I’ve done plenty of retrospectives over the years ranging
from ones that cover a director’s filmography to the more traditional franchise
retrospectives that I often do whenever a franchise’s newest release comes out.
I’ve also done a few animation-centric retrospectives such as the one that I
did on Aardman Animations back in 2018 and what is easily one of the biggest
projects that I’ve ever done on this site, a full series of retrospectives
detailing the numerous classics made by Walt Disney Animation Studios. However,
there’s one retrospective project that I’ve been dying to do for years now and
that is covering the filmography of another one of the most prominent animation
studios in the industry, DreamWorks Animation. While it goes without saying
that Disney is (and will usually be) the key source behind my favorite bits of
media, especially when it comes to animated films, DreamWorks’ animated films
were just as much of a prominent staple of my childhood. Granted, I stopped
watching them regularly in theaters by the start of the 2010s, but back then,
I always went to see the newest DreamWorks film just like with all of Disney Animation
and Pixar’s new releases. However, when it comes to doing a retrospective on
DreamWorks, there’s one slight problem that’s been the reason why it’s taken me
so long to get around to doing this. At the time that I’m writing this, the
studio has produced forty-two official films since 1998, and to put it simply,
it would be downright impossible for me to cover all those films in a single
post without it being far too massive.
So instead, I decided that the best solution was to take
this one step at a time and divvy these films up into a series of posts just
like my Disney Animation retrospectives. But whereas the Disney retrospectives
were divided by decades, I decided to start off this new series of DreamWorks
retrospectives by first tackling their biggest franchises; specifically, the
ones that have had at least three cinematic installments to date. After that,
I’ll do a quick run-through of DreamWorks’ brief foray into the world of
traditionally animated films before covering any of the studio’s one-off
releases and those that have started to spawn their own franchises but not
necessarily to the lengths that DreamWorks’ most famous franchises have
reached. And, of course, it all begins with the franchise that singlehandedly
turned DreamWorks into the animation juggernaut that it is today. Sure, this
year will mark the first time that this franchise has seen a theatrical release
in more than a decade, but there’s no denying the impact that it’s had on both
animation and pop culture in general. Heck, even if I didn’t have the
franchise’s name in the title of this post, I’m confident that most of you
reading this know exactly what I’m talking about; none other than the
adventures of the crude but lovable green ogre… named Shrek. Originally adapted
from the 1990 picture book of the same name by author William Steig, Shrek is
easily one of the most famous film franchises of all time. To date, it is the
second-highest-grossing animated franchise of all time with over $3.5 billion
worldwide, a total that’s only been bested by the more recent global phenomenon
that is the Despicable Me franchise.
Now, I must admit that this was one of the most daunting
retrospectives that I’ve done on this site. To be clear, this isn’t a case of
me being nervous about tackling the franchise’s lesser-received outings or
anything; instead, this is mainly because of the franchise’s current role in
the pop-cultural zeitgeist. As I noted earlier, Shrek still stands as
one of the most famous franchises of all time; speaking from experience, it
truly was a major staple of my generation and I assure you that it’s still
fondly remembered by many of those who grew up with it. But nowadays, when it
comes to Shrek, most people are probably more familiar with its status
as one of the most prominent icons of internet culture and, more specifically,
internet meme culture. Simply put, Shrek has an extensive history when it comes
to internet memes, but I won’t be covering any of that here because… well, to
be perfectly frank, that’s one rabbit hole that I do NOT want to dive
into. Plus, I don’t want y’all getting mad at me if you end up looking some of
these up because of how… messed up they can get. Let’s put it this way; as much
as I hate the following term because of how hyperbolic and false it is 99.9% of
the time, I do sort of feel that some Shrek memes out there could
legitimately result in a case of ‘ruined childhoods’. So, with all that out of
the way, it’s time to be reminded why ogres are just like onions (that’s right,
it’s all because of those layers) as we tackle the fantastical adventures of an
indisputable cinematic all-star.
