A case of the whole being better than the sum of the parts

Rating: 8/10 (18 May 2001)

I really enjoyed "Shrek." I was engaged throughout, and was, at times, even moved. However, when I considered the film I realized there were some less than satisfactory elements. Somehow, the film manages to rise above them and achieve a sort of ingratiating brilliance.
The plot, about a curmugeon ogre named Shrek who is just out for some quiet and sanctuary who gets roped into rescuing the Princess Fiona, ingenuously uses and pokes at fairy tale (And Disney movie) conventions. There are plenty of grin-worthy moments, especially from Eddie Murphy's charming sidekick Donkey, but few laugh out loud funny moments, or any lines I can recall after the fact. And while there's little at fault with Mike Myers' performance as Shrek, he really isn't giving the audience anything new. This Scottish voice was hilarious on SNL, funny during "So I Married An Axe Murderer" and getting old during "Austin Powers."
But despite these quibbles, "Shrek" has a way of getting under your skin. Diaz's performance is wonderful (So is her character's animation, wonderfully intricate), and the more "sappy" stuff in the picture actually works better than some of the comedy. One sequence involving Shrek and the Princess at their lonliest is both visually superb, and suprisingly moving.
Even if I can't quite put my finger on what made the film so enjoyable, I can't deny the fact that it was. For whatever reason, the film has an easygoing charm, an almost effortless quality to it (On a film that took several years to make, and cost how many gads of millions of dollars). Kids will enjoy it, and adults will too. I'm a "man" of 20, and I enjoyed it just as much as my younger sibling, and my two parents. As Jeff Craig as it might sound, it's a great family film.