![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
neoyiThe first Shrek was a good film: Shrek was a complicated soul with an awesome personality, Fiona kicked feminine ass without being preachy about it, and Donkey…well, Donkey’s still annoying, but you can’t win ‘em all. The point was, their beautiful characterization and interactions made the movie all the more believable for me, so much that I could see Shrek and Fiona’s love by the end as well as Donkey’s loyal friendship to both. The second took things to a bigger extreme as is expected of most sequels and while again, the plot was solid, it didn’t have the emotional nor humorous depths the first one did. Something is wrong when I have to fake laugh throughout various scenes in the theaters because everyone else did.
I came to Shrek 3 with reluctance, but with a sense of eagerness. The Shrek franchise as a whole isn’t bad, but I was thrown off when Dreamworks announced they’d make a Shrek 4 and a possible Shrek 5 way back, something I view as overkill, but I would--could let it slide if they were brilliant or at least held good expectations in my eyes. Well…in the case of the third movie, it’s hit-and-miss...
****************************************************************
STORY: SPOiLERS from this point on!
Shrek isn’t all that pleased taking up kingly duties for Fiona’s pops. When he’s on his deathbed, the king states Fiona’s cousin: Arthur can take over should Shrek decide not to (and he doesn’t wanna). So Shrek, Donkey, and Puss handle the princely quest while Fiona, her mother, and friends (various females of fairy tales) later handle a crisis of kingdom takeover by that jerk of a sissy boy, Prince Charming and his band of fairy tale villains--oh, and she’s pregnant, did I mention that yet?
Shrek is generally portrayed as this big, rude guy who suffers some severe attitude problem this side of therapy, yet it’s merely to mask and hide any doubts or fears he has inside of him--ones his closest friends and wife manages to unlock, making for a “jerk” with a heart of gold type. I love how no-nonsense and blunt Shrek is and yet be so helpful and caring to others when needed to be. He did it with his interaction with Arthur and that was simply fantastic. Even when it didn’t seem like it, he managed to install in the kid the confidence he needed that went beyond, “I don’t wanna rule because it’s not my thing”. He’s selfish desire on his refusal to have kids is countered by the heartwarming fear that he won’t be a good father to them (being an Ogre, he’s not exactly Father of the Year model). In fact, he basically plays the “father” role to Arthur--sorry, Artie--as a metaphor to what he will face. Now naturally this could be a good thing, but other then a couple of warming advices, Shrek’s interaction with Arthur wasn’t all that fatherly-ish, that is, if the writers were going for that. It didn’t hit me at all and it’s a complete downfall.
Artie himself isn’t all that interesting either, he’s the loser kid whom we’re all expect to feel sorry for, but considering he whines half the time, I didn’t care much for him. It’s like he had a hard time deciding whether he should be king or not, bouncing back and forth like a friggin’ ping-pong without giving out an exact reason on why. Something to do with father issues? Current status of loserville? All shown, but not emphasized. He's not a bad character, there just wasn't enough of him for me to care. The other new character is Merlin whom only appears for like 15 minutes and disappears until the very end to counter a pointless subplot I’ll get to in a minute. I like that Merlin is a nutcase which makes for some quirky personality here and there, but his role is virtually pointless and unneeded, seemingly added to tack on more King Arthur lore. He should have kept to Lancelot and Guinevere and just stuck as a cameo in Artie’s high school (which I was rather amused with--but that’s cuz’ I like how past history elements in stories mixes with our present--of course, expect typical high school stuff: cheerleaders, bullying jocks, the nerds, etc).
New character aside, the rest all return…and are also handled badly. Shrek works fine, but his sidekicks do nothing more then act as sidekicks. Donkey and Puss are either bickering at one another or just standing around the background while Shrek does most of the work. To add insult to injury, Merlin adds the subplot to switch Donkey and Puss’ body in the ever so cliché switcheroo plot. Unfortunately this goes absolutely nowhere and seemingly is tacked on to give Donkey and Puss a purpose--a pathetic one at best.