(Also, as a quick
disclaimer, I’ll only be focusing on the Shrek films, which means that I
won’t go over any of its non-theatrical spin-offs; TV specials, TV shows, the Shrek
4-D attraction that operated at multiple Universal Studios parks for many
years, etc. And yes, this same mandate will also be applied to future
installments of these DreamWorks retrospectives…)
SHREK (2001)
This past year marked the 20th anniversary of the
original Shrek, a film that was a full-on decade in the making. Plans
for a Shrek film go back as far as 1991 when Steven Spielberg bought
the film rights to William Steig’s book with the intent of making a traditionally
animated film with Bill Murray as the voice of the title character and Steve
Martin voicing his sidekick Donkey. It wasn’t until 1995 when the film was
finally put into development at the newly formed studio that Spielberg
co-founded with former Walt Disney Studios chairman Jeffrey Katzenberg and
business magnate David Geffen, DreamWorks SKG. After an initial attempt at a
live-action/CGI hybrid that utilized motion-capture (which, on a fascinating
note, was developed by a team of animators that included none other than J.J.
Abrams) failed to impress, Shrek was finally turned into a fully
computer-animated film developed by Pacific Data Images. Another interesting
development came about with the process of casting the title role. At first,
SNL breakout star Chris Farley was cast as Shrek; sadly, Farley passed away in
1997 before he was able to complete his work on the film. Farley’s SNL co-star
Mike Myers was then cast in his place and, after recording a newly rewritten
script, requested to re-record all his dialogue in a Scottish accent. A bold
move like this and all the various directions that the film went through to get made ultimately worked out in the end as Shrek promptly
became a cultural phenomenon upon its release. It grossed over $484 million
worldwide (the fourth-highest total of 2001), won the inaugural Oscar for Best
Animated Feature and, of course, effectively turned DreamWorks into the first
genuine rival to Pixar when it comes to computer-animated films.
All that said, though, the discourse surrounding Shrek nowadays
mostly comes from the debate as to how well it holds up after all these years,
especially given the varying quality of its sequels and its overall status as
not only a parody of fairytales but also a direct potshot at Disney given
Jeffrey Katzenberg’s notoriously unpleasant departure from the studio in 1994. And,
of course, there’s everything that has to do with all the… ‘internet shenanigans’
that Shrek has gotten into in recent years that have painted this entire
franchise in a new light. But as someone who’s very much a part of the
generation that grew up with this series (and yet, for the record, didn’t partake
in the fandom’s descent into meme culture) and still remembers going to see
this film at his local drive-in theater, I’d argue that much of the first Shrek
still holds up quite well, especially when it comes to its writing. Say
what you will about the extensive use of pop-cultural references that would up
end up defining a lot of DreamWorks films at the time or if the film’s jabs at
Disney are a bit too mean-spirited nowadays, but for the most part, a lot of Shrek’s
humor and comedic banter is excellent throughout. And, of course, as many have
noted over the years, this film deserves quite a lot of credit for somehow
managing to be a family-friendly fantasy adventure that isn’t afraid to drop in
some subtle (or, in some cases, unsubtle) bits of adult humor that undoubtedly
went over the heads of kids like me who watched this back in the day.
It also helps that the film is anchored by an incredibly
lovable group of protagonists in the trio of Shrek, Donkey, and Princess Fiona,
who are then contrasted by the film’s hilariously self-obsessed antagonist Lord
Farquaad (who may or may not have been based on former Disney CEO Michael
Eisner), all of whom are excellently voiced by the quartet of Mike Myers, Eddie
Murphy, Cameron Diaz, and John Lithgow, respectively. And so, with all this in
mind, to answer the question that I had set up earlier about whether the
original Shrek still holds up… overall, I’d say that it does. Now, if
you go back to some of my earliest posts on this site, I once listed this as
one of my Top 10 Favorite Films of all-time way back in September 2012.
Admittedly, I don’t know if it has maintained a spot on that list since then
but, suffice it to say, this has always been a personal favorite of mine. Outside
of the usual case of it being an early-era computer-animated film that’s
obviously been outdone in animation quality by the medium’s subsequent
releases, Shrek hits that sweet spot as a nostalgic animated classic for
all ages. Case in point, as utterly irreverent and crass as its humor can be at
times, it can also hit you with the feels at just the right moments. For better
or worse, Shrek truly was a landmark release for animated films and it’s
hard to imagine what the world of animation would be like without that old
smelly ogre.
Rating: 5/5!
