"Shrek The Third" Talkback (Spoilers)

[Dr.Pepper]

SHREK THE THIRD

Release Date: May 18, 2007
Studio: DreamWorks Animation
Director: Chris Miller, Raman Hui
Screenwriter: Peter Seaman, Jeffrey Price
Starring: Mike Myers, Eddie Murphy, Cameron Diaz, Antonio Banderas, Rupert Everett, Justin Timberlake, Julie Andrews, John Cleese, Eric Idle, Cheri Oteri, Amy Poehler, Maya Rudolph, Amy Sedaris, John Krasinski, Ian McShane
Genre: Animation, Comedy, Fantasy
MPAA Rating: PG (for some crude humor, suggestive content and swashbuckling action)

Plot Summary: When Shrek married Princess Fiona, becoming the next King and Queen of Far, Far Away wasn't part of the plan. So when his father-in-law, King Harold, falls ill, it is up to Shrek to find a suitable heir or he will be forced to give up his beloved swamp for the throne. Recruiting Donkey and Puss In Boots for a new quest, Shrek sets out to bring back the rightful heir to the throne, Fiona's rebellious cousin Artie. Back in Far, Far Away, Fiona's jilted Prince Charming storms the city with an army of fairy tale villains to seize the throne. But they have a surprise in store because Fiona, together with her mother, Queen Lillian, has drafted her fellow fairy tale heroines to defend their "happily ever afters." As Shrek, Donkey and Puss work on changing Artie from a royal pain in the you-know-what into a future king, Fiona and her band of princesses must stop Prince Charming to ensure there will be a kingdom left to rule.

Comments?


I just saw it. I think it is the best of the three.

 

[Draft]

2>1, at least the last time i watched it

despite pop culture(which i do like), i thoguht shrek 2 had a better plot

don't throw sticks/yap at me for that, it's my opnion

seeing Shrek 3 soon

 

[Baltofan]

One of the best movie trilogies.

 

[Khurath]

Yep, not feeling this one. The first was an okay film, but the second seemed really unnecessary. From the trailers for this one I don't want anything to do with it. The fact that there's still more coming leaves me with low expectations for any of it. Pop culture based movies have a very short shelf life. Even watching the first one nowadays is nauseating.

Of course, it'll still sell like crazy. I'm not delusional.

 

[btv]

Everything in it felt bland, the animation, the designs, the setting, but it was better then two.

 

[simpspin]

I dunno...this one had the best animation by a long shot, and the story was okay, but the new characters voiced by Justin Timberlake and Eric Idle, although supposedly important, seemed useless.

Out of the three, this is the worst one by far, but on it's own, it's not really a bad film. Shrek 2 is still the best one, IMO.

 

[Serena S.]

Shrek was great.,...

I went to go see saturday and it was good IMO. Puss 'n Boots had me laughing just about the whole especially when he.......oops i speak anymore, I'd be spoiling. XD I suggest this movie to be seen......but I will say that it's not as good as Spider-Man 3 but it is still like I said worth seeing.

*Btw, Justin Timberlake did a good job and he actually had some laughable scenes too!......but I speak about unless (for the folks you hasn't seen it yet) you go see it!

Movie: 4 out of 5!

 

[tb4000]

The animation and detail has come a long way since the first one back in 2001. All the characters, even the background ones, look shockingly real, almost that uncanny valley thing, but because they act so goofy, not quite to that point.

 

[Fanboy Dave]

I saw it today and I really liked it,it was a good solid family movie without being too kiddie or too mature in terms of language and pop culture references. I heard something about Puss getting his own movie and I'm all for it,that cat is awesome. All in all I would say I liked 2,3,1 in that order but that's only me. The pace was good,the jokes were pretty consistant and they really didn't rehash old material so it worked out well.

 

[HomeMoviesFan]

Um, are some of you in la-la land? "The best of the three?"

You've...gotta be joking me, right? Shrek 2 was by far wonderfully terrific (and that's not just my nostalgia kicking in because 2004 was a much better year than this one currently is)...and the original Shrek is very closely behind, but this one...jeez. The animation is the only thing making it seemed like they tried.

Warning: my rant is long and novel-like. You have been warned.

