- Media Centre
(http://www.gamingforce.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=3)
- - [Movie] Shrek the Third
(http://www.gamingforce.org/forums/showthread.php?t=13915)
Elrasiel
Oct 24, 2006 05:56 PM
Shrek the Third
They finally released a first picture of the movie to which I've got a link on my Blog.
Here's the 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.
As much as I enjoy Shrek, I'm hoping this is the last one.
The Wise Vivi
Oct 24, 2006 10:22 PM
Yeah, heard about this a couple months ago on TV. I can't wait to see it. It should be good, if the previous two were good. I will expect no less.
Gecko3
Oct 24, 2006 10:28 PM
Sweet, this opens on my birthday :D
I liked the Shrek movies for the most part, but I hope this relies more on story than just pop culture like Shrek 2. From the sounds of it, it'll probably end up being too "pop-culture-ish", but hey, maybe they'll have learned (or not, cause their 2-D animated movies, which had decent stories in them, flopped, while fart and burping jokes did well).
NovaX
Oct 24, 2006 10:32 PM
Wow, that storyline is bad. Really bad. I really liked the first Shrek, but the second didn't really do it for me.
Sparhawke
Nov 9, 2006 04:57 PM
I read on ign.com some time ago that the ceo of dreamworks mentioned one more Shrek movie after Shrek the 3rd. If either make enough money I'm sure we'll see more Shrek. Also, they were talking about a Puss-in-Boots spin off movie. Personally I've been enjoying the Shrek movies so I don't mind. :)
Dopefish
Nov 9, 2006 05:03 PM
I was annoyed by the time the first one ended, so I doubt I'll see the third unlss I am going for free.
Cellius
Nov 9, 2006 05:10 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elrasiel
They finally released a first picture of the movie to which I've got a link on my shitty Blog.
Wow, thank you so fucking much for not embedding the image and instead offering a link to your blog, because those clicking on the thread title expect self-promotion like that, and actually don't want to see an image from Shrek 3.
God, I will never understand people's love for the Shrek series. They're so fucking boring. Just like most everything Mike Myers does. Austin Powers and Shrek have been a blight on the pop culture world. Go watch a real fucking movie. Expand your horizons a bit. Fuck, read a book.
Ayos
Nov 10, 2006 01:52 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denicalis
Fuck, read a book.
Start light. I'd recommend possibly some Shakespeare, or Tolkien. Then you can graduate to the impressive talents of Dean Koontz and Madeleine L'engel, and maybe by that time you'll be ready for some mind-blowing earth-shattering Kevin Wong.
Maybe.
VitaminZinc
Nov 10, 2006 03:41 PM
I didn't care for the first Shrek movie that much. The second I actually enjoyed, though.
A third...? That's kind of pushing it. The fact they're already planning on a 4th is even worse.
esrom2
Nov 16, 2006 10:47 AM
There is more! I found this...
Lovable movie monster Shrek is expanding his career to television. Disney's ABC Network has announced plans for 'Shrek the Halls'. Reuters reports that the half an hour animated Christmas shorts starring Shrek will air next December on television.
I think this could be pushing it a bit.
Gechmir
Nov 16, 2006 10:57 AM
Goodie ;D I enjoyed Shrek 2 more than Shrek 1. Maybe this'll be better than 2? Hmm. Either way, I'll be looking forward to the release. Puss in Boots is quite an interesting character =p
"Found it. Catnip."
"What? Uh. That's... That's not mine..."
Cstar375
Nov 26, 2006 11:27 AM
A Shrek 4 really?!
samer9666
Nov 28, 2006 03:53 AM
too much shrek .. people need to learn to stop before things get really boring
millions of ideas are out there .. oh well
Balcony Heckler
Nov 28, 2006 07:41 AM
that movie's gonna be great. and of course they're going to make shrek 4, as long as the series makes money, they're gonna keep coming. and starting next year, the christmas holidays are going to get a little greener:
The way they originally poked fun at fairly tales was kinda cool at the time but this looks more like merchandise whoring to me...
omfg we must make a girl power 3rd movie! [/sarcasm]
Chibi Neko
Nov 28, 2006 07:54 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt
As much as I enjoy Shrek, I'm hoping this is the last one.
Me too, but these movies make a lot of money so you never know. It is the same with the X-Men movies, because they where all a great commercial success, 'The Last Stand' dosn't seem the be 'Last' after all.
