The birth of Shrek has a strong subversion color. It can be said that subversion of tradition and subversion of classics is the biggest feature, biggest selling point and biggest success of Shrek's image and the first work in this series. He subverts the handsome appearance of the protagonist of ordinary animation works, he subverts all civilized behaviors in human life-such as bathing, farting gently, eating with elegant manners, etc., and he also subverts Snow White, Sleeping Beauty, Skinny Nocio and countless other classics. This series of subversions endows Shrek with unique existence value, and also endows its first work with extraordinary readability - after watching the movie, we will relish such an ugly but kind-hearted man , Indecent but romantic, a very lively hunk.
Perhaps under the tremendous success of the first Shrek, we will be eager to know what happened to the Shrek couple, so this series has a second. In the second part, the film also naturally tells some hypothetical stories, that is, it is not important to interpret the actual appearance through Shrek transforming into a human form, but having a love is the most important thing. The two protagonists eventually returned to their monster forms. One thing to pay attention to here is that the director has already started to find reasons for Shrek to be a monster, just to highlight his heart that is hotter than normal people, and deliberately set it to look like a monster, because this contrasts the effect strong. And in the first part he was born a monster without any explanation or reason. We know that subversive works need no reason. You should never make it clear why they are so subversive. Once the window paper is pierced, it will be boring. "Shrek 2" uses an explanatory language and a straightforward to explicit way to repeat the truth that the audience has realized and what they have experienced in "Shrek 1". A superfluous one?
For "Shrek 3", the audience simply watched it out of habit, rather than watching it for a desire. Because people don't really want to know what's going on with this big guy anymore, they're thinking, "Oh, this big guy is here again, let's go and see." Why don't they want to know? Because through the explanation of "Shrek 2", this big man has actually become mediocre. He has been reassured by ordinary and secular life. He is no longer a born character, but reduced to a worldly character. In the first part, it turned princesses into monsters. This wonderful feeling of bringing a character who was originally very involved in the world to the realm of birth has not only disappeared in the next two works, but has gradually become : Two people who were born in the world, lived the life of joining the WTO, came into contact with the people who joined the WTO, and were constantly influenced by the people who joined the WTO, and finally joined the WTO collectively. It can be said that in "Shrek 3", the mystery of Shrek's birth was not only completely deprived, but also added the habits of many classic heroes. .
When it came to "Shrek 4", the audience's lament was finally over. There was a little contradiction and a little nostalgia. On the one hand, I miss the original big man, and on the other hand, I can't bear to continue watching him become mediocre. It can be said that Shrek, who has gradually returned to the mainstream heroes of Hollywood, has indeed brought this series to an end, because it is not subverting others, but subverting itself. The subversion that is quite brilliant in this film is the setting of the fat cat, and other plots can be said to be causing trouble. For example, although Shrek is a loner, "Shrek 4" has to create a lot of monsters, and let the image of this big green man appear in the form of a race. This is a huge failure, because it is a meaningless subversion of the basic setting of the prominent individuals of the first "Ugly Monsters Have Kindness", because the Shrek we need must be offbeat and unique, not ordinary , community; in Shrek's individual body, the contrast between ugliness and goodness is very clear, and how do you reflect the collective goodness in a large group of ugliness? It's like Beauty and the Beast, there can always be only one beast, not multiple beasts.
Shrek embarked on this path of subverting himself is inevitable. Because no matter how unique the character is, the continuous sequels will make it normal; no matter how much it subverts the traditional plot, it can only subvert the tradition once, not again and again. If "Shrek 1" is a brilliant idea, then 2, 3, and 4 can only be regarded as successful commercial operations. For real subversion, once is enough.
View more about Shrek Forever After reviews