Let's start off with theme of general parody: the first Shrek was primarily focused on literature and in sub-regions, Disney spoofing. The second Shrek went after movies and television, and surprisingly made it work better than the first. This one goes in a direction that's ultimately bizarre considering the mainstream target audience: theatre. Yes, that's right, Shrek the Third is mainly focused with parodying the performing arts, preferably bad dinner theatre. To be said the first of many times, what were they thinking?!

Next, plot: (this is kinda cryptic, helps if you know the full plot) Okay, the first one is a well-crafted, linear, by-the-books buddy, quasi-road-trip-slash-journey movie that evolves into a romance. The plot flows perfectly and all loose-ends are nicely tied. The second one jazzes it up a bit with a meet-the-parents idea, yet it makes the idea its own and throws in a few plot twists as well as a surprisingly-not-forced journey jammed into the middle (because it expands on the exposition), with the ending tying up loose ends, thus being once again satisfying. Then there's number three...it starts off with decent exposition, then eyes the course ahead. The audience thinks it knows where it's going, but they are proven wrong. Shrek 2 did this sort of thing, too, but where it went MADE FREAKING SENSE. Shrek the Third goes off in an entirely different direction just to serve its "hey, they seemed good in the writers' room" ideas purpose, but ultimately shreds the plot. What's worse is that the subplot gets more attention than the main plot because of this! And then when it hints towards something that might make up for this (more on that later), it NEVER gets to it! No loose ends tied up, as it only explains the ending for one of the stories. Frustrating, just like you must be after reading this paragraph.

Next, tone: Seriously, the last two began upbeat with decent exposition. This one does half of that: it begins with decent exposition. But parodying seriousness or not, bad dinner theatre and a somber frog king funeral (which seemed to make fun of national tragedies...yeah, real goldmine there, writers) does not seem to scream "comedy" to me. Especially for a kids movie, and the light tone that suceeded really suffered because of it. The last two began on a high and then eventually lowered to a dark period, then back to a high for the climax, like EVERY family film should! (because it's a formula that works...including for the first two like previously mentioned!!!)

Now, comedy: Like I said before...theatre as the main parody target? C'mon writers...whoa, wait a second, the names of the writers...in the credits! (checks imdb) Oh, man, why didn't I notice it before! Pretty much 3/4ths of the writers have never worked on a Shrek film before!! This explains why only 1/4th of the comedy works like it would in the first two flicks! Everything that worked in Shrek 1 and 2 in the humor department is subdued, including Donkey...and I mean, how can you go wrong with Donkey...well, let's be nice, it is number three, and there's only so many one-liners you can write for a character without letting the VA improvise. (that with Eddie Murphy?...no thanks) But, wait a second, Puss in Boots was only in the last film! And he didn't even appear until halfway through! Surely he's filled with comic dynamite yet to be explored. That would be great...if they ever EXPLORED IT!! Even Puss gets only a few hits! So, suffice it to say, if you want to know the best jokes in the film, know that they involved a wicked Puss one-liner (like, pretty much the only good one he ever gets) about Shrek as a father and anything involving Gingerbread Man. It's as if the original writers came back especially to write on that one character. Boy, was his "life-flashing-before-his-eyes" sequence hysterical.

Now, onto my main point (if somehow you're still with me): the pointlessness of it all. It seemed as if the director (who helped write the first two) invited his friends over and said, "guys, will you help me write Shrek 3?" After they say yes, they have a big party and watch the first two, followed by a drunken writers' meeting. They have the wafer-thin plot figured out...and it actually might work with well execution. Then the big-comedy-ideas pour in, and I imagine it goes like this:

(BEWARE: SPOILERS and MAD Magazine-esque ribbing follow!)

Writer #1: Hey, let's have Fiona have a baby shower!

Director: That's a great idea for a cute little scene during the subplot!

Writer #2: Yeah, and her guests should be all these fairy tale princesses!

Director: Smart, funny, and allows for Disney-bashing, I like it!

Writer #3: Yeah, but for no reason at all, as well as dumping the original idea of why it was funny, let's use four chicks who used to be (or currently are) cast members on Saturday Night Live even though their voice acting is mediocre and you can't really tell its them so the humor in this point is really never there!