SHREK 2 (2004)
The success of the original Shrek naturally resulted
in the announcement of a follow-up not long after its release, and if you
needed any further indication as to why this franchise became such a pop-cultural juggernaut in the early 2000s, just look at what 2004’s Shrek 2 managed
to pull off. Simply put, Shrek 2 was one of the biggest critical and
financial hits of its time; it earned over $928 million worldwide, easily
making it the highest-grossing film of 2004 and besting the likes of well-proven
franchises like Spider-Man and Harry Potter. This also made it
the highest-grossing animated film at that time, which was a record that it
maintained for 6 years until Pixar’s Toy Story 3 became the first
animated film to gross over $1 billion worldwide. And while it may not have won
that year’s Oscar for Best Animated Feature, its overall critical reception was
very much on par with the original, with some even arguing that Shrek 2 was
a rare case of a ‘superior’ sequel. With almost all the core cast and crew
members returning from the original, Shrek 2 dutifully maintains the
original’s brilliant mix of kid-friendly humor and adult gags that its target
audience won’t truly understand until they’re older and then proceeds to one-up
its predecessor on the overall timing and delivery of said jokes to result in a
more consistently funny film. And since this film’s animation has aged a lot
better, by comparison, there’s a lot of fun to be had finding all the little
Easter Eggs and visual gags that are peppered throughout.
Shrek 2 also benefits greatly from all the fun new
characters that it introduces. Jennifer Saunders’ Fairy Godmother is a delightfully
over-the-top and highly memorable main antagonist right down to her quite
arguably iconic cover of ‘Holding Out for a Hero’ that runs over the film’s
finale. And, of course, Shrek 2 is also notable for turning the
original’s trio of heroes into a full-on quartet with the introduction of
Antonio Banderas’ scene-stealing interpretation of the fierce feline swordsman
Puss in Boots, who may just be the franchise’s most famous character given that
he’s since gone on to headline not one but two feature-length spin-offs and a
six-season series on Netflix. In short, it’s easy to see why Shrek 2 is the
beloved classic that it is; nevertheless, there has been some debate over the
years over its long-held reputation as a ‘superior’ sequel. In other words, while
you’re probably more likely to see most people say that Shrek 2 is the
franchise’s best film, there are some folks out there who still prefer the
first Shrek. As for me, I’d say that I’m somewhere in the middle of this
debate where the first Shrek is, as I mentioned earlier, my ‘personal
favorite’ of the bunch… but at the same time, it’s hard to deny that Shrek 2
is, indeed, a superior sequel to what was already a damn great first
installment.
Rating: 5/5!
SHREK THE THIRD
(2007)
With a pair of highly acclaimed and hugely popular films under
its belt, it’s safe to say that the Shrek franchise was still seen in
high regard as it prepared for the release of its third installment, Shrek
the Third. Sure, the production had to undergo a notable change in direction
due to Shrek and Shrek 2 director Andrew Adamson’s commitment to
Disney’s The Chronicles of Narnia franchise, but at the very least, Shrek
the Third was under the direction of a familiar face in Shrek story
artist and Shrek 2’s head of story Chris Miller, AKA the voice of the
Magic Mirror. And upon its release, Shrek the Third did continue the
franchise’s success at the box office with a nice $813.4 million run that
included a then record-setting opening weekend for an animated film that was
also the third highest-grossing opening weekend of any film at that time. But
as for its critical reception… well, that was another story. Unlike the first
two films, Shrek the Third did poorly with critics as it undoubtedly
fell victim to the dreaded threequel curse where the third installment of a
popular franchise ends up being seen as its weakest. And when it comes to Shrek,
some have argued that this film’s poor reception may have hurt the franchise a
lot more than you might think. At a time when several studios were trying
(and, in most cases, failing) to capitalize on the concept of satirical retellings
of classic fairy tales, Shrek the Third’s middling reception is what may
have been responsible for ultimately killing audience interest in the genre, and
since this is the very franchise that kickstarted that whole trend… that’s
saying something.
