[ad_1]
<div _ngcontent-c14 = "" innerhtml = "
& # 39; Shrek forever & # 39; image courtesy of DreamWorks Animation
I do not know how Variety article stating that Comcast, and Chris Meledandri intends to restart the Shrek franchise (and Puss in Boots) is all that differs from the relatively identical statements made in Deadline in June 2016. This announcement was made during the last stage of the Secret lie of pets marketing campaign, while this announcement comes just before The grinch opens (November 9). In any case, the idea that Comcast Corp. (which owns Universal and Focus Features) would provide DreamWorks Animation and would not do anything with the software Shrek franchise is about as likely as Disney buys Lucasfilm and does not do it again Star wars movies.
The word that caught everyone's attention is "reboot", which may well be a catch-all jargon to revive a long dormant franchise. Since Variety This article clearly indicates that Meledandri and his friends want the return of the main vocal distribution (Mike Myers, Eddie Murphy, Cameron Diaz and Antonio Banderas), the most likely path is not a reboot "erase the slate", but rather a direct result. . What worked for Jurassic Park, Star wars, Halloween and Rocky will surely work for Shrek. And in this era of pop culture obsessed with nostalgia, a sequel is a way to have your cake (revive the sleepy brand) and eat it too (appeal to older fans / adults of the four Shrek movies.
And among sleeping IP, Shrek is one of the biggest heavyweights of the 1980s to 2000s that has not been restarted or relaunched in recent years, assuming Transformers and Pirates of the Caribbean) never really left. The other franchise of the very duper from the beginning to the mid-2000s, Harry Potter, currently lives in the Fantastic beasts saga. As you remember, the Shrek The franchise, strong of four films from 2001 to 2010, is essentially a fantasy adventure that has slowly become a domestic melodrama. The marketing has focused on the jokes about "the attack on Disney" and the kids made fun of Eddie Murphy but Shrek was a romantic comedy between the generous-minded ogre of Mike Meyers and the obstinate princess of Cameron Diaz.
The first film, inspired by the book of William Steig, offered to a man beaten by the prejudices of society who discovered the love of a woman struggling with problems related to his destiny. Shrek 2 Our main character wondered if he was worthy of Fiona's love and felt guilty about the changes she had made. Shrek the third his fear of the responsibilities and challenges of fatherhood. Shrek forever dealt with the realization of these fears as well as the realities of an "unforeseen life". The movies had their share of action and show, but they were not action movies.
Warts and all, and I will say that the first two Shrek the films are much better than the last two, they were among the most realistic romantic comedies and the most "adult" of this period. The impact was not entirely positive. Shrek, in the same way The Virgin Forty Years, showed in Hollywood that men and women would line up for romantic comedies led by men. Shrek essentially killed the G score as a viable option for animated films. Basically, they sent every studio (including DWA) to claim their own animated, zany, pop culture-friendly, manic, crazy, man-driven feature film. This changed the DNA even of the traditional American animation film.
And it goes without saying that these four successes were massive. Shrek totaled $ 42 million in a national total of $ 267 million, an amazing 6.3 times multiplier that remains one of the most legendaryTitanic blockbusters of the modern era. Shrek 2 ($ 108 million Friday-Sunday / $ 128 million Wednesday-Sunday) is still the best $ 100 million legger opener of all time. In 2004, its national total was $ 441 million. Titanic ($ 600 million) and Star wars ($ 460 million including reissues). It also culminates with one of the best action sequences of the last 30 years.
Shrek the third is probably the weakest of the three films, to the point that it has probably dragged down Shrek forever. But, opening (again) in the same weekend setting as the last two days before Remembrance Day, things started with a record. Its $ 122 million launch Friday-Sunday was the biggest animated opening up Finding Dory ($ 135 million in 2016). He is still in second place, corrected for inflation, behind Indestructible 2 ($ 184 million last summer). Both because of relatively "meh" quality and ridiculous competition at the beginning of the summer (Spider-Man 3, Pirates 3, Ocean & # 39; s Thirteen), the third Shrek earned "only" 322 million domestic dollars and 799 million dollars worldwide. And three years later, a fourth installment sold as "the last chapter".
Heck, the movie ends with Shrek literally closing the book on the story of his life. Shrek forever was a little less successful than the first three, it was not much. The film started with a surprisingly low budget of $ 70 million in May 2010, which led to all sorts of manual work, including (relatively speaking) from me. But 2010 was also a miserable summer. Thus, the rather decent family animation feature film that was released in 3D at the time when 3D was still cool and could justify keeping larger auditoriums for longer periods of time. turned out a lot lighter than the last movie. It finally reached 237 million US dollars (3.3 times against a multiplier of 2.6 times the last film) and brought in 752 million dollars in the world.
