THE DIGITAL CINEMA PRESENTATIONS
Shrek opened in North America in 3,587 theaters in 35mm. Eleven of the bookings were in the nascent Digital Cinema format.
ARIZONA
- Peoria – Harkins Arrowhead Fountains 18
BRITISH COLUMBIA
- Richmond – Famous Players SilverCity Riverport 19 [unpromoted]
CALIFORNIA
- Burbank – AMC Media Center North 6
- Irvine – Edwards Irvine Spectrum 21
- San Francisco – AMC 1000 Van Ness 14
FLORIDA
- Lake Buena Vista – AMC Pleasure island 24 [unpromoted]
ILLINOIS
- South Barrington – AMC South Barrington 30
NEW YORK
- New York – Loews 42nd Street E-Walk 13
OHIO
- Valley View – Cinemark Valley View 24
ONTARIO
- Toronto – Famous Players Paramount 14 [unpromoted]
TEXAS
- Plano – Cinemark Legacy 24
THE Q&A
Scott Mendelson is a box-office analyst for Forbes.
Scott kindly spoke to The Bits about the appeal and legacy of Shrek. (He was previously interviewed for this column’s retrospectives on Batman Returns, Howard the Duck and The Matrix.)
Michael Coate (The Digital Bits): How do you think Shrek ought to be remembered and/or celebrated on its 20th anniversary?
Scott Mendelson: Shrek was the first full-fledged theatrical animated franchise. Yes, we had some “were supposed to be on VHS or DVD” sequels (Peter Pan: Return to Neverland, Toy Story 2) and a couple of Disney toons that got theatrically-intended follow-ups (The Rescuers Down Under and Fantasia 2000), but Shrek popped up on the scene right as Hollywood was going all-in on globally-viable, four-quadrant fantasy franchises, and Shrek was absolutely it for a generation in terms of animated properties. When viewing the early 2000s as the start of Hollywood’s tentpole fever, Shrek belongs alongside Pirates of the Caribbean, Harry Potter and Spider-Man as the “ones that started it all,” for better or worse. It was also arguably the first animated franchise that was explicitly intended to appeal as much to adults as to kids. It wasn’t just “this Disney feature is so good that you’ll like it too,” it was half snarky grown-up satire, half mature grown-up romantic comedy, all massaged into a still kid-friendly PG-rated package (back when most toons were still G-rated) featuring grown-up movie stars (Eddie Murphy, Cameron Diaz and Mike Myers).
Coate: When did you first see Shrek?
Mendelson: I saw the film on its domestic opening night and was quite fond of it. Again, with all the talk of how it was a sarcastic jab at Walt Disney and the consumerism of the fairy tale IP landscape, it worked primarily because it remembered into be a thoughtful and nuanced “human” character comedy as well, a film that could be enjoyed whether or not you “got” or cared about the Disney barbs or the “adult” humor. Likewise, the sequels (the terrific Shrek 2 and the not-so-terrific Shrek the Third and Shrek Forever After) put the romantic melodrama between Shrek and Fiona front-and-center, with the in-jokes and pop culture references acting as a seasoning rather than the main course. It’s not an apples-to-apples comparison, but we should remember that the MCU works as well as it does because it makes the interlocked continuity a “bonus” amid a character-driven character dramedy/action fantasy, rather than the core reason for existence.
Coate: In what way is Shrek a significant motion picture?
Mendelson: Its blow-out success changed the course of DreamWorks Animation, and Hollywood animated films in general. First, it cemented the fact that a PG rating was no longer “dangerous” for a toon. Second, it along with Toy Story led to the comparative “bro-ification” of animated films. Like the Judd Apatow films a few years later, Shrek took a genre that was generally considered “female-driven” and made it “safe” for men. Of course, the bad news is that once Hollywood realized they could score big bucks by centering rom-coms and animated flicks around male protagonists, they did so to the near-extinction (for a decade anyway) of female-led toons and (for much, much longer) female-led romantic comedies.
As for DreamWorks, the perceived reasons for its success (the pop culture references, the modern music, the PG-rated jokes, the all-star cast) became the template for modern American animation. Of course, I’d argue DWA’s Madagascar cemented this trend and cemented popular critical consensus about DWA. No matter, DWA went from offering a darker, more mature and more boundary-pushing animated film (Antz, Prince of Egypt, etc.) to being known as a lesser “funny animals spouting hip lingo” studio, no matter how good some of those films (How to Train Your Dragon, Over the Hedge, Kung Fu Panda, etc.) turned out to be.
Coate: Why do you think Shrek was so successful?
