Shrek or Monsters, Inc.?

Richard Howard2 said:Look, I'm telling you, being different doesn't make it better. It's just different.

Yeah. Kind of like how you aren't actually dumb, you're just... uniquely gifted.

[Man, I couldn't help myself! Mods, my bad, feel free to ban me if you have to...]

Anyway, the biggest animated disaster I've ever sat through was 'Atlantis: The Lost Empire'—or whatever it was called—and the biggest animated train wreck I haven't even seen, but everyone tells me is a total mess, is that 'Sinbad' movie...

Monsters, Inc.

Totally random tangent here, but does anyone else remember that one cartoon about the Sword in the Stone? You know, the one where Merlin is all involved and then finally, right at the end, Arthur pulls the sword out!?

Does anyone actually remember watching that!?

feralgardener502 said:Yeah. It’s not that you lack intelligence, it’s just that you are incredibly unique.

[Damnation, I couldn't help myself. Moderators, my apologies, feel free to ban me for as long as you see fit...]

Do you actually want me to ban you? Just say it twice more... 🙂

Richard Howard2 said:👍

Man, those old Disney classics still look absolutely incredible!
If I recall correctly, the last truly great Disney film was "The Little Mermaid."

The Little Mermaid isn't actually that old Disney movie. 🤔

That was really more like the opening signal for the Disney renaissance in the early nineties, which was largely driven by Michael Eisner and Jeffrey Katzenberg (who happens to be running animation over at DreamWorks these days). That era paved the way for Beauty and the Beast, then Aladdin (which came out long before Andy Serkis, though everyone was buzzing back then about whether Robin Williams could snag an Oscar), leading up to the absolute peak with The Lion King, before things started sliding toward mediocrity with Pocahontas.

But honestly, throughout the latter half of the nineties and right up to now, they had the Pixar studio in their corner. Sadly, Steve Jobs just announced that in 2005, they're cutting ties with Disney to go looking for a new partner. It feels like losing a major cash cow—even if Disney still gets to keep the Pixar back catalog, plus two more films and the rights to sequels for the movies they made together ( Toy Story, A Bug's Life, Finding Nemo).

The Little Mermaid isn't really one of those "old" Disney classics.

No, that wasn't even about how good the old cartoons look. I was just trying to say that the last decent Disney movie I actually sat through was The Little Mermaid. Well, maybe Beauty and the Beast too.

Even though The Lion King was arguably Disney's biggest hit ever, it basically marked the start of that whole ridiculous 90s style they leaned into—it just happened to be the first of its kind, so I guess it didn't feel quite as bad at the time...

Richard Hernandez13 said:The Little Mermaid Not really, I guess. Hey man. A Disney movie. 🤔

Oh, give me a break, Richard Hernandez13... to these kids, anything that happened before the band Colonia hit the scene is just "old school." 🙄 😁

Alright, all jokes aside... I’ve been noticing lately that whenever people talk about anything even remotely specific, they immediately jump in with, "Uuuuuu, but that's so old." Like, give me a break. We're talking about stuff from '96 or '98—that's not exactly ancient history. 😲

Richard Hernandez13 said:That was basically the signal for the Disney renaissance back in the early nineties, which was largely driven by Michael Eisner and Jeffrey Katzenberg (who’s actually running animation over at DreamWorks today). Following that, we saw... Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin Years before Andy Serkis was even in the conversation, people were already arguing about whether Robin Williams actually stood a chance at an Oscar nomination. That debate was basically the absolute peak of everything. The Lion King...and then he just slid right back into mediocrity, starting with... Pocahontas.

It’s a total Renaissance. 👍 As for me, I'll always be a fan of Disney's golden age.

I guess I just have to say it: their animated films from that specific era are hands down my absolute favorites. They were easily the best.

So, we have Beauty and the Beast, which—if I’m remembering correctly—was actually the first animated film to ever snag an Oscar nomination for Best Picture.

Then came Aladdin. Man, I can still vividly remember those massive lines outside the movie theaters in Washington, D.C. back when it was first released. What really struck me at the time was just how much older the crowd seemed to be; there were so many adults heading into the theater to see it. I guess I was only about 11 years old myself back then.

And then we get to the absolute peak with The Lion King. Personally, I’d say it’s Disney's best feature-length film...👍

Everything has just gone downhill since then. I guess the audience eventually got tired of the constant singing and dancing and wanted something different, and once Disney lost their way, well, look where we are now.

Honestly, after The Lion King, I feel like the only thing worth watching was Princess Fiona's new look... everything else since then has just been absolute garbage.

Look, I guess things have actually improved a little over the last couple of years, but let’s be real—that's mostly thanks to Pixar. Once Pixar loses its touch or moves on, we'll probably be stuck watching absolute garbage like Planet of the Apes again.

Which reminds me, we've got a new Disney release coming our way called "Brother Bear." Has anyone actually seen it yet?

What’s your take on all that Cartoon Network junk? Honestly, most of it seems pretty mindless to me... Maybe just Sheep in the Big City, that sheep is actually adorable...👍

The Undertaker said:This is a bit random, but does anyone remember that Sword in the Stone bit—you know, when Merlin is there and Arthur finally pulls the sword out at the end of the movie!?

Anyone else?

I know my folks have them tucked away somewhere—though who actually knows where— 😁 but that part with the squirrels is definitely my favorite... honestly, I grew up with all those classic Disney movies at home, mostly thanks to some bootleg tapes, since back in the old days in America, you couldn't really get them any other way..

those were the days..

Anyway, I'm really looking forward to the next two—based on the forums, they look like 👍 - Shrek 2 and The Incredibles

and those short Pixar films... 😂 😂 'For the birds'... need I say more?

I mean, Shrek is just way better in my book. Monsters, Inc. feels like something made more for kids, whereas Shrek is basically for everyone, regardless of age.🙂

I honestly love both movies—I've actually got them both on DVD! Honestly, they're both equally great in their own way. I know people tend to judge Shrek differently now because of all the sequels, but personally? Even the sequels didn't let me down at all.

But, if we're talking about back when they were both hitting theaters here in the States (Shrek in 2001 and Monsters, Inc. in 2002)... I’d definitely have to go with Shrek!

I’d take Shrek over Monsters, Inc. any day. Honestly? Hercules and The Emperor's New Groove actually cracked me up way more.

I’ll take a side on Monsters, Inc.—mostly because Shrek feels like classic DreamWorks formulaic stuff to me: grab two massive comedy stars, one cute female lead, parody some fairy tales, throw in some action, wrap it up as a buddy-comedy rom-com, and boom—happy ending. People eat the popcorn, buy the shirts, make sequels, and everyone’s happy. It isn't bad per se, and honestly, the way Shrek pulled it off was top-tier. 👍

On the other hand, Monsters, Inc. might lack that immediate, loud appeal Shrek has (even with those big comedy names😁), but I found myself coming back to it more often. The world-building is just more imaginative, and the stories feel more interesting, leading to much better finales. Plus, there's a sense that this kind of magic only works in animation.

Bottom line: I see Shrek as a (very good) comedy featuring animated characters, while Monsters, Inc. is first and foremost a (very good) animated film.🙂