For those who aren’t aware, I have been going back and doing audio remasters of a number of my older videos, now that I have much better equipment, software, and general knowledge of how to record and edit audio. I had already produced remasters for my videos on the effects of both Shrek and The Fox and the Hound on American animation, and intended to release them in mid-late January, but then suddenly, in early December of last year, the algorithm started recommending these two older videos (hence why you might have already watched the original version of this). I just wanted to let you all know to avoid confusion, especially for those who have already watched the originals (though I’d appreciate you watching the improved versions). I’ll be leaving the original uploads live for a little while, to avoid sabotaging myself in the algorithm, before eventually unlisting them (though the originals will still be linked in the bottom of the descriptions of the remasters). In other news, I should have a brand-new video out in mid-late February, with my 50K Q&A special hopefully coming out in March or April (so be sure to get your questions in now, on either the video announcement or the community post). And yes, I have seen Puss in Boots: The Last Wish. It's very good. With any luck, we really are entering a new era of experimentation within American theatrical animation.
@Cardinal West Puss N Boots the Last Wish showed me that Dreamworks still has it. An incredibly competent script with a lot of care and effort that went into it. I was surprised how good it was and it’s definitely up there with Shrek 2 for me and one of Dreamworks best. Ironic that Dreamworks scored such a big win and Disney well, they’ve been spinning their wheels. Not that Dreamworks was doing great but what an era where a Shrek property beats them out.
@@lauchlangibson732 That video was so good and I really loved it , i hope he can share it in some way away from yt, at least so we can watch it and enjoy the story
@@wonder_platypus8337 It's honestly quite good. The story is moving, the voice work is excellent, and the animation is distinctive and striking and quite well-suited to the story being told.
@user-ec2mi2xq6l I angry cuz you say thing I don't like grrr. Jk. But also L trash opinion Pussnbotthwhshlast was a 10000000 out of 5 stars best movie of ever times.
Less a problem with Shrek and more a problem with creatives misunderstanding what made Shrek work. They thought it was "Haha funny animation, haha butt jokes, haha pop culture references, haha goofy talking animals." When it was the subversiveness of Shrek that made it appeal to audiences. The rest of that stuff was just sprinkles on the cupcake. And predictably, the other studios decided to bury the cupcake under an Everest-size pile of sprinkles.
Similar thing happened to Comic Books (more specifically Superhero comics) in the wake of Frank Millers The Dark Knight Returns and Alan Moore & Dave Gibbons Watchmen. Dark and Gritty was in, but it was mostly done superficially and without the thought and effort that went into the other works. If it superficially looks similar, it's good enough for companies.
I think it kind of suffered the same fate as the Simpsons, it grew from being a parody to being parodied. The original Shrek was a sharp and witty deconstruction of a classic Disneyfied fairytale, but it spawned so many imitators the meme worthy, self aware, chock full of cultural references fantasy film has become a genre that itself invites parody.
@@theyakkoman or what Guardians of the Galaxy did to superhero movie jokes. I fucking love and adore the guardians, but damn did the misunderstanding of what made the comedy in the first movie good ruined a bunch of stuff.... Starting w suicide squad
It's a shame that Shrek had a large negative effect on American animation because the first Shrek movie is actually a great film and parody of many Disney films! Many films inspired by Shrek didn't understand what made Shrek so great yet had such a negative effect on American animation.
Shrek reminds me of Watchmen: it did something new and fresh which was enormously successful and then proceeded to ruin its medium because its success inspired endless imitation by lesser talents that didn't understand why it worked.
@reality6442 I'd say quite the contrary really, at least about the movie itself. It's a timeless, hilarious classic that will probably be at the forefront of American culture for a long time. The movie itself is great. The negatives are the largely soulless imitations which don't actually understand the magic behind what made Shrek so refreshing in the first place.
I'd say it's less Shrek that is the problem than the fact that what gets made is whatever makes money. Shrek just happened to stumble on to the winning formula, and if it wasn't them it'd have been someone else and we would still be in the same place today.
@Peters6221 The problem isn't that the industry misinterpreted the formula, the problem is your average joe's taste is bad and respect for the children's mental development nonexistent.
Studios have always needed to make money to survive. The problem is the consumer. I think a big part of modern audiences is that adults don't go to see movies now unless their kids make them so we only get movies that kids want to see. Advertising is the other huge problem. People avoid advertisements so much that we only hear about movies if there is some controversy about it. As a result, we get either dumb movies for kids, or movies that only care about offending certain people and confirming other people's biases.
With the success of Spider-Verse and The Last Wish, I'm hoping more filmmakers are inspired to aim for that level of ambition in the near future. If nothing else, I'd love to see them experiment with art styles and mixing 2D and 3D animation techniques.
@@yrooxrksvi7142 That's fair. Though without Spiderverse we probably wouldn't have gotten such a nice visual style for Puss in Boots 2. Spiderverse really did pave the way to show that visual variety can work and that not everything needs to look as realistic as possible, and thats just the tip of the iceberg.
Two words regarding "We never killed a main character in a Disney movie": Bambi's mom. This was almost 40 years prior to the Fox and the Hound. And while it didn't happen to a main character, the donkey scene in Pinocchio was very dark stuff, too. Generally, Walt Disney himself was much more willing to include darker stuff in his movies than those his direct successors at the company.
The fun fact - he was the one who pushed hardest for Old Yeller to be killed off like in the book, which others at the studio opposed. Disney argued that children must learn that life is not a fairy tale and rightly noted that an animal suffering from rabies in the 19th century could only hope for death due to the lack of veterinary medicine at that time. Disney himself said that he makes films for the whole family (read: adult parents) and if he made films only for children, he would wear one shirt. And if he were alive today, he would have no problem making his animations in PG13 (or maybe even R). He just happened to make films during the Hays Code, which censored everything.
Sometimes I wonder is the hatred for Matt Damon is simply for him being Matt Damon, I've never seen anyone complain about the narration of Spirit in other languages dubs
As everyone and their mothers have said in this video and the original one, it's not really fair to blame Shrek for the downfall of western animation it didn't do anything wrong. Yes, it's the movie that started the whole trend of referential crass comedies. But that's not the fault of Shrek Itself. Shrek is a good movie with a lot of heart put into it. It's everyone who copied it without understanding *why* Shrek worked that's really at fault. And, it can't really be understated that this happens ALLLLLLL the time with media. Basically, any entertainment industry will inevitably go through the cycle of something really creative and original becoming extremely popular, everyone else in the space seeing this and wanting a piece of the massive money pie it got, and inevitably copying it. Shrek got popular, every animated movie tried to be like Shrek. Rick and Morty got popular, and now anything labling itself as "Adult animation" has to be a crude comedy where all the characters are assholes. The hunger games got popular, everyone started writing post-apocalyptic stories with love triangles without understanding why those things worked in the original work. Even this current trend of hyper-styalized, 2d/3d hybridization is ultimately just a result of studios wanting a piece of the Into the Spiderverse pie. It's certainly a better trend than most things. But a trend none the less. So ultimately, you're not wrong. But it's still not fair to blame Shrek when it's only sin was being a good movie.
