telltaletypist:

mrmeriwether:

an-apocalypse-of-magpies:

norwayspruce:

carolxdanvers:

lizmitches:

ophanic:

same energy

How dare you. The animation for Shrek at the time was INSANE.

I feel like what people who were born after Shrek always miss is that it was actually a huge unironic cultural sensation. The minions want what Shrek had. The mcu sits awake at night cursing lord farquaad because they could never have a villain as well written as him

Shrek was a revolution for 3D CG animation.

Compare human figures in Toy Story (1995)

Toy Story 2 (1999)

Monsters Inc. (2001)

Jimmy Neutron: Boy Genius (2001)

and Shrek (2001)

Even Shrek himself counts

Look at that detail - Shrek and Farquaad have subtle stubble, Shrek has liver spots on his scalp, characters have pores on their skin, Shrek’s ears here even have a subtle transparency like real skin and cartilage. His linen tunic has scruffy and rough edges and lint bobbing on the shoulders. Shrek doesn’t just represent a step forward, it represented a BIG jump. Look back at the early 3D Pixar films and you’ll see a progression in what 3D software could effectively render - first plastic toys, then chitinous insects, then scaly or leathery monsters with an enterprising look into the astoundingly complicated field of hair and fur. Shrek is a joke now, but it revolutionised the field of animation. Shrek finally prompted the Academy to add an Award for Best Animated Feature; after Beauty and the Beast lost Best Picture a few years before, Shrek was the point they could no longer dismiss the art and effort that go into animated films.

It also killed interest in 2D animation in the west but that’s none of my business

Never forget that they had to tone down the detail on Fiona’s hair because it looked TOO realistic to the point it was distracting.