Was Shrek 2 not as good as it was hyped?

[SunnyD]

Just curious, because I watched it twice and realized that the story was kindof lacking, they opted for more musical sequences than dialog, and reused a LOT of dialog from the original movie.

But I still liked it. Just not as much as the original.

Oh - and how come it took Shrek and Fiona about 4 days to get to Far, Far Away, but took Gingy and the crew about 10 minutes?

 

[moshquerade]

it lived up to the hype, altho i thought the music in it this time was the suck.

 

[GasX]

sequel + hype = you are a dumbass for expecting a lot...

 

[apac]

I thought it was better than the original in some ways, especially some of the jokes. Laughed my ass off.

 

[RossMAN]

Originally posted by: apac
I thought it was better than the original in some ways, especially some of the jokes. Laughed my ass off.

Likewise.

If Shrek 2 didn't have "Puss-e-boots" it wouldn't have been as good.

 

[dmcowen674]

Just came back from seeing it. I was surprised they made a sequel as good as the original, well done, well done. :thumbsup:

 

[Lonyo]

I was confused by the Far Far Away time, but then you can't really be sure how long it took Shrek and Fiona to get there, from what I remember, since it moved about a lot.

I loved the Rawhide rendition by Donkey though.

 

[Rudee]

Donkey with his lip-smacking was cracking me up. Especially when it did it right in Shrek's face.

 

[MAME]

it was a good movie

 

[EpsiIon]

Originally posted by: RossMAN

Originally posted by: apac
I thought it was better than the original in some ways, especially some of the jokes. Laughed my ass off.

Likewise.

If Shrek 2 didn't have "Puss-e-boots" it wouldn't have been as good.

I think it's Puss-In-Boots, from the old fairy tale.

Anyway, I thought the movie was hilarious. I went to be entertained for 90 minutes and was very pleased. The jokes were clever, (mostly) original, and I laughed for nearly the entire time. Honestly, though, I don't think you should ever go to an animated film expecting an amazing story. Most of these things are entertaining fluff, plain and simple. There is the rare film that rises above this, but that is the exception rather than the rule. If you expect too much, you're only going to be let down.

 

[SunnyD]

Don't get me wrong, it was a good movie. I was sortof expecting a more original script as far as dialog was concerned. A lot seem recycled from the first.

 

[blurredvision]

I watched it at the Loew's theater at Universal Studios in Orlando while on vacation this past week, and I liked it pretty well. I was always a fan of the first one, as I thought the jokes were great. This time around, I believe it had a different, more grown-up feel (although slight), but was still pretty funny.

I give it a 9 out of 10.

 

[CanOWorms]

that "Knights" segment was hilarious

 

[Kanalua]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Just came back from seeing it. I was surprised they made a sequel as good as the original, well done, well done. :thumbsup:

 

[waggy]

Originally posted by: moshquerade
it lived up to the hype, altho i thought the music in it this time was the suck.

yeah i agree. the music was NOT as good.

the nice thing about the orginal was the music.

but shrek 2 was worth the $9 i paid for me and my wife to go!

 

[0roo0roo]

when was shrek about story?

 

[MidasKnight]

My son and daughter ( ages 15 ) and younger 13 yr old son loved the flick.

 

[Queasy]

Originally posted by: SunnyD
Don't get me wrong, it was a good movie. I was sortof expecting a more original script as far as dialog was concerned. A lot seem recycled from the first.

That would be the 'Mike Myers effect'. He recycled alot of the same stuff from Wayne's World into Wayne's World 2 and throughout all three Austin Powers flicks. You kind of have to expect it with anything he is in.

 

[Kroze]

nothing is as good as the original.

 

[Macro2]

RE:"nothing is as good as the original."

The Austin Powers sequels were better than the original.

 

[LordMaul]

Originally posted by: SunnyD
Just curious, because I watched it twice and realized that the story was kindof lacking, they opted for more musical sequences than dialog, and reused a LOT of dialog from the original movie.

But I still liked it. Just not as much as the original.

Oh - and how come it took Shrek and Fiona about 4 days to get to Far, Far Away, but took Gingy and the crew about 10 minutes?

I agree completely. It was good for a few smiles (never actually laughed, whereas I did at the first one) and they had a lot of recycled material. It was probably better than 90% of the rest of cinema fodder, though.

 

[LordMaul]

Originally posted by: Kroze
nothing is as good as the original.

Empire Strikes Back?

(Yeah, I had to mention the Holy Trilogy)

 

[UNCjigga]

I actually enjoyed it better than the first one. Maybe because I saw the first one with 0 hype so I didn't think much of it (and I hate that '3rd Rock from the sun' guy), but then saw the 2nd one with +1001 hype and therefore I think its great because I can't think for myself?

 

[UNCjigga]

Oh and I for one think (or am made to think) that the whole retro music thing was kickass!

 

[glen]

Shrek was not nearly as good as it is hyped as being.
Shrek 2 was about as good as the first one.
Puss in Boots was pretty funny - "It's catnip!"