Freelance
Nov 28, 2006 10:27 AM
Ugh, MORE Shrek.
As you can see, I'm not a Shrek fan. Shrek 2 was better than the first, but not by much. I doubt Shrek 3 is any better. I'm pretty disatisfied(sp?) with American animated movies nowadays. The older movies were much better.
Domino
Nov 28, 2006 01:47 PM
Shrek 3? Is it really needed? Sure the first two did well enough, but why drag out one film that was alright (i.e. the first one), and turn it into a trilogy that will probably be average at best.
Just leave it alone and think of something original. Oh wait, I forgot, the movie people don't do original anymore do they?
Tellurian
Nov 28, 2006 04:22 PM
I take 3 other Shreks over any other CG movie featuring annoying talking animals all the time. Thank you very much.
Kairi Li
Dec 4, 2006 05:13 PM
Shrek 1 was great, Shrek 2 was also good. But I think a 3rd anf 4th is beating a dead horse almost as bad as Square with FF7. I love how Shrek one and 2 was able to make something conventional like Disney's fairy tales and make into something funny and parody like without losing the core of the story that its the inside of a person that counts. They also had good casting for the majoirty of the cast in one and two. (John Cleese and Julie Andrews as King and Queen? Antonia as spanish puss in boots? C'mon). However, I think doing a 3rd and 4th is defintly pushing it, they have to make the script really good and different to even try to avoid repeitition.
Now a side movie like Puss in boots is a better idea, since it takes place in the same universe but tells a different tale of a different character, most franchises should at least try this approach rather than feature the same char over and over again. (Unless is something like Spider Man or Batman, cause they have ALOT of existing cool material to work with already.) Its like the sequel to Bruce Almighty NOT featuring Jim Carrey's character again, if they did then it had lesser chance of being something original and good.
Lizeris Dupe
Dec 4, 2006 05:42 PM
Clever way to advertise your blog, thread-creator.
Anyways, I haven't even seen the second Shrek, but having seen the first, I can't say that I'm exactly thrilled that they're making a third.
Its sort of like the "Scary Movie" series that they should have let die years ago... it never seems to come to and end, and when it does, people that were once fans of it tend to want to wash their hands clean of anything to do with the films.
(I'm assuming the trailer on youtube is the same one you posted)
I couldn't help but lol at the boat part towards the end. Predictable, but funny nonetheless. I'm afraid that this movie is going to have many clichés, but hopefully they won't ruin the whole thing. The plot seems a bit stupid; I think it's obvious that they're running out of ideas. I couldn't help but roll my eyes at the part where Donkey was in Puss in Boot's body.
I still think that Shrek movies are still of higher caliber than your generic animated movie. Meh, I'm sure Shrek the Third will get a few laughs out of me, as well as a few cringes.
Cirno
Dec 17, 2006 02:52 AM
Funniest thing in that trailer had to be the the boat scene at the very end. Everything else was kinda ...okay? The crossdressing man-woman got a chuckle out of me, though.
I'll probably end up seeing it on DVD, but theatrically? Haha. Oh wow.
pitzbgeek0812
Jan 9, 2007 07:22 PM
Shrek was a pretty good movie and the second one was okay. I really think they're trying way too hard to draw it out with a third one. I think the original fans of the first movie may have moved on to becoming fans of other movies by this time.
Fiddlegoof
Jan 9, 2007 07:27 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by NovaX
(Post 298891)
Wow, that storyline is bad. Really bad. I really liked the first Shrek, but the second didn't really do it for me.
I agree. They're really digging deep for this one. Hopefully they add another dance mix at the end, just to keep it interesting for the 5 year olds.
It's one of the most highly anticipated films of 2007. The third installment of the very popular (and highly profitable) "Shrek" series.
But is "Shrek the Third" actually any good? DreamWorks Animation execs obviously want to know. Which is why they held a test screening of this still-in-production picture this past weekend.
Lucky for us, loyal JHM reader Buddy Glass actually managed to attend this screening. And what follows is his highly detailed look at this very early version of "Shrek the Third." WARNING! Spoilers abound in this particular article. So if you want to avoid learning too much about this animated feature a full eight months before it hits theaters, you probably want to bail out of this story now.
Still with us? Okay. Buddy Glass' story starts with he & his family picking up tickets for a test screening ...
Spoiler:
.... thinking we were going to see a slightly early preview of “Flushed Away” and were absolutely stunned to get into the theater and be told we were going to be the first audience ‘ever’ to see “Shrek The Third”. The kids and adults in the audience went wild but we were told the movie was only about 40% done and some would feature animation without lighting and a fair amount would be just storyboards (in some cases, extremely rough storyboards). They had metal detectors and were very firm on security (couldn't bring in cell phones with cameras or recorders - understandable).
My impression is that they have a lot of work to do – especially making this movie a lot funnier. My kids agreed and thought it was just okay, definitely worse than the first two. The story is actually fine, although it drags seriously in the middle, and the ending is kind of ho-hum. They seriously need to hire some folks to bring in more gags – especially for the adults. As it is now, they have a film with a decidedly different tone than the others, with flashes of good material in amongst a more adventure-oriented script interested in hitting a fair number of plot points more than giving the audience some chuckles. I think it is definitely salvageable but they need good joke writers – there are so many lines where I was just trying to write their jokes in for them because they hadn’t bothered to include one!
The film’s opening introduces a subplot that sounds funnier on paper than in action. Prince Charming is shown riding through the forest, proclaiming the wondrous actions he’s going to do (sounds like saving Fiona) and we pull back to find out he’s actually on stage, performing a skit at a pub. After a moment, another actor in a rough but obvious Shrek costume wanders onto stage and, to Charming’s dismay, the crowd cheers. The whole thing stage apart after that and every starts to laugh as he rushes off stage and into his dressing room (which is actually an alley door and his setup is out there – cute joke). He vows to claim the throne of Far Far Away.
Soon, we’re up in the castle and find out that Shrek and Fiona are filling in for the king, who is sick. So, they are showing up to events, knighting people (Shrek accidentally stabs a guy he then dubs “Sir Bleed-a-lot”), and it all culminates in them being dolled up with Elizabethan-looking costumes (complete with face-makeup) and they cannot move their arms. Shrek and Fiona are waiting on stage and he gets a page to take a stick and scratch his rear (since he can’t reach it), which, of course, leads to someone opening the curtain and revealing them as this page is poking at Shrek’s posterior. The whole place goes slapstick and it is pretty funny. In fact, this whole “Shrek covers for the King” sequence is good, although, like the rest of the movie, it needs those wall-to-wall gags like in Shrek 2 (which, for my money, was a hilarious film that was much funnier and much more clever film than the first). Donkey and Puss run around but with very little to do and not much that is funny (a couple of good jokes but these are great characters and they aren’t used very well here).
But, then they find out that the king is dying. There is a funny (although, again, could be funnier) sequence where the frog king (still done nicely by Cleese) keeps almost dying. Before he finally croaks (and they don’t use anywhere near the frog puns they could), he tells them that Shrek should be king but if he really doesn’t want to do so, then there is a cousin, Arthur, who is the next in line.
Leaving Fiona & the Queen back at the castle, Shrek, Donkey & Puss in boats sail off to a place called Worstershire – a joke they belabor (in Shrek 2, that would have been a throwaway line but the jokes are in short supply so they need to put up signs). It turns out, this is a high school, which gives then a chance to make a lot of jokes about a medieval-fantasy high school, some funny (D&D geeks, stoners falling out of a van with ‘frankincense and myrrh’, some Valley Maiden-talk) and some bits that are boring (everything else).
They eventually find Arthur (“Artie”) in the exact circumstance out of Screenplay 101 – they find a tough knight on the high school jousting a small guy who falls over and they assume the rough-and-tumble guy is Arthur (turns out, he’s Lancelot but they miss the chances for jokes here). The sad-sack little guy is Artie and he slinks away, people call him names as Shrek and Donkey/Puss pursue, and when Shrek says he is the new king (and someone says he should only be the king of losers or something – need good joke, please!) eventually it is decided he should run over to try and take out the Sword In The Stone (which is, conveniently, on school grounds and just outside the room they are in – why isn’t there a joke here!?!? They just rush past it).
So they get out by the Sword and just as Artie is about to try and give it go, Shrek says he needs ‘inspiration’ and Puss suddenly conducts the school band to distract them while Shrek tries to loosen it up for him. The loosening idea is terrific, but ‘striking up the band’ and all is really boring, not funny and is a stretch to make any sense at all. My eight year old actually leaned over and said, “why would the band start playing?” I didn’t say it but I thought, “Um, lazy screenwriters?” So he pulls the sword out, Shrek grabs him and they are off.