Even I’ll admit that back when this film came out, I wasn’t
too big on it despite being a huge fan of the previous two films. Admittedly,
some of this was probably due to me starting to branch out at the time and
watch more than just the newest Disney, Pixar, or DreamWorks releases, but
while I did get this film on DVD as a holiday gift, I didn’t rewatch it as much
as I did the first two films. In fact, when it comes to both this and the next
two films, these most recent viewings of them are either the first time I’ve
seen them in years… or at all. And once I rewatched this film, I found that my
stance towards it hasn’t changed that much. Shrek the Third undoubtedly
suffers from a lesser script when compared to the first two films as it's a lot
more reliant on its pop-cultural references which, as I noted earlier, were a
common (and often criticized) aspect of DreamWorks’ early 2000’s works. As a
result, the humor is a lot less consistent and outside of the development that Shrek
and Fiona have triplets, there’s little to no character development for any of
the main protagonists outside of Shrek’s fears about becoming a parent. Instead,
more time is spent focusing on the flimsy premise of Shrek and company seeking
out the heir to Far Far Away’s throne, Arthur Pendragon, and dealing with the
return of Shrek 2’s secondary antagonist Prince Charming who, despite
being promoted to the role of the main antagonist, arguably works better as a
supporting villain rather than the main one like his mother, the Fairy
Godmother. And as for the new addition of Arthur (as voiced by Justin
Timberlake), he ended up being the very definition of a one-off character since
this is the only film that he’s appeared in.
But despite these shortcomings, there are some enjoyable
parts of this film, such as a superfluous but amusing subplot in which a spell
from the wizard Merlin causes Donkey and Puss in Boots to switch bodies or the
part where Fiona rallies her fellow princesses (Snow White, Cinderella, and
Sleeping Beauty) to fight back against Charming’s forces. And barring a few
iffy visual designs here and there, these Shrek films have, at least,
consistently improved their animation quality with each subsequent release. In
conclusion, since this film’s release, I’ve seen plenty of folks online label it
as one of the worst animated films of all time, with some even arguing that,
because it’s so bad, it even ruins the previous two films by proxy… but if you
ask me, this film doesn’t deserve such an infamously harsh reputation. No, I’m
not saying that this is any sort of masterpiece or anything, especially when
compared to the first two films, but on its own, it’s a relatively harmless
family flick that, at its worst, is simply a subpar installment of the Shrek
franchise that lacks a lot of its trademark spunk. To be clear, I don’t attribute
any of this to the change in direction that I mentioned earlier since Chris
Miller has been involved with the franchise since the beginning; plus, as we’ll
soon see, he did go on to redeem himself as a director thanks to the franchise’s
first spin-off. At the end of the day, I’d argue that this is simply a straightforward
case of diminishing returns that, admittedly, ended up hurting the franchise overall
as it marked a clear turning point for this once seemingly unstoppable phenomenon.
Rating: 2.5/5
SHREK FOREVER
AFTER (2010)
Around the time that Shrek 2 came out, it was
reported that DreamWorks was planning to make at least three more Shrek films
after that (not counting the Puss in Boots spin-off), with the fifth set
to be the series’ last. And yet, while I’m not saying that the mediocre reception
toward Shrek the Third was solely responsible for the following
development, I also wouldn’t be surprised if it was, indeed, ‘a part’ of the reason
that the proposed fifth film was ultimately nixed. Thus, the fourth film, directed
by Mike Mitchell (director of films like the 2005 cult classic Sky High and
the LEGO Movie sequel that didn’t deserve to be a box-office flop) and
originally titled Shrek Goes Fourth, was renamed Shrek Forever After and
officially repurposed into being the franchise’s final mainline
installment. Opting for an It’s a Wonderful Life-style story, the film
sees Shrek, having recently become disillusioned with his current life,
agreeing to a deal with Rumpelstiltskin (who, funnily enough, was in Shrek
the Third as a part of Prince Charming’s crew and had a completely
different character design) that will let him have a full day where he can be a
true ogre again. But of course, as anyone familiar with the classic fairy tale
can probably guess, the sneaky imp double-crosses Shrek by placing him in an
alternate reality where he was never born, thus allowing Rumpel to become the
ruler of Far, Far Away.