I think this video is a little unfair and overlooks quite a bit. First off, Pixar is sparsely brought up in this video, and they were unstoppable in the 2000s/2010, with two of their movies in that era being nominated for Best Picture and many others garnering several other nominations/wins. Pixar was mature and appealed to both kids and adults during this time, which may have been in part influenced by the success of Shrek (at least the ability to really dig into it). Additionally, while I do miss 2D animation dearly, I don’t think you can solely blame Shrek for its downfall. In fact, I would argue Pixar is more responsible for this, as its box office returns made Disney’s 2D stuff look embarrassing. At least Dreamworks tried to build 2D animation into their lineup. Still want to emphasize I think you did a great job with the editing and writing of this video, I just think the subject matter is a little off base. I agree that different animation styles and techniques should have been considered more during this time, but to say Shrek had a negative effect on animated storytelling feels unfair as I think it did more good than bad.
You say that as if the movie wasn't just a glorified middle finger to Disney. Shrek shouldn't have been a hit, It should haven been a cult classic ala the Iron Giant.
They didn't bring up Pixar because Pixar didn't really make up the majority of what was being made nor did they influence the industry beyond CG. Besides, other than Incredibles...Pixar makes safe movies, with usually good to great writing. Pixar also doesn't really experiment with artstyles or camera work. It's why PnB2 is, imo, better than most of the Pixar catalog. I'd only put Incredibles, Ratatouille, Toy Story 2 and maybe Coco on the same level as PnB2.
Pixar’s newer movies have different art styles. Just compare Soul, Luca, or Elemental to their older movies and you can see a huge difference in terms of art styles.
Man, I really wish we lived in a world where both Shrek and the ambitious 2d films coming out then were successful. Good movies shouldn't have to compete with one-another for ticket sales IMO.
I hope you'll cover Spirit: Stallion of the Cimarron in a later video. Given your love of both animation and animal xenofiction, I'm sure you would have a lot of things to say about this movie.
Ironically, for me the worst Shrek knock-off is Shrek The Third. I think that it exemplifies ALL of the negative traits that later animated films by Dreamworks and other studios adopted to try and replicate the first Shrek. I might even go so far as to say that Shrek The Third is an Illumination movie in disguise. I think Disney realised very quickly that they couldn’t put their own spin on Shrek when they made Chicken Little which I have no qualms about calling their worst ever movie. We owe Spider-Verse, Puss In Boots: The Last Wish and the new TMNT for breathing new life and vision into mainstream animated cinema.
🦁. @MrBrown36706. Chicken Little is their worst ever film? I'm sorry!? but is The Last Jedi or name the MCU film post phase III a joke to you (or for that matter the Disney remakes). Or are we not counting those as Disney movies, or are we only talking about their animated films, even than, have a hard time believing Chicken Little is their worst film ever. Think u r severely underestimating the true cataclysm that is the films (ha films! 😏) Disney make now days.
🦁.@@dylansharp8471 What's your issue? do you actually think phase IV & V films in the MCU are any good at all & not catastrophically awful, & we're aren't counting No Way Home (that's Sony). Because there hasn't been a single good film past phase III (not that other phases were great or anything), I'll literally give you the entire list & you tell me if any of these are of worth. • Eternals • Shang-Chi: Legend of the Ten Rings (it's probably the only movie that came close to okay) • Black Widow • Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 • Thor: Love and Thunder • Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania • Black Panther: Wakanda Forever • Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness • The Marvels So are any of those better than Chicken Little? Because really doubt it, tho admittedly haven't watched that film in ages, so maybe I'm wrong on how bad it is.
I've noticed this in different entertainment mediums. An IP, be it a video game, movie, TV series, novel, or what else have you, takes off and is wildly successful. Then so many others try to ride its coattails, having learned the wrong lesson in what made the inspiration great in the first place.
i think a cool idea for a movie that i would like to see made is one that's the opposite of shrek basically its a more traditional fairy tale movie that pokes fun at fairly tale parodies and the tropes of movies that were inspired by shrek.
Awesome video i loved watching. I by and large agree it's a tragedy what has occurred to the American animation industry with it becoming vapid, shallow, and a waste of time. I agree with you on the films you viewed positively with one exception the breadwinner was not mentioned if you have not seen it I highly recommend it.
Honestly I'm not the biggest fan of Shrek either. Well, the first movie. It has it's moments, a good message and good main characters, but it's sequels are far better (the third one is a little less good, but could've been worse). I don't think it's to blame for anything though. It worked for it's time, and people tried to replicate it without knowing what made it work, as others have mentioned. Anyway, unrelated, but I ordered your book! I'm excited to read Winter Without End and see your skills. From your videos, it's promising.
Oh fascinating. Well written, but I can't agree that shrek is a cause of things. Shrek just confronts so much of what was lurking under the surface to begin with, and honestly, strikes me more as a herald of the times to come than the cause of them. I would argue that the Emperor's New Groove and Lilo and Stitch would easily be contributers to this pattern you're attributing solely to shrek (in this essay at least). The first of those was easily as vicious and hostile to the hand that fed it as Shrek, and Lilo and Stitch flew too close to the sun of having something genuinely confrontational to status quo, even after editing. I can't disagree that the cgi of the first shrek movie was grim though, even as someone who likes a lot of the underlying design. It does not at all work with the medium well, it's extremely uninspired in technique. But it was also happening in the same wave of that ridiculous drive for quantitative "quality" as was kneecapping artistic value in video games. The 2000s were a ramping, escalating cavalcade of increasing framerates, increasing pixel density, more shadows, more light, more realism, more more more to make 3D computer graphics reflect the real world. That drive for granular, "objective" improvement totally thrashed the hell out of stylistic experimentation in every media touched by it. It happened in all movies, not just the solely animated ones (you can see some of the more dire examples in the way cgi is handled artisticalky through the jurassic park franchise). That, on top of the increasing budget differentials between what was available to amateurs and what was expected of big companies is what drove the corporate hollowness you're describing, in my opinion at least. I do also think, fundamentally, that Shrek's willingness to be ugly is the franchise's best strength, to tell the story of side characters without turning them into the same thing as what protagonists are expected to be. I think that's part of why TLW is so strong, even though I complained mildly about the way those particular dice fell in my comment on TLW, fact is that the main cast consists of talking animals, one of whom is distinctively unconventional in appearance, one with chronic pain, even. I'd be very curious to know how you feel about the visual appeal (in the technical sense) of Horner in that movie vs Shrek in his first appearance and the way he's handled visually in the third movie. Is it objection to the character design itself or the way it's handled? (Side note, have you ever seen some of the original concept art of the vikings in HTTYD that were drawn by the guy who designed the majority of the dragons? I wish I didn't forget his damn name, but I'm still disappointed that the movie didn't use even more of his work)
My 6 year old mind was not ready for the death of Little Foot's mom. 35 years later I still remeber that scene. I don't even know what the plot of disney movie was.
