Um, are some of you in la-la land? "The best of the three?"
You've...gotta be joking me, right? Shrek 2 was by far wonderfully terrific (and that's not just my nostalgia kicking in because 2004 was a much better year than this one currently is)...and the original Shrek is very closely behind, but this one...jeez. The animation is the only thing making it seemed like they tried.
Warning: my rant is long and novel-like. You have been warned.
Let's start off with theme of general parody: the first Shrek was primarily focused on literature and in sub-regions, Disney spoofing. The second Shrek went after movies and television, and surprisingly made it work better than the first. This one goes in a direction that's ultimately bizarre considering the mainstream target audience: theatre. Yes, that's right, Shrek the Third is mainly focused with parodying the performing arts, preferably bad dinner theatre. To be said the first of many times, what were they thinking?!
Next, plot: (this is kinda cryptic, helps if you know the full plot) Okay, the first one is a well-crafted, linear, by-the-books buddy, quasi-road-trip-slash-journey movie that evolves into a romance. The plot flows perfectly and all loose-ends are nicely tied. The second one jazzes it up a bit with a meet-the-parents idea, yet it makes the idea its own and throws in a few plot twists as well as a surprisingly-not-forced journey jammed into the middle (because it expands on the exposition), with the ending tying up loose ends, thus being once again satisfying. Then there's number three...it starts off with decent exposition, then eyes the course ahead. The audience thinks it knows where it's going, but they are proven wrong. Shrek 2 did this sort of thing, too, but where it went MADE FREAKING SENSE. Shrek the Third goes off in an entirely different direction just to serve its "hey, they seemed good in the writers' room" ideas purpose, but ultimately shreds the plot. What's worse is that the subplot gets more attention than the main plot because of this! And then when it hints towards something that might make up for this (more on that later), it NEVER gets to it! No loose ends tied up, as it only explains the ending for one of the stories. Frustrating, just like you must be after reading this paragraph.
Next, tone: Seriously, the last two began upbeat with decent exposition. This one does half of that: it begins with decent exposition. But parodying seriousness or not, bad dinner theatre and a somber frog king funeral (which seemed to make fun of national tragedies...yeah, real goldmine there, writers) does not seem to scream "comedy" to me. Especially for a kids movie, and the light tone that suceeded really suffered because of it. The last two began on a high and then eventually lowered to a dark period, then back to a high for the climax, like EVERY family film should! (because it's a formula that works...including for the first two like previously mentioned!!!)
Now, comedy: Like I said before...theatre as the main parody target? C'mon writers...whoa, wait a second, the names of the writers...in the credits! (checks imdb) Oh, man, why didn't I notice it before! Pretty much 3/4ths of the writers have never worked on a Shrek film before!! This explains why only 1/4th of the comedy works like it would in the first two flicks! Everything that worked in Shrek 1 and 2 in the humor department is subdued, including Donkey...and I mean, how can you go wrong with Donkey...well, let's be nice, it is number three, and there's only so many one-liners you can write for a character without letting the VA improvise. (that with Eddie Murphy?...no thanks) But, wait a second, Puss in Boots was only in the last film! And he didn't even appear until halfway through! Surely he's filled with comic dynamite yet to be explored. That would be great...if they ever EXPLORED IT!! Even Puss gets only a few hits! So, suffice it to say, if you want to know the best jokes in the film, know that they involved a wicked Puss one-liner (like, pretty much the only good one he ever gets) about Shrek as a father and anything involving Gingerbread Man. It's as if the original writers came back especially to write on that one character. Boy, was his "life-flashing-before-his-eyes" sequence hysterical.
Now, onto my main point (if somehow you're still with me): the pointlessness of it all. It seemed as if the director (who helped write the first two) invited his friends over and said, "guys, will you help me write Shrek 3?" After they say yes, they have a big party and watch the first two, followed by a drunken writers' meeting. They have the wafer-thin plot figured out...and it actually might work with well execution. Then the big-comedy-ideas pour in, and I imagine it goes like this:
(BEWARE: SPOILERS and MAD Magazine-esque ribbing follow!)
