Shrek the Third

Diana Saenger started her review out by saying, “DreamWorks’ animated series about Shrek, an ogre who rules his territory by making fun of himself and looking at the glass as half-full, became a funny and successful franchise as the result of the first two releases. Shrek (2001) and Shrek 2 (2004) are nearing the $1.4 billion revenue mark, and the amount is still climbing.” With this type of success, it was obvious to come out with “Shrek the Third,” but this 2007 sequel lacks everything that made the first two films so entertaining.

At the end of “Shrek 2,” Shrek’s life was turning out good. The swamp loving and grouchy (who also has a heart of gold) ogre, found the love of his life in the kind of eccentric Princess Fiona. Her parents, King Harold and Queen Lillian, who rule Far, Far Away, weren’t too happy about their only daughter marrying an ogre and going off to live in his swamp. Eventually they saw how happy they were and finally approved their marriage with blessings.

“Shrek the Third” starts with King Harold, who was turned into a frog in the last film, on his death bed. He decides Shrek must take his throne and rule the kingdom. Farting a lot in the swamp is one thing – but in the castle? Shrek knows right away that he doesn’t want the job. When he sees there is one other relative, Fiona’s cousin Arthur, voiced by Justin Timberlake, who could rule the kingdom, Shrek and his friends, Puss in Boots and Donkey leave to find him.

Saenger said, “Up to this point there have a been a few laughs, so as the ship sails away, I—as a  big Shrek fan—settled in for more laughs and for that smart pop-culture banter that filled the first two films. Without delay the conniving Price Charming shows up to become the next king. There's a long unfunny segment where he puts on his own stage play, not exactly making his quest to rule too urgent.” He finally breaks into the castle and takes Fiona, her girl friends and the Queen captive, then throws them in the dungeon.

How about those girl friends? Saenger said, “Well, they have the depth of a pancake and spout inane dialogue.” The animation of Snow White (Amy Poehler), Cinderella (Amy Sedaris), Sleeping Beauty (Cheri Oteri) and Rapunzel (Maya Rudolph) seems weak compared to the animation in the rest of the movie, which also lacks in comparison to the previous films.

Making their directing debuts on “Shrek the Third” are Chris Miller and Raman Hui. Saenger said, “The movie also has a slew of writers, some new, but they've layered the new offering with non-comical heavy-handed scenarios and uninteresting characters.”

Charming’s evil colleagues such as Captain Hook (Ian McShane) and Rumpelstiltskin (Conrad Vernon) are as weak as anything. Where are the funny characters that really stood out in the other “Shrek” movies, like the hilarious Fairy Godmother? Also, where are those wonderful parodies that made “Shrek” and “Shrek 2” as enjoyable for parents as it was for kids?

Shrek himself is so unfunny it actually hurts. Saenger said, “The big oaf we loved has been replaced by a doofus moving through his lackluster life with little interest. What a disappointment to lose what Mike Myers previously brought to this character. Even the news that Shrek is about to be a father is treated with daft set-ups devoid of warmth and humor. Shrek’s dream sequence about multiple babies is like many of the scenes here that rely on pratfalls and fast action but fail to be amusing. Fiona turns out to be a nurturing wife, but there's little humor in her role as well.”

Honestly, Donkey and Puss in Boots are the only funny characters in the movie and they are irregular. Saenger said, “I remember checking my watch during long moments where nothing funny or engaging happened at all.”

Rupert Everett as Charming is truthfully the best part of this film. He successfully brought his character to life in the last two movies, and even though he has a kind of unlikely plotline in “Shrek the Third,” he still deserves his earning the high scores as a comical and interesting character.

Saenger ended her review by saying, “With more focus on Shrek toys at the fast food joints than a clever story, the bottom line in this unfortunate sequel is that Shrek no longer has fun, and neither do we.”

After such a great success with the first two movies, this one just fell flat, like a lot of third installments do. This was just a boring story with the whole, “I don’t want to be king,” like a spoiled, rotten child. I was really let down and disappointed by this film when I saw it. Just do yourself a favor and never see this one because it clearly is making Shrek into an ogre who doesn’t want any responsibility and just wants to lounge around and do nothing. If that was the case, then it just makes the first film unnecessary when he married Fiona. Why make the third film like that when Shrek should have known what was coming for him after he asked Fiona to marry him? Like I said, avoid this film.

Well, now that we have gotten that one out of the way, prepare yourselves for next week for the finale of “Shrek Month.”