"Shrek" Movie Review Essay & Film Analysis

ESSAY TOPICS:   film analysis movie review Shrek
Cartoon is already so old and left many parts that somehow it's embarrassing to write a review for the very first part. Although some reviews? Rather, the idea that I'd like to share. They are caused by disagreement and some specifications about the negative opinions.
I think that this cartoon you can watch the children, but with one condition. Prior to "Shrek," they need to see some kind of Soviet cartoons, where there will be other characters, another morality of these same characters and in general all. But do not get hung up on them if you want to see your child such as "Shrek." As for me, neither one nor the other (Soviet and American cartoons) should not be taken to the wild fanaticism of example only correct (!) Behavior.
I know moms who are shaking about what to grow and where we are heading, their dogmas largely limited to children, forbidding them to look a lot like kantslagere some: a maximum of 40 minutes a day, only the Soviet cartoons; Careful surveillance, so as not to change channels. And - although it is little specifically refers to the cartoon, but no less important - such surveillance and overprotection concerns the whole life of the child. Well, it is also wrong! I for that without any restrictions, but with the mind and watch something, and another.
omit consequences overprotective, though they are catastrophic! I just will not write about them, because, once again, to review it does not apply. Instead, call the consequences if prohibited by the US cartoons, forced to watch only ours. That force, foaming at the mouth screaming, some bad "Shrek" and his ilk. Yes, your child will learn the good, will learn morality, some moral precepts. This is very good, I do not argue. But it may also happen (if you go too far with the imposition of view) that, having absorbed the kindness, the child will become too soft and the "scapegoat in school"; instead moralist parents got moralofaga, the man who against all "nInArmalnogo", argues the Internet, call names, insults, wonders why people are different, but not like he wants. If morale is good, moralofazhnost - No, because it makes people hate others, simply because they live in, have other interests, "not such" friends; moralofazhnost forces to go into someone else's bed. More afraid that the Soviet cartoons - this is the ideal, but life is not ideal, and this disparity is ... well, to put it mildly, shocking and create problems of child
Besides, what else forget the parents, -. The forbidden fruit is sweet. Forbid child "Shrek" and similar cartoons - he gets to them, vlechonny thought, why he can not, vlechonny strong interest. Look at it and do not understand. And I could see without any restrictions with the parent, having absorbed the good that is in the cartoon. A few moments even if the parent explains, create discussion. Pozadaot questions, for example, generally favoring Fiona, he can ask about her singing: "Do you think she did well with a bird or a bad thing?" The same thing to ask about inflating balls of snakes and toads. More about that Shrek without permission took and carried Fiona. Do not be afraid to discuss, to communicate on a "question - answer" rather than "vtyuhat morality", I'm sorry for being rude
I like that the "wrong" cartoon deprived of some unpleasant moral. plants, which are so adore! in the meantime, the moral precepts generate a lot of pain and phrases such as "Tyzhedivachka!" For example, the image of Fiona. I can hear, or rather, I read negative about it? That's right, "nizhenstvina"! My God, be feminine or not feminine - is a matter of each person, most importantly, a man of character remain. (And Fiona the whole humanity, except here these moments with inflating balls and the bursting of the birds, which, I agree, it is necessary to explain (through discussion) to the child). And I feel like burns those to whom I may have spoiled the West, a new generation of rIbonok.
so, the woman has the right to be not feminine! dispose of her body, to be with a certain character does not coincide with the standard imposed by the shovels and the society for many years way. Just all this should not disturb others. And I do not see that in the way. (Moralofagov in the forest and the swamp have no Shrek)
I like that Fiona can dress as he wishes And by the way, about at normal wearing:.. To ak ordinary princess. With the cut, yes. Incidentally, neat and not as an excuse, from moth. And what else would she dress? Maybe in a burqa? Then the movie will not be enemies?
I admire the fact that she can stand up for yourself! This is just a very positive aspect of the cartoon, and cartoon enemies spotted in this only "nizhenstvinast". Do you know how many now sexist, inadequate mudchin (this is not a typo)? And sometimes just need to be the champion, Fiona, to save his honor, and sometimes life. That's right, she punched the Robin Hood unfinished
About Shrek rightly said Fiona:. «Let manners are not perfect ...» This is so, it is a minus. It is important that children do not take him belch, some coarseness as a model of right conduct. But, you know, they do not do it, if equally will see both Soviet and American cartoons. If they argue with their parents, and not to look stupid. Of course, if you look stupid or what not to speculate, maybe you can gain something bad.
In general, do not have to be perceived as the ideal Shrek. It's not argue. But it is quite an interesting character, in which there is and a lot of good and bad things, there is something to think about.
's all about thinking about whether you can see it to children. Yes, but there are nuances. Everything is painted above.
Overall Cartoon colorful, interesting characters, a play on the famous fairy tales. Many watched many people know about it. Given the nuances of why children can watch, but with some modifications, and given the fact that it is not my favorite part (my favorite, probably, 2 and 4), slightly reduced estimate.
8 of 10

How to cite this essay: