While there are good things to be said for the third Shrek film, which I certainly enjoyed more than the first despite the relative dearth of original thinking, it really should have been the end of the franchise and may well be the weakest of the films. On the other hand, it was successful enough for the fourth film to be made, and we’re soon to get a Puss in Boots spin-off as well. Shrek is horrified to hear that he is next in line to the throne. However, there is another heir he can persuade to rule, young Prince Arthur. However, Arthur has to be retrieved from his boarding school and kept safe, while other less worthy pretenders vie to capture the throne for themselves.
References to Rosemary’s Baby and Live or Let Die, as well as some amusingly over-the-top performances from two Pythons don’t disguise tired Disney gags and the fact that they’ve recycled a weak villain from the last film and introduced the blandest young hero ever seen. The second film had a much stronger plot and an excellent turn from Jennifer Saunders to keep it aloft, but here the plot is simply too weak to carry the comedy.
What results is a mess that lacks the spark that Shrek films need to work.
I’d sit through Shrek 2 again happily. Not sure about this one.
No comments:
Post a Comment