Interestingly if you look at the production history of Tangled, you’ll see an…almost different way this history could have played out. Disney started tangled (then called Rapunzel) because it was inspired by shrek, but in a different way. It was going to be a story where two teens, Clair and Vince, fall into a storybook and play out the tale of Rapunzel. Vince was fat and this was important because it was a true beauty and self esteem story. They got far enough to cast Jack Black for Vince and Claire (a fairy tale obsessed girl with short brown hair no shoes and a purple princess dress under a hoodie) became the short hair version of Rapunzel in the finished movie, they were far enough along to make working models. And then Disney realized they were the butt of Shrek’s joke and instead of embracing their-mostly finished apparently-movie, they sent it into production hell to make it as much Not Shrek but with just as much “criticism of fairy tales” as Shrek. I honestly find it interesting, how we could have had a very different story for the history of animation. And yes it’s getting back on track but man. I constantly wonder what we could have had if Disney hadn’t changed Tangled. And I say this because everyone follows Disney in a lot of ways. So how would the trends be now?
@@Revanshard4501 oh-no, before Tabgled was Tangled, it was Rapunzel, and the main characters were two teens sucked into a storybook. Claire, who was an introvert who loved fairytales, and Vince, a fat pizza delivery guy and her love interest. They take on the roles of Rapunzel and her prince once in the book. Disney was basing the story’s nature a bit off shrek, until they realized the movie was making fun of them and completely reworked the story. Vince was going to be voiced by Jack Black, and you can still find character storyboards of the two. My point was, it’d be interesting if Disney had gone through with that story, a shrek but their own interpretation, instead of self aware fairytales (even tangled criticized itself a little) what the current movie scene would look like.
Is anyone else kinda surprised he didn’t mention Disney getting movie rights to Ghibli movies in the mid 90s and the effects anime would at least had on TV animation for a while. with the likes of Teen Titans,Samurai Jack,Avatar& even Boondocks
I'm really hype for gruff, a youtube movie about paper characters, and I think you might like it when it comes out, based off what we've seen on it. At least, I think it's going to be a movie-type thing.
Actually Shrek had little influence on the overall direction of the industry and most of its shticks had already been done over and over again even by Disney - think Hercules. In fact, what happened in the early 2000s is that the studios sought to drive down the costs of animated films whose budgets had ballooned over the past 15 years or so at the same time as the market for animation became more saturated as more studios and more releases were crowding out the release schedules and margins for profits decreased. Tarzan is a good example of this - it was terribly expensive and barely made its money back. Studios don't want to make their money back, they want fat profits. Most of the movies you reference like Treasure Planet or Atlantis were simply cheaper and worse for it. Compare Tarzan with Treasure Planet - many of the same people were involved in making them but Planet is clearly worse. Why? Because Planet was done in like half the time. Every idea in it - story, visual design ideas, etc - feel like the first pass. Compare that to the degree of design and exploration that Tarzan benefited from. Also, this was the time that animation shifted away from 2d and fully embraced 3d. This is a big topic that merits a much closer analysis but let's just say that when Disney shut down the 2d studio that was the core of the brand and the core of what Walt had built, it was a pretty dark moment in the history of animation. At the time 3d animation was quite crude and for many artists it was unclear whether it would ever be possible to animate in 3d characters as expressive and full of life as 2d was capable of. Shrek was regarded as the epitome of everything wrong with 3d. Plastic looking props and sets, fake looking effects, and, worse of all, stiff characters that had been badly designed and crudely animated. Established studios like Blue Sky, Disney and Pixar already had a "house style" each of them so that leaves basically no one in the industry left to emulate Shrek and while it spawned a few sequels, Dreamworks themselves moved away from it pretty quickly to do other better things.
18:55 -- The contrast between the diminishing returns for masterpieces like Kubo and Cartoon Saloon's work on the one hand, and the box-office success of crushingly mediocre Illumination product on the other, darn near breaks my heart. Sure, we could blame the difference in marketing -- Wolfwalkers, my favorite animated film of the new millennium, wasn't even released to theaters but went straight to Apple TV, thanks a lot COVID -- but at the end of the day, we're the ones who choose to support mediocrity over brilliance, and I haven't the tiniest clue how to solve that problem. While it's true there will always be a demand for entertainment aimed at children, that's no reason why that entertainment shouldn't be GOOD. Kids deserve better. Audiences of all ages deserve better. But unless we DEMAND better instead of settling for an onslaught of irritating Minions flicks and soulless Dr. Seuss adaptations, nothing will change.
12:31 Two movies which I regard to be titans in the field of animation history, personally. The end of Iron Giant is too beautiful to remain dry-eyed, and The Incredibles was a fantastic example of maturity without raunch.
This re-releasing so soon after the release of Puss In Boots: The Last Wish is incredibly amusing, since Dreamworks broke out of the mold to craft something with it's own distinctive style. I like to think that we have Spider-Verse and Arcane to thank for the current trend. As an aside, part of the reason some of those films that don't make a lot of profit suffer from a disturbing lack of marketing. I didn't know Wolfwalkers even existed until it was no longer in theaters, and while I'd heard of Kubo and the Two Strings, I had to actively seek it out. Meanwhile, The Fantastic Mr Fox was actually quite well advertised and I did go to see it and while my husband fell asleep in the theater (the only time that's ever happened), I stayed awake and rather wish I hadn't - neither of us have anything particularly good to say of it.
So is that also the reason why in the West Anime is still seen by many as 'something for children' that cannot be compared to 'real movies' or 'real TV shows' even if many of these eastern animation shows are definitely not targeting children as their audience?
I love that you use the track "Juno is in love" in the background of your commentary it brings a nice vibe. At 13:12 "President of Academy" plays. Will you be doing a commentary on Beastars when the animated series ends?
Cheez and Schlock may have dominated American animation. The Japanese have stepped up their game in feature animation with absolute masterpieces like Your Name and A Silent Voice, not to mention Ghibli standbys. Eventually American animation will buy a clue from films like How To Train Your Dragon and get back to the innovations that made us animation pioneers.
Why not do a few films for budget that they know would get a good earning and then later make something experimental. As long as the other film successes cover the cost then it’d work. I mean they made a few movies back to back that were far less than what it made. It was expensive regardless but still
Im pretty sure everyone is saying this, but it's not entirely accurate or fair to blame Shrek for the downfall of animation quality or its reputation. Shrek itself is a great movie, a classic even that has obviously withstood the test of time. Whats really to blame are other studios and Dreamworks itself for trying to copy the winning formula of Shrek without understanding why it all worked. And the fact that it would only really work the first time it was done anyways. Obviously, the consequences of Shrek has had negative effects, but thats not on the movie's part so much as the inability of everyone else not being able to move forward from it. I think your analysis is well put together but the very basis of your argument is off center. Its almost there, but not quite right since nobody should blame a movie for being good even if it had unintended negative after effects. If anything, the fall of 2D animated movies should be put on Pixar, but nobody seems to want to blame them since the qualities of their older films were so good. Meanwhile Shrek gets a lot of flack for the simply doing the same thing (i.e. being a good movie), but only because it was done in a different way. Ironically, in doing so, Shrek displayed all the qualities that you and everyone else wants in their animated films: creativitiy, innovative, and not afraid to push boundaries on whats allowed in "children's movies" bc it never saw itself as just a kids movie.
