visuals of its scenery that it just touches me. It is downright aesthetically intoxicating.

Its wide-ranging gallery of eccentric characters have also been paid great attention to – this time gloriously supported by A-list actors (John Cleese, Julie Andrews, Rupert Everett) – both in animation and in story. Although Shrek and Fiona are still largely central to the story they now occasionally take a backseat to the new sparkling creatures like Puss-in-Boots, Fairy Godmother, Fiona's parents and yet more of Pinnocchio, Gingie and their crew in the swamp. The film is having a lot of self-referential fun in navigating its many story lines and inside-jokes and it makes no pretense about it. Shrek 2 is therefore positively peppered with rapid-fire dialogue, deadpan humour, pop-culture references and homages (to Ghost Busters, Blazing Saddles, The Lord of the Rings and MORE). It's a little more brave, and a little less serious.

The most credit is however due to its score. I'll admit that I don't know much about subtle musical scores in films, nor is it something that I always pick up on, but in Shrek is becomes the film. Eels make a great appearance in the soundtrack, as does alternative rock songs and classic songs (Funkytown - Lipps, Inc.) – it's amazingly catchy and thanks to its continuous scoring (music in some form in nearly every scene) it invests the film in a sort of lyrical flow. It all fits perfectly and smoothly with the fluid animation and the fairytale setting. It's a dream world beautifully captured by Dreamworks.

Although its key plot outline of Shrek meeting Fiona's parents and feeling inadequate is well-sketched, it suffers numerous diversions that take the form of jokes, detours and supporting characters, massively straying from the template – all of which you cannot help but feel do not quite belong in the story, and serve only the purpose of blatant humour and homages. There is nothing wrong with that per se, but the film occasionally feels a bit disjointed because of it. Its disorganisation is its fatal flaw but there is another woeful mistake in Shrek 2 – its final, cheesy song-and-dancer number at the end. WHY or WHY do so many films fall prey to this horrible device?!

Granted, the latter is not enough to ruin a film on its own but it does remind me of a rather nasty approach that you occasionally feel it takes. Letting its actors shine. Parts of Shrek 2 thereby acts more as an elaborate excuse to parade the 'fun, quirky' actors behind the characters (Antonio Banderas' Hispanic accent seems to be an endless source of amusement as far as the film is concerned). This approach, combined with its slight disorganisation makes this sequel slightly inferior to Shrek I. It is, however, a very funny film that caters to all ages.

7 out of 10
5 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Berk !!!!! (TV)
leplatypus7 August 2005
I don't understand how this animation can be the third success in the all-time box office.

Sure, all the design is wonderful and the research has asked a lot of attention. Sure, the cat & the donkey, the piggies are funny characters, but the movie fails in all its intentions.

A comedy which laughs at fairy tales: Well, except two brilliant scenes (the speeches at the arrival, and the following super), all humor is based on the American way of life. The magic castle is here, but it's look like Hollywood, even MacDonald, Pop Idol are present. This is the worst kind of humor: references. There is no surprise in it….

Next, behind the smiles, the authors try to deliver a educational message, as any classic fairy tale. The problem is the choice of the subject: Is look important in life ? This question, again a typical American attitude, couldn't have been the greatest treason made to the spirit of fairy tale.

Indeed, beauty is always the necessary (and shadowed) support of true basic educational messages (independence, curiosity, etc….). The look, glamorous or frightening is only the more visible sign for young children to learn the good feelings (friendship, honesty --- characterised by "nice" people) from the bad feelings (cruelty, liar, temper --- characterised by "ugly" people).

So, Shrek keeps asking if "ugly" people can love "nice" princess, and finally, concludes that :YES !! 2 long hours to demonstrate an evidence (because, in his heart, he has good feelings) with an humor often not funny….

That explains my bad recommendation of this sequel…..
9 out of 20 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Lots of Fun!
surfsister3 June 2004
Warning: Spoilers
Shrek 2 was a lot of fun for me. I purposely didn't read up on the story so it would be a surprise. The beginning was a real hoot especially when Charming pulled off his helmet and revealed he was wearing a hair net! Then, when he pulled that off he threw his hair about in slow motion. Really top notch stuff.

I also enjoyed the Puss-In-Boots addition. What a great job the pros did in developing that character (he definitely needs his own movie, now). Every furry hair in place and all looking so real. I loved his little kitty expression he did several times to get the ooh's and aah's before his vicious attacks. Just like a cat!!

**SPOILERS** The Fairy God Mother starts out sweet as honey, but turns into 'the bad guy' you love to hate. Her potion factory is stuffed with all kinds of things to look at, so I am sure I will have to see this movie again to get a good look at everything. Who were those little guys running the factory? I couldn't figure that one out. Pinocchio's thong scene could be a little iffy for young kids, though it was funny for us oldsters.

When Shrek became human and Donkey became a stallion it added to the fun of the movie. I really liked their new looks.

Stay for the credits because there is an added bonus. I always sit tight during the credits, now, in case there is something more. The few people who stayed in the theatre were rewarded by a cute scene.