Writer #1: Hey, let's have Fiona have a baby shower!
Director: That's a great idea for a cute little scene during the subplot!
Writer #2: Yeah, and her guests should be all these fairy tale princesses!
Director: Smart, funny, and allows for Disney-bashing, I like it!
Writer #3: Yeah, but for no reason at all, as well as dumping the original idea of why it was funny, let's use four chicks who used to be (or currently are) cast members on Saturday Night Live even though their voice acting is mediocre and you can't really tell its them so the humor in this point is really never there!
Director: Well, okay, but that's a big paycheck likely to be made to those four, so we can't have this just be one little scene, they need to be really pointless main characters and devote a bunch of screentime to them!
Writer #2: But we can't make the film too long because of the family factor.
Director: Well, let's just salvage some time from our really much, much, MUCH more important main plot! Anymore suggestions?
Writer #1: Remember how Shrek and Donkey transformed into handsome versions of themselves in the previous movie? Well, for no reason at all, Donkey and Puss should switch bodies! That would make for some hilarious observations even though all we really are doing is switching the voice actors and having the characters around them comment that their voices have changed every now and then.
Director: Well, even though it doesn't service the plot IN ANY WAY AT ALL, we'll shoehorn it in somewhere.
Writer #2: But how would they switch bodies?
Director: Well, if we're doing a parody of the Arthurian legend, how about we include Merlin?
Writer #3: But isn't that another pointless character in this already convoluted mess?
Director: Yes, but alas.
Writer #1: Oh, oh! And just like how we had John Cleese in the second film, we can get another Python to do his voice, like Eric Idle! Though that would require yet another big paycheck, so we need him to have a decent amount of screentime.
Director: Well, instead of Shrek staying at the school and teaching Arthur his lesson there as well as continuing the seems-to-be-working parody of high school, we can have them travel to Merlin and have him help Shrek and Arthur bond in a totally idiotic, lazy way.
Writer #1: Oh! Oh! And to be EXTRA LAZY in our writing, let's have Merlin just transport them to Far, Far Away, therefore solving the trouble of giving more screentime to the damn subplot! Then Donkey and Puss can "hilariously" switch bodies because Merlin is so inept.
Director: Well, how are they going to switch back?
Writer #2: Merlin can just pop out of the blue at the very end and he switches them back like the world's BIGGEST CONVIENCE.
Writer #1: Oh! Oh! I actually have a CREATIVE, INVENTIVE AND ORIGINAL IDEA.
Director: Really?! Honest?!
Writer #1: Yeah, let's have Arthur be Prince Charming's son! That would tie the film around!
Director: That's a GREAT idea!
(they all sprinkle in the script hints that Arthur is Prince Charming's son, up until the climax when--)
Writer #1: WAIT! Actually, that's a bad idea. Throw it out.
Director: If you say so...
(They neglect to write a revelation but they leave ALL THE HINTS BEFOREHAND STILL IN THERE!!!)
Writer #1: You know what, let's not even have an ending where Arthur stands up and shows his worthiness as king...let's have him say a really-PC speech!
Director: That's the ticket...I guess.
Writer #1: Then after he gets the crown, we NEVER SEE HIM AGAIN!
Writer #2: Just like the great characters established in the high school that just vanish into thin air, even though it seemed like they were going to do something later on?
Writer #1: Exactly!
Director: Whatever...you guys do what you want, I'm going to go over to the production team on Bee Movie so I can remind myself what good comedic ideas look like...
So, anyways, the end result is the one of the most inferior movies of all time. I mean, to follow Shrek 2 with this is an utter embarrasment.
I tried to think of something worse, then it came to me: no matter what may happen, there WILL be a Shrek 4...and it takes no dummy to see that there might as well be a Shrek 5...I'm going to go off and wallow in the fields of disappointment that this summer has sent me to twice so far...not looking good...