On the trip back, Artie and Shrek fight a bit and eventually end up crashing the boat (at some point, their Viking-for-no-reason captain just disappears but whatever) on an island. They eventually find their way to a door (by now, Artie is furious and doesn’t want to go back to be king) which Artie bangs on and proclaims that he is being kidnapped. This part was storyboarded so I can’t tell you how it will look but some big apparition comes out and a loud voice says something about fearing whoever-something. Then, it short-circuits a bit and the real guy comes out. Ho-hum. I’ve seen the Wizard of Oz.
We find out that this old guy is Merlin (Artie says he used to be a teacher at the school but had a nervous breakdown – not funny at all! Can’t they come up with something better and a term that means something to eight year olds?) He is voiced by the great Eric Idle (although some of the work was in progress). This character, second only to Artie, is so underdeveloped that this whole sequence, despite one funny joke about underwear stew, just drags and drags. Typical second act problems but since they focus on Artie and Merlin, two uninteresting and underdeveloped characters, you are practically begging for Donkey and Puss to cut up or Shrek to be his usual grumpy self (this is in short supply throughout the movie, but it is funny when he does act like himself – like Donkey telling him to change his tactic of yelling at Artie to get him to be king and Shrek picking up a big log to beat him with). Shrek bonds with Artie when it is revealed that he was abandoned by his parents. Shrek eventually says that what people think of you is not the same as what you are (oh, they say it in a nicer way, but you get it) and Artie finally thinks maybe he could be king.
So, after wasting some time on the island there, they suddenly decide to head back and have Merlin teleport them back to Far Far Away and it works.
But while all of this is happening, Charming has gone back to the nasty pub in the second movie and rouses all the villains there to join him in taking over Far Far Away. He appeals to them by saying a version of the same homily Shrek convinced Artie with – “Why should we be denied our Happily Ever After because some else says so!?!” The idea here, again, is great and some of the lines he uses to convince them (the evil queen is there, Captain Hook) but so much more could be done! And, yes, Regis is here as the Uglier Stepsister. That works okay but it is hardly a revelation. They agree to join in storming the castle. Yay, we have our villains. Nowhere near as interesting as the way things work out in Shrek 2 but oh well.
Meanwhile, Fiona meets with Snow White, Sleeping Beauty, Rapunzel, and the Ugly Stepsister (now reformed) there. This scene is some fun, although there are frequently chances for funny jokes that are just lost. Almost everything out of a character’s mouth in Shrek 2 was funny. If only that were the case here…still, there are some good bits.
As the villains descend on the castle, the princesses go off to hide in the bowels of the castle (and there is an inspired joke here in the moving wall and statuary they are hiding behind where they come together and make the Frog King kiss a Horses rear – why aren’t there more wonderful throwaway jokes like this!) There is one funny scene where they confront the highly-underused minor characters (Gingerbread Man, Wolf, Three Little Pigs, and Pinochio) and, in the funniest bit in the film, Charming tries to get Pinochio to tell them where Shrek is by saying he can’t possibly lie but Pinochio combats this with a bunch of confusing double-triple-and-quadruple negatives. This is wonderfully done and a window into the level of often sophisticated humor in Shrek 2. But it is short-lived.
The Princesses, Queen and Fiona wander around (for too long) but eventually come out and Rapunzel betrays them to Charming so she can be queen. What a missed opportunity to say that she was made she didn’t get her own movie! (Rapunzel Unbraided notwithstanding – what a lovely in-joke) The princesses are all captured and put into a cell.
Shrek and gang return but as they confront Charming, Artie runs off when Charming reveals that Shrek is supposed to be king but wanted to ‘pawn it off’ on Artie – and that he loosened the sword for him back at school. The kid takes off and Shrek is captured by the villains. The most striking thing here is that Shrek seems so weak! In the past, he always kicks butt but he’s strangely subdued in this one. It doesn’t work to well, especially when you think he should be winning these fights.
The princesses and Fiona whine a bit before the Queen inexplicably breaks down the wall with a shrug (“Didn’t think you got your fighting skills from your father, did you?” Whatever) and they get out. Suddenly, they start kicking butt and it is fun with Snow White sending the birds that come when she sings to attack an evil tree, Cinderella using her glass slippers as boomerangs, and Sleeping Beauty tripping people by falling asleep in front of them while they run up to her. Some good bits here (with a sort of reference to the new Charlie’s Angels in the actions and the Kill Bill ladies in the music).
