JasonEvans
05-17-2007, 09:54 AM
Saw it last night.
I went in wondering how they would keep it fresh and original after the first two. The answerr is-- they couldn't.
This was a decent animated film with a few amusing moments, but it really pales in comparison to the first two. My sons (7 & 10) thought it was ok but did not leave it with much enthusiasm. I have not asked them but I doubt they would even consider watching it again and they generally want to see good kids movies twice.
The plot never takes off and has zero inventive turns. The bad guy is again Prince Charming, like in Shrek 2, and he's hardly imposing. His "plan" is confusing and never makes sense. The finale is just strange and I did not get the point of it. The resolution involves talking and coming to grips with what kind of person you want to be-- yawn. The sub-plot about Shrek and Fiona being pregnant is also handled poorly.
The weak story would be ok if the humor was a good as it has been in the other films, but the jokes are really few and far between here. The Shrek character has gotten waaaay too serious and is very rarely funny. Donkey and Puss in Boots do ok and provide the most comic relief, but many of the jokes about their characters have been played out over time. There are a couple new characters introduced, including some classic fairytale princesses and Artie (a young King Arthur) but none of them are all that interesting.
I expected the film to do something to tip a hat to Artie being voiced by Justin Timberlake, but Artie never dances or sings (many other characters sing-- usually very badly). In fact, the musical choices in the movie are just strange. Rather than re-voice and freshen up classic rock songs as they have done in the past (I'm a Believer by Smashmouth and Eddie Murphy for example), they just play the same versions we have been hearing for years. So, at one point, we actually get Paul McCartney singing Live and Let Die. It was out of place and awkward.
Make no mistake, the movie will make money -- I still expect it to earn more than $200 million -- but I cannot see it coming close to the $440 million that Shrek 2 made and I think it will struggle to get to the $260+ that the first Shrek earned (in 2001, which would be more than $300 million when adjusted for ticket inflation).
--Jason "I'm probably being too hard on it-- but I found it to be very mediocre" Evans
I went in wondering how they would keep it fresh and original after the first two. The answerr is-- they couldn't.
This was a decent animated film with a few amusing moments, but it really pales in comparison to the first two. My sons (7 & 10) thought it was ok but did not leave it with much enthusiasm. I have not asked them but I doubt they would even consider watching it again and they generally want to see good kids movies twice.
The plot never takes off and has zero inventive turns. The bad guy is again Prince Charming, like in Shrek 2, and he's hardly imposing. His "plan" is confusing and never makes sense. The finale is just strange and I did not get the point of it. The resolution involves talking and coming to grips with what kind of person you want to be-- yawn. The sub-plot about Shrek and Fiona being pregnant is also handled poorly.
The weak story would be ok if the humor was a good as it has been in the other films, but the jokes are really few and far between here. The Shrek character has gotten waaaay too serious and is very rarely funny. Donkey and Puss in Boots do ok and provide the most comic relief, but many of the jokes about their characters have been played out over time. There are a couple new characters introduced, including some classic fairytale princesses and Artie (a young King Arthur) but none of them are all that interesting.
I expected the film to do something to tip a hat to Artie being voiced by Justin Timberlake, but Artie never dances or sings (many other characters sing-- usually very badly). In fact, the musical choices in the movie are just strange. Rather than re-voice and freshen up classic rock songs as they have done in the past (I'm a Believer by Smashmouth and Eddie Murphy for example), they just play the same versions we have been hearing for years. So, at one point, we actually get Paul McCartney singing Live and Let Die. It was out of place and awkward.
Make no mistake, the movie will make money -- I still expect it to earn more than $200 million -- but I cannot see it coming close to the $440 million that Shrek 2 made and I think it will struggle to get to the $260+ that the first Shrek earned (in 2001, which would be more than $300 million when adjusted for ticket inflation).
--Jason "I'm probably being too hard on it-- but I found it to be very mediocre" Evans