Given what I just said about the plot following the well-established
premise made famous by It’s a Wonderful Life in which the main protagonist
sees how the lives of their friends and family are considerably worse if they
never existed, Shrek Forever After’s plot is, admittedly, quite
predictable in its execution. However, the film makes up for this with two
things that, in retrospect, were severely lacking in Shrek the Third…
heart and legitimate emotional stakes. Looking back, it seems as if Shrek
the Third was more focused on replicating Shrek 2’s ‘joke-a-minute’
vibe, thus making it a film that aimed to be more of a comedic romp… but in
doing so, lacked the emotional beats that were just as prevalent in the first
two films as their wacky senses of humor. Shrek Forever After, on the
other hand, admittedly may not be as much of a comedic riot as the first two
films were but it’s far more character-driven than its immediate predecessor. Shrek’s
complete devotion to Fiona and their children is what drives him to set things
right after his foolhardy attempt at reliving the glory days and the film
utilizes Fiona, Donkey, and Puss in Boots a lot better than Shrek the Third did.
It also sports a solidly entertaining bad guy in Rumpelstiltskin (voiced by the
film’s head of story, Walt Dohrn), who does manage to rival Lord Farquaad and
the Fairy Godmother as both a hilarious and downright sinister antagonist.
As I noted with Shrek the Third, Shrek Forever
After maintains the franchise’s track record of consistently improved
animation with each new installment. Forever After was also notably
released in 3-D since this was around the time when the format was making a
comeback and DreamWorks Animation had been using it regularly since 2009. I
didn’t see this in 3-D when it was in theaters since I saw it at a drive-in
(the same drive-in where I saw the first film, in fact…), but from what I’ve heard,
DreamWorks Animation always managed to do quite well with implementing 3-D into
their films, especially when compared to films that were hastily converted into
the format in post-production to capitalize on its then-recent resurgence. And
so, with all that in mind, for a film that I haven’t seen since it first came
out 12 years ago… Shrek Forever After surprisingly holds up quite well. While
I can’t say that it’s as good as the first two Shrek films, it does give
the franchise a much-needed bit of course correction by bringing back a lot of
the aspects that made it great but were sadly missing in Shrek the Third.
In other words, the best way that I can describe this film is that, when
compared to its predecessor, this one feels a lot more in line with what we’ve
come to expect from the Shrek franchise. And while it’s still unclear yet
if there’s going to be a fifth Shrek film as it’s been in the works for
years now, Forever After does succeed in its initial goal of being a
fitting send-off for this iconic franchise.
Rating: 4/5
PUSS IN BOOTS
(2011)
Shrek Forever After may have been the narrative finale
to the Shrek franchise but it wouldn’t end up being the franchise’s last
hurrah on the big screen. From the moment he made his franchise debut in Shrek
2, it was clear to DreamWorks that Puss in Boots was going to be an
indisputable breakout character, and so, Shrek 2’s head of story Chris
Miller pushed heavily for a spin-off centered on the suave swashbuckling feline.
And while said film was originally conceived as a direct-to-video release that
would’ve come out in 2008, one year after Miller’s directorial debut with Shrek
the Third, it was eventually repurposed as a theatrical release once
DreamWorks eventually realized the character’s full potential for cinematic
adventures. Chris Miller soon signed on to direct, thus making Puss in Boots
his second directorial outing for the franchise, and thankfully for Miller,
Puss in Boots was not a critical dud like Shrek the Third was. The
film opened to solid reviews from critics, earned an Oscar nomination for Best
Animated Feature, and amassed a highly respectable $555 million run at the box office. As a result, what started out as a spin-off of a hugely successful
DreamWorks franchise ended up turning into its own hugely successful DreamWorks
franchise. In 2015, it spawned a Netflix series, The Adventures of Puss in
Boots, which lasted for six seasons, and this December, Puss in
Boots will make his triumphant return to the big screen in Puss in Boots:
The Last Wish.