Director: Well, okay, but that's a big paycheck likely to be made to those four, so we can't have this just be one little scene, they need to be really pointless main characters and devote a bunch of screentime to them!

Writer #2: But we can't make the film too long because of the family factor.

Director: Well, let's just salvage some time from our really much, much, MUCH more important main plot! Anymore suggestions?

Writer #1: Remember how Shrek and Donkey transformed into handsome versions of themselves in the previous movie? Well, for no reason at all, Donkey and Puss should switch bodies! That would make for some hilarious observations even though all we really are doing is switching the voice actors and having the characters around them comment that their voices have changed every now and then.

Director: Well, even though it doesn't service the plot IN ANY WAY AT ALL, we'll shoehorn it in somewhere.

Writer #2: But how would they switch bodies?

Director: Well, if we're doing a parody of the Arthurian legend, how about we include Merlin?

Writer #3: But isn't that another pointless character in this already convoluted mess?

Director: Yes, but alas.

Writer #1: Oh, oh! And just like how we had John Cleese in the second film, we can get another Python to do his voice, like Eric Idle! Though that would require yet another big paycheck, so we need him to have a decent amount of screentime.

Director: Well, instead of Shrek staying at the school and teaching Arthur his lesson there as well as continuing the seems-to-be-working parody of high school, we can have them travel to Merlin and have him help Shrek and Arthur bond in a totally idiotic, lazy way.

Writer #1: Oh! Oh! And to be EXTRA LAZY in our writing, let's have Merlin just transport them to Far, Far Away, therefore solving the trouble of giving more screentime to the damn subplot! Then Donkey and Puss can "hilariously" switch bodies because Merlin is so inept.

Director: Well, how are they going to switch back?

Writer #2: Merlin can just pop out of the blue at the very end and he switches them back like the world's BIGGEST CONVIENCE.

Writer #1: Oh! Oh! I actually have a CREATIVE, INVENTIVE AND ORIGINAL IDEA.

Director: Really?! Honest?!

Writer #1: Yeah, let's have Arthur be Prince Charming's son! That would tie the film around!

Director: That's a GREAT idea!

(they all sprinkle in the script hints that Arthur is Prince Charming's son, up until the climax when--)

Writer #1: WAIT! Actually, that's a bad idea. Throw it out.

Director: If you say so...

(They neglect to write a revelation but they leave ALL THE HINTS BEFOREHAND STILL IN THERE!!!)

Writer #1: You know what, let's not even have an ending where Arthur stands up and shows his worthiness as king...let's have him say a really-PC speech!

Director: That's the ticket...I guess.

Writer #1: Then after he gets the crown, we NEVER SEE HIM AGAIN!

Writer #2: Just like the great characters established in the high school that just vanish into thin air, even though it seemed like they were going to do something later on?

Writer #1: Exactly!

Director: Whatever...you guys do what you want, I'm going to go over to the production team on Bee Movie so I can remind myself what good comedic ideas look like...


So, anyways, the end result is the one of the most inferior movies of all time. I mean, to follow Shrek 2 with this is an utter embarrasment.

I tried to think of something worse, then it came to me: no matter what may happen, there WILL be a Shrek 4...and it takes no dummy to see that there might as well be a Shrek 5...I'm going to go off and wallow in the fields of disappointment that this summer has sent me to twice so far...not looking good...

 

[Serena S.]

You know, I thought that Artie was somehow Prince Charming' s son but they now came out with it...I mean, Artie and Prince look just a like and all....so was pondering that until now......Thanks for summoning that up, HomeMoviesFan.

 

[Aldrius]

You know what would have been cool? If the Fairy Godmother pulled a green goblin and started popping up in mirrors demanding Charming do things.

 

[Duke]

Toon Zone chimes in with Alex Weitzman's review of Shrek 3.

 

[Hordesman]

You know, I thought that Artie was somehow Prince Charming' s son but they now came out with it...I mean, Artie and Prince look just a like and all....so was pondering that until now......Thanks for summoning that up, HomeMoviesFan.

I think there's a shallow genepool there. If Fiona had married Charming, the result would have been like the Hapsburgs.