Mendelson: Because, and I cannot repeat this enough, DreamWorks didn’t rely on the marketing hooks (the cast the Disney jokes, the PG-rated content) to take over the movies. Audiences liked Myers’ Shrek, Diaz’s Fiona and Murphy’s Donkey, and they absolutely wanted to see them in another adventure. Shrek 2 benefited by (A) bringing Antonio Banderas’ Puss in Boots and Rupert Everett’s Prince Charming to the table as added-value characters and (B) having a hook “What happens after Happily Ever After?” that was both universal and specific to these specific characters. Shrek 2 opened huge ($128 million over Wed-Sun, including a then-record $44 million Saturday) because audiences saw and lovedShrek.
Shrek 2 legged out to $440 million domestic (and $919 million worldwide) in 2004 because it was a terrific movie and played well alongside Spider-Man 2 in a more adult-skewing (Bourne Supremacy, Troy, Collateral, etc.) summer. Shrek the Third opened with a $122 million Fri-Sun debut (a then-record for a toon) because audiences loved Shrek and Shrek 2. But it flatlined (a still huge $321 million domestic) because it wasn’t very good (and had plenty of kid-friendly summer competition alongside Pirates 3, Spider-Man 3, Transformers and Harry Potter 6), and thus Shrek Forever After opened “soft” with $70 million in 2010. Beyond quality, it was the first ongoing animated franchise after Toy Story with marquee characters whom audiences wanted to follow from theatrical movie to theatrical movie.
Coate: Acting in animated productions rarely gets the credit I think it deserves. Can you discuss the performances in Shrek? Where do you think Shrek ranks among the body of work of Myers, Murphy, Diaz and Lithgow?
Mendelson: It wasn’t good news for actual voice-over actors, who have spent 25 years or so fighting off A-list (and frankly often D-list) celebrities for prime voice-over roles. However, Shrek really was the first big animated franchise which was sold on the alleged grown-up bankability of its cast. In terms of performances, their voice over work is as good as anything they’ve ever done in live-action or otherwise. It helps that the films are character-driven and mostly dialogue-driven, so the stars could treat it as a conventional live-action romantic comedy. Still, the core performances are absolutely essential (at least where it wasn’t dubbed overseas) to the success of both the first Shrek and the sequels. I won’t begin to speculate how it would have played with Chris Farley’s original vocals, or if Myers hadn’t convinced DWA to let him re-record his entire role with a Scottish accent, but the specificity of the characters were essential to the films’ success.
Coate: What is the legacy of Shrek?
Mendelson: It sits alongside Spider-Man, Pirates of the Caribbean and Harry Potter as one of the definitive “new” franchises of the global tentpole era, while making both animated features and rom-coms “safe” for male-centric protagonists and PG ratings. Its pop culture impact completely altered the narrative for DWA while setting a template for countless copycats, none of which (save maybe for the middle Ice Age sequels) would match its global success until it closed its book in 2010, months before Illumination’s Despicable Me would launch Illumination into the stratosphere. Its success may have been defined in the media and the zeitgeist as being a bawdy, star-studded grown-up cartoon with sharp satirical arrows aimed at Disney, but Shrek and its sequels worked in spite of those easily-dated elements, and because the film made sure to work as a singular animated franchise that works as one of the more thoughtful and realistic portrayals of marriage and parenthood in any mainstream Hollywood biggie, animated or otherwise.
Coate: Thank you, Scott, for sharing your thoughts about Shrek on the occasion of its 20th anniversary.
--END--
IMAGES
Selected images copyright/courtesy DreamWorks Animation, DreamWorks Pictures, PDI (Pacific Data Images), Paramount Home Entertainment.
SOURCES/REFERENCES
The primary references for this project were regional newspaper coverage and trade reports published in Boxoffice, The Hollywood Reporter and Variety, and interviews conducted by the author. All figures and data pertain to North America (i.e. United States and Canada) except where stated otherwise.
SPECIAL THANKS
David Ayers, Don Beelik, Beverly Carver (University of Texas at Arlington), Sarah Dana (Carlsbad City Library), Matthew Nye (San Diego Public Library), Mary Schaff (Washington State Library), Laura Ruttum Senturia (Denver Public Library), Adam (Cleveland Public Library).
IN MEMORIAM
- Kathleen Freeman (“Old Woman”), 1919-2001
- William Steig (book on which Shrek was based), 1907-2003
- Peter Dennis (“Ogre Hunter”), 1933-2009
- Kelly Asbury (story artist [and co-director of Shrek 2]), 1960-2020
-Michael Coate
Michael Coate can be reached via e-mail through this link. (You can also follow Michael on social media at these links: Twitter and Facebook)