I sure hope there will be a Shrek 3 in the offing. They need to keep a good thing going.
4 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Wow! This really sucked!
captainguido8 November 2004
Wow...this movie sucked horribly. I enjoyed the original Shrek and held a high opinion of this movie...I cannot believe the massive let down that I experienced with this. My wife and I saw this with my nieces and even they didn't think it was funny at all. The adult references (a plenty) were very tacky and not very effective at all. I'm glad I have the Unlimited Movie Pass at Blockbuster...otherwise I would have been upset at having paid three dollars for a crappy movie. I would classify this one in the "horrible failures" file, along with the entire Guyver series and any video game to film movie (including Resident Evil). If I could rate this garbage anything less than 1, I would.
9 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
filmaniac199 November 2004
Anyone in the world can make a spoof off other movies, it takes no

skill what so ever. While the original Shrek relied on paradoxes of Disney movies, Shrek 2 needed to spoof current movies to get laughs. All the references to Lord of the Rings, Spiderman and the Matrix is disgusted me that the writers at Pixar and Disney couldn't come up

with their own material. Make your own movie and keep out of the other ones! I for one do not want to pay 8.50 to go see rip offs of other movies that i already paid to see the full thing. If a company really wants to make a parody then they should devote the whole movie to it, and do it right. Mel Brooks gives us an example in Space Balls. Now that's a funny movie!
10 out of 24 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Doesn't quite match the first film, but good fun anyway
mjw23051 February 2005
Shrek 2 keeps the wining trio of Mike Myers, Cameron Diaz and Eddie Murphy, and it throws in the comic genius of John Cleese and Jennifer Saunders as well. The freshness of the first film has gone, but that is not to say that this sequel is stale, far from it! It still has plenty of new gags and parody's, and it successfully plays on a few 'in jokes' from Shrek's first outing.

The only problem i can see here, is this, the magic has worn off a little, (despite the introduction of the fairy god-mother) and it does leave the movie just a shade behind the original.

A Good sequel, and i can't wait for Shrek 3, but i suspect it may disappoint (lets hope not)

5 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Shrek 2 Blew
tjpmkp24 May 2004
This movie would have gone straight to video except for the fact that the producers knew that people would spend millions in the theater to make it a huge hit. Viewers beware. You're wasting your money.

This sequel has none of the original's charm, wit or warmth. Puss N Boots was the only funny part of the film. The rest of it was just plain boring. I'm also sick of the pop culture references at every turn. It's lame. Changing the name "Burger King" to "Burger Prince"? What a stroke of genius! Those writers at Dreamworks must have spent weeks coming up with that bit of comic gold.
5 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
The references and some good performances keep it funny but the plot leaves a bit to be desired
bob the moo19 July 2004
After their fairytale romance, Fiona decides that it is time to return home (to Far, Far Away) to get Shrek to meet her parents. Despite him thinking it is just one big bad idea, Shrek agrees but is proved right when the sight of two ogres is greeted with fear and dislike by the people and the Royals. Thigs get more complicated when the Fairy Godmother gets involved to help push Shrek out and get her son, Prince Charming, into Fiona's heart with the help of the King and some magic. Will true love out?

Within seconds of this film starting it was apparent that the film would continue the mould of the first by being full of cultural references and in-jokes – indeed the title sequence contains some none-too-subtle attacks of Disney! However what was less sure was how the story would hold up when compared to the clever fairytale from the first. Sadly the story is the film's main weakness as it is just not as well written as it could have been – it still works well enough to support the film but too often it feels too busy and forced – it is still a love story with an emotionally warm ending but the plot is overly complicated and, dare I say it – convoluted. Like I said, it still worked well enough but too often a few moments pass without a laugh or reference and the plot is exposed as the deadweight that it threatened to be. It still manages to have heart and laughs but it shows the importance of good writing. I'm not sure if they can correct this flaw for parts 3 and 4 (supposedly already green-lit) but they gotta work out something with a better structure.

Reference fans will love it of course and there are so many! Let me see: Little Mermaid, Mission Impossible, Spiderman, Zorro, Hawaii Five-O, Spinal Tap, Fabulous Baker Boys, Indiana Jones, Alien, Garfield, Cabaret, Flashdance, From Here to Eternity, Lord of the Rings, ET, Ghostbusters, Blazing Saddles, Wizard of Oz, Rawhide, Annie, Beauty & The Beast, Snow White – and those are just off the top of my head! Many of these are funny, some of them are just amusing but none of them fall flat. My only complaint about the many references is that quantity is not the same as quality and, in a way, some of them are too obvious and just not as clever as one would have wanted.

The cast is yet another reason that the film works. Myers delivers a sturdy role – but he must be straining at the bit for more humour and improvisation. Diaz is again a bit flat for my money and she shows her limitations in bits that require more heart. Murphy is great in a role that has given him his best material for years – maybe it is his supporting function but he is free and fun and one of the main attractions. Banderas is great fun – his character is great and he has great lines all the way through. Cleese is OK but has little to work with – but not compared to Andrews, who simply is wasted. Saunders is so-so but could have been better; not all her fault though as her character is part of the plot problems. Everett doesn't match his Beckham-esque character but he is still good. The original fairytale characters are all funny but some 'local' talent would have been better kept with the US voices in place.

Overall this is an enjoyable film but the plot is not as good as the original film. The weaknesses in narrative are partly covered by the increase in references but not all of them are as funny as they really should be. Still a very enjoyable film for kids and adults but they really need to put in more work on the plot rather than the 'knowing jokes' if they want to stop Shrek 3 becoming a series slide.
10 out of 25 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews