Shrek the Third (2007)

What a beautiful movie!

A Disappointing Continuation

A story that's too fascinating to pass by...

Blistering performances.

When King Harold falls ill, Shrek is looked at as the heir to the land of Far, Far Away. Shrek recruits his friends Donkey and Puss in Boots to install the rebellious Artie as the new king. Shrek the Third is fun but not as fun as the first 2 i'm afraid and it makes sense why some viewers were left a bit disappointed. The story for sure was entertaining but not that needed to be fair plus the humor at times can get a bit tame but the likes of Myers, Murphy and Diaz make for an entertaining although a bit disappointing follow up to Shrek and Shrek 2 but still good. (8/10)

This movie is a disgrace to the shrek franchise, and should just be forgotten about. If you see this movie, I garuntee you will want to move to Zimbabwe and start a new life because your old one was ruined from that movie.

This film really disappointed. I loved the first two, the second one was the high point which is rare for sequels. This film focused less on Shrek and more on Justin Timberlake's take on a version of King Arthur that I don't even think the kiddos would have wanted. I have to wonder, Justin Timberlake was referenced slightly in the second film, could that have had anything to do with his presence in this movie?I feel the main problem with this film is the lack of Shrek, yes Shrek is throughout the film but rather than have the lovable Shrek that existed in this film, we focus more on his family dynamic which intertwines with the plot line of Arthur. Shrek becomes somewhat of a secondary character in his own franchise no longer the happy go lucky ogre but a (sigh) even more complex and developed character. Don't get me wrong, you need to flesh out a character, but I think you can go a little too far with just about anything, like drugs...I feel if they had tossed the whole "fatherhood" plot line the film would have been markedly better. Perhaps focusing more on Shrek getting back to his swamp and out of Far Far Away. The conflict from the previous movies was about finding true love and overcoming stereotypes, the second one did something similar with the parents and Fiona choosing the real Shrek over the "new" Shrek. Both of the prior films focused on topics that had more to do with an ugly ogre than a family ogre. This is reminiscent of the "Ice Age" films where the mammoth started a family over the course of the films and they gradually got worse and worse even though the animation effects were getting better and better. I feel the Arthur plot line could have been done better if they had fleshed it out more. In fact this film feels really fast certainly not as long or effective as the previous films. The villain was also somewhat of an odd choice, it really did not make much sense for the vapid Prince Charming to have the cunning or nerves to start a villain rebellion and take over the city. A better villain should have been Morgan La Faye or Mordred, two characters that would have fit better into the Arthurian mythos. I feel that maybe what could have been done instead of Shrek seeking out Arthur would have been for the young Arthur to instead seek out Shrek to slaughter as a way to prove himself worthy as king. Leave Far Far Away out of the picture and maybe even have the "problems with Fiona" subplot to not to be about potential fatherhood but instead getting back together in the end and overcoming petty differences. Really, they should have stopped at the second Shrek film where the characters were "happily ever after" and not much else could be done with them. I know that Shrek is a semi sarcastic adult take on fairy tales, but potential fatherhood is, well, not as big a draw as a sarcastic ogre finding love in a princess, which was a much better subversion of the traditional conception of standard fairy tales. This one was meh, and the fourth one was bleh.Quick note. This website doesn't allow brackets? Oh well...

Shrek the Third is a bland, uninspired and unnecessary sequel to two masterpieces of animated storytelling. When the King of Far Far Away dies, Shrek and Fiona are set to inherit the Kingdom, but Shrek doesn't want to be King so they must set out to find the new heir, Arthur.While Shrek and his loyal sidekicks seek out Arthur, Fiona is dealing with the idea of motherhood. This is pretty much all Fiona does for the entire movie - the other fairy tale princesses rock up (including Amy Poehler is Snow White in a wasted role) before promptly being taken captive by Prince Charming. The secondary antagonist of the second film, Charming is a bit flat in the villain department because he's already run his course. Shrek the Third feels more like a third act to Shrek 2, with nothing particularly groundbreaking in its own right. There's a couple of Arthurian legend references, but they lack the fun and role reversal that made the first two Shreks so funny. Eddie Murphy as Donkey and Antonio Banderas as Puss in Boots both get left on the sidelines as the film packs with too many unnecessary characters, not least of which is Arthur himself. Justin Timberlake's breathy Mark Wahlberg impression is grating on the ears, and the fact that he doesn't have any scenes with Fiona (Timberlake's real life ex-girlfriend Cameron Diaz) means we can't even laugh at it.The writing takes a huge hit in Shrek the Third. The first two films are incredibly witty with jokes that are subtle enough for adults to love but kids to innocently miss. A typical insult in this film is "the only thing you're going to be king of is king of stupid!"Yeah.During the film's climax, Donkey, Puss and Fiona lead forces to save a captured Shrek on stage before everyone. The fact that Fiona rocks up just as Donkey and Puss do pretty much renders her entire plot pointless, as their escape has ultimately no impact on the story. The battle itself has none of the emotional stakes of Shrek 2, but rehashes the same antagonist and the same setting with many of the same heroes. However, unlike the satisfying conclusion of last time, this battle is saved by Artie who delivers a sappy and cliché "Lets All Love One Another" speech which has all the villains throw down their weapons.Then in the most excruciating moment possible, Charming stabs Shrek - only to miss and go under his arm. Then Dragon knocks Rapunzel's tower on him, presumably killing him instantly.That's messed up.Shrek the Third was wholly unnecessary. Its too tied to the second Shrek (the kingdom of Far Far Away and Charming's claim to its throne). Surprisingly I almost preferred the ending from Shrek 2 regarding Charming, where the Ugly Stepsister snaps him up for a dance. I can see the logic for bringing him back to resolve in another sequel, but the result is a film that has no ground to break on its own. Its a breezy 93 minutes, which contributes to its "blink and you'll miss it" vibe, because outside two flimsy stories no one has anything to do here.