I love how he picked up vivziepop at tthe end just to see this video released *just* under 3 yeatrs after the first episode of Hazbin Hotel aired officailly on Amazon.
given all this, isn't it very poetic that Puss in Boots the last Wish, an offspring of the Shrek series, is attempting to undo much of this shift toward irreverent and humor based storytelling in Animation
Actually, Shrek saved the entirety of fiction and humanity's very nature forever and ever, not just in western animation but the entire globe. An one who has seen shrek regardless of dub has been influenced one way or another by the green godly ogre. You can't even think of the word ogre and not think of Shrek. Shrek is love, Shrek is life.
JoJo's Bizarre Adventure's author has stated that Shrek is his favorite animated film. He even put it at #8 in his "Top 20 Suspense Films" list. He knows that everything will be ogre as well
I think it's kind of weird to blame a single work of art for changing the market. Like, sure, Shrek marked a trend shift, but it's not like the market forces that gave it momentum didn't exist beforehand. Hell, this sort of comedy existed in serialised animation for years before Shrek came along. If it wasn't Shrek, it would've been something else In fact, even without the profit motive, there would always be art created for mass appeal - and there's nothing wrong with that. The real issue is that as long as profit remains the priority (and it will by the design of pur economic system), there will be little desire to take risks with expensive projects
I think blaming Shrek for the current state of the industry is frankly, lazy and convenient. If anyone is to 'blame', it would be the studios and Dreamworks themselves shamelessly parroting it.
it only really resonates with (traumatized) the kids who watched it then, where as Shrek is still relevant to everyone today well after it released. Ask a young zoomer or gen alpha who Little Foot is and they will have no idea, unless their parents took extensive measures to expose them to it.
Right... It looks like if you cut the 3 minutes that actually talk about Shrek being a success and rename the video, the narrative might actually have some point.
Well, we know the problem is mostly because it requires buy-in from the audience since most think treating this medium too seriously equals delusion and pretentiousness. Especially when some beloved artists have been put into question when some of their twisted morals and behavior ended up ruining their reputation. Since we know most people don't like being talked down to if a thinking-type movie was done wrong, That and because of the societal climate we live in as of now; wants something to only conform to their own biases because of our frustration, entitlement problems, and spite.
Note that the movies pre-shrek were animated. It wasnt until after that we started to get these ugly ass cgi movies that all look the same with big bug eyed people. The incredibles was arguably far more damaging than Shrek. Toy story was far more damaging than Shrek. Making the movies well written is what matters, not more "mature". Violence, sexuality and drug use add little to a film. If Simbas father had been in jail the entire movie instead of killed, the movie would change very little beyond the emotional death itself which we had in many older films, most famously bambi which pretty much no one likes. These experimental films were not what mainstream audiences wanted and the movement towards films like boss baby was inevitable. Especially as the market opened up internationally and was no longer as American centric, where fantasy action became much more important as a chinese audiences would struggle to follow more complex plots but loved visual spectacle in the same way the transformers cgi mess movies took over. The death of visual creativity and explosion of ugly bug eye people that all look the same is where animation really died.
Without Shrek, we wouldn't have gotten Last Wish. Also, Madagascar 3 is surprisingly good, despite all odds. That franchise actually got better as it progressed, where most tend to get worse.
Took 13 minutes to discuss Shrek and then rather than explaining WHY he just says "Look, things were worse after", did you have anyone proof read your script?
I don't think Sherek is to blame here. It was just in the right place in the right time. The industry was already deep in a downwards spiral and would copy and emulate whatever successful film happened to be next. And no matter what film it happened to be, it wouldn't matter, be cause everyone would still complain anyways because copycats are never as good as the original.
Shrek is very good and important to me, less because of the crass humor and references, and more due to the protagonists finding love and being comfortable in their "cursed" form. the problem isn't Shrek, it's capitalism. good art takes more money to make, and doesn't make money as fast as the next minions movie, so why bother making it?
![30 ชั่วโมงคนเดียว บนรถไฟชั้น 3 โซเวียต [Around The World Ep. 2]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/MlE9boAVqDA/mqdefault.jpg)
For those who aren’t aware, I have been going back and doing audio remasters of a number of my older videos, now that I have much better equipment, software, and general knowledge of how to record and edit audio.
I had already produced remasters for my videos on the effects of both Shrek and The Fox and the Hound on American animation, and intended to release them in mid-late January, but then suddenly, in early December of last year, the algorithm started recommending these two older videos (hence why you might have already watched the original version of this).
I just wanted to let you all know to avoid confusion, especially for those who have already watched the originals (though I’d appreciate you watching the improved versions). I’ll be leaving the original uploads live for a little while, to avoid sabotaging myself in the algorithm, before eventually unlisting them (though the originals will still be linked in the bottom of the descriptions of the remasters).
In other news, I should have a brand-new video out in mid-late February, with my 50K Q&A special hopefully coming out in March or April (so be sure to get your questions in now, on either the video announcement or the community post).
And yes, I have seen Puss in Boots: The Last Wish. It's very good. With any luck, we really are entering a new era of experimentation within American theatrical animation.
Will you rerelease the sequel trilogy video?
@Cardinal West Puss N Boots the Last Wish showed me that Dreamworks still has it. An incredibly competent script with a lot of care and effort that went into it. I was surprised how good it was and it’s definitely up there with Shrek 2 for me and one of Dreamworks best. Ironic that Dreamworks scored such a big win and Disney well, they’ve been spinning their wheels. Not that Dreamworks was doing great but what an era where a Shrek property beats them out.
@@lauchlangibson732hat video was nearly three hours long lol. I doubt he would
Love your videos. Thanks for all the stuff you make / do
@@lauchlangibson732 That video was so good and I really loved it , i hope he can share it in some way away from yt, at least so we can watch it and enjoy the story
The best thing about Shrek is that it paved the convoluted path that gave us Puss in Boots: The Last Wish.
Haven't seen it yet. Any good really?
@@wonder_platypus8337 Absolutely.
@@wonder_platypus8337 It's honestly quite good.
The story is moving, the voice work is excellent, and the animation is distinctive and striking and quite well-suited to the story being told.
@@wonder_platypus8337 nope
@user-ec2mi2xq6l I angry cuz you say thing I don't like grrr. Jk. But also L trash opinion Pussnbotthwhshlast was a 10000000 out of 5 stars best movie of ever times.
Less a problem with Shrek and more a problem with creatives misunderstanding what made Shrek work. They thought it was "Haha funny animation, haha butt jokes, haha pop culture references, haha goofy talking animals." When it was the subversiveness of Shrek that made it appeal to audiences. The rest of that stuff was just sprinkles on the cupcake.
And predictably, the other studios decided to bury the cupcake under an Everest-size pile of sprinkles.
Similar thing happened to Comic Books (more specifically Superhero comics) in the wake of Frank Millers The Dark Knight Returns and Alan Moore & Dave Gibbons Watchmen.
Dark and Gritty was in, but it was mostly done superficially and without the thought and effort that went into the other works. If it superficially looks similar, it's good enough for companies.
I think it kind of suffered the same fate as the Simpsons, it grew from being a parody to being parodied. The original Shrek was a sharp and witty deconstruction of a classic Disneyfied fairytale, but it spawned so many imitators the meme worthy, self aware, chock full of cultural references fantasy film has become a genre that itself invites parody.
