Give it an A for effort

Rating: 7/10 (29 December 2004)

The field of animation has come to be regarded as strictly for children, which makes it all the more surprising when a gem like Shrek tries to aim for something other than the lowest common denominator. Indeed, this is almost a return to the days when fairy tales had something of a moral, and often a good one. The problem, as so often happens in animation, is that the performance of the characters is often reduced to a singular note after a certain point. Thankfully, the note they do play is pleasant to the ear, so to speak, for the most part.
Mike Meyers really ought to consider doing voice-over work full-time. His performance in front of the camera has reached a point where he seems only able to portray stereotypes, and even his stereotypes all seem alike after a while. Behind a microphone, on the other hand, his performance becomes a whole different story. Granted, he doesn't sound like anything more than Mike Meyers trying to sound Scottish, but he does it well enough that the voice fits the character. The rest is sold by the exquisite animation. A critique of Ralph Bakshi's attempt at The Lord Of The Rings stated that while simple, subtle gestures are harder to animate, they are much more effective. Shrek is a case in point.
Eddie Murphy is ponderously annoying as Donkey, the sidekick. This is where one of the fundamental weaknesses in Shrek becomes clear. There is nothing Shrek does with Donkey that he cannot do without Donkey. Granted, the scene with Donkey and the dragon is funny, but aside from that moment, Donkey's schtick gets terribly annoying in a hurry.
Cameron Diaz, like Meyers, proves that she is easier to take when she is behind a microphone rather than in front of a camera. The character of Fiona, and the story behind her, is one of Shrek's crowning touches. The reason why she fears to be seen during the evening is explored with more satisfaction in the sequel, but it says something about the usual fairy tale canon.
In the end, however, Shrek is just too short. Ninety minutes is not enough time to explore characters with such potential. I realise that the film is primarily marketed at a child audience, but there are numerous other films aimed at such an audience where character development, rather than short attention spans, has been treated as a priority. Or perhaps it is just economical use of the screen time. Much of Shrek's screen time is devoted to in-jokes about fairy tales and such, when a bit of time explaining exactly *why* Farquaad is such a killjoy would have done wonders.
Nonetheless, I gave Shrek a seven out of ten. It isn't the best animated feature I've ever seen, and there certainly are better fantasy stories out there. What Shrek has going for it is that it doesn't take itself more seriously than the material demands. And unlike many that make this claim, it can truly keep all members of a family entertained. Such is getting rare in this day and age where "all ages" excludes anyone whose age can be measured with two digits.