My question is: where does the dragon get her lipstick? Does she use regular sized lipstick or a very huge lipstick? If the former, how many lipsticks does she get through in a week? If the latter, does she go to a department store specifically for dragons? A pharmacy for dragons? Or a dragon Sephora? Please, I need to know THE TRUTH.
Fund my kickstarter to make this poignant, moving movie about the dragon finding her lipstick, which will obviously floor everyone at Sundance. They will cry, they will laugh, they will probably be sick from all of their very intense emotions, and then they will all want to meet me and I will say no thank you sir, I have a prior engagement watching Big Joel's new video (which will probably be about, uhhh, let's see....... how the Power Rangers are a metaphor for death of the ego or something).
I like shrek 2 however it kinda played on the original's story again, it was basically fiona getting a second chance to renew her relationship her shrek and if she still wanted to be an ogre or revert back to her human self.
the phrase "i just love thinking about shrek and knowing that shrek exists" really captures the appeal of this channel for me. its so...unfailingly interested in the world
Joel reminds me of what I like about Lindsay Ellis' work in that he doesn't discard old things just because they're old. I don't mean things that are old enough to be classics, I mean things that are just barely old enough to be considered worn out and no longer interesting. People are already bored of stuff like Twilight and Shrek even though the conversation around them was never anything but shallow.
I feel like the first the first shrek was meant to be a satire of disney’s classical portrayal of beauty and attractiveness and more specifically beauty and the beast with the ending being a direct inverse of the prince becoming attractive (farquaad could be seen as a visual metaphor of how not even the people who shape our view of attractiveness can live up to it)
I remember reading that an early version of Shrek 2 would've focused on Shrek inheriting the throne from King Harold but abdicating immediately and letting the fairy tale creatures hold an election instead. Pinocchio and Gingerbread Man would've emerged as the two big candidates and it would've been a satire about the artificiality of democracy under an info-saturated and image-obsessed public. Apparently the director liked it a lot, but felt it lacked the emotion of the first movie. Honestly, it was probably a good call, but I can't get over why they didn't repurpose that premise for the third movie. Shrek is finally given all the power and does the in-character thing (give it up) only for it to lead to a crazy scenario. There would probably need to be a lot more added, but that feels like a much more logical flow out of Shrek 2 than "Shrek passively accepts this is how the kingdom works and he's ready to take on domestic life."
Speaking of Shrek the Third I highly recommend that you look up the deleted scenes for it. Apparently it was originally going to be about Shrek and Artie looking for the Holy Grail so Artie could become king or something like that.
One of the worst/weirdest aspects of Shrek 3 is that Shrek is not the main character. Arthur is. Arthur goes through the emotional development there, Shrek is just the delivery boy. The only thing that changes about Shrek is that he stops being afraid of being a parent after seeing the Cyclops' daughter, basically at the end of the movie, instantly. It's a weird movie.
Movie four doesn't even mention Author for some reason?? Isn't he out there being king? Couldn't he have done something? And the princesses were fun in the movie but I wished that was developed more...
You know, now that I think about it... The Shrek movies kind of go in a weird timeline. Shrek goes from being originally a deviant, outcast from society and rejects its views, to being the ploy for the kingdom and even going as far as destroying another deviant from society, as if he now has the power and jurisdiction to pursue a justice he thinks is right. Like a ruler. And even though he wasn't the ruler of Far Far Away, he easily accepted that he could've been without a thought. He now lives on the top of society and is okay with that. It's just baffling to me how the writers made Shrek turn into the thing he originally rejected and despised.
Which, if it had been intentional and perhaps not a kids movie, might be kinda cool? I mean the takeaways of the first movies are more thought provoking and all around better, but if you're into pessimism the overall narrative we end up with isn't entirely hollow.
@@partycitydumpster I do believe that the first two films were indeed less for Kids than what you are implying, but for sure it's true for the 3 and 4. But yes, they can be read in that way, assuming that there was a certain idea behind them which imo is "Society and Power aren't actually hostile and harmful to deviants by its own nature but they can be such". I mean in the 2nd film issues mostly come from people inside the system, not the system itself (what Lord Farquad represented). It's only natural if those people change (as the King did) the problems are reduced. And yeah, Shrek could have run away from that responsability but he felt that responsability to be correct. Simply refusing to search form the other heir meant to live society without a guide, It meant to betray the will of a man he came to love as a father in law.
@@Hyperversum3 At the end of the second film, the system regulating deviance is changed to make entities once considered abnormalities, like Shrek and the King, normal citizens. As a consequence, the standards used to judge outsiders changes, resulting in a shift in how the general public chooses to identify deviants. Prince Charming happens to be an individual whose current set of character traits did not align with the new policy, resulting in his poor position in the third film. Because the new system benefits him, Shrek is obligated to preserve the new status quo even though, at the time, he didn't really know what it meant. From his immediate vantage point, he knew that the new system was beneficial to the well-being of him, his family, and his friends. That was all that mattered at the time, so he tried to maintain the system. It's in the fourth film that he understands the importance of his power in the current system. If the system ever changes, he could end up like Prince Charming, a man stripped of rank and privileges, forever chasing what he lost. However, unlike Charming, who had no experiences as a deviant, Shrek had led a prior existence on the fringe of society, so he didn't immediately realize what he gave up by dismantling the system he built. While the new system under Rumpelstiltskin supports some aspects of his original life, the associated risks and dangers are now alien to him, as he has become accustomed to using his societal position as a means to mitigate certain punishments (ie the "do the roar" scene). Therefore, he resigns himself to marital life, knowing that he is sacrificing freedom in exchange for stability.
The memes made me forget of how good and fun the first movies were... but what really impresses me is how to this day the 3D doesn't look dated, it is perfectly watchable! That is astonishingly amazing.
When I first saw human characters in Shrek, I thought they were real actors at first. And then I understood that they are not, and the Uncanny Valley is still strong for me with these movies.
It looks a bit wonky, but you're right, it's fine, really. Something about the backgrounds having too much empty space, and the colour choice being off, I think.
@@mellow_mallow I feel like it actually fits the themes of the movie that Human Shrek is far more unsettling and bizarre to look at than normal Ogre Shrek. It never bothered me as a kid because it makes innate sense that Human Shrek should feel wrong and uncomfortable, so I accepted it as part of the movie's emotional journey.
I've always had a deep love for Quasimoto. Maybe because of my own disability, illness, and life experiences, but still. Same for Phantom of the Opera. I've never felt bad for any of them because I can't feel bad for my own situation. But I can reach out my heart to them in a sense like I wish more people would for me and not because they feel bad for me. Which at the end of these movies like Hunchback I feel (some) people "love" him because they feel bad for him.
I think Shrek 4 is my favorite one but it's difficult to express why. I think it has something to do with how Shrek has an incomplete understanding of what an ogre even is and how his solitary swamp life wasn't really natural or healthy. Throughout the films Shrek is a hero to fairy tale creatures but he doesn't consider himself to be one of them any more than he is a human. Time and time again he shrugs off systemic injustice as "not his problem" and when he fights it's always as a struggle to regress to a former state, to have as little responsibility as possible, to sever himself from culture and history as much as he possibly can so he can squat forever in his mudhole in comfortable ignorance. That's his dream. This is why Donkey is the most important character in Shrek, he forces Shrek to grow. The first 3 films are about Shrek being dragged out of his comfort zone against his will and struggling to get back to it. And Fiona isn't a new dream, she's a new element of the mudhole, an upgrade. Shrek 4 is different in that it's the only one where going back to his mudhole is simply no longer a goal that can be achieved, and he needs to find a completely new reason for living. Seriously, he gives up entirely on returning to the old timeline and makes peace with his own death knowing at least that (this version of) Fiona will be okay. Of course he did end up being able to go back, but he had no way to know that was going to happen and the experience changed him, made him more awakened to empathy and willing responsibility and sacrifice.
Limey Lassen but his actions also demonstrate the disastrous nature of the power he holds, and he chooses to take them back to the status quo of monarchy rather than finding a way to stop someone like Rumpelstiltskin from ever gaining that power again.
bumble At the time of the first movie, it was. However, after knowing what it means to have a family and be responsible for others, he was forced into a position where he could no longer truly tolerate solitude.
This shift makes a lot of sense on a meta level too looking at DreamWorks, the first movie is also a huge dig as Disney, the company that DreamWorks founder was fired from/quit. They were competing against Disney as the outcast underdogs at the time, by the time they got to Shrek 3 the franchise and the studio were well established powerful big dogs themselves, and by Shrek 4 they had made some films that were attempts at the wildness of their first few (Turbo anyone?) and learned that embracing the status quo (sequels and adaptations) was safer.
@@Lost_in-the_Woods it reminds me of this quote, "Those who try to fight/takedown the establishment later on become the establishment" or something like that
Oh I'm very into these takes. I'd add to Shrek 2 hinging on change as its theme that it's really interesting they chose the Fairy Godmother as the antagonist. In fairy tales she's taken for granted as a benevolent figure giving the princess a makeover to let her into the castle, but Shrek turns that on its head. It frames her as a villain manipulating appearances and emotions to ultimately reinstate and propogate the status quo. The agent of change in fairy tales is made the villain in a film where change is seen and enforced as coercive.
I never knew how much sociology, psychology, and philosophy was in Shrek until now LOL. This video really reminds me of Michel Foucault's "Madness in Civilization" and Erving Goffman's "Everyday Presentation of the Self." I had to read these for my philosophy classes and WOW do they say similar stuff that you're saying about Shrek. It's fucking hilarious how deep Shrek can be when analysed seriously. Big props to you man! Also, this is my first time watching your videos, definitely will watch more!