Fiona and her mother get a fair amount of screen time, but the same can’t be said of their gal pals. Snow White, Sleeping Beauty, Cinderella, etc. have personalities you barely see all but like 10 minutes off...in grand total. With the added notion of Gingerbread Man, the Wolf, Pinocchio, and the three pigs, as well as a crapload of villains, you’re getting a movie with so many characters and little screen time to develop them enough for me to care. How the hell could I expect to fall for Rapunzel’s betrayal when I couldn’t even figure out her thin personality? How the hell I suppose to care about the villains’ change of heart because of Artie? Oh, yeah, and no real interaction between Fiona and Prince Charming? That’s kind of a downer; I’d figure he’d pay SOME attention to her. Seriously, remember the first film only focused on three characters, each with their own set of limelight?
Story pacing is questionable at best, creating rest stops that aren’t necessary. I’m irritated how Fiona and her girlfriends are easily captured and stuck in jail, yet it takes them a handful amount of time before Fiona’s ma breaks outta jail by beating the shit out of a wall with her head when logically, she could have done so earlier instead of waiting around till their kingdom got completely overrun by Nancy Boy and his party posse--oh, but THAT'S to add more time to the movie, of course. Again, why do we also need the Merlin subplot again? Tell me what it did that served an overall role of the movie besides transporting the heroes to Far, Far Away (which could have been solved another way considering how useless he is).
ANIMATION:
At this point, it’s nothing I haven’t really seen. It’s pretty, but I don’t know…nothing seems to have changed much from Shrek 2. Or maybe I’m still spoiled by The Incredibles.
MUSIC:
Ya know, I know it’s a Shrek thing to do by adding bunches of pop cultural music during scenes of the movie, so I have to take it for granted, it just annoys me, is all. I rather listen to the orchestra score to move the plot then some band I don’t know singing. Rarely does this ever work for me. Fortunately I enjoyed listening to the more dramatic music, which were good as always.
IN SHORT:
A decent film that misses a lot of mark when it didn’t have to. I don’t expect a miracle, but I expected something. The movie overall kept me chuckling, but not outright bashing--mostly on Shrek’s sarcastic tone, but I didn’t get a kick out of it. Sorry, but I feel I won’t be anticipating Shrek 4: Midlife Crisis.
5/10
I came to Shrek 3 with reluctance, but with a sense of eagerness. The Shrek franchise as a whole isn’t bad, but I was thrown off when Dreamworks announced they’d make a Shrek 4 and a possible Shrek 5 way back, something I view as overkill, but I would--could let it slide if they were brilliant or at least held good expectations in my eyes. Well…in the case of the third movie, it’s hit-and-miss...
****************************************************************
STORY: SPOiLERS from this point on!
Shrek isn’t all that pleased taking up kingly duties for Fiona’s pops. When he’s on his deathbed, the king states Fiona’s cousin: Arthur can take over should Shrek decide not to (and he doesn’t wanna). So Shrek, Donkey, and Puss handle the princely quest while Fiona, her mother, and friends (various females of fairy tales) later handle a crisis of kingdom takeover by that jerk of a sissy boy, Prince Charming and his band of fairy tale villains--oh, and she’s pregnant, did I mention that yet?
Shrek is generally portrayed as this big, rude guy who suffers some severe attitude problem this side of therapy, yet it’s merely to mask and hide any doubts or fears he has inside of him--ones his closest friends and wife manages to unlock, making for a “jerk” with a heart of gold type. I love how no-nonsense and blunt Shrek is and yet be so helpful and caring to others when needed to be. He did it with his interaction with Arthur and that was simply fantastic. Even when it didn’t seem like it, he managed to install in the kid the confidence he needed that went beyond, “I don’t wanna rule because it’s not my thing”. He’s selfish desire on his refusal to have kids is countered by the heartwarming fear that he won’t be a good father to them (being an Ogre, he’s not exactly Father of the Year model). In fact, he basically plays the “father” role to Arthur--sorry, Artie--as a metaphor to what he will face. Now naturally this could be a good thing, but other then a couple of warming advices, Shrek’s interaction with Arthur wasn’t all that fatherly-ish, that is, if the writers were going for that. It didn’t hit me at all and it’s a complete downfall.
