Stunning, touching, funny.

Rating: 10/10 (4 November 2001)

Pixar have outdone themselves once again. Everyone else is an also-ran. I saw "Shrek" for the first time this afternoon on video. Then I went and bought a ticket to "Monsters Inc.". First, this is the second in a disturbing series of coincidences where Pacific Data Images / Dreamworks SKG is first to market with a similar theme to Whatever-Pixar-Has-Announced. It happened with Antz / Bug's Life and now it seems with Shrek / Monsters. While not plagiarism, it is nonetheless eyebrow-raising that the same theme (hero bugs and misunderstood monsters) ends up in both studios. PDI/SKG's screens are crowded and rich, but can't hold a candle to Pixar animation - and their storytelling falls far short as well. Originality? To take a William Steig book and then completely remove any trace of the author's celebrated illustration style is disturbing. And as for the characters, they all seem, like the ants in Antz, to be made of the same basic animation model, stretched and colored to turn them into the needed creature. It's the cheap way out, and it shows. Pixar's animation techniques are visually stunning - see this in a theatre - don't wait for video/DVD - the fur on Sully alone is worth the price of admission. Shrek had its moments - but that was the point - moments - but not a film that hangs together - gags, funny voices (you listen to "Donkey" it's because it's funny to hear Eddie Murphy in a home-boy dialect as a donkey, not because of the riveting dialogue). The acid test? I'm, far too old to be moved by a kid's movie - and I was, as with even some of Pixar's shorts - near tears near the end. I wouldn't rent Shrek again - there's really nothing to go back to look at - but as usual, I'll likely go pay to see Monsters again... how can a character with one eye emote more than most with two? Bravo Pixar! Memo to PDI/SKG - you don't go down in history for cutting corners & me-too. Try again.