Yeah I inmediately thought about Foucault when he talked about powerand how the king didn't really have it, he only act through it as long as he was acceptable.
The Shrek movies are the opus of a man's life: Shrek 1 - Single / love Shrek 2 - Married / family Shrek 3 - Children / settled Shrek 4 - Mid life crisis / resolution
Shrek will move to his universe's equivalent of Florida )Xanth jokes?) to retire with Fiona where there will be Disneyworld jokes since the franchise started as a middle finger to Disney. Their children, as teenagers, will have some adventures of their own, perhaps one of them will try to outdo the others to be the favorite child. He/she will think they have to do something dangerous to win their parents' love. The others will have to go on a quest to bring their sibling back. Of course this will involve the dronkeys too. They will make fun of newer Disney and Pixar movies along the way. Eventually the older sibling will learn that they don't have to do the thing, and that love of family is more important than the McGuffin they were after. It will end with a really heartwarming family moment interrupted at the end by a fart or some inappropriate comment. Then another dancing scene. Perhaps a coronation of the oldest sibling.
I would say Shrek 5's theme would be 'passing the torch' doesn't need to include death, but showing his kids growing up and becoming independent and Shrek letting them go to become individuals. ^u^
Yeah... The humor of the first one is the strongest by far because it comes from a place of the creator being the most venomously enraged. It turns out that it wasn't something he could recreate later for sequels.
The whole character of Farquaad was extremely inspired by Eisner and he has a pretty uncanny resemblance to him, so his entire character is pretty much Katzenburg giving the finger to him.
gum ball To further add on to that, Eisner was actually a really tall guy compared to Katzenburg and even said of him “I think I hate that little midget”, so making Farquaad really small was Katzenburg turning the tables on him.
I've been following you since almost the beginning, Joel, and I'm glad to see that you're starting to get the recognition that you deserve. I'm sure that your subscribers will keep growing, because you really do put out great content.
After watching this video, I suddenly have a much deeper understanding of why Shrek 1 & 2 left me feeling super happy inside, while Shrek 3 & 4 both left me feeling empty and kinda depressed. So it wasn't just because the jokes got worse. (Though that too, I guess.)
I was more pissed by the fourth - I struggle with the words, but it just... feels so contrived and nihilistic. Suddenly, Fionas parents are willing to give up their kingdom to save their daughter, Fiona herself is blissfully ignorant to Shrek's problems, as are his other "friends", and the whole going-back-in-time feels... empty (Puss-in-boots is fat now - ha.) EDIT: Basically, what Joel says in the review: "Once you're part of society, suck it all up and don't change anything - they're too stupid to change anyway."
tbh to me shrek 4 is shrek: midlife crisis he had it good, people loved him, wife and children, no antagonism but then he threw it away for one day of ethereal """freedom""" and at the end learned to not fix what isnt broke by way of being deprived of the fruits of his accomplishments the movie warns of romanticizing your 20s and teens and instead of throwing the shit you worked for away you should just go into therapy or something
Yeah, I personally felt that Joel missed the target on this one too? His sociopolitical breakdown of the series was very interesting, but I felt the theme of Shrek4 was more about growing up & accepting your responsibilities as well as your privileges, and thinking critically about how your choices may affect other people? Plus valuing what you have & what you collectively create with others, rather than always chasing shallow self-indulgent pleasures of the "grass is always greener" variety. Clearly that's not what everybody takes away from it, though...?
I feel like it could have helped if the movie had a little more time to explore what Shrek's issue was with his present life. Does he feel restricted and like he has to be a perfect moral image like the conflict in Shrek 2? Is he not used to being accepted and finds the socialization overwhelming? Or is he, as you said, just questioning things and romanticizing the past?
@@larsatticus6807 I interpret it as a loss of identity. Some parents describe feeling like they've lost themselves. In becoming "Mom" or "Dad," they are no longer Jane or Joe. While he doesn't necessarily resent being a parent, Shrek, instead of feeling like Shrek, feels stuck as "husband," "Dad," and so on. In one line, he talks about being a "real ogre" again. Whatever challenges being an ogre brought, Shrek still took pride in being one - it was an intrinsic part of his identity, and one he feels he's lost. For me, the fourth film is definitely a midlife crisis story.
I only just realized while watching this what happened to mama bear. Holy shit it always made me wonder where she was when seeing papa bear and baby bear and hearing him say “I miss mama” I just never realized she wasn’t with them because she was turned into a rug!
Whodoggit didn't know this video would end with the suggestion that Shrek world is a dystopia - 180° from the traditional Disney kingdom narrative, my life has changed, I'm happy, shrek fever
THANK YOU. Its nice to see SOMEONE taking this series seriously. The second movie is a modern comedy classic, a real satire of the early 2000's and Beverly Hills culture.
Y’know, Joel, I’ve genuinely had my abilities of perception enhanced by your videos. The flexibility and non-doctrinaire character of your thought is really admirable. Keep up the fantastic work.
Whodogit! Didn't know a video could make me this happy! Um...Shrek! Shrek! Shrek! I have Shrek fever! Uh, and then just close it out with a dot, dot, dot.
I have Shrek fever.... But seriously, but you did a great job Big Joel, and the phrase "Shrekoverse" delights me in unfathomable ways. You took this in a different direction that I was expecting. I expected you to lean even more into the "performative" aspect, how Shrek 1 implies that a lot of the ways Shrek behaves are because this is the way "ogres" are "supposed" to be, and rejects it, just as a lot of the other fairy tale creatures do as well. But this approach fascinates me, and gave me a lot to think about. Thank you!
It's interesting that you bring that up, because it was sorta a deleted part of this paper. for some reason, I wanted to avoid talking about the metatextual qualities of Shrek, and when I started trying to write about this idea, it became impossible haha.
That makes sense to me! I think that was a good call, while I find performativity fascinating I don't think the dynamics of power are discussed as often or as well as you do in this video. It gave it a more unique approach. I was just telling my friend how much I appreciated that you thoroughly avoided the well-trodden ground of "Shrek was a critique of commercialism and then became the ultimate expression of it."
"Shrek was a critique of commercialism and then became the ultimate expression of it." Makes me think of that Simpsons analysis. The Simpsons was a parody/critique of the family sitcom genre, and it became a bland generic sitcom itself as time went on...
"Well actually, that would be a _giant._ Now ogres, oh they're much worse. They'll make a suit out of your freshly peeled skin! Squeeze the jelly from your eyes - actually, it's quite good on toast."
I agreed with everything up until the Shrek 4 discussion. The Shrek series tells of a man in different roles within society. In Shrek 1 he is seen as a deviant by both society and himself. In Shrek 2 he is seen as a deviant by society, even though he doesn't see himself that way anymore. In Shrek 3 ..... ............... .... .. In Shrek 4 he is finally accepted by society, which is something he has never experienced before. Of course under these circumstances he would have a sense of unease and feel insecure in this role. Because of this he yearns for the life he had before when he was viewed as a deviant, simply because it is familiar to him. When in a new position, people tend to default back to what they know, as it is more predictable. Shrek signs a contract to experience a day as things used to be as he in unsure of himself and the role he know plays. Over the course of the film he learns that he has changed from the person he used to be and he no longer is happy living the role of a societal deviant. It makes him appreciate his current life and shows him that even if his new domestic life is unfamiliar, it is worth navigating this new territory because he loves his family. So in the end, he is not settling because he has realised that things could be worse. He is genuinely excited to continue to live his life with Fiona, and committed to making the most of everyday.
you always look earnestly and analytically at the things nobody else takes seriously, the lorax, rocky iv and logan paul are some other great examples, and you always find so much meaning that i would never even have imagined was present. idk you’re my favorite keep doing what you’re doing bc the world needs more of it
12 seconds into the video and I'm nervous; "I just love thinking about Shrek, and knowing Shrek exists..." I've got a feeling I've seen this video before and it ends with "Shrek is love, Shrek is life"...
Big Joel You really should! It explores the Shrekiverse outside of what's happening in the main series and adds more background to the minor characters.
Oh dear god the memories are flooding back As a child, I had an *unhealthy* obsession with Puss in Boots. Leaving the movie theater, I tap danced around the tile floor of the mall like he did in the film. Later I got the Xbox Kinect game for it, and every play session, slowly but surely, I'd grab an extra article of clothing from my mom's closet. I put on a little sombrero. A few days later I found a pair of boots. Next thing you know I'm wielding a kebab skewer and waving it everywhere. (the kinect only used motion controls) Not to mention watching the movie nearly EVERY NIGHT. I discovered my destiny, and it had been fulfilled. 𝙄 𝙖𝙢 𝙥𝙪𝙨𝙨 𝙞𝙣 𝙗𝙤𝙤𝙩𝙨 Luckily this madness stopped after two weeks. But those were... quite the two weeks.
I just thought it was OK. It felt sort of similar to lots of children's cartoons. I felt like Shrek is for teens and adults but PiB was definitely just for kids. None of that "suck it Disney" humor.
I went to a screening where they accidentally played paranormal activity instead of puss and they gave us free tickets to make up for all the kids being traumatized, so I'd say I like it.
I actually disagree with you on your analysis of shreck forever after. While looking at the entire series as one larger story I see where your pulling that theme from but I don't think that was the intention. Instead of Shrek realizing subservience to society and power is the best timeline I think it's a brilliant take on love and the necessity of self sacrifice. His own freedoms and pleasures are sacrificed for his wife and family, but that's ok. Because making them happy is more then enough for him to be happy. I think it's a step into fatherhood and the responsibility that comes with it for his character. I've always kind of seen the first two movies as sequential and the third movie as not counting at all. And finally the fourth being an additive story that doesn't fit with the narrative of the first two. But anyway I love your videos you have inspired me to attempt writing a similar analysis script of my own one day.