But for now, our focus is on Puss’ first solo outing. Set
long before his first encounter with Shrek and Donkey, the film explores Puss’
backstory and how an incident involving him and his childhood friend Humpty
Dumpty resulted in him becoming a fugitive of the law in the town that he was
raised in, San Ricardo, which is a status that he’s been trying to undo for
quite some time. This eventually leads to him reuniting with Humpty Dumpty who,
along with fellow feline adventurer Kitty Softpaws, recruits Puss for a quest
to find the magic beans that will grow the giant beanstalk that will lead them
to the Giant’s Castle where they will find the mythical golden-egg laying
goose. As I alluded to earlier, this is the one Shrek-related film that
I did not see when it first came out. That said, though, since this was around
the time that I was starting to truly get into film criticism and was paying
greater attention to how films were faring with critics and audiences, I was at
least aware of this film’s generally positive reception and how many saw it as
a surprisingly solid release, especially given that this was clearly at a time
where the Shrek franchise’s popularity had started to dwindle. Having
now finally watched this film for the first time, it isn’t that hard to see why
it proved to be such a big hit. For starters, the film more than manages to
stand on its own as a spin-off of the Shrek franchise without having to
rely on any major nods to the previous films outside of the title
character’s classic visual cues.
Barring a relatively straightforward plot with some rather
predictable plot twists, Puss in Boots is a rollicking swashbuckling
adventure that feels right in line with the many classics that that genre has
spawned, including the ones that Antonio Banderas has been in like 1998’s The
Mask of Zorro. Banderas, of course, is charismatic and great as always in
his fourth outing as Puss in Boots and the film pairs him with one of his most
iconic leading ladies from outside of the world of animation as Salma Hayek
delivers an equally terrific performance as femme fatale Kitty Softpaws. Meanwhile,
Zack Galifianakis is a terrific addition to the ensemble as well as Humpty
Dumpty, who constantly blurs the line between being Puss’ friend and Puss’ foe
to serve as a great foil to him without being a completely irredeemable
antagonist. With all this and a lot of great animation (which, just like Shrek
Forever After, must’ve made this a fun one to watch in 3-D), Puss in
Boots is a highly entertaining spin-off that more than holds its own
against the franchise from which it was spawned. Simply put, Puss in Boots, as
brilliantly performed by Antonio Banderas, has easily been one of the Shrek franchise’s
best characters, and thanks to a film like this, it’s clear that he can be just
as great of a main protagonist as he is a loyal sidekick.
Rating: 4.5/5
BONUS REVIEW:
SHREK THE MUSICAL (Home Video Release - 2013)
Before we conclude today’s retrospective, I figured that
it’d be fun to cover the following release which, while not a theatrical
release like the main Shrek films, has been included in some of the
franchise’s recent Blu-Ray and DVD boxsets. Sure, reviewing Broadway
productions isn’t really my thing, but if I can do something like this for the
filmed production of Hamilton back in 2020, I can certainly cover the Shrek
franchise’s transition from the big screen to the Great White Way. In 2008,
a musical adaptation of the original Shrek film made its official
Broadway debut at the historic Broadway Theatre. This was a project that had
been in the works since 2002, just one year after the original film’s release,
with the stage play written by Pulitzer Prize-winning playwright David
Lindsay-Abaire and music by Tony Award-winning composer Jeanine Tesori with
Lindsay-Abaire writing the lyrics. Originally, the production did not use any
of the songs from the film, but by 2009, “I’m a Believer”, which was initially
just played as background music after the final curtain, was added to the show’s
finale. While the show ultimately closed in 2010 without managing to make its initial
investment back, it did nab a bunch of Tony Award nominations at the 63rd
annual ceremony, including a nomination for Best Musical and acting nods for
three of the production’s four main leads, and ended up winning for its
costuming. And in 2013, an assembled cut of multiple filmed performances of the
show by RadicalMedia (the same team behind the filmed production of Hamilton)
was released on home media.
Given that this is based solely on the first film with a few
minor nods to Shrek 2 (e.g. a non-speaking cameo from Puss in Boots), it
goes without saying that Shrek the Musical benefits greatly from it
being based on one of the franchise’s best outings. And overall, David
Lindsay-Abaire does a great job of adapting the original film’s story into a
musical format, with only a few cuts here and there and some new narrative additions
like opening a la William Steig’s original book with a sequence where Shrek’s
parents send him off on his own and a plot twist that reveals that Lord
Farquaad is the son of the seven dwarves’ Grumpy. While some have argued that
the latter twist contradicts the series’ message of embracing who you are
(which, ironically, is an argument that goes back as far as the first film’s
release given its recurring gag of Shrek and company making fun of Farquaad’s
short stature), the musical still maintains the film’s heartfelt themes quite
well. Set and costuming design is quite good throughout as they do a solid job
of replicating the overall visual aesthetic of the films; makeup design, on the
other hand, is a lot more hit-or-miss due to the unsettling looks that some of
the characters are given. As for the music, it too is solid throughout with favorites
of mine being Fiona’s two solos; ‘I Know It’s Today’, which covers her
backstory locked in the dragon’s tower, and ‘Morning Person’, which serves as
an extension of the scene in the first film where she goes off on her own and
causes a bird to explode by singing in one of Shrek’s many classic bits
of dark humor.
