 Click on CAPCon Alert image for explanation |
Christian Analysis of American Culture (CAP Ministry) www.capalert.com/ Entertainment Media Analysis Report A service to His little ones (which includes at-home teens) through you, their parents and grandparents, in His name by His Word MAR24051  (2004), PG |
"http://www.capalert.com/ now_playing.htm" Target="_New"  Click it to try it! |
tax-deductible donations. PLEASE .......  Features PayPal! |
on what Hollywood feeds your kids. SUBSCRIBE to our FREE newsletter. |
 (2004), PG -- Shrek 2 is not only darker than the Shrek of 2001 , it is not as funny.  Cast/Crew Details Courtesy Internet Movie Database Production (US): DreamWorks SKG, Pacific Data Images Distribution (US): DreamWorks Distribution LLC Director(s): Andrew Adamson, Kelly Asbury, Conrad Vernon Producer(s): Jeffrey Katzenberg, David Lipman, Aron Warner, John H. Williams Characters: William Steig Screenplay: J. David Stem, Joe Stillman, David N. Weiss Music: Stephen Barton, Harry Gregson-Williams, David Bowie, Kathleen Brennan, Christopher Carrabba, Nick Cave, Desmond Child, Steven Greenberg, Robby Rosa, Pete Shelley, Jim Steinman, Tom Waits Film Editing: Michael Andrews Production Management: Tony Cosanella, Jennifer Dahlman, Philip R. Garrett Costume Design: Isis Mussenden Art Department: Steven E. Gordon, John Stevenson Viewed At: Driftwood Theater 6 From flatulence by both Shrek (Mike Myers) and Fiona (Cameron Diaz) in a mud bath to a beach scene from Here to Eternity where Fiona feeds a mermaid to the sharks for bumping her off Shrek in a wave, we are witness to the wedded bliss between Shrek and Fiona following their escapades of self-discovery in the Shrek of 2001. All manner of honeymoon joys are shared by the perky pair. Now it is time to "Meet the Parents." Her parents. Fiona's parents, King Harold (John Cleese) and Queen Lillian (Julie Andrews) in Far, Far Away (700 miles far, far away) sent a formal invitation to the nuptial pair in their swamp paradise. Shrek is not at all comfortable with the idea of meeting Fiona's parents. Fiona is a princess. Daughter in royalty. Shrek is an ogre. Shrek is certain that being an ogre will be a barrier to social success and familial harmony with her parents. After Shrek puts his foot down to Fiona dictating they are NOT going, it is off to Far Far Away ... with donkey (Eddie Murphy) to keep Shrek and Fiona company, asking "Are we there yet" about every mile or so. And popping his lips about ever other nerve. Recall Los Angeles and the famous "Hollywood" sign on the hill and you will have the picture of Far Far Away, complete with stretch limo-carriages and sprawling mansions with "Rapunzel" and "Cinderella" emblazoned in wrought iron above the ranch-size gates. King Harold is less than cordial while Queen Lillian is the peace-keeper and compromise-maker. But as much as Lillian and Fiona try to smooth the relationship between Shrek and King Harold, friction rules. Shrek and Fiona are married and there is nothing King Harold can do about it. But the fairy godmother - err - fairy witch (Jennifer Saunders) can. She has plans for her son, Prince Charming (Rupert Everett) and Fiona. The witch wants her son to steal Fiona and will stoop to forcing King Harold to hire hit man, Puss-in-Boots (Antonio Banderas) to kill Shrek to get her way. Yes, to kill Shrek. Now starts the battle. A battle between the fairy godmother witch, King Harold and Shrek. The witch uses every manner of concoction, potion and incantation to witch Fiona away from Shrek [Rev. 21:8]. Shrek 2 is not only darker than the Shrek of 2001 , it is not as funny. Nor does it have as much to say as the Shrek of 2001. Shrek 2 is funny in a few places but all too often it tries to be funny with crude and rude, even vulgar humor such as having Pinocchio do the "Michael Jackson" dance and grab his privates while doing a pelvic thrust. [Eph. 5:4] Another instance is Puss-in-Boots licking his privates twice while purring. And these two scenes are not just of a cat. Once an animated character, even an animal is personified with a human personality communicating as a human the character stops being just a cartoon character to the young viewer. Yet one more example of vulgar humor is Pinocchio admitting to wearing women's thong underwear. Maybe the "kinky" of that will make no sense to the very young, depending on their level of experiential development, but the imagery or idea is still planted, lending to becoming desensitized to such sexually immoral habits [Deut. 22:5]. As I've said before folks, I didn't write the movie. If this stuff sounds vulgar to you here in print, wait until you see it in the movie. Harvard educated child developmental expert and psychology professor Dr. Karen Nelson and practicing counselor Dr. Larry Gilliam agree with me that it would be unusual for even a 16 year old to be able to fully separate fantasy from reality or to fully anticipate the consequences of his/her actions. This movie is targeted at a much younger audience than 16. And examples of behavior and imagery such as the ones above stick with your kids, folks. They remember it. Often for life. Don't you still remember Bambi and when his mother was shot? This is all too bad, too. Shrek 2 is the most astounding computer animation I have ever seen. The level of detail and attention to it is exemplary. And there is much more to the story but since this analysis is being posted on opening day, I do not want to spoil the film for you any more than I already have. But I do ask that you please read the listing in the Findings/Scoring section for yourself before deciding whether to take your little ones to see this film. For your information, a comparative betweent the Shrek of 2002 and this Shrek 2 is provided below. 
SCRIPTURAL APPLICATION(S) If needed to focus or fortify, applicable text is underlined or bracketed [ ]. If you wish to have full context available, the Blue Letter Bible is a convenient source. If you use the Blue Letter Bible, a new window will open. Close it to return here or use "Window" in your browser's menu bar to alternate between the CAP page and the Blue Letter Bible page. ***Selected Scriptures of Armour against the influence of the entertainment industry*** As always, it is best to refer to the Findings/Scoring section -- the heart of the CAP analysis model -- for the most complete assessment possible of this movie. |
 |
(The heart of the CAP Analysis Model)  Wanton Violence/Crime (W) Impudence/Hate (I) Sexual Immorality (S) Drugs/Alcohol (D): Offense to God (O) Murder/Suicide (M) |
 |  |
 |  |
 |
|
 |
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 Single Christian Network |
 |
 |  |
 |
 Kids, Teens and Home Vertical Portal |
 |
| There are some in the entertainment industry who maintain that 1) violent programming is harmless because no studies exist that prove a connection between violent entertainment and aggressive behavior in children, and 2) young people know that television, movies, and video games are simply fantasy. Unfortunately, they are wrong on both accounts." And "Viewing violence may lead to real life violence." I applaud these associations for fortifying 1 Cor. 15:33. Read the rest of the story. From our more than eight years of study, I contend that other aberrant behaviors, attitudes, and expressions can be inserted in place of "violence" in that statement. Our Director - Child Psychology Support, a licensed psychologist and certified school psychologist concurs. For example, "Viewing arrogance against fair authority may lead to your kids defying you in real life." Or "Viewing sex may lead to sex in real life." Likewise and especially with impudence, hate and foul language. I further contend that any positive behavior can be inserted in place of "violence" with the same chance or likelihood of being a behavior template for the observer; of being incorporated into the behavior mechanics and/or coping skills of the observer. In choosing your entertainment, please consider carefully the "rest of the story" and our findings. |
| In the name of Jesus: Lord, Master, Teacher, Savior, God. Tom Carder President ChildCare Action Project (CAP): Christian Analysis of American Culture 100% dependent on your tax-deductible financial support |  |