Yeah i think the movie is about how Shrek passed so much time without insecurities and not being an outcast, that he took all he gained for granted. Shrek was nostalgic about a time that was objetively worse for him, but that was so long ago he forgot how unhappy he was despite all the fun times. I think the movie is about someone who, after some time in commodity, takes for granted what he was and wishes to go back to the "good ol' days" and is confronted with the fact that he was never happy then.
The problem however, is that I don't think Shrek 4 really goes for that. Firstly, Shrek 2 was already all about how Shrek was willing to sacrifice his own freedom, pleasure and even appearance for Fiona's sake. So if we accept this is what Shrek 4 is doing then all Shrek 4 does is essentially make Shrek walk backwards so it can make him walk forward again. And it doesn't even go all the way to where it was since it ends with Shrek and Fiona both being subservient to society. With this ending, what's the guarantee it won't happen again in like 10 years when Shrek misses being free again? Secondly, Shrek's main motivation in 4 is to get things back to normal because his old life was good and this life isn't and that he'd die in 24 hours. Not out of sacrifice for his family or to give them the best life. I feel if you wanted to explore that theme of Shrek being responsible in Shrek 4, a better set up would have been that Rumplestilskin actually lets Shrek go and there is no time limit. Like, Rumplestilskin tells him "I have no conflict with you, just other Ogres, don't get in my way and I won't kill you". So now that Shrek has his freedom again, he goes for it because he believes he can make life right for his friends who don't know him anymore. This would be a better story, but it would still basically be a repeat of Shrek 1's final act.
@@FraserSouris I think you still kind of missed a lot of Shrek's main character arc in Forever After. _At first,_ Shrek's goal is to get his life back on track with his remaining day, but it's made clear that this endeavor is still one of selfishness-every time he tries to make Fiona fall in love with him again with the intent of reversing his own mistake, he is unsuccessful because he still hasn't considered the state of things in the present. It's why their kiss on the bridge doesn't work. Shrek, at the beginning of the movie, wants his old life back, but it is his inability to see the "right now" *at all* that keeps him from truly appreciating the ones he loves both before and after the contract. Once he realizes this, he straight up gives up on retrieving his happily ever after, rather opting to save the captured ogres and fight for Fiona's cause even when given a chance to maybe cheat his way out of his predicament. This is even further reiterated when he straight-up tells Fiona while dying that she'll find happiness and a family without him, even in this new world. Because of this, once he finds himself back at the party, he can truly enjoy his life and the people in it unimpeded by the same selfish notions as before. Yes, Shrek 2 (still the better movie lol) makes Shrek willing to give up his previous life to make Fiona happy. But this movie _does_ add to that, even if not perfectly-it sees Shrek learn to ditch the concept of a "previous life" altogether, which has worked to his detriment over the course of the series. To this end, this would have been less impactful (or even impossible) without the explicit time limit. Shrek 1 and 2 both give Shrek free-rein over his involvement-at any point, he can walk away, and this works for both of their main messages. In Forever After, though, if he could simply just say "fuck it" and go away at any time as you suggest, that previously-mentioned flaw probably wouldn't be addressed. He'd just be able to sit back and take things slow knowing he'd eventually just go "back to normal" anyways, which stems from his harmful outlook on the past.
so basically, the shrek series is just a weird thought process of "oh i hate power ew it's wrong" to "power is unchangeable and great yeah" then "wait i think i liked hating power" to "shut up and deal with it" wow, that makes more sense the more and more i think about it
It's super weird because at the end of Shrek 2 they fix all their problems forever but then it's like "Well, yeah, you fixed everything. Make another film." and the writers are sort-of like "Oh, okay.... I guess we're just going to get things off-track just to get back to the status quo now." and then they were forced to stick with the same thing for the final one purely because that's what this world is and they can't really escape what was the best possible ending.
Right? And they made a lot of spin offs, like the Puss and Boots movie+show, and other random holiday specials for Shrek as a whole, so I don't think the possibility of Dreamworks making another Shrek film is that unlikely. Plus, Pixar's been doing it a whole lot with the sequels and new parts, maybe Dreamworks will follow.
This was a _very_ good video. That being said, I'm surprised you didn't bring up Shrek's feelings about fatherhood - I thought that Shrek The Third and Shrek Forever After were largely focused on that.
Is it just me or did the fourth movie completely disregard the second? Without Shrek the Prince still would have come to save Fiona. The king and queen had no reason to go to rumplestiltskin.
There's maybe a SLIGHT way that makes sense, but it would have required making it clear that Shrek's journey to the castle clears some kind of obstacle that would be impossible for Charming
Geo Globe okay but yet in the fourth movie the king and queen did not do the deal with rumple because Shrek saved Fiona so they were trying to save her before Charming even made an attempt to save Fiona. As though he and the second movie never happened
I'm just wondering where are Fairy God Mother and Prince Charming in the alternate world where Shrek doesn't save Fiona. Did they go somewhere else? Were they still killed? The movie totally pretends that factor doesn't exist.
Shrek Forever After actually does have a deeper message behind it. The message is that everything, even the things you worked hard for, can be taken away from you if you let them. Nothing is intrinsically 'yours', it's all just relative. Fleeting. Subjective. The films all followed the same inherent line of morality: "It's okay to be different.", "Take pride in who you really are.", "Take responsibility for yourself", and finally "Cherish what you have in the moment". The four movies, even if they go down in quality, all bear the same moral tone of being mature and growing as a person, that's what makes the Shrek movies so good. Shrek _is_ Life.
"Just because people treat you like a villain, an ogre, or just some loser, it doesn't mean you are one." But... Shrek IS an ogre...? I never understood this line in the movie.
Whodoggit, didn't know a video could make me this happy. Shrek Shrek Shrek, I have Shrek fever. Uh... and then just close it out with like a dot, dot, dot.
That's a very interesting take on the series as a whole... I never rewatched the 3rd or 4th so I never really saw this thematic change- thanks for pointing it out
I really loved this video but I don't think Shrek 4 tells us that "this was the best possible worlds". I think he just learns to be happy again with his life. I mean, I know it was so obvious and probably the intended message here; but it is just that we all forget to appreciate what we got in our life. It is not the best version, it could be better but it doesn't mean that it is not great. I'm sorry if its hard to read my english, but yeah. People usually tend to remember what is important and what isn't after they lose those things.
I always interpreted that it's simply a story about communication. If Shrek just asked "Can I have a 'Me Time' weekend sometimes? I love you guys but I kinda need some time for myself, just a couple days!" he would be much less overwhelmed. Many good people commit the mistake of not speaking up about their own needs and it just ends up creating an embittered outlook. I will always assume that Shrek will communicate more after what he has gone through, none of this sociopolitical stuff.
Tho it’s horribly depressing, I *_love_* the scene in _”I am legend”_ where *Will Smith* recites the dialog of _Shrek_ along with them... the scene with his dog tho, that *_always_* kills me 😢
I just love the clever satire of the first two movies. Prince Charming's spoiled ass eating a fast food in the carriage as his coddling mom essentially forces the king to have charming marry Fiona is just fitting for both midieval and modern contexts.
First two movies: Shrek represents the unending nature of the class struggle as even as he gains power and status he is still ostracized by the state's power structures. 3 and 4: Shrek is a bougie bitch and gets the wall
It's not even a hard jump, the proletariat is seduced by the small favors and becomes a petite burgoise that forgets the needs of his class, sympathizing with the rich in their policies.
Vladimir Lenin thats some misogynist revisionism fam. while shrek represents the uneducated backwoods semi-lumpen agricultural laborer, fionna represents the urban working class, because she has the ability to transform into the privelaged class, "the red bourgoisie" after the establishment of the dotp but instead she acts as a revolutionary agent by sticking to her principles and continuing to transform society through revolutionary mass organization while maintaining the class character of the state as authentically proletarian ie. seeking to destroy class rather than position revolutionary urban workers as new technocrats. shrek is also thoroughly anti deng xiao ping
Really appreciated your analysis here, and thanks for the heads-up about the 4th movie which I haven't seen. I wonder if parenthood is seen as changing one's relationship to power structures - that one becomes more tolerant because you are supposed to prioritize stability for your kids' sake.
This is a great video. I wonder how this interacts with the politics of fairy tales in general, for whom commentary on the state usually boils down to good king = good state, bad king = bad state. Come to think of it, usually a fairy tale will feature a bad king; any good kings involved will have died at the beginning, and/or be crowned at the end (often being the main character). It's easy to make a fairy tale that *looks* like negative commentary on the state if you start out with a bad king, that the good people fight. But in a fairy tale the good people have to win, meaning it ends with good government, which means your sequel will *have* to be of the "good king dies, is replaced by bad king who must be replaced by good king again" variety, which makes a very different statement about the role of the state. In that sense the second Shrek movie looks like it was the most innovative of the bunch.
I literally paused the video before you went into the shrek forever after analysis, watched the whole movie (apparently i missed that one) just so i could finish the last 4 minutes. Well worth my time. Subed.
I always forget Shrek Forever After even exists and whenever I see clips from it I remember why. That entire film was just a miserable slog about how your unfulfilling life is the best you’re going to get. They were clearly going for the whole It’s a Wonderful Life angle but it was just handled so terribly.
icantthinkofaname, that's your opinion. You see to me All the Shrek Movies are all great. And Shrek Forever After is such an amazing movie just like the rest and especially an amazing emotional ending!!! Yeah I know that my opinion may not matter to you, but that's just what I think. All I know is that I can't wait for the 5th Shrek Movie coming out in 2019 or 2020.
