Funny, but a bit flat

Rating: Null/10 (23 May 2004)

I watched Shrek 2 in a full theater, and all of us had a good time. This is indeed a very funny movie. So what if it does not seem as fresh and original as the first movie?
There are a few points that I, after reading other reviews, want to make:
1) This is not a musical, and neither was the first. The songs in both films are clearly there as parody. Remember the song that Fiona sings with the bird in the first? It's not there for it's musical value, it is there because the scene is a parody of the similar scene from Snow White. Likewise, Shrek 2 has songs which are necessary because of what the associated scene is all about; for example, if you have seen Cinderella, you know that Fairy Godmothers have to have their 'magic' song. And so on. Are the songs good, or in any way memorable? No, and I don't think they were intended to be. Probably just the opposite.
2) The movie will suffer, both to older audience members, and to future audience years from now, because of the nature of it's topical references. The first movie satirized fairy tales and the movie made from them, and almost everyone knows those stories and can recognize and laugh at these references. In Shrek 2, a large percentage of references are to subjects other that fairy tales. For example, if older or future viewers don't know who Justin Timberlake is, and what his relationship is/was with a certain actress who provides a voice in this film, they are going to totally miss a funny gag. There are probably hundreds of tiny things like this scattered throughout this movie, and missing them will serious diminish it's humorous quality.
3) The animation is still basically just as sloppy as that in the first film. My guess is that they have some very good people at Dreamworks, but those people are good at computer design and making the characters look good and three dimensional in a static sense. What they are missing are good ANIMATORS, those folks that design and fine tune how things move and get from point A to point B. This is where the two big computer animation studios differ; Dreamworks usually has very good stories, good actors, and good looking but poorly animated films. Pixar, on the other hand, has consistently excellent stories, good actors, and great looking and expertly animated films. It seems like every year or two, both studios come out with big movies, and Dreamworks is first to release, I will see theirs, and say wow! Then, a month or two later, Pixar comes out with theirs, done during the same time period, and I will say WOW!!!
4) This movie need to be seen twice to appreciate the visual gags. There are just too many small things going on, in the corners of the frame or for very short durations, for a viewer to catch the first time around. Look for the Spinal Tap poster, the sharks and the mermaid, the Headless Horseman's sobriety test, etc.