And eight years later, apart from a lot of money, Jeffrey Katzenberg and his friends kept their promise not to revive the Shrek franchise. But they gave us the dreadfully confusing movie Puss in Boots end of 2011. The fantastic / western adventure of Antonio Banderas / Salma Hayek was much better than it should have and it featured one of the smallest declines in the world. a second weekend without vacation for a supersaturated outing. The film started with $ 34 million at the end of October (not much), but then gained $ 33 million the next weekend before rising to $ 149 million nationally and $ 554 million worldwide. budget of $ 130 million.
And that brings us to today. Eight years have passed since the last Shrek movie. I do not pretend I'm dying to get a commitment, but I'm not surprised to see Comcast trying to get back into the Shrek business. It is still, by entry, the second largest franchise ever ($ 702.2 million per film versus $ 643 million for each of the five films). Ice Age movies and $ 927 million each Despicable Me/Minions film), but I will say it was the first true theatrical franchise. He showed that a great animation success could spawn just as good as a real action fantasy franchise.
It's not surprising that Shrek is about to return, presumably. Despite the wording, a sequel, that it will happen years and years later (I would give your left eye for a Loganriff on Puss in Boots) or just a few seconds later Shrek forever (as Indestructible 2), is a much better game, financially and artistically, than a reboot that acts as a glorified remake. Reboots worked for Batman begins, Casino Royale and Star Trekbut they were brands whose absolute origins had never been told on film. The first Shrek is essentially the story of "how Shrek and Fiona met and fell in love". A new Shrek origin would be like I do not know, make a Die hard prequel.
Actually, I'm pretty sure that the studio just out Halloween and Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom (which was absolutely the fifth Jurassic Park film) understand this distinction. Anyway, a new Shrek would suffer the same disadvantage as any other intellectual property renewed, namely that it was a brand that erupted 15 years ago, because it was a good thing, because it was entertaining and intelligent, and because it was quite different from the brand. nothing else on the market at this time. And yet, he will now bet more on the same thing, without the need to prove that DWA could pose as the main rival of Disney.
Ironically, Shrek was partially fueled by DreamWorks Animation's desire to show that they could offer something distinctly different from Walt Disney's stereotyped animated feature film and exist as a competitor. 17 years later, a new Shrek on the contrary, the film should be different from the DWA model that it essentially invented by justifying itself alongside the brand Illumination. This is just another reason why a "classic" sequel would be much more useful to the brand than a remake or reboot. Today, I can not give this DWA franchise the respect it deserves. 17.5 years later, Shrek is always a star.
">
& # 39; Shrek forever & # 39; image courtesy of DreamWorks Animation
I do not know how Variety article stating that Comcast, and Chris Meledandri intends to restart the Shrek franchise (and Puss in Boots) is all that differs from the relatively identical statements made in Deadline in June 2016. This announcement was made during the last stage of the Secret lie of pets marketing campaign, while this announcement comes just before The grinch opens (November 9). In any case, the idea that Comcast Corp. (which owns Universal and Focus Features) would provide DreamWorks Animation and would not do anything with the software Shrek franchise is about as likely as Disney buys Lucasfilm and does not do it again Star wars movies.
The word that caught everyone's attention is "reboot", which may well be a catch-all jargon to revive a long dormant franchise. Since Variety This article clearly indicates that Meledandri and his friends want the return of the main vocal distribution (Mike Myers, Eddie Murphy, Cameron Diaz and Antonio Banderas), the most likely path is not a reboot "erase the slate", but rather a direct result. . What worked for Jurassic Park, Star wars, Halloween and Rocky will surely work for Shrek. And in this era of pop culture obsessed with nostalgia, a sequel is a way to have your cake (revive the sleepy brand) and eat it too (appeal to older fans / adults of the four Shrek movies.
And among sleeping IP, Shrek is one of the biggest heavyweights of the 1980s to 2000s that has not been restarted or relaunched in recent years, assuming Transformers and Pirates of the Caribbean) never really left. The other franchise of the very duper from the beginning to the mid-2000s, Harry Potter, currently lives in the Fantastic beasts saga. As you remember, the Shrek The franchise, strong of four films from 2001 to 2010, is essentially a fantasy adventure that has slowly become a domestic melodrama. The marketing has focused on the jokes about "the attack on Disney" and the kids made fun of Eddie Murphy but Shrek was a romantic comedy between the generous-minded ogre of Mike Meyers and the obstinate princess of Cameron Diaz.
The first film, inspired by the book of William Steig, offered to a man beaten by the prejudices of society who discovered the love of a woman struggling with problems related to his destiny. Shrek 2 Our main character wondered if he was worthy of Fiona's love and felt guilty about the changes she had made. Shrek the third his fear of the responsibilities and challenges of fatherhood. Shrek forever dealt with the realization of these fears as well as the realities of an "unforeseen life". The movies had their share of action and show, but they were not action movies.