I actually loved Shrek Forever After. It was a big contrast to the first three movies and I loved the dark route it turned. It also taught the lesson of contentment which I think is portrayed well in the movie, and how making rash decisions can affect your life. Not the best Shrek film, but definitely not the worst.
I think there's an argument to be made that the fourth movie is more about cultural identity than the other two. Shrek, finally established and welcomed as part of a cohesive culture, is dissatisfied with his life because he doesn't see himself reflected in it. He feels like an ogre playing at being human- an assimilationist- as opposed to a welcomed outsider. Over the course of his movie, he gains an understanding of his culture as an ogre that he never had before. By the end of the movie, he has a new understanding of and appreciation for his own unique culture that he can pass on to his children. He goes from having to give up his identity as an ogre in order to reproduce human culture to having a renewed sense of identity. He's content because now he can bring something to the table, so to speak- his children can learn about ogre society *and* human society, instead of defaulting to a human set of norms and expectations, and true cultural exchange can take place. Its the same sort of difference between things like "being one of the guys" or "one of the good ones" and being recognized as your own, different individual. Shrek is accepted as (functionally) human, but he doesn't want to be a human, he wants to be an ogre and accepted as such. The whole movie is him acknowledging this and learning what that means and finding fulfillment in his identity.
I always saw Shrek's motivations in The Third as a sort of two way road. He's clearly become more close with Far Far Away and it's people, so he doesn't want to just leave them without any sort of leader. Plus, it's shown that Charming takes over when Far Far Away has no ruler, Shrek may have anticipated this, and knows he can't let it happen to those he knows. He wants peace to continue in his in-law's kingdom, regardless of how horrible and weak of a person he was when younger. However, he knows that in order for that peace to continue, there needs to be a ruler who both knows how to lead, and wants to do so, and as such, he takes a chance to go after the other heir.
Your point at around 10:45 or so about the king only having power so long as he was acceptable is interesting in light of actual history. I've been listening to the British History Podcast, and that's literally how it was for the kings of early medieval Briton: they held power only so long as they could keep convincing the nobles that they had power. Their job was to keep money flowing to their support through various conquests and a more unified England WITHOUT constant fighting actually really threatened the power of the king since keeping the nobles happy was the king's primary job, upward mobility for nobles required acquiring more land, and they were running out of land and neighbors to snatch it from.
it seems to me that the overall arc of the 4 shrek films may mirrors the journey of a hollywood aspirant. The hollywoodness was always my least favorite aesthetic element in shrek, an as the series progresses this aesthetic shoulders out more an more of the fantasy.
Huh, that is an interesting take on things. I suppose that's the real reason the later films weren't as good -- they go from taking fairy tale tropes and overturning them to just, well, going back to the usual fairy tale tropes. Shrek 1 and 2 were about characters who are usually depicted as heroes being the villains, whereas Shrek 3 and 4 we see, well, villains being villains, never exploring *why* they're villains or *why* the "norm" is good. Huh.
Fun fact: the opening credits were replaced for different languages in cinemas (not so in home releases), but not replaced with other credits: rather, Mike Myers' credit was replaced with actual mud without letters, the Eddie Murphy's credit was replaced with just the empty broken mirror; and as a kid I never understood why the film focused so much in the background elements during the opening.
Y'know, I could never understand why the last two movies left me feeling... weird? But you totally nailed it, so thanks for solving that mystery! Once again, brilliant stuff
I want to make a point. Farquad did not know where the fairy tale creatures went. He was torturing Gingy to get the information. The fairy tale creatures sent Shrek to Farquad because they judged him by his cover and thought he would do something ogrish.
Pinocchio can be seen being sold by Geppetto just before Donkey was brought up to the soldier ("Five shillings for the possessed toy.") When Donkey escapes, I do not recall seeing Pinocchio escape as well. Since we later see him at Shrek's swamp with the other fairy tale creatures ("Nobody invited us... We were forced to come [to your swamp]!"), it is safe to assume he did not escape, and that he and the others were the okes captured and ghettoed by Farquaad and Gingy was being tortured for info on another group.
This video has given me many insights into the Shrek franchise, including that the villain in Shrek 4 looks uncannily like Vice journalist Oobah Butler.
Fascinating video, although I would tend to believe Shrek 3 and Shrek 4 are the inevitable consequence Shrek 1 and 2. The point about power and structure is once you are accepted into a society you inherently become part of it. It's impossible to be a society of misfits because once you find your place you now fit in the resulting Society. In a way that's why the theme of the X-Men is kind of terrifying. They are permanent outsiders, but only because they are presented as inherently better. A bit like that old shampoo commercial don't hate me because I'm beautiful. Really it's one step off of the philosophy of Rick Sanchez, where any atrocity is justified because you know, he's just better than everyone else. In this way Shrek is coming to terms with the reality of personal and societal growth.
This was such a welcome break from copy and paste channels, honestly. I love the Shrek movies, and it's always nice to hear an intelligent point of view on something most people see as just a joke/C-grade movie. Good vid. I have shrek fever...
Shrek 2 is genuinely, unironically a cinematic masterpiece
I haven't seen Shrek since I was a kid, maybe I should watch them again
Indeed, it is.
Princess Bubblegum did nothing wrong
You should.
Finally, someone also said it again.
Oh shit my favorite youtuber commenting on my other favorite youtubers videos
Should’ve called the video “Unpeeling the Shrek series”
Leo Phoenix Underrated comment.
Wew lad. Dunno why this isn't pinned.
Like onions
*unpeeling*
@@genevieveowusu885 lmao only just noticed this 😂
My question is: where does the dragon get her lipstick? Does she use regular sized lipstick or a very huge lipstick? If the former, how many lipsticks does she get through in a week? If the latter, does she go to a department store specifically for dragons? A pharmacy for dragons? Or a dragon Sephora? Please, I need to know THE TRUTH.
I want a full movie about the dragon finding her lipstick.
What if it's actually blood O.O
thanks, this is the kind of stuff i go to the comments for :)
Fund my kickstarter to make this poignant, moving movie about the dragon finding her lipstick, which will obviously floor everyone at Sundance. They will cry, they will laugh, they will probably be sick from all of their very intense emotions, and then they will all want to meet me and I will say no thank you sir, I have a prior engagement watching Big Joel's new video (which will probably be about, uhhh, let's see....... how the Power Rangers are a metaphor for death of the ego or something).
I'd respect that.
For me personally, Shrek 2 is the best Shrek movie. It’s like, all the greatness of the first movie, with twice as many iconic characters.
yeah, I've always said it's the franchises magnum opus for those reason you gave + much more.
Don’t click on the flag agreed!!!
I like shrek 2 however it kinda played on the original's story again, it was basically fiona getting a second chance to renew her relationship her shrek and if she still wanted to be an ogre or revert back to her human self.
shrek 2 is the best but shrek 4 is my favorite
the phrase "i just love thinking about shrek and knowing that shrek exists" really captures the appeal of this channel for me. its so...unfailingly interested in the world
Joel reminds me of what I like about Lindsay Ellis' work in that he doesn't discard old things just because they're old. I don't mean things that are old enough to be classics, I mean things that are just barely old enough to be considered worn out and no longer interesting. People are already bored of stuff like Twilight and Shrek even though the conversation around them was never anything but shallow.
I feel like the first the first shrek was meant to be a satire of disney’s classical portrayal of beauty and attractiveness and more specifically beauty and the beast with the ending being a direct inverse of the prince becoming attractive (farquaad could be seen as a visual metaphor of how not even the people who shape our view of attractiveness can live up to it)
That makes sense! Awesome viewpoint
Defenitly! even I noticed that at a young age
It's 4am but there's a 20 minute in-depth analysis video on Shrek. It hurts but I do it for Big Joel
Big Lover are you an Aussie?
Almost certainly NZ.
Big Lover I love him so much
Incredibly appropriate name
Big Lover, I am you from the future. I did the same thing.
"I just love thinking about shrek and knowing that shrek exists..."
...
Beautiful, isn't it?
I think Big Joel neglected to check himself, because he has thoroughly Shreked himself.
I remember reading that an early version of Shrek 2 would've focused on Shrek inheriting the throne from King Harold but abdicating immediately and letting the fairy tale creatures hold an election instead. Pinocchio and Gingerbread Man would've emerged as the two big candidates and it would've been a satire about the artificiality of democracy under an info-saturated and image-obsessed public. Apparently the director liked it a lot, but felt it lacked the emotion of the first movie.
Honestly, it was probably a good call, but I can't get over why they didn't repurpose that premise for the third movie. Shrek is finally given all the power and does the in-character thing (give it up) only for it to lead to a crazy scenario. There would probably need to be a lot more added, but that feels like a much more logical flow out of Shrek 2 than "Shrek passively accepts this is how the kingdom works and he's ready to take on domestic life."
that sounds so much better than what Shrek the Third actually ended up being
Speaking of Shrek the Third I highly recommend that you look up the deleted scenes for it. Apparently it was originally going to be about Shrek and Artie looking for the Holy Grail so Artie could become king or something like that.
One of the worst/weirdest aspects of Shrek 3 is that Shrek is not the main character. Arthur is. Arthur goes through the emotional development there, Shrek is just the delivery boy. The only thing that changes about Shrek is that he stops being afraid of being a parent after seeing the Cyclops' daughter, basically at the end of the movie, instantly. It's a weird movie.
i know right, the whole parenthood aspect of shrek 3 is just....so underdeveloped and boring
Oh aye -- I'm a delivery boy.