In the midst of all this, Artie wanders off and finds Merlin again in the forest. Suddenly, he’s told the real Sword in the Stone is nearby and he pulls it up and realizes he IS supposed to be king. Boring, slow scene! Not funny at all. All of this was storyboarded so hopefully they will come up with some better writing here.
They end up breaking up a reenactment of the show at the beginning of the movie, with Charming now using the real Shrek all tied up. This sequence was all in storyboard so it was hard to tell what was going on but, essentially, they all fight a bit until Artie comes in and tells Charming that everything is fine because you don’t need to be what other people say you are (the lesson Shrek taught him). Merlin pops in, everything works out and Artie becomes king.
So, there you go – an idea of where they are with Shrek The Third. My impressions:
Mike Myers is so subdued here that he almost disappears from the movie for long stretches - but it’s not his fault. Few lines give him much to do.
Cameron Diaz does well with what she has. No problem there.
Eddie Murphy and Antonio Banderas are in the same boat –talented voice actors wishing they had more and better lines. Why don’t they use the comic duo and have a lot of fun with them? Too much exposition for the gags.
Justin Timberlake barely registers. It is not a horrible misfire but also nothing special at all. Again, the script doesn’t develop Artie at all. Why make him a sort-of wimp but not really very interesting. He's just a dull character. Why not an ADD fratboy or something more inclined to give us laughs? Some kind of traits that would make him funnier would be nice. As it is, Artie gets plenty of screen time but not much development. Their take on characters like Fairy Godmother and so many others have been so inventive. Why is Artie such a bore with nothing to do?
Eric Idle – What a waste that they don’t give Merlin more. They could have some fun with it but they miss the chance. Eric Idle is one funny guy but they don’t give him anything to do (seems like a lot of his lines are not in there yet anyway, so maybe he’ll help them out with some adlibs). This character needs to be seriously redeveloped – just a crotchety old guy who lost some of his abilities. What a bore! They need to find a way to reimagine Merlin in an interesting way – not just toss him in there with no development. Artie and Merlin are so carelessly and humorlessly shoehorned into this movie, they hardly seem to be from the Shrek universe.
Charming – Rupert Everett gives it a good try but the character that was so witty in Shrek 2 is reduced to little more than a revenge-minded buffoon. I wish they’d let him be a little more inspired like he is when recruiting the others. I wish his plan would be more interesting than running in there and taking everything over. He ends with a whimper, too. Ho-hum again.
Saturday Night Live Princesses – A funny idea and, in action, it works okay. These are hysterical ladies and they could do a lot more if given better material. As it is, they make do with occasionally witty lines that mostly lack bite. Maya Rudolph (Rapunzel) is the only one that seems a little out of it. Tiny Fey might have been better.
Minor characters – Most of the best humor is from the minor characters and they just don’t get used. The Three Blind Mice are barely in one scene. The rest of the other characters are so rarely show it is just a shame (making way for the one-joke princesses (although it is a good joke) and the underdeveloped Merlin and Artie. The Gingerbread Man is hysterical but other than one brilliant moment of his life flashing before his eyes (another absolute high point and one of the few times I laughed out loud), he’s not given much to do.
That’s a lot, I know. But the biggest problem with the movie is that it lacks the fast and furious humor of the others (especially Shrek 2), the witty songs (like the Be Our Guest parody), and the endless throwaway gags that made people NEED to see Shrek 2 over and over again. This is their main problem and they need to hire some funny script doctors that can bring in a lot more gags-per-minute than they have now. My kids were really fidgety during a lot of it and I became bored numerous times, rarely laughing heartily. Asked afterward to name favorite moments and they had a hard time.
As it is, they have a long work-in-progress that they need to tighten, strengthen in the middle and make a lot funnier. If Artie and Merlin are going to take up so much space, they will need to be more compelling if they plan to obscure so deeply the guy who the movie is named after – Shrek, who really is submerged in the second and third acts. I’m stunned Mike Myers didn’t give them more good ideas.
But let’s not be too harsh! They still have months and months to work on it. They have the parts, they just need writing help to work those characters out and inject some humor. Then, they will have another blockbuster on their hands.
So there you have it. "Shrek the Third." Which sounds like it still needs a lot of work before its May 18, 2007 release.