Heck. Even Dreamworks itself did that.
@@theyakkoman The funny thing is, the guy who did what you're describing in its utemost extreme is Frank Miller himself when he did all star Batman.
@@theyakkoman or what Guardians of the Galaxy did to superhero movie jokes. I fucking love and adore the guardians, but damn did the misunderstanding of what made the comedy in the first movie good ruined a bunch of stuff.... Starting w suicide squad
It's a shame that Shrek had a large negative effect on American animation because the first Shrek movie is actually a great film and parody of many Disney films! Many films inspired by Shrek didn't understand what made Shrek so great yet had such a negative effect on American animation.
Shrek reminds me of Watchmen: it did something new and fresh which was enormously successful and then proceeded to ruin its medium because its success inspired endless imitation by lesser talents that didn't understand why it worked.
The first Shrek movie is a crass, joyless, mess that will be forgotten about in twenty years.
@@reality6442the movie might be forgotten, but the chain reaction it set off will haunt us for many more years.
@reality6442 I'd say quite the contrary really, at least about the movie itself. It's a timeless, hilarious classic that will probably be at the forefront of American culture for a long time. The movie itself is great.
The negatives are the largely soulless imitations which don't actually understand the magic behind what made Shrek so refreshing in the first place.
The second movie slapped too.
I'd say it's less Shrek that is the problem than the fact that what gets made is whatever makes money. Shrek just happened to stumble on to the winning formula, and if it wasn't them it'd have been someone else and we would still be in the same place today.
@Peters6221 The problem isn't that the industry misinterpreted the formula, the problem is your average joe's taste is bad and respect for the children's mental development nonexistent.
Studios have always needed to make money to survive. The problem is the consumer. I think a big part of modern audiences is that adults don't go to see movies now unless their kids make them so we only get movies that kids want to see. Advertising is the other huge problem. People avoid advertisements so much that we only hear about movies if there is some controversy about it. As a result, we get either dumb movies for kids, or movies that only care about offending certain people and confirming other people's biases.
With the success of Spider-Verse and The Last Wish, I'm hoping more filmmakers are inspired to aim for that level of ambition in the near future. If nothing else, I'd love to see them experiment with art styles and mixing 2D and 3D animation techniques.
I honestly preferred Puss in Boots 2's animation and visual style over Into the Spiderverse. Less mind numbing and easier on the eyes.
Both movies are awful
@@CartoonsEveryone L opinion
@@isaacmapes you got an L opinion too
@@yrooxrksvi7142 That's fair. Though without Spiderverse we probably wouldn't have gotten such a nice visual style for Puss in Boots 2. Spiderverse really did pave the way to show that visual variety can work and that not everything needs to look as realistic as possible, and thats just the tip of the iceberg.
Two words regarding "We never killed a main character in a Disney movie": Bambi's mom. This was almost 40 years prior to the Fox and the Hound. And while it didn't happen to a main character, the donkey scene in Pinocchio was very dark stuff, too. Generally, Walt Disney himself was much more willing to include darker stuff in his movies than those his direct successors at the company.
The fun fact - he was the one who pushed hardest for Old Yeller to be killed off like in the book, which others at the studio opposed. Disney argued that children must learn that life is not a fairy tale and rightly noted that an animal suffering from rabies in the 19th century could only hope for death due to the lack of veterinary medicine at that time. Disney himself said that he makes films for the whole family (read: adult parents) and if he made films only for children, he would wear one shirt. And if he were alive today, he would have no problem making his animations in PG13 (or maybe even R). He just happened to make films during the Hays Code, which censored everything.
Fun fact: someone actually made a cut of Spirit that cut out Matt Damon’s narration entirely.
GIMME
Why?
Where can we find it?
WHERE IS IT!? I NEED IT!!
Sometimes I wonder is the hatred for Matt Damon is simply for him being Matt Damon, I've never seen anyone complain about the narration of Spirit in other languages dubs
You really managed to hit all my nostalgia buttons with this one... Titan A.E. , Oliver and Company, The Road to El Dorado. Absolute bangers.
Calling Shrek the anti-Disney is apt, in both positive and negative ways.
more to negative! This movie ruined American animation
As everyone and their mothers have said in this video and the original one, it's not really fair to blame Shrek for the downfall of western animation it didn't do anything wrong. Yes, it's the movie that started the whole trend of referential crass comedies. But that's not the fault of Shrek Itself. Shrek is a good movie with a lot of heart put into it. It's everyone who copied it without understanding *why* Shrek worked that's really at fault.
And, it can't really be understated that this happens ALLLLLLL the time with media. Basically, any entertainment industry will inevitably go through the cycle of something really creative and original becoming extremely popular, everyone else in the space seeing this and wanting a piece of the massive money pie it got, and inevitably copying it.
Shrek got popular, every animated movie tried to be like Shrek.
Rick and Morty got popular, and now anything labling itself as "Adult animation" has to be a crude comedy where all the characters are assholes.
The hunger games got popular, everyone started writing post-apocalyptic stories with love triangles without understanding why those things worked in the original work.
Even this current trend of hyper-styalized, 2d/3d hybridization is ultimately just a result of studios wanting a piece of the Into the Spiderverse pie. It's certainly a better trend than most things. But a trend none the less.
So ultimately, you're not wrong. But it's still not fair to blame Shrek when it's only sin was being a good movie.
Ironically, Disney has brought its own demise by still trying so hard to piggyback Shrek's success after 20+ years.
I think this video is a little unfair and overlooks quite a bit. First off, Pixar is sparsely brought up in this video, and they were unstoppable in the 2000s/2010, with two of their movies in that era being nominated for Best Picture and many others garnering several other nominations/wins. Pixar was mature and appealed to both kids and adults during this time, which may have been in part influenced by the success of Shrek (at least the ability to really dig into it). Additionally, while I do miss 2D animation dearly, I don’t think you can solely blame Shrek for its downfall. In fact, I would argue Pixar is more responsible for this, as its box office returns made Disney’s 2D stuff look embarrassing. At least Dreamworks tried to build 2D animation into their lineup. Still want to emphasize I think you did a great job with the editing and writing of this video, I just think the subject matter is a little off base. I agree that different animation styles and techniques should have been considered more during this time, but to say Shrek had a negative effect on animated storytelling feels unfair as I think it did more good than bad.
You say that as if the movie wasn't just a glorified middle finger to Disney. Shrek shouldn't have been a hit, It should haven been a cult classic ala the Iron Giant.
Also, I think it's a bit unfair to call classic Disney films "childish" considering the mature themes they hold.
They didn't bring up Pixar because Pixar didn't really make up the majority of what was being made nor did they influence the industry beyond CG. Besides, other than Incredibles...Pixar makes safe movies, with usually good to great writing. Pixar also doesn't really experiment with artstyles or camera work.
It's why PnB2 is, imo, better than most of the Pixar catalog. I'd only put Incredibles, Ratatouille, Toy Story 2 and maybe Coco on the same level as PnB2.
Pixar’s newer movies have different art styles. Just compare Soul, Luca, or Elemental to their older movies and you can see a huge difference in terms of art styles.