I'm not a messenger boy...I'm a delivery boy
Krisha Actually I love all the movies, always surprised that people don't like Shrek 3
Movie four doesn't even mention Author for some reason?? Isn't he out there being king? Couldn't he have done something? And the princesses were fun in the movie but I wished that was developed more...
"I just love thinking about Shrek-"
Who dosent?
Pleasantly surprised to see you in the comments
"I just love thinking about Shrek and knowing Shrek exists puts a smile on my face"
Same dude. Same.
Quote of the year right there
You know, now that I think about it... The Shrek movies kind of go in a weird timeline. Shrek goes from being originally a deviant, outcast from society and rejects its views, to being the ploy for the kingdom and even going as far as destroying another deviant from society, as if he now has the power and jurisdiction to pursue a justice he thinks is right. Like a ruler. And even though he wasn't the ruler of Far Far Away, he easily accepted that he could've been without a thought. He now lives on the top of society and is okay with that. It's just baffling to me how the writers made Shrek turn into the thing he originally rejected and despised.
Which, if it had been intentional and perhaps not a kids movie, might be kinda cool? I mean the takeaways of the first movies are more thought provoking and all around better, but if you're into pessimism the overall narrative we end up with isn't entirely hollow.
@@partycitydumpster I do believe that the first two films were indeed less for Kids than what you are implying, but for sure it's true for the 3 and 4.
But yes, they can be read in that way, assuming that there was a certain idea behind them which imo is "Society and Power aren't actually hostile and harmful to deviants by its own nature but they can be such".
I mean in the 2nd film issues mostly come from people inside the system, not the system itself (what Lord Farquad represented). It's only natural if those people change (as the King did) the problems are reduced. And yeah, Shrek could have run away from that responsability but he felt that responsability to be correct. Simply refusing to search form the other heir meant to live society without a guide, It meant to betray the will of a man he came to love as a father in law.
yeah, but you know, ogres... they have layers...
@@Hyperversum3
At the end of the second film, the system regulating deviance is changed to make entities once considered abnormalities, like Shrek and the King, normal citizens. As a consequence, the standards used to judge outsiders changes, resulting in a shift in how the general public chooses to identify deviants. Prince Charming happens to be an individual whose current set of character traits did not align with the new policy, resulting in his poor position in the third film.
Because the new system benefits him, Shrek is obligated to preserve the new status quo even though, at the time, he didn't really know what it meant. From his immediate vantage point, he knew that the new system was beneficial to the well-being of him, his family, and his friends. That was all that mattered at the time, so he tried to maintain the system.
It's in the fourth film that he understands the importance of his power in the current system. If the system ever changes, he could end up like Prince Charming, a man stripped of rank and privileges, forever chasing what he lost. However, unlike Charming, who had no experiences as a deviant, Shrek had led a prior existence on the fringe of society, so he didn't immediately realize what he gave up by dismantling the system he built. While the new system under Rumpelstiltskin supports some aspects of his original life, the associated risks and dangers are now alien to him, as he has become accustomed to using his societal position as a means to mitigate certain punishments (ie the "do the roar" scene). Therefore, he resigns himself to marital life, knowing that he is sacrificing freedom in exchange for stability.
The memes made me forget of how good and fun the first movies were... but what really impresses me is how to this day the 3D doesn't look dated, it is perfectly watchable! That is astonishingly amazing.
When I first saw human characters in Shrek, I thought they were real actors at first. And then I understood that they are not, and the Uncanny Valley is still strong for me with these movies.
It looks a bit wonky, but you're right, it's fine, really. Something about the backgrounds having too much empty space, and the colour choice being off, I think.
it's... acceptable
I really don't like handsome shrek tho
Oh yeah, Shrek 3D was a thing.
@@mellow_mallow I feel like it actually fits the themes of the movie that Human Shrek is far more unsettling and bizarre to look at than normal Ogre Shrek. It never bothered me as a kid because it makes innate sense that Human Shrek should feel wrong and uncomfortable, so I accepted it as part of the movie's emotional journey.
I've always had a deep love for Quasimoto. Maybe because of my own disability, illness, and life experiences, but still. Same for Phantom of the Opera. I've never felt bad for any of them because I can't feel bad for my own situation. But I can reach out my heart to them in a sense like I wish more people would for me and not because they feel bad for me. Which at the end of these movies like Hunchback I feel (some) people "love" him because they feel bad for him.
I think Shrek 4 is my favorite one but it's difficult to express why. I think it has something to do with how Shrek has an incomplete understanding of what an ogre even is and how his solitary swamp life wasn't really natural or healthy. Throughout the films Shrek is a hero to fairy tale creatures but he doesn't consider himself to be one of them any more than he is a human. Time and time again he shrugs off systemic injustice as "not his problem" and when he fights it's always as a struggle to regress to a former state, to have as little responsibility as possible, to sever himself from culture and history as much as he possibly can so he can squat forever in his mudhole in comfortable ignorance. That's his dream. This is why Donkey is the most important character in Shrek, he forces Shrek to grow. The first 3 films are about Shrek being dragged out of his comfort zone against his will and struggling to get back to it. And Fiona isn't a new dream, she's a new element of the mudhole, an upgrade. Shrek 4 is different in that it's the only one where going back to his mudhole is simply no longer a goal that can be achieved, and he needs to find a completely new reason for living. Seriously, he gives up entirely on returning to the old timeline and makes peace with his own death knowing at least that (this version of) Fiona will be okay. Of course he did end up being able to go back, but he had no way to know that was going to happen and the experience changed him, made him more awakened to empathy and willing responsibility and sacrifice.
Limey Lassen but his actions also demonstrate the disastrous nature of the power he holds, and he chooses to take them back to the status quo of monarchy rather than finding a way to stop someone like Rumpelstiltskin from ever gaining that power again.
Limey Lassen That's why Shrek is a metaphor for bisexuality
but swamp life *is* natural and healthy for ogres. different things can be natural and healthy for different kinds of people
Limey, you just said the best comment about the most underrated Shrek movie. Thank you.
bumble
At the time of the first movie, it was. However, after knowing what it means to have a family and be responsible for others, he was forced into a position where he could no longer truly tolerate solitude.
Hoo doggy, didn't know video could make me this happy shrek shrek shrek, i have shrek fever...
This shift makes a lot of sense on a meta level too looking at DreamWorks, the first movie is also a huge dig as Disney, the company that DreamWorks founder was fired from/quit. They were competing against Disney as the outcast underdogs at the time, by the time they got to Shrek 3 the franchise and the studio were well established powerful big dogs themselves, and by Shrek 4 they had made some films that were attempts at the wildness of their first few (Turbo anyone?) and learned that embracing the status quo (sequels and adaptations) was safer.
Holy shit, Turbo was Dream Works? I don't think a single fuck was given about that movie in the entire Kingdom of Denmark where I live
Why does no one like shrek 4?
@@ctons I like shrek 3 more, but also I haven't watched it in absolutely forever and just like it for the nostalgia of the movie and the ps2 game
You either die a rebellion or live long enough to see yourself become the status quo.
@@Lost_in-the_Woods it reminds me of this quote, "Those who try to fight/takedown the establishment later on become the establishment" or something like that
"I just love thinking about Shrek, and knowing that Shrek exists. [Shrek is love, Shrek is life]"
- Big Joel, 2018
You okay there Big Joel? Sounded like you had a deadly case of Shrek Fever there in the end
Oh I'm very into these takes. I'd add to Shrek 2 hinging on change as its theme that it's really interesting they chose the Fairy Godmother as the antagonist. In fairy tales she's taken for granted as a benevolent figure giving the princess a makeover to let her into the castle, but Shrek turns that on its head. It frames her as a villain manipulating appearances and emotions to ultimately reinstate and propogate the status quo. The agent of change in fairy tales is made the villain in a film where change is seen and enforced as coercive.
“I just love thinking about shrek and knowing shrek exists”.
and who among us who could say otherwise
"There is so much to do and so much to see," said Candide, "so what is wrong with taking the backstreets?"
I never knew how much sociology, psychology, and philosophy was in Shrek until now LOL. This video really reminds me of Michel Foucault's "Madness in Civilization" and Erving Goffman's "Everyday Presentation of the Self." I had to read these for my philosophy classes and WOW do they say similar stuff that you're saying about Shrek.
It's fucking hilarious how deep Shrek can be when analysed seriously. Big props to you man! Also, this is my first time watching your videos, definitely will watch more!
Foucault was a huge influence on this video!
Yeah I inmediately thought about Foucault when he talked about powerand how the king didn't really have it, he only act through it as long as he was acceptable.
When you said “he is the state” all I heard was *I AEM THE SENNATE*
Polar GrizBear I fucking love that I know exactly what you mean and just...appreciate you for your prequel memes
The Shrek movies are the opus of a man's life:
Shrek 1 - Single / love
Shrek 2 - Married / family
Shrek 3 - Children / settled
Shrek 4 - Mid life crisis / resolution
Will Shrek 5 next year be about the end of a man's life then?
Shrek will move to his universe's equivalent of Florida )Xanth jokes?) to retire with Fiona where there will be Disneyworld jokes since the franchise started as a middle finger to Disney. Their children, as teenagers, will have some adventures of their own, perhaps one of them will try to outdo the others to be the favorite child. He/she will think they have to do something dangerous to win their parents' love. The others will have to go on a quest to bring their sibling back. Of course this will involve the dronkeys too. They will make fun of newer Disney and Pixar movies along the way. Eventually the older sibling will learn that they don't have to do the thing, and that love of family is more important than the McGuffin they were after. It will end with a really heartwarming family moment interrupted at the end by a fart or some inappropriate comment. Then another dancing scene. Perhaps a coronation of the oldest sibling.
