areaseven Posted June 1, 2007 Posted June 1, 2007 Shrek the Third ( シュレック３ ) PDI DreamWorks Animation, 2007 Directed by Chris Miller and Raman Hui Based upon characters created by William Steig and various fairytale authors Running Time: 92 minutes Rated PG for violence and mature situations. Cast Mike Myers as Shrek Eddie Murphy as Donkey Cameron Diaz as Princess Fiona Antonio Banderas as Puss in Boots Rupert Everett as Prince Charming Justin Timberlake as Artie Julie Andrews as Queen Lillian Cheri Oteri as Sleeping Beauty Amy Poehler as Snow White Amy Sedaris as Cinderella Maya Rudolph as Rapunzel Eric Idle as Merlin Larry King as Doris the Ugly Stepsister Cody Cameron as Pinocchio/the Three Little Pigs Aaron Warner as the Big Bad Wolf Christopher Knights as the Three Blind Mice Conrad Vernon as the Gingerbread Man Ian McShane as Captain Hook Susan Blakeslee as the Evil Queen John Krasinski as Lancelot Regis Philbin as Mabel John Cleese as King Harold Synopsis All is well in the kingdom of Far Far Away, until King Harold falls ill and finally croaks (literally). Before his final breath, he tells Shrek that he is the next in line to be king. But when Shrek declines the offer, he is told that there is another - a boy named Arthur. Meanwhile, as Shrek, Donkey and Puss in Boots journey to the high school kingdom of Worcestershire to pick up Artie, Prince Charming persuades all the evil fairytale characters to attack Far Far Away and have a piece of their "happily ever after." Making matters more complicated is news of Fiona's pregnancy, which doesn't sit very well with Shrek. Story: C- Yes, the much-awaited sequel to Shrek and Shrek 2 has arrived. Amidst all the expectations, is Shrek the Third as good as the first two films? Sadly, no. It seems that Shrek the Third has suffered from the Third Movie Syndrome, which typically means that the third in a series of films is the weakest of the bunch. While it remains funny from beginning to end, all the jokes tend to wear out very quickly. The film itself feels too short and rushed. Another problem is the character interaction. We're supposed to believe that Arthur is the next king, but throughout the entire film, he's a complete wuss (not just because he's voiced by a complete wuss himself). And because the film uses characters from King Arthur's folklore, you'd be expecting him to wield Excalibur. Unfortunately, the fabled sword is nowhere to be found in this film. Probably one of the best moments in the film is when Merlin casts a spell to teleport Shrek, Donkey, Puss and Artie back to Far Far Away. The side effect is Donkey and Puss switching personalities. In one scene where our heroes are surrounded by Prince Charming's troops, Puss (in Donkey's body) attempts to do his cute staredown. As for the other princesses, they're not that interesting as supporting characters. Sleeping Beauty does what she does best: sleep. Snow White can summon all the forest animals to the tune of Led Zeppelin's "Immigrant Song," but that's about it. And don't get me started with Rapunzel. Animation: A+ As with the first two films, Shrek the Third boasts amazing computer-generated animation. But although there's a lot more rendering and environments, it somehow doesn't look as detailed as Shrek 2. Soundtrack: A What's not to love about Harry Gregson-Williams' (Metal Gear Solid 2-3, Team America World Police) orchestral score? Aside from that, the film includes "Royal Pain" by Eels (opening theme), "Live and Let Die" by Paul McCartney & Wings (King Harold's funeral theme), and Donkey and Puss' cover of "Thank You (Falletin Me Be Mice Elf Again)" (ending theme). The Bottom Line If you love Shrek, you wouldn't miss Shrek the Third in theatres. Otherwise, it's a rental. Links Official Shrek Homepage Official Shrek the Third Homepage (Japanese) Reference The Internet Movie Database Quote
mechaninac Posted June 1, 2007 Posted June 1, 2007 (edited) Totally agree. While the movie wasn't bad per se, it felt "flat". It had none of the freshness and imagination of the first, and very little of the sharp humor and social satire of the second. Shrek the Third just felt like one long cliché ridden attempt to profit from the popularity of the franchise. It's definitely a 2.5 star flick. Edited June 1, 2007 by mechaninac Quote
DestroidDefender Posted June 1, 2007 Posted June 1, 2007 I gotta agree. Too many things happening and none off them really pay off big. SPOILERS The Donkey - Puss switch amounts to nothing beyond the moment mentioned above. Arthur and Merlin? Same. Princess Super Team? A couple good moments but in the end not much. Shrek at sea? Surely something funny there - no? There is a weird viking/sea captain character but he's barely noticeable. And it's about FarFarAway - again. Who is running things in DuLac nowadays? Quote
JsARCLIGHT Posted June 1, 2007 Posted June 1, 2007 I saw it opening day. It both is and feels like it was written by committee. The movie has like seven people in writing credits. The visuals I personally thought were greatly improved from the past Shrek movies in certain spots but severely lacking in others. Some shots where beautiful and others just looked rushed. As usual the Dreamworks people seem to have such talent in designing and rendering creatures and monsters but their human beings seem so lifeless and bland. The movie that is coming out next weekend that I really want to see is Surfs Up. I love penguins and the water effects look outstanding in that movie... plus I'll do anything to get the wretched taste of Happy Feet out of my mouth. Quote
David Hingtgen Posted June 1, 2007 Posted June 1, 2007 I loved Shrek 1, liked 2 a lot, but thought 3 was a complete waste of time and money. Skip it if you haven't seen it already, unless you are the world's biggest Shrek fan. Also, more so than any other movie I've seen--"you saw all the good parts in the trailer". Quote
areaseven Posted June 5, 2007 Author Posted June 5, 2007 The movie that is coming out next weekend that I really want to see is Surfs Up. I love penguins and the water effects look outstanding in that movie... plus I'll do anything to get the wretched taste of Happy Feet out of my mouth. Happy Feet was bad? I'll probably pass on Surf's Up and wait until it hits DVD. Speaking of penguins... Quote
JsARCLIGHT Posted June 5, 2007 Posted June 5, 2007 Happy Feet, to me personally, was terrible. It had decent visual quality but it's story was all over the place, it half-finished things and half-started others, the "music" if you can call it that was pretty much all recycled "karaoke" rather than original songs and then finally you have the heavy handed emotionally charged environmentalist message they jam down your throat 3/4 of the way through with the feel good, never-happen-in-real-life ending. Yes I know it's a movie about singing and dancing penguins but the whole thing just reeked of schlock, over the top effort to appease certain audiences and, to be honest, I was soooooo pissed it beat out Cars for the oscar. That was a fix if ever I saw one. Happy Feet is the first children's movie I've gone to see that I was squirming in my seat over how awful I thought it was. And I sat through BOTH Hoodwinked and Doogal. Call me stuck up but I don't go see children's movies to get preached to about socio political things. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.