Man, I really wish we lived in a world where both Shrek and the ambitious 2d films coming out then were successful. Good movies shouldn't have to compete with one-another for ticket sales IMO.
It was fun to see a lot of Shrek knockoffs in the early 2000s. And by fun I mean insufferable.
I hope you'll cover Spirit: Stallion of the Cimarron in a later video. Given your love of both animation and animal xenofiction, I'm sure you would have a lot of things to say about this movie.
Mate I'll fight you on Brother Bear. That movie makes me cry every time.
Ironically, for me the worst Shrek knock-off is Shrek The Third. I think that it exemplifies ALL of the negative traits that later animated films by Dreamworks and other studios adopted to try and replicate the first Shrek. I might even go so far as to say that Shrek The Third is an Illumination movie in disguise.
I think Disney realised very quickly that they couldn’t put their own spin on Shrek when they made Chicken Little which I have no qualms about calling their worst ever movie.
We owe Spider-Verse, Puss In Boots: The Last Wish and the new TMNT for breathing new life and vision into mainstream animated cinema.
Is the same vision of always but with a pretty filter
🦁. @MrBrown36706. Chicken Little is their worst ever film? I'm sorry!? but is The Last Jedi or name the MCU film post phase III a joke to you (or for that matter the Disney remakes). Or are we not counting those as Disney movies, or are we only talking about their animated films, even than, have a hard time believing Chicken Little is their worst film ever. Think u r severely underestimating the true cataclysm that is the films (ha films! 😏) Disney make now days.
@@kingjerrodthelion
"or name the MCU film post phase III a joke to you"
Seriously dude?!
🦁.@@dylansharp8471 What's your issue? do you actually think phase IV & V films in the MCU are any good at all & not catastrophically awful, & we're aren't counting No Way Home (that's Sony). Because there hasn't been a single good film past phase III (not that other phases were great or anything), I'll literally give you the entire list & you tell me if any of these are of worth.
• Eternals
• Shang-Chi: Legend of the Ten Rings (it's probably the only movie that came close to okay)
• Black Widow
• Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3
• Thor: Love and Thunder
• Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania
• Black Panther: Wakanda Forever
• Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness
• The Marvels
So are any of those better than Chicken Little? Because really doubt it, tho admittedly haven't watched that film in ages, so maybe I'm wrong on how bad it is.
I've noticed this in different entertainment mediums. An IP, be it a video game, movie, TV series, novel, or what else have you, takes off and is wildly successful.
Then so many others try to ride its coattails, having learned the wrong lesson in what made the inspiration great in the first place.
i think a cool idea for a movie that i would like to see made is one that's the opposite of shrek basically its a more traditional fairy tale movie that pokes fun at fairly tale parodies and the tropes of movies that were inspired by shrek.
Or a fairy tale parody but not so crass or irreverent.
@@alsatusmd1A13 you know a more book faithful of Howl's Moving Castle would be exactly that
Not gonna lie, I'd watch that.
New Sincerity and metamodernism is waving
Awesome video i loved watching. I by and large agree it's a tragedy what has occurred to the American animation industry with it becoming vapid, shallow, and a waste of time. I agree with you on the films you viewed positively with one exception the breadwinner was not mentioned if you have not seen it I highly recommend it.
Hearing all the movies I grew up watching on VHS all being referenced is so shockingly emotional for me. I’m literally almost crying
Same feeling I got
I like how its giving every jojo reference posible just to not make a jojo video
Thumbelina, Atlantis, Titan A.E. and Treasure Planet are *criminally underrated.*
Honestly I'm not the biggest fan of Shrek either. Well, the first movie. It has it's moments, a good message and good main characters, but it's sequels are far better (the third one is a little less good, but could've been worse). I don't think it's to blame for anything though. It worked for it's time, and people tried to replicate it without knowing what made it work, as others have mentioned.
Anyway, unrelated, but I ordered your book! I'm excited to read Winter Without End and see your skills. From your videos, it's promising.
1:47
“Legit archival footage”
Ah yes, when Chris Evans was a young boy. Everyone wants the secret to his anti-aging!
Oh fascinating. Well written, but I can't agree that shrek is a cause of things. Shrek just confronts so much of what was lurking under the surface to begin with, and honestly, strikes me more as a herald of the times to come than the cause of them. I would argue that the Emperor's New Groove and Lilo and Stitch would easily be contributers to this pattern you're attributing solely to shrek (in this essay at least). The first of those was easily as vicious and hostile to the hand that fed it as Shrek, and Lilo and Stitch flew too close to the sun of having something genuinely confrontational to status quo, even after editing.
I can't disagree that the cgi of the first shrek movie was grim though, even as someone who likes a lot of the underlying design. It does not at all work with the medium well, it's extremely uninspired in technique. But it was also happening in the same wave of that ridiculous drive for quantitative "quality" as was kneecapping artistic value in video games. The 2000s were a ramping, escalating cavalcade of increasing framerates, increasing pixel density, more shadows, more light, more realism, more more more to make 3D computer graphics reflect the real world. That drive for granular, "objective" improvement totally thrashed the hell out of stylistic experimentation in every media touched by it. It happened in all movies, not just the solely animated ones (you can see some of the more dire examples in the way cgi is handled artisticalky through the jurassic park franchise). That, on top of the increasing budget differentials between what was available to amateurs and what was expected of big companies is what drove the corporate hollowness you're describing, in my opinion at least.
I do also think, fundamentally, that Shrek's willingness to be ugly is the franchise's best strength, to tell the story of side characters without turning them into the same thing as what protagonists are expected to be. I think that's part of why TLW is so strong, even though I complained mildly about the way those particular dice fell in my comment on TLW, fact is that the main cast consists of talking animals, one of whom is distinctively unconventional in appearance, one with chronic pain, even.
I'd be very curious to know how you feel about the visual appeal (in the technical sense) of Horner in that movie vs Shrek in his first appearance and the way he's handled visually in the third movie. Is it objection to the character design itself or the way it's handled?
(Side note, have you ever seen some of the original concept art of the vikings in HTTYD that were drawn by the guy who designed the majority of the dragons? I wish I didn't forget his damn name, but I'm still disappointed that the movie didn't use even more of his work)
So it was like what Watchmen and The Dark Knight Returns did for comic books.
Also Illumination Studios must be stopped lmao
Why do you say Illumination?
Illumination is doing well. They are making a new duck movie and they’re own studio called Moonlight.
My 6 year old mind was not ready for the death of Little Foot's mom. 35 years later I still remeber that scene. I don't even know what the plot of disney movie was.
Interestingly if you look at the production history of Tangled, you’ll see an…almost different way this history could have played out. Disney started tangled (then called Rapunzel) because it was inspired by shrek, but in a different way. It was going to be a story where two teens, Clair and Vince, fall into a storybook and play out the tale of Rapunzel. Vince was fat and this was important because it was a true beauty and self esteem story. They got far enough to cast Jack Black for Vince and Claire (a fairy tale obsessed girl with short brown hair no shoes and a purple princess dress under a hoodie) became the short hair version of Rapunzel in the finished movie, they were far enough along to make working models. And then Disney realized they were the butt of Shrek’s joke and instead of embracing their-mostly finished apparently-movie, they sent it into production hell to make it as much Not Shrek but with just as much “criticism of fairy tales” as Shrek.