Shrek 5 - Despacito 2
its scary you wrote up a plot that actually sounds so generic it could be used
I would say Shrek 5's theme would be 'passing the torch'
doesn't need to include death, but showing his kids growing up and becoming independent and Shrek letting them go to become individuals. ^u^
2019 and Shrek 2 is still a blast to watch!!
'The 1st Shrek is a very simple movie with a very simple idea:' Katzenburg was still pissed at Eisner. Sorry, couldn't resist.
Yeah... The humor of the first one is the strongest by far because it comes from a place of the creator being the most venomously enraged. It turns out that it wasn't something he could recreate later for sequels.
anger and resentment make for the best comedy
The whole character of Farquaad was extremely inspired by Eisner and he has a pretty uncanny resemblance to him, so his entire character is pretty much Katzenburg giving the finger to him.
Michael Vessel adding on to that, ever notice how faarquad sounds a little like FUCKWAD
gum ball To further add on to that, Eisner was actually a really tall guy compared to Katzenburg and even said of him “I think I hate that little midget”, so making Farquaad really small was Katzenburg turning the tables on him.
I've been following you since almost the beginning, Joel, and I'm glad to see that you're starting to get the recognition that you deserve. I'm sure that your subscribers will keep growing, because you really do put out great content.
After watching this video, I suddenly have a much deeper understanding of why Shrek 1 & 2 left me feeling super happy inside, while Shrek 3 & 4 both left me feeling empty and kinda depressed. So it wasn't just because the jokes got worse. (Though that too, I guess.)
I remember feeling pissed by the 3rd for more reasons than that the coup was stopped with a single speech check.
I was more pissed by the fourth - I struggle with the words, but it just... feels so contrived and nihilistic. Suddenly, Fionas parents are willing to give up their kingdom to save their daughter, Fiona herself is blissfully ignorant to Shrek's problems, as are his other "friends", and the whole going-back-in-time feels... empty (Puss-in-boots is fat now - ha.)
EDIT: Basically, what Joel says in the review: "Once you're part of society, suck it all up and don't change anything - they're too stupid to change anyway."
@@fermintenava5911 Exactly. While the third felt like mawkish Disney-lite, the fourth feels like It's A Wonderful Life meets Nihilism.
Fermin Tenava Part of me agrees with that message, but that doesn’t mean I’m going stop trying due to the chance of change.
tbh to me shrek 4 is shrek: midlife crisis
he had it good, people loved him, wife and children, no antagonism
but then he threw it away for one day of ethereal """freedom""" and at the end learned to not fix what isnt broke by way of being deprived of the fruits of his accomplishments
the movie warns of romanticizing your 20s and teens and instead of throwing the shit you worked for away you should just go into therapy or something
Yeah, I personally felt that Joel missed the target on this one too? His sociopolitical breakdown of the series was very interesting, but I felt the theme of Shrek4 was more about growing up & accepting your responsibilities as well as your privileges, and thinking critically about how your choices may affect other people? Plus valuing what you have & what you collectively create with others, rather than always chasing shallow self-indulgent pleasures of the "grass is always greener" variety. Clearly that's not what everybody takes away from it, though...?
I feel like it could have helped if the movie had a little more time to explore what Shrek's issue was with his present life. Does he feel restricted and like he has to be a perfect moral image like the conflict in Shrek 2? Is he not used to being accepted and finds the socialization overwhelming? Or is he, as you said, just questioning things and romanticizing the past?
@@larsatticus6807 From the "Do the roar" scene, I would guess maybe it's meant to be a mixture of all three? 🤔
Nicely put! 👍
@@larsatticus6807 I interpret it as a loss of identity. Some parents describe feeling like they've lost themselves. In becoming "Mom" or "Dad," they are no longer Jane or Joe. While he doesn't necessarily resent being a parent, Shrek, instead of feeling like Shrek, feels stuck as "husband," "Dad," and so on. In one line, he talks about being a "real ogre" again. Whatever challenges being an ogre brought, Shrek still took pride in being one - it was an intrinsic part of his identity, and one he feels he's lost. For me, the fourth film is definitely a midlife crisis story.
@@larsatticus6807 all of them we had a montage of him slowly becoming more sad
I only just realized while watching this what happened to mama bear. Holy shit it always made me wonder where she was when seeing papa bear and baby bear and hearing him say “I miss mama” I just never realized she wasn’t with them because she was turned into a rug!
Cecona oh....oh my gosh
Oh dear me.
Oh fuck nuggets
Lol had the same reaction
5:54 “For power to render Donkey as a non-person, this guy first has to agree that he IS a person.” Whooa, Joel, that’s an awesome way to put that.
Okay I guess the next 20 minutes of my life are going to be about Shrek.
Bojack!
Hey, aren't you the horse from Horsin' Around?
Aren't you the horse from secretariat?
Aren't you the horse from The Bojack Horseman Show?
to be fair i'm in shrek the musical so at least every night isn't about it
Whodoggit didn't know this video would end with the suggestion that Shrek world is a dystopia - 180° from the traditional Disney kingdom narrative, my life has changed, I'm happy, shrek fever
THANK YOU. Its nice to see SOMEONE taking this series seriously. The second movie is a modern comedy classic, a real satire of the early 2000's and Beverly Hills culture.
Y’know, Joel, I’ve genuinely had my abilities of perception enhanced by your videos. The flexibility and non-doctrinaire character of your thought is really admirable. Keep up the fantastic work.
Whodogit! Didn't know a video could make me this happy! Um...Shrek! Shrek! Shrek! I have Shrek fever! Uh, and then just close it out with a dot, dot, dot.
whot
I had to scroll too far for this dot dot dot
569… nice
the video was so well-worded and educational then it ends with "i'll shrek you on the next.. shrek."
I have Shrek fever....
But seriously, but you did a great job Big Joel, and the phrase "Shrekoverse" delights me in unfathomable ways. You took this in a different direction that I was expecting. I expected you to lean even more into the "performative" aspect, how Shrek 1 implies that a lot of the ways Shrek behaves are because this is the way "ogres" are "supposed" to be, and rejects it, just as a lot of the other fairy tale creatures do as well. But this approach fascinates me, and gave me a lot to think about. Thank you!
It's interesting that you bring that up, because it was sorta a deleted part of this paper. for some reason, I wanted to avoid talking about the metatextual qualities of Shrek, and when I started trying to write about this idea, it became impossible haha.
That makes sense to me! I think that was a good call, while I find performativity fascinating I don't think the dynamics of power are discussed as often or as well as you do in this video. It gave it a more unique approach. I was just telling my friend how much I appreciated that you thoroughly avoided the well-trodden ground of "Shrek was a critique of commercialism and then became the ultimate expression of it."
"Shrek was a critique of commercialism and then became the ultimate expression of it."
Makes me think of that Simpsons analysis. The Simpsons was a parody/critique of the family sitcom genre, and it became a bland generic sitcom itself as time went on...
"Well actually, that would be a _giant._ Now ogres, oh they're much worse. They'll make a suit out of your freshly peeled skin! Squeeze the jelly from your eyes - actually, it's quite good on toast."
I love Shrek 4, it’s possibly even my favorite of the series
it's weird that this would be the one to get my patreon money, but shrek works in mysterious ways
Jacob Geller moment
holy hell crossover of the century???
I agreed with everything up until the Shrek 4 discussion. The Shrek series tells of a man in different roles within society. In Shrek 1 he is seen as a deviant by both society and himself. In Shrek 2 he is seen as a deviant by society, even though he doesn't see himself that way anymore. In Shrek 3 ..... ............... .... .. In Shrek 4 he is finally accepted by society, which is something he has never experienced before. Of course under these circumstances he would have a sense of unease and feel insecure in this role. Because of this he yearns for the life he had before when he was viewed as a deviant, simply because it is familiar to him. When in a new position, people tend to default back to what they know, as it is more predictable. Shrek signs a contract to experience a day as things used to be as he in unsure of himself and the role he know plays. Over the course of the film he learns that he has changed from the person he used to be and he no longer is happy living the role of a societal deviant. It makes him appreciate his current life and shows him that even if his new domestic life is unfamiliar, it is worth navigating this new territory because he loves his family. So in the end, he is not settling because he has realised that things could be worse. He is genuinely excited to continue to live his life with Fiona, and committed to making the most of everyday.
you always look earnestly and analytically at the things nobody else takes seriously, the lorax, rocky iv and logan paul are some other great examples, and you always find so much meaning that i would never even have imagined was present. idk you’re my favorite keep doing what you’re doing bc the world needs more of it
12 seconds into the video and I'm nervous; "I just love thinking about Shrek, and knowing Shrek exists..." I've got a feeling I've seen this video before and it ends with "Shrek is love, Shrek is life"...
I know it's not strictly a Shrek movie, but do you have any thoughts on the Puss In Boots movie?
im sad to say I haven't seen it
Big Joel You really should! It explores the Shrekiverse outside of what's happening in the main series and adds more background to the minor characters.
Oh dear god the memories are flooding back
As a child, I had an *unhealthy* obsession with Puss in Boots. Leaving the movie theater, I tap danced around the tile floor of the mall like he did in the film. Later I got the Xbox Kinect game for it, and every play session, slowly but surely, I'd grab an extra article of clothing from my mom's closet. I put on a little sombrero. A few days later I found a pair of boots. Next thing you know I'm wielding a kebab skewer and waving it everywhere. (the kinect only used motion controls) Not to mention watching the movie nearly EVERY NIGHT. I discovered my destiny, and it had been fulfilled.