Artie himself isn’t all that interesting either, he’s the loser kid whom we’re all expect to feel sorry for, but considering he whines half the time, I didn’t care much for him. It’s like he had a hard time deciding whether he should be king or not, bouncing back and forth like a friggin’ ping-pong without giving out an exact reason on why. Something to do with father issues? Current status of loserville? All shown, but not emphasized. He's not a bad character, there just wasn't enough of him for me to care. The other new character is Merlin whom only appears for like 15 minutes and disappears until the very end to counter a pointless subplot I’ll get to in a minute. I like that Merlin is a nutcase which makes for some quirky personality here and there, but his role is virtually pointless and unneeded, seemingly added to tack on more King Arthur lore. He should have kept to Lancelot and Guinevere and just stuck as a cameo in Artie’s high school (which I was rather amused with--but that’s cuz’ I like how past history elements in stories mixes with our present--of course, expect typical high school stuff: cheerleaders, bullying jocks, the nerds, etc).
New character aside, the rest all return…and are also handled badly. Shrek works fine, but his sidekicks do nothing more then act as sidekicks. Donkey and Puss are either bickering at one another or just standing around the background while Shrek does most of the work. To add insult to injury, Merlin adds the subplot to switch Donkey and Puss’ body in the ever so cliché switcheroo plot. Unfortunately this goes absolutely nowhere and seemingly is tacked on to give Donkey and Puss a purpose--a pathetic one at best.
Fiona and her mother get a fair amount of screen time, but the same can’t be said of their gal pals. Snow White, Sleeping Beauty, Cinderella, etc. have personalities you barely see all but like 10 minutes off...in grand total. With the added notion of Gingerbread Man, the Wolf, Pinocchio, and the three pigs, as well as a crapload of villains, you’re getting a movie with so many characters and little screen time to develop them enough for me to care. How the hell could I expect to fall for Rapunzel’s betrayal when I couldn’t even figure out her thin personality? How the hell I suppose to care about the villains’ change of heart because of Artie? Oh, yeah, and no real interaction between Fiona and Prince Charming? That’s kind of a downer; I’d figure he’d pay SOME attention to her. Seriously, remember the first film only focused on three characters, each with their own set of limelight?
Story pacing is questionable at best, creating rest stops that aren’t necessary. I’m irritated how Fiona and her girlfriends are easily captured and stuck in jail, yet it takes them a handful amount of time before Fiona’s ma breaks outta jail by beating the shit out of a wall with her head when logically, she could have done so earlier instead of waiting around till their kingdom got completely overrun by Nancy Boy and his party posse--oh, but THAT'S to add more time to the movie, of course. Again, why do we also need the Merlin subplot again? Tell me what it did that served an overall role of the movie besides transporting the heroes to Far, Far Away (which could have been solved another way considering how useless he is).
ANIMATION:
At this point, it’s nothing I haven’t really seen. It’s pretty, but I don’t know…nothing seems to have changed much from Shrek 2. Or maybe I’m still spoiled by The Incredibles.
MUSIC:
Ya know, I know it’s a Shrek thing to do by adding bunches of pop cultural music during scenes of the movie, so I have to take it for granted, it just annoys me, is all. I rather listen to the orchestra score to move the plot then some band I don’t know singing. Rarely does this ever work for me. Fortunately I enjoyed listening to the more dramatic music, which were good as always.
IN SHORT:
A decent film that misses a lot of mark when it didn’t have to. I don’t expect a miracle, but I expected something. The movie overall kept me chuckling, but not outright bashing--mostly on Shrek’s sarcastic tone, but I didn’t get a kick out of it. Sorry, but I feel I won’t be anticipating Shrek 4: Midlife Crisis.
5/10