Warts and all, and I will say that the first two Shrek the films are much better than the last two, they were among the most realistic romantic comedies and the most "adult" of this period. The impact was not entirely positive. Shrek, in the same way The Virgin Forty Years, showed in Hollywood that men and women would line up for romantic comedies led by men. Shrek basically killed the G score as a viable option for animated movies. Basically, they sent every studio (including DWA) to claim their own animated, zany, pop culture-friendly, manic, crazy, man-driven feature film. This changed the DNA even of the traditional American animation film.
And it goes without saying that these four successes were massive. Shrek totaled $ 42 million in a national total of $ 267 million, an amazing 6.3 times multiplier that remains one of the most legendaryTitanic blockbusters of the modern era. Shrek 2 ($ 108 million Friday-Sunday / $ 128 million Wednesday-Sunday) is still the best $ 100 million legger opener of all time. In 2004, its national total was $ 441 million. Titanic ($ 600 million) and Star wars ($ 460 million including reissues). It also culminates with one of the best action sequences of the last 30 years.
Shrek the third is probably the weakest of the three films, to the point that it has probably dragged down Shrek forever. But, opening (again) in the same weekend setting as the last two days before Remembrance Day, things started with a record. Its $ 122 million launch Friday-Sunday was the biggest animated opening up Finding Dory ($ 135 million in 2016). He is still in second place, corrected for inflation, behind Indestructible 2 ($ 184 million last summer). Both because of relatively "meh" quality and ridiculous competition at the beginning of the summer (Spider-Man 3, Pirates 3, Ocean & # 39; s Thirteen), the third Shrek earned "only" 322 million domestic dollars and 799 million dollars worldwide. And three years later, a fourth installment sold as "the last chapter".
Heck, the movie ends with Shrek literally closing the book on the story of his life. Shrek forever was a little less successful than the first three, it was not much. The film started with a surprisingly low budget of $ 70 million in May 2010, which led to all sorts of manual work, including (relatively speaking) from me. But 2010 was also a miserable summer. Thus, the rather decent family animation feature film that was released in 3D at the time when 3D was still cool and could justify keeping larger auditoriums for longer periods of time. turned out a lot lighter than the last movie. It finally reached 237 million US dollars (3.3 times against a multiplier of 2.6 times the last film) and brought in 752 million dollars in the world.
And eight years later, apart from a lot of money, Jeffrey Katzenberg and his friends kept their promise not to revive the Shrek franchise. But they gave us the dreadfully confusing movie Puss in Boots end of 2011. The fantastic / western adventure of Antonio Banderas / Salma Hayek was much better than it should have and it featured one of the smallest declines in the world. a second weekend without vacation for a supersaturated outing. The film started with $ 34 million at the end of October (not much), but then gained $ 33 million the next weekend before rising to $ 149 million nationally and $ 554 million worldwide. budget of $ 130 million.
And that brings us to today. Eight years have passed since the last Shrek movie. I do not pretend I'm dying to get a commitment, but I'm not surprised to see Comcast trying to get back into the Shrek business. It is still, by entry, the second largest franchise ever ($ 702.2 million per film versus $ 643 million for each of the five films). Ice Age movies and $ 927 million each Despicable Me/Minions film), but I will say it was the first true theatrical franchise. He showed that a great animation success could spawn just as good as a real action fantasy franchise.
It's not surprising that Shrek is about to return, presumably. Despite the wording, a sequel, that it will happen years and years later (I would give your left eye for a Loganriff on Puss in Boots) or just a few seconds later Shrek forever (as Indestructible 2), is a much better game, financially and artistically, than a reboot that acts as a glorified remake. Reboots worked for Batman begins, Casino Royale and Star Trekbut they were brands whose absolute origins had never been told on film. The first Shrek is essentially the story of "how Shrek and Fiona met and fell in love". A new Shrek origin would be like I do not know, make a Die hard prequel.
Actually, I'm pretty sure that the studio just out Halloween and Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom (which was absolutely the fifth Jurassic Park film) understand this distinction. Anyway, a new Shrek would suffer the same disadvantage as any other intellectual property renewed, namely that it was a brand that erupted 15 years ago, because it was a good thing, because it was entertaining and intelligent, and because it was quite different from the brand. nothing else on the market at this time. And yet, he will now bet more on the same thing, without the need to prove that DWA could pose as the main rival of Disney.
Ironically, Shrek was partially fueled by DreamWorks Animation's desire to show that they could offer something distinctly different from Walt Disney's stereotyped animated feature film and exist as a competitor. 17 years later, a new Shrek on the contrary, the film should be different from the DWA model that it essentially invented by justifying itself alongside the brand Illumination. This is just another reason why a "classic" sequel would be much more useful to the brand than a remake or reboot. Today, I can not give this DWA franchise the respect it deserves. 17.5 years later, Shrek is always a star.