𝙄 𝙖𝙢 𝙥𝙪𝙨𝙨 𝙞𝙣 𝙗𝙤𝙤𝙩𝙨
Luckily this madness stopped after two weeks. But those were... quite the two weeks.
I just thought it was OK. It felt sort of similar to lots of children's cartoons. I felt like Shrek is for teens and adults but PiB was definitely just for kids. None of that "suck it Disney" humor.
I went to a screening where they accidentally played paranormal activity instead of puss and they gave us free tickets to make up for all the kids being traumatized, so I'd say I like it.
my dad was watching this with me before he went to work and he simply said: *"some people look way to deep into this"*
I actually disagree with you on your analysis of shreck forever after. While looking at the entire series as one larger story I see where your pulling that theme from but I don't think that was the intention. Instead of Shrek realizing subservience to society and power is the best timeline I think it's a brilliant take on love and the necessity of self sacrifice. His own freedoms and pleasures are sacrificed for his wife and family, but that's ok. Because making them happy is more then enough for him to be happy. I think it's a step into fatherhood and the responsibility that comes with it for his character. I've always kind of seen the first two movies as sequential and the third movie as not counting at all. And finally the fourth being an additive story that doesn't fit with the narrative of the first two.
But anyway I love your videos you have inspired me to attempt writing a similar analysis script of my own one day.
Yeah i think the movie is about how Shrek passed so much time without insecurities and not being an outcast, that he took all he gained for granted. Shrek was nostalgic about a time that was objetively worse for him, but that was so long ago he forgot how unhappy he was despite all the fun times.
I think the movie is about someone who, after some time in commodity, takes for granted what he was and wishes to go back to the "good ol' days" and is confronted with the fact that he was never happy then.
@@matti.8465 I honestly think Shrek Forever After is on the same high bar as the first two.
yeah shrek 4 is my favorite shrek movie and second-favorite dreamworks movie
The problem however, is that I don't think Shrek 4 really goes for that.
Firstly, Shrek 2 was already all about how Shrek was willing to sacrifice his own freedom, pleasure and even appearance for Fiona's sake. So if we accept this is what Shrek 4 is doing then all Shrek 4 does is essentially make Shrek walk backwards so it can make him walk forward again. And it doesn't even go all the way to where it was since it ends with Shrek and Fiona both being subservient to society. With this ending, what's the guarantee it won't happen again in like 10 years when Shrek misses being free again?
Secondly, Shrek's main motivation in 4 is to get things back to normal because his old life was good and this life isn't and that he'd die in 24 hours. Not out of sacrifice for his family or to give them the best life.
I feel if you wanted to explore that theme of Shrek being responsible in Shrek 4, a better set up would have been that Rumplestilskin actually lets Shrek go and there is no time limit. Like, Rumplestilskin tells him "I have no conflict with you, just other Ogres, don't get in my way and I won't kill you". So now that Shrek has his freedom again, he goes for it because he believes he can make life right for his friends who don't know him anymore.
This would be a better story, but it would still basically be a repeat of Shrek 1's final act.
@@FraserSouris I think you still kind of missed a lot of Shrek's main character arc in Forever After.
_At first,_ Shrek's goal is to get his life back on track with his remaining day, but it's made clear that this endeavor is still one of selfishness-every time he tries to make Fiona fall in love with him again with the intent of reversing his own mistake, he is unsuccessful because he still hasn't considered the state of things in the present. It's why their kiss on the bridge doesn't work. Shrek, at the beginning of the movie, wants his old life back, but it is his inability to see the "right now" *at all* that keeps him from truly appreciating the ones he loves both before and after the contract. Once he realizes this, he straight up gives up on retrieving his happily ever after, rather opting to save the captured ogres and fight for Fiona's cause even when given a chance to maybe cheat his way out of his predicament. This is even further reiterated when he straight-up tells Fiona while dying that she'll find happiness and a family without him, even in this new world. Because of this, once he finds himself back at the party, he can truly enjoy his life and the people in it unimpeded by the same selfish notions as before. Yes, Shrek 2 (still the better movie lol) makes Shrek willing to give up his previous life to make Fiona happy. But this movie _does_ add to that, even if not perfectly-it sees Shrek learn to ditch the concept of a "previous life" altogether, which has worked to his detriment over the course of the series.
To this end, this would have been less impactful (or even impossible) without the explicit time limit. Shrek 1 and 2 both give Shrek free-rein over his involvement-at any point, he can walk away, and this works for both of their main messages. In Forever After, though, if he could simply just say "fuck it" and go away at any time as you suggest, that previously-mentioned flaw probably wouldn't be addressed. He'd just be able to sit back and take things slow knowing he'd eventually just go "back to normal" anyways, which stems from his harmful outlook on the past.
Amazing that a multimillionaire like Large Joel could come from such humble roots.
so basically, the shrek series is just a weird thought process of "oh i hate power ew it's wrong" to "power is unchangeable and great yeah" then "wait i think i liked hating power" to "shut up and deal with it"
wow, that makes more sense the more and more i think about it
It's super weird because at the end of Shrek 2 they fix all their problems forever but then it's like "Well, yeah, you fixed everything. Make another film." and the writers are sort-of like "Oh, okay.... I guess we're just going to get things off-track just to get back to the status quo now." and then they were forced to stick with the same thing for the final one purely because that's what this world is and they can't really escape what was the best possible ending.
Right?
And they made a lot of spin offs, like the Puss and Boots movie+show, and other random holiday specials for Shrek as a whole, so I don't think the possibility of Dreamworks making another Shrek film is that unlikely. Plus, Pixar's been doing it a whole lot with the sequels and new parts, maybe Dreamworks will follow.
shrek 5 is coming in 2019 lol
wait seriously
edit: oh my lord that's an actual thing how did i not know about that
I hope in Shrek 5 Shrek leads a revolt against the power structure of Deviancy.
Shrek 4 is underrated.
This was a _very_ good video. That being said, I'm surprised you didn't bring up Shrek's feelings about fatherhood - I thought that Shrek The Third and Shrek Forever After were largely focused on that.
I thought I had seen shrek 2, and then watched this and realized I didn’t. Childhood memories are a lie
Is it just me or did the fourth movie completely disregard the second? Without Shrek the Prince still would have come to save Fiona. The king and queen had no reason to go to rumplestiltskin.
There's maybe a SLIGHT way that makes sense, but it would have required making it clear that Shrek's journey to the castle clears some kind of obstacle that would be impossible for Charming
Cecona No because by the time Charming *actually* came she got bored of waiting and saved herself.
Geo Globe okay but yet in the fourth movie the king and queen did not do the deal with rumple because Shrek saved Fiona so they were trying to save her before Charming even made an attempt to save Fiona. As though he and the second movie never happened
I'm just wondering where are Fairy God Mother and Prince Charming in the alternate world where Shrek doesn't save Fiona. Did they go somewhere else? Were they still killed? The movie totally pretends that factor doesn't exist.
+TheRealPentigan
How about, I dunno, a colossal, fire-breathing dragon? :P
I have so little memory of Shrek 3 that I completely blended what little I did remember into 1, 2, and 4. I think that must say a lot about the movie
I remember more about Shrek the Thirds DVD extras than the actual film.
Big Joel the all-star!
OMG, it's you! 💚
i actually like shrek unironically and the songs for the most part...i am not in it for the memes or comedy..i like the story....is that weird?
Shrek Forever After actually does have a deeper message behind it. The message is that everything, even the things you worked hard for, can be taken away from you if you let them. Nothing is intrinsically 'yours', it's all just relative. Fleeting. Subjective. The films all followed the same inherent line of morality: "It's okay to be different.", "Take pride in who you really are.", "Take responsibility for yourself", and finally "Cherish what you have in the moment". The four movies, even if they go down in quality, all bear the same moral tone of being mature and growing as a person, that's what makes the Shrek movies so good. Shrek _is_ Life.
"Just because people treat you like a villain, an ogre, or just some loser, it doesn't mean you are one."
But... Shrek IS an ogre...? I never understood this line in the movie.
S H He says a big mean stupid ogre. He is an ogre but he's not a *monster* because of it.
Whooodogit! Didn’t know a video could make me this happy! Um… Shrek, Shrek, Shrek, I have Shrek fever…
"Look at Beast, Aladdin, or Quasimodo. Characters society turned their *back* on."
Pretty insensitive choice of words.
why?
Because Quasimodo was a hunchback
oh ok. thought you also included beast and aladdin for a sec XD
Beast also got stabbed in the back by Gaston
true dat
WHOOOOO doggit! I didn’t know a video could make me this happy!! Shrek shrek shrek, I have shrek fever…
Thank you Joel...you have graced us with more Shrek...thank you
somebody once told me
this video will be made
Whodoggit, didn't know a video could make me this happy. Shrek Shrek Shrek, I have Shrek fever. Uh... and then just close it out with like a dot, dot, dot.
Tuning in 5(ish) years later and i caught glimpse of the legendary "Smaller Joel" at 1:48
Yesss Joel you haven’t abandoned us ❤️
That's a very interesting take on the series as a whole... I never rewatched the 3rd or 4th so I never really saw this thematic change- thanks for pointing it out
I really loved this video but I don't think Shrek 4 tells us that "this was the best possible worlds". I think he just learns to be happy again with his life. I mean, I know it was so obvious and probably the intended message here; but it is just that we all forget to appreciate what we got in our life. It is not the best version, it could be better but it doesn't mean that it is not great. I'm sorry if its hard to read my english, but yeah. People usually tend to remember what is important and what isn't after they lose those things.
