Shrek II in the works

[tiggerstheman1]

According to SpecScripts.com, Dreamworks has begun the process of creating the Shrek sequel. Will it actually hit the screens anytime? Don't know.

Lots of other really interesting script sales of late.

 

[toefungus]

That's no surprise, and I'm sure it will be another huge success.

 

[YoHo]

I don't know, for all its success, I still think Shrek's plot was weak, plus, what's the story? Is there another story to be told there? or is this just a Scary movie 2?

I think they pretty much said everything that needed to be said.

 

[tiggerstheman1]

I tend to agree that I don't see a continuation of the storyline.

Side note: The deal was made on June 1st so Dreamworks didn't waste any time in putting something in the pipeline.

The only halfway plausible storyline would be for Shrek to go off and start righting wrongs in other kingdoms. Perhaps Lord Farquat's brother in the neighboring kingdom is pushing around the Ogre's there. Maybe they start a Union. Perhaps they develop a highly imaginative Info-mercial and become ShrekCo...

 

[Buzz2001]

There are plenty more Disney characters they can add to the movie to bump up sales.

 

[PhilJT]

Originally posted by YoHo
I don't know, for all its success, I still think Shrek's plot was weak, plus, what's the story? Is there another story to be told there? or is this just a Scary movie 2?

I think they pretty much said everything that needed to be said.

Maybe Shrek did have a 'weak plot', but I guess I was too busy laughing my *** off to notice. I thought it was fresh, brash, original, and hilarious.
Personally, I have always had a problem with the message in many of the Disney animated films. One of their common themes seems to be "beauty is on the inside, not the outside". Yet, in the end, the ugly guy either gets dumped for the handsome guy (ie, Quasimodo or Grumpy) or he has to change into a handsome prince (the Beast) before he marries the girl. In other words, you may be beautiful on the inside, but you better be beautiful on the outside to have a shot at happiness. I loved the way Shrek turned this formula inside-out.
Shrek left us with this terrific cast of animated characters. Sure somtimes they don't smell very good. Sometimes they fart. Sometimes they're stubborn and stupid. Sometimes they screw up. Just like most people I know. Maybe that's why (along with the incredible computer animation), I actually forgot that I was watching an animated film.
Shrek ends with a wedding. Gee, I can see why you would say that there is no possible way for this to lead to another story. I guess Dreamworks may as well close up shop, since they've already "said everything that needed to be said".
Funny, we could have said the same thing after Toy Story. Luckily for us, there was enough imagination left at Disney to realize that Buzz and Woody might have something more to say.
I haven't seen much to convince me that Disney has a monopoly on the imagination market any more. Quite the contrary. I have, however seen conclusive proof that Dreamworks possesses an abundance of imagination. I'll be looking forward to Shrek 2.

 

[johare]

Really Buzz...what 'Disney' characters did you find in Shrek? All I saw were a bunch of fairy tale characters which existed long before Disney came along...

 

[YoHo]

I have, however seen conclusive proof that Dreamworks possesses an abundance of imagination

Really? An abundance you say?
Wow, then I guess I should just ignore the reviews of AI, or maybe forget the deplorable Road to El Dorado (If Katzenberg didn't own part of the company, he'd have been fired)

Toy Story is a story about Buzz Lightyear.
Toy Story 2 is a story about Woody.
what is Shrek 2 going to be about Donkey?

The theme of Shrek is laudable, but just, because Disney in the past has used classic fairy tale story telling and Dreamworks tapped into the always fleeting modern culture doesn't mean one is superior to the other. In fact, why am I arguing with you since I did not at any time make the Claim that Disney's meathods were superior, only that I found Shrek to be Drek.
It is well documented on these boards that what you found "fresh, brash, original, and hilarious"
I found tepid, unfunny, lacking plot and a bit of a snooze.

I'm applying Walt Disney's standards, look for fresh stories. For the life of me I don't see one in Shrek. Katzenberg and Dreamworks in my mind would be better off persuing a new set of Characters just as they used to do at Disney.

 

[johare]

Toy Story was about Buzz AND Woody.
Toy Story II was also about Woody AND Buzz.
Shrek II will likely feature Shrek AND Donkey.

Besides, if Disney can do Toy Story 2, Return of Jafar, Simba's Pride and Little Mermaid 2, why shouldn't Dreamworks go for a sequel. Where were the 'fresh stories' there? With the exception of TS2 most of those Disney sequels were pretty bad.

btw: I thought AI was Warner Bros. and not Dreamworks.

 

[YoHo]

AI is Spielberg and therefore it is SKG even if Warner Bros. Distributed it.


I'm not saying Disney has't commited the same mistakes, That doesn't make it right. I was quoting Walt's policy, Not Ei$ner's.

I restate, TS was about Buzz and his coping with what he was. Woody was a supporting actor.
TS2 was about Woody confronting a newfound past and Buzz is the supporting Character.

That not withstanding, the point is that both characters were developed enough from Day one to produce two high quality movies. I don't think Shrek and Donkey have that

 

[PhilJT]

I think it will take some time to determine how successful AI is. It is no surprise that the reviews have been mixed. Being a collaboration between 2 of the most creative film makers in history, it is an important and intriguing film. Both Spelberg and Kubrick obviously had a great deal of passion for the story. Whether or not their very different sets of sensibilities were able to blend successfully is certainly a subject of debate. In any event, whether successful or not, AI is an attempt at greatness. The film may have over reached, but to me, that is not a negative. AI may not be the perfect film, but it is a work of genius, it takes risks.
Pearl Harbor, as well as pretty much every other post-Katzenberg (with the notable exceptions of Pixar), fail for just the opposite reason. This film takes no chances. It tries to follow the same formula as the financially successful Titanic. It goes out of its way to not offend anyone, in fear of losing revenue in the Japanese marketplace. Special effects and a shallow love story line are no substitute for passion and vision. This film is so forgettable, that it has already been forgotten.