But just like how the original film sold itself on its lead
quartet of Mike Myers, Eddie Murphy, Cameron Diaz, and John Lithgow, the
original Broadway production of Shrek the Musical is fully bolstered by
its lead quartet. Revered Broadway icon Brian D’Arcy James does a phenomenal
job in the title role, not at all hindered by the extensive makeup work done to
turn him into Shrek and nailing the character’s gruff yet sympathetic demeanor.
Daniel Breaker, meanwhile, flawlessly mirrors the madcap, mile-a-minute style
of comedy that Eddie Murphy brought to the role of Donkey even if the musical focuses
on Shrek’s best friend and noble steed considerably less than the film did.
However, the biggest standouts of the cast (especially from a comedic
standpoint) are Sutton Foster as Princess Fiona and Christopher Sieber as Lord
Farquaad. Foster happily revels in playing a more manic and slightly unhinged
version of Fiona who, as evident from her first solo “I Know It’s Today”, was
clearly affected by her prolonged imprisonment but, nevertheless, is still very
much the same spunky and badass heroine that she is in the films. Sieber,
meanwhile, brings all the laughs as Farquaad who, in the musical, is still the
same nefarious wannabe despot that he was in the film but way more over the top
in execution when compared to John Lithgow’s far more sinister take on the
character.
I didn’t see Shrek the Musical back when it made its
Broadway debut. While I did visit New York quite often on annual vacations with
my family when I was younger, none of those trips tended to include a trip to
the theater. In fact, outside of any instances where I went to see a show’s
touring production at the historic Providence Performing Arts Center, I don’t
think that I ever saw an actual Broadway show directly in New York City until a
High School Chorus trip in 2011. Plus, as I noted earlier, this was around the
time when I was starting to move away from solely watching films like Shrek;
ergo, despite being a huge fan of the franchise, this show, to put it quite
simply, didn’t really attract my interest back then. Having now since seen it a
few times thanks to its home media release (which, like RadicalMedia’s
presentation of Hamilton, is a relatively solid production that’s
impressively seamless given that it’s a compilation of multiple performances),
I believe that I probably would’ve enjoyed it quite a bit if I had seen it as a
kid. As crazy as the idea of a Broadway adaptation of the first Shrek film
may seem (especially to some of the franchise’s biggest critics), Shrek the
Musical is just as much of an undeniable crowd-pleaser as its beloved
source material. This classic story of a grumpy yet lovable ogre is excellently
reimagined for the stage without losing any of the original screenplay’s charm,
especially thanks to its lovable main protagonists (and main antagonist that
you love to hate) being portrayed by some of the most talented stars in all of
Broadway. And as a result, it’s another prime example of how DreamWorks’ most
prominent franchises have managed to successfully expand their horizons far
beyond their humble beginnings on the big screen.
Rating: 4.5/5
And that concludes this
retrospective on the franchise that made DreamWorks Animation a household name,
Shrek. Thanks for following along and be sure to sound off in the comments
below with your own personal memories of this franchise… though, if you’ll
grant me one request, let’s keep these conversations restricted solely to the
films and any other official franchise spin-offs (video games, TV specials, Shrek
4-D, etc.) and refrain from bringing up any of that messed up
internet content that I referred to back in this post’s intro. On that note, as
I also mentioned in that intro, this will be the first installment of a new
series of retrospectives here on Rhode Island Movie Corner that will cover the numerous
feature films produced by DreamWorks Animation. To be clear, there is no
definite timetable as to when the next DreamWorks retrospective will be
published, but in keeping with my plan of starting things out by focusing on
DreamWorks’ biggest franchises in the order of their debuts, the next DreamWorks
Retrospective will cover the Madagascar series.
.jpeg)