I always interpreted that it's simply a story about communication. If Shrek just asked "Can I have a 'Me Time' weekend sometimes? I love you guys but I kinda need some time for myself, just a couple days!" he would be much less overwhelmed. Many good people commit the mistake of not speaking up about their own needs and it just ends up creating an embittered outlook. I will always assume that Shrek will communicate more after what he has gone through, none of this sociopolitical stuff.
Fairy Godmother from part 2 was kinda hot.
Whodoggit. Didn't know a video could make me this happy. Shrek Shrek Shrek. I have Shrek fever...
Looked forever for this comment
Every day, I wake up and say, “Thank god that Shrek ASMR exists.”
Tho it’s horribly depressing, I *_love_* the scene in _”I am legend”_ where *Will Smith* recites the dialog of _Shrek_ along with them... the scene with his dog tho, that *_always_* kills me 😢
I just love the clever satire of the first two movies. Prince Charming's spoiled ass eating a fast food in the carriage as his coddling mom essentially forces the king to have charming marry Fiona is just fitting for both midieval and modern contexts.
Do a Marxist Analysis of Shrek
Oh wait
Somebodies already done it and marxism is trash.
First two movies: Shrek represents the unending nature of the class struggle as even as he gains power and status he is still ostracized by the state's power structures.
3 and 4: Shrek is a bougie bitch and gets the wall
It's not even a hard jump, the proletariat is seduced by the small favors and becomes a petite burgoise that forgets the needs of his class, sympathizing with the rich in their policies.
Vladimir Lenin thats some misogynist revisionism fam. while shrek represents the uneducated backwoods semi-lumpen agricultural laborer, fionna represents the urban working class, because she has the ability to transform into the privelaged class, "the red bourgoisie" after the establishment of the dotp but instead she acts as a revolutionary agent by sticking to her principles and continuing to transform society through revolutionary mass organization while maintaining the class character of the state as authentically proletarian ie. seeking to destroy class rather than position revolutionary urban workers as new technocrats. shrek is also thoroughly anti deng xiao ping
Really appreciated your analysis here, and thanks for the heads-up about the 4th movie which I haven't seen. I wonder if parenthood is seen as changing one's relationship to power structures - that one becomes more tolerant because you are supposed to prioritize stability for your kids' sake.
Hope you ended up watching Forever After lol. It's worth a shot, Joel had a bad take there imo
This is a great video. I wonder how this interacts with the politics of fairy tales in general, for whom commentary on the state usually boils down to good king = good state, bad king = bad state. Come to think of it, usually a fairy tale will feature a bad king; any good kings involved will have died at the beginning, and/or be crowned at the end (often being the main character). It's easy to make a fairy tale that *looks* like negative commentary on the state if you start out with a bad king, that the good people fight. But in a fairy tale the good people have to win, meaning it ends with good government, which means your sequel will *have* to be of the "good king dies, is replaced by bad king who must be replaced by good king again" variety, which makes a very different statement about the role of the state. In that sense the second Shrek movie looks like it was the most innovative of the bunch.
I literally paused the video before you went into the shrek forever after analysis, watched the whole movie (apparently i missed that one) just so i could finish the last 4 minutes. Well worth my time. Subed.
I always forget Shrek Forever After even exists and whenever I see clips from it I remember why. That entire film was just a miserable slog about how your unfulfilling life is the best you’re going to get.
They were clearly going for the whole It’s a Wonderful Life angle but it was just handled so terribly.
icantthinkofaname, that's your opinion. You see to me All the Shrek Movies are all great. And Shrek Forever After is such an amazing movie just like the rest and especially an amazing emotional ending!!! Yeah I know that my opinion may not matter to you, but that's just what I think.
All I know is that I can't wait for the 5th Shrek Movie coming out in 2019 or 2020.
I actually loved Shrek Forever After. It was a big contrast to the first three movies and I loved the dark route it turned. It also taught the lesson of contentment which I think is portrayed well in the movie, and how making rash decisions can affect your life. Not the best Shrek film, but definitely not the worst.
Shrek>shrek2>shrek4>shrek3>shrek spinoffs
I think there's an argument to be made that the fourth movie is more about cultural identity than the other two. Shrek, finally established and welcomed as part of a cohesive culture, is dissatisfied with his life because he doesn't see himself reflected in it. He feels like an ogre playing at being human- an assimilationist- as opposed to a welcomed outsider. Over the course of his movie, he gains an understanding of his culture as an ogre that he never had before.
By the end of the movie, he has a new understanding of and appreciation for his own unique culture that he can pass on to his children. He goes from having to give up his identity as an ogre in order to reproduce human culture to having a renewed sense of identity. He's content because now he can bring something to the table, so to speak- his children can learn about ogre society *and* human society, instead of defaulting to a human set of norms and expectations, and true cultural exchange can take place.
Its the same sort of difference between things like "being one of the guys" or "one of the good ones" and being recognized as your own, different individual. Shrek is accepted as (functionally) human, but he doesn't want to be a human, he wants to be an ogre and accepted as such. The whole movie is him acknowledging this and learning what that means and finding fulfillment in his identity.
Six likes away from 169 likes!! Good luck!
This truly gives me a different, more deep perspective on a series I would have not thought too deep about otherwise.
It's so great to see someone talk about this movie positively without it being a meme
I always saw Shrek's motivations in The Third as a sort of two way road. He's clearly become more close with Far Far Away and it's people, so he doesn't want to just leave them without any sort of leader. Plus, it's shown that Charming takes over when Far Far Away has no ruler, Shrek may have anticipated this, and knows he can't let it happen to those he knows. He wants peace to continue in his in-law's kingdom, regardless of how horrible and weak of a person he was when younger. However, he knows that in order for that peace to continue, there needs to be a ruler who both knows how to lead, and wants to do so, and as such, he takes a chance to go after the other heir.
Whodoggit, didn't know video could make me this happy. Shrek Shrek Shrek, I have Shrek fever...
Your point at around 10:45 or so about the king only having power so long as he was acceptable is interesting in light of actual history. I've been listening to the British History Podcast, and that's literally how it was for the kings of early medieval Briton: they held power only so long as they could keep convincing the nobles that they had power. Their job was to keep money flowing to their support through various conquests and a more unified England WITHOUT constant fighting actually really threatened the power of the king since keeping the nobles happy was the king's primary job, upward mobility for nobles required acquiring more land, and they were running out of land and neighbors to snatch it from.
it seems to me that the overall arc of the 4 shrek films may mirrors the journey of a hollywood aspirant.
The hollywoodness was always my least favorite aesthetic element in shrek, an as the series progresses this aesthetic shoulders out more an more of the fantasy.
sometimes i watch this video because it feels like a big hug.. even though ive already watched it more than once
not how i expected to spend my morning, but i'll roll with it
Hoo-dog it; didn't know video could make me this happy.
Shrek Shrek Shrek, I have Shrek fever...
Watched Shrek at 5? That's impressive. You're very smart and well-rounded for your age.
[sips]
A 23 minute video analysis of shrek.... You earned a new subscriber keep up the good work 😤❤
Huh, that is an interesting take on things. I suppose that's the real reason the later films weren't as good -- they go from taking fairy tale tropes and overturning them to just, well, going back to the usual fairy tale tropes. Shrek 1 and 2 were about characters who are usually depicted as heroes being the villains, whereas Shrek 3 and 4 we see, well, villains being villains, never exploring *why* they're villains or *why* the "norm" is good. Huh.
Fun fact: the opening credits were replaced for different languages in cinemas (not so in home releases), but not replaced with other credits: rather, Mike Myers' credit was replaced with actual mud without letters, the Eddie Murphy's credit was replaced with just the empty broken mirror; and as a kid I never understood why the film focused so much in the background elements during the opening.
Y'know, I could never understand why the last two movies left me feeling... weird? But you totally nailed it, so thanks for solving that mystery! Once again, brilliant stuff
I want to make a point. Farquad did not know where the fairy tale creatures went. He was torturing Gingy to get the information.
The fairy tale creatures sent Shrek to Farquad because they judged him by his cover and thought he would do something ogrish.
Wrong
Pinocchio can be seen being sold by Geppetto just before Donkey was brought up to the soldier ("Five shillings for the possessed toy.")
When Donkey escapes, I do not recall seeing Pinocchio escape as well. Since we later see him at Shrek's swamp with the other fairy tale creatures ("Nobody invited us... We were forced to come [to your swamp]!"), it is safe to assume he did not escape, and that he and the others were the okes captured and ghettoed by Farquaad and Gingy was being tortured for info on another group.
So close to 69 likes, helping in the race G
This video has given me many insights into the Shrek franchise, including that the villain in Shrek 4 looks uncannily like Vice journalist Oobah Butler.
Fascinating video, although I would tend to believe Shrek 3 and Shrek 4 are the inevitable consequence Shrek 1 and 2. The point about power and structure is once you are accepted into a society you inherently become part of it. It's impossible to be a society of misfits because once you find your place you now fit in the resulting Society.
In a way that's why the theme of the X-Men is kind of terrifying. They are permanent outsiders, but only because they are presented as inherently better. A bit like that old shampoo commercial don't hate me because I'm beautiful. Really it's one step off of the philosophy of Rick Sanchez, where any atrocity is justified because you know, he's just better than everyone else.
In this way Shrek is coming to terms with the reality of personal and societal growth.
This was such a welcome break from copy and paste channels, honestly. I love the Shrek movies, and it's always nice to hear an intelligent point of view on something most people see as just a joke/C-grade movie. Good vid. I have shrek fever...
i love you big joel
Whoo doggit, didn't know a video could make me this happy! Shrek, Shrek, Shrek. I have Shrek fever ...
1:37
So the wolf is having a relationship with that knight? OwO
OMG what a nice detail