I honestly find it interesting, how we could have had a very different story for the history of animation. And yes it’s getting back on track but man. I constantly wonder what we could have had if Disney hadn’t changed Tangled. And I say this because everyone follows Disney in a lot of ways. So how would the trends be now?
I'm genuinely confused. Since when does Tangled criticize fairytale stories? I've always thought it did a good job of just being one.
@@Revanshard4501 oh-no, before Tabgled was Tangled, it was Rapunzel, and the main characters were two teens sucked into a storybook. Claire, who was an introvert who loved fairytales, and Vince, a fat pizza delivery guy and her love interest. They take on the roles of Rapunzel and her prince once in the book. Disney was basing the story’s nature a bit off shrek, until they realized the movie was making fun of them and completely reworked the story. Vince was going to be voiced by Jack Black, and you can still find character storyboards of the two. My point was, it’d be interesting if Disney had gone through with that story, a shrek but their own interpretation, instead of self aware fairytales (even tangled criticized itself a little) what the current movie scene would look like.
12:00 the best movie description of all time
Is anyone else kinda surprised he didn’t mention Disney getting movie rights to Ghibli movies in the mid 90s and the effects anime would at least had on TV animation for a while. with the likes of Teen Titans,Samurai Jack,Avatar& even Boondocks
I'm really hype for gruff, a youtube movie about paper characters, and I think you might like it when it comes out, based off what we've seen on it. At least, I think it's going to be a movie-type thing.
A comment in the original video really stood out to me described Shrek as the Halo of animated features. Pretty apt comparison.
Actually Shrek had little influence on the overall direction of the industry and most of its shticks had already been done over and over again even by Disney - think Hercules. In fact, what happened in the early 2000s is that the studios sought to drive down the costs of animated films whose budgets had ballooned over the past 15 years or so at the same time as the market for animation became more saturated as more studios and more releases were crowding out the release schedules and margins for profits decreased. Tarzan is a good example of this - it was terribly expensive and barely made its money back. Studios don't want to make their money back, they want fat profits. Most of the movies you reference like Treasure Planet or Atlantis were simply cheaper and worse for it. Compare Tarzan with Treasure Planet - many of the same people were involved in making them but Planet is clearly worse. Why? Because Planet was done in like half the time. Every idea in it - story, visual design ideas, etc - feel like the first pass. Compare that to the degree of design and exploration that Tarzan benefited from. Also, this was the time that animation shifted away from 2d and fully embraced 3d. This is a big topic that merits a much closer analysis but let's just say that when Disney shut down the 2d studio that was the core of the brand and the core of what Walt had built, it was a pretty dark moment in the history of animation. At the time 3d animation was quite crude and for many artists it was unclear whether it would ever be possible to animate in 3d characters as expressive and full of life as 2d was capable of. Shrek was regarded as the epitome of everything wrong with 3d. Plastic looking props and sets, fake looking effects, and, worse of all, stiff characters that had been badly designed and crudely animated. Established studios like Blue Sky, Disney and Pixar already had a "house style" each of them so that leaves basically no one in the industry left to emulate Shrek and while it spawned a few sequels, Dreamworks themselves moved away from it pretty quickly to do other better things.
Super interesting. Excited to check out more of your videos
18:55 -- The contrast between the diminishing returns for masterpieces like Kubo and Cartoon Saloon's work on the one hand, and the box-office success of crushingly mediocre Illumination product on the other, darn near breaks my heart. Sure, we could blame the difference in marketing -- Wolfwalkers, my favorite animated film of the new millennium, wasn't even released to theaters but went straight to Apple TV, thanks a lot COVID -- but at the end of the day, we're the ones who choose to support mediocrity over brilliance, and I haven't the tiniest clue how to solve that problem.
While it's true there will always be a demand for entertainment aimed at children, that's no reason why that entertainment shouldn't be GOOD. Kids deserve better. Audiences of all ages deserve better. But unless we DEMAND better instead of settling for an onslaught of irritating Minions flicks and soulless Dr. Seuss adaptations, nothing will change.
Shrek just inspired a bunch of lazy people to make 3D knock offs like Disney inspired a lot of 2D garbage knock offs. It's a sad situation.
growing up as a pastors kid i watched the prince of egypt SO MANY TIMES it’s so beautiful
EDIT: i’m an atheist now but still absolutely love the movie
Walt Disney was a genius & the fact that his imitators watered things down is their problem.
he did NOT just call Kung Fu Panda "above average." Great video!
12:31 Two movies which I regard to be titans in the field of animation history, personally. The end of Iron Giant is too beautiful to remain dry-eyed, and The Incredibles was a fantastic example of maturity without raunch.
aw hell yeah remastered shrek video
Please explore the original Bambi novel it’s so interesting
Also, this video is goddamn phenomenal. Like, look how far we've come
This re-releasing so soon after the release of Puss In Boots: The Last Wish is incredibly amusing, since Dreamworks broke out of the mold to craft something with it's own distinctive style.
I like to think that we have Spider-Verse and Arcane to thank for the current trend.
As an aside, part of the reason some of those films that don't make a lot of profit suffer from a disturbing lack of marketing. I didn't know Wolfwalkers even existed until it was no longer in theaters, and while I'd heard of Kubo and the Two Strings, I had to actively seek it out. Meanwhile, The Fantastic Mr Fox was actually quite well advertised and I did go to see it and while my husband fell asleep in the theater (the only time that's ever happened), I stayed awake and rather wish I hadn't - neither of us have anything particularly good to say of it.
Wow. It’s kinda crazy how Shrek made both a positive and negative influence.
So is that also the reason why in the West Anime is still seen by many as 'something for children' that cannot be compared to 'real movies' or 'real TV shows' even if many of these eastern animation shows are definitely not targeting children as their audience?
I love that you use the track "Juno is in love" in the background of your commentary it brings a nice
vibe. At 13:12 "President of Academy" plays. Will you be doing a commentary on Beastars when the animated series ends?
Great video, thanks
Awesome vid!
Could you do a video on the book and film “The Last Unicorn”?
Cheez and Schlock may have dominated American animation. The Japanese have stepped up their game in feature animation with absolute masterpieces like Your Name and A Silent Voice, not to mention Ghibli standbys. Eventually American animation will buy a clue from films like How To Train Your Dragon and get back to the innovations that made us animation pioneers.
Nowadays it seems like streaming animation projects like Ninona, X-Men 97 and Blood of Zeus.