 

[Discloner]

Honestly, I thought it was good; definetly a film that will age a helluva lot better then the prior film. It wasn't awful, nor was it fantastic, it was just enjoyable and really that's all I wanted from it. I was pleased we weren't getting the same "Shrek doubts himself because he's an monster and nobody will love him" angle that they more or less rehashed for Shrek 2, and moved on a wee bit to "Shrek doubts his ability to be a father because he's a monster", while in writing they seem similar the application felt wildly different to me and it's a set-up that is perhaps a bit more relatable to an audience then playing up 'Shrek's different' yet again. They weaved the that into the story quite well - Artie had father issues, and Shrek was having issues with being a father; it was a natural progression.

His dream sequence with all the babies pouring into the room was hilarious - especially when he 'woke up' and saw Puss and Donkey with baby faces. Man, just thinking about it makes me laugh.

I did like the fact that the character of Shrek was a little less...uh...grumpy. Slightly more care-free but not completely complacent with his setting - still yerning to go back home to his swamp. And we get the fun of following the princesses in all their tweaked glory (Cheri Oteri and Amy Sederis as princesses, it was impossible for this to fail).

The animation was great - in some spots, perhaps too good; for instance the Frog King's funeral which seemed ultra-errie to me with these realistic humans and pigs staning in the cloudy weather with Shrek and Fiona. But overall it was pleasent to look at, which I guess has never really been that big of a problem for Shrek films (the first still holds up rather well). I loved some of the esentricity - like when the king was on his death bed making all those faces. Makes for some fun physical comedy amongst some serious events and situations.

In the end I kind of wish it were longer, or...meatier. It seemed like they frequently cut to the point, which in some places wasn't nessisarily a bad thing but things were happening a wee bit too fast in spots where I might have liked them to be drawn out a bit more.

 

[tb4000]

One of my favorite characters was Gwen, the sarcastic Daria-like chick at the high school. I just liked how they animated her, with that droll expression a lot of teenagers have, and her voice was well done also. The one that said her friend was really into college guys and mythical creatures. XD

 

[Ishtar]

Well, I finally saw Shrek The Third last night. I actually liked it quite a bit and it entertained me the whole way through. I didn't like it as much as Shrek 2, but I liked it better than the 1st one. I gotta say, I loved the Phantom Of The Opera gag in Prince Charming's dressing room, especially since I'm a fan of Broadway shows.

 

[GWOtaku]

Not bad, but it definitely didn't live up to the first two. I felt that there wasn't enough humor--a lot of crazy stuff happened, but it seemed a bit light on the jokes. There were some good ones though: King Harold's hysterically prolonged death, Shrek's dream, the Gingerbread Man's life flashing before his eyes, Pinocchio rambling on and on to avoid telling a lie, Shrek making fun of Charming's leotard--these were all great. Donkey and Puss trading bodies would have been much more funny if they had done more with it and not spoiled it in the trailers.

Also Shrek 2 added onto the cast, it was too bad they didn't throw something new in this time. Its not like Shrek needed a third sidekick, but nothing new was added The princesses don't really count in my book, as I doubt they will be recurring.

Speaking of which, there wasn't enough of them taking the fight to the fairy tale baddies. For that matter, this movie needed tons more focus on them in general. The Arthur sideplot was a good lesson to teach and there was nothing wrong with it, but come on--one sermon from the kid and the whole crisis is over? Lame, lame, lame. Out of all the baddies in the movie only Captain Hook got any screentime, it was such a waste to bring in all those characters for nothing.

Its not as though I disliked it, but I have to give this about 2.5 stars simply because I felt like there was so much that could have been done here but wasn't. Not a bad movie, but its average compared against the earlier installments.

 

[judyindisguise]

Screw the critics (especially Roger Ebert - his review of the film was damn weird IMO) - I loved Shrek The Third. Lots of fun, even though some of the gags were perhaps a bit weak. Still, people in my theater applauded when Artie appealed to the bad guys to reform. And the CGI is much improved (although character design is still definitely not Dreamworks' strong point). I'd give this film an 8/10.

 

[Alex Weitzman]

(especially Roger Ebert - his review of the film was damn weird IMO)

What was so weird about it? He said quite a few of the same things I did.

And speaking as somebody who's loved Ebert's reviews forever and has been quite worried for his health, I'm thrilled to see him back and reviewing. It looks like, based on the slate of reviews he did, that he's officially back for good.