Ogre sequel not original's equal

I like "Shrek 2" for all the same reasons I liked the original "Shrek:" it's smart, savvy, funny, creative and original. These are not compliments any sequel should take lightly. As a general rule of thumb, sequels tend to be worse than their predecessors. "Shrek 2" is among the rare few that can hold its own against the first.\nThe good news is the majority of the original cast is back (one of the signs a sequel might not be doomed). As the film opens, we join our hero Shrek (voiced by Mike Myers) and his new wife Fiona (Cameron Diaz) on their honeymoon. Once they arrive back to their swampy home, they receive an invitation to visit Princess Fiona's parents in the land of Far Far Away.\nThe plot, if there's any to report on, is like a "Guess Who's Coming To Dinner?" with ogres. Fiona's parents (a king and queen voiced by John Cleese and Julie Andrews) have trouble adjusting to Shrek and Fiona's new ogre-ness, and the two go through a rocky period where they wonder how strong love really is, as Prince Charming (Rupert Everett) and his mom, the Fairy Godmother (Jennifer Saunders), plot to win over Fiona.\nIt's the type of conclusion we reached in the first "Shrek," whose moral of the story was love knows no bounds and it's not who you love but that you actually love. So why the need for a "Shrek 2?" Well, like most sequels, the first one made a boatload of money. DreamWorks, its distributing and producing company, wanted to cash in on a sequel -- and they did. Early box office reports show "Shrek 2" pulled in over $100 million its opening weekend, the largest opening for an animated movie ever and the largest one-day box office gross. \nThe writers and directors must be commended for making a fun and widely entertaining movie. For a project that seems like it was spawned just for more money, "Shrek 2" is full of new satire, parody and rip-offs. It's packed tightly with pop culture references (including a catchy soundtrack full of song covers). It's like a golden overflow of wit that they couldn't fit into the first "Shrek." \nIf "Shrek 2" can be accurately accused of anything, I think one could make a compelling case that it's perhaps too mature to be a kids' movie. To be sure, there's little doubt in my mind that the first "Shrek" was always meant for adults, and kids would like it merely for its flashy, animated characters and its bathroom humor. (I suppose some adults could get their kicks off of that as well.) \nThat said, while I think it's worth the time and money, "Shrek 2" is still not as good as the original. The original literally took me by surprise. During the first "Shrek," I hadn't had so much fun at a movie since "High Fidelity." It grabbed ahold of my imagination and ran with it. \nIt's a fruitless comparison either way. "Shrek 2" can stand on its own legs and is a strong follow-up.