What a classy intro 🤌🏼
Perhaps this is the darkest timeline…
Why not do a few films for budget that they know would get a good earning and then later make something experimental. As long as the other film successes cover the cost then it’d work. I mean they made a few movies back to back that were far less than what it made. It was expensive regardless but still
Im pretty sure everyone is saying this, but it's not entirely accurate or fair to blame Shrek for the downfall of animation quality or its reputation. Shrek itself is a great movie, a classic even that has obviously withstood the test of time. Whats really to blame are other studios and Dreamworks itself for trying to copy the winning formula of Shrek without understanding why it all worked. And the fact that it would only really work the first time it was done anyways. Obviously, the consequences of Shrek has had negative effects, but thats not on the movie's part so much as the inability of everyone else not being able to move forward from it. I think your analysis is well put together but the very basis of your argument is off center. Its almost there, but not quite right since nobody should blame a movie for being good even if it had unintended negative after effects. If anything, the fall of 2D animated movies should be put on Pixar, but nobody seems to want to blame them since the qualities of their older films were so good. Meanwhile Shrek gets a lot of flack for the simply doing the same thing (i.e. being a good movie), but only because it was done in a different way. Ironically, in doing so, Shrek displayed all the qualities that you and everyone else wants in their animated films: creativitiy, innovative, and not afraid to push boundaries on whats allowed in "children's movies" bc it never saw itself as just a kids movie.
Just their older films?
0:56 the Beastars music in the background
Shrek is love, Shrek is life
Shrek is love, Shrek is life
Say what you will but Ovid was the pinnacle of Greek humor tho, he did receive a 2,300+ year exile
amazing video
also holy shit did bro just use pain star at the end of the video
15:43 I'm actually surprised this audio remaster still included the "however many minutes" thing considering you now knew how much time it took.
I love how he picked up vivziepop at tthe end just to see this video released *just* under 3 yeatrs after the first episode of Hazbin Hotel aired officailly on Amazon.
given all this, isn't it very poetic that Puss in Boots the last Wish, an offspring of the Shrek series, is attempting to undo much of this shift toward irreverent and humor based storytelling in Animation
the best thing in shrek is you get unlimited memes
can someone please tell me whats the music that starts playing at 12:13!!!
I blame corporate greed
Best to turn your attention to the East, and appreciate what they have going on over there.
Not just the east, but other countries as well (eg France.)
The current state of movies has driven me to more Japanese media that doesn't insult western audiences. Jin Roh is my favorite film I've seen.
I think the reason Shrek was such a masterpiece of Animation was aside from its visuals, was that it subvert expectations.
When's the Criterion 4k bluray coming out
Brad birds iron giant and incredible aren’t that great? I beg to differ.
Got it Shrek ruined my life
Shrek was great, but if one wishes to copy a formula one must understand the purpose of the ingredients. Classic blunder.
Actually, Shrek saved the entirety of fiction and humanity's very nature forever and ever, not just in western animation but the entire globe. An one who has seen shrek regardless of dub has been influenced one way or another by the green godly ogre. You can't even think of the word ogre and not think of Shrek. Shrek is love, Shrek is life.
JoJo's Bizarre Adventure's author has stated that Shrek is his favorite animated film. He even put it at #8 in his "Top 20 Suspense Films" list. He knows that everything will be ogre as well
I think it's kind of weird to blame a single work of art for changing the market. Like, sure, Shrek marked a trend shift, but it's not like the market forces that gave it momentum didn't exist beforehand. Hell, this sort of comedy existed in serialised animation for years before Shrek came along. If it wasn't Shrek, it would've been something else
In fact, even without the profit motive, there would always be art created for mass appeal - and there's nothing wrong with that. The real issue is that as long as profit remains the priority (and it will by the design of pur economic system), there will be little desire to take risks with expensive projects
I think blaming Shrek for the current state of the industry is frankly, lazy and convenient. If anyone is to 'blame', it would be the studios and Dreamworks themselves shamelessly parroting it.
dangit this was a whole bummer. Still a good essay. Just dang....
19:48 What's that from?
Atlantis: The Lost Empire (2001)
Disagree on the point of Land Before Time not having a larger lasting cultural impact. Little Foots moms death haunts me to this day sir.
it only really resonates with (traumatized) the kids who watched it then, where as Shrek is still relevant to everyone today well after it released. Ask a young zoomer or gen alpha who Little Foot is and they will have no idea, unless their parents took extensive measures to expose them to it.
Right... It looks like if you cut the 3 minutes that actually talk about Shrek being a success and rename the video, the narrative might actually have some point.
Wait how exactly is brother bear not a musical?
Schaffrillas productions can probably answer that for you.
The characters don't sing in the movie
@@CartoonsEveryone Then why isn’t The Fox and the Hound considered a musical?
@@downhomesunset obviously because most of the characters don't even sing. Only one character sings 3 songs and one song by a disembodied voice.
BOLT MENTIONED 🗣️🗣️🗣️💯🔥💯🗣️💯🔥🗣️ WTF IS A BAD MOVIE???? 🗣️🗣️🔥🔥💯💯💯
No, Bolt is good
@@CardinalWest oh, I’m guessing you’ve never seen this meme format before. I agree with you, it’s a fantastic film, one of my childhood favorites
Omg did you make this video because you thought Shrek was infamous to animation as a whole
Well, we know the problem is mostly because it requires buy-in from the audience since most think treating this medium too seriously equals delusion and pretentiousness. Especially when some beloved artists have been put into question when some of their twisted morals and behavior ended up ruining their reputation. Since we know most people don't like being talked down to if a thinking-type movie was done wrong, That and because of the societal climate we live in as of now; wants something to only conform to their own biases because of our frustration, entitlement problems, and spite.
Note that the movies pre-shrek were animated. It wasnt until after that we started to get these ugly ass cgi movies that all look the same with big bug eyed people. The incredibles was arguably far more damaging than Shrek. Toy story was far more damaging than Shrek. Making the movies well written is what matters, not more "mature". Violence, sexuality and drug use add little to a film. If Simbas father had been in jail the entire movie instead of killed, the movie would change very little beyond the emotional death itself which we had in many older films, most famously bambi which pretty much no one likes.
These experimental films were not what mainstream audiences wanted and the movement towards films like boss baby was inevitable. Especially as the market opened up internationally and was no longer as American centric, where fantasy action became much more important as a chinese audiences would struggle to follow more complex plots but loved visual spectacle in the same way the transformers cgi mess movies took over. The death of visual creativity and explosion of ugly bug eye people that all look the same is where animation really died.
Kung Fu Panda and How to Train your Dragon only above average?! Sacrilege.
We are fucked
Atleast the Super Mario Bros Movie is decent
You could also just say Shrek is love Shrek is life and I’d still agree
Without Shrek, we wouldn't have gotten Last Wish. Also, Madagascar 3 is surprisingly good, despite all odds. That franchise actually got better as it progressed, where most tend to get worse.
Took 13 minutes to discuss Shrek and then rather than explaining WHY he just says "Look, things were worse after", did you have anyone proof read your script?
4:50
12:00 calling it a furry fanfic is as hilarious as it is accurate xD
This is why it’s okay to be a weeb. Abandon the swamp, embrace the intergalactic elf cat empire.
13:05
12:40
I don't think Sherek is to blame here. It was just in the right place in the right time. The industry was already deep in a downwards spiral and would copy and emulate whatever successful film happened to be next. And no matter what film it happened to be, it wouldn't matter, be cause everyone would still complain anyways because copycats are never as good as the original.
Its fairly blame
15:50
Shrek is very good and important to me, less because of the crass humor and references, and more due to the protagonists finding love and being comfortable in their "cursed" form. the problem isn't Shrek, it's capitalism. good art takes more money to make, and doesn't make money as fast as the next minions movie, so why bother making it?