This wiki has been closed following a Request for Comments. Please see this page for more information.

Shrek the Third

From Awful Movies Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
ALTIN.png

"Exquisite!" — Cool Cat, Cool Cat Saves the Kids

This article has been featured on the Awful Movies Wiki!


Shrek the Third
2007 - Shrek the Third.jpg

Shrek the third teaser.jpg
Shrek-the-third u-L-F3NETL0.jpg
Shrek the Third One for All 3.jpg
Shrek3Poster.jpg

🎵🎶Somebody once told me this film was gonna bore me, it ain't the sharpest film in the franchise.🎶🎵
Genre: Animation
Comedy
Fantasy
Directed By: Chris Miller
Raman Hui (co-director)
Written By: Jeffrey Price
Peter S. Seaman
Chris Miller
Aron Warner
Starring: Mike Myers
Eddie Murphy
Cameron Diaz
Antonio Banderas
Julie Andrews
John Cleese
Rupert Everett
Eric Idle
Justin Timberlake
Seth Rogen
Maya Rudolph
Amy Sedaris
Amy Poehler
Photography: Color
Distributed By: Paramount Pictures
DreamWorks Animation
Release Date: May 6, 2007 (Mann Village Theatre)
May 18, 2007 (United States)
Runtime: 93 minutes
Country: United States
Franchise: Shrek
Prequel: Shrek 2
Flushed Away (by DWA's animation filmography release)
Sequel: Shrek Forever After
Bee Movie (by DWA's animation filmography release)


Shrek the Third (also simply known as Shrek 3) is a 2007 American computer-animated fantasy comedy film directed by Chris Miller and co-directed by Raman Hui. It is the third installment in the Shrek film franchise and serves as a sequel to Shrek 2. The premiered at the Mann Village Theatre, Westwood in Los Angeles on May 6, 2007, and was released in the United States on May 18, 2007.

Plot

When King Harold suddenly croaks, Shrek learns he will have to rule the land of Far, Far Away, unless he can find a suitable heir to the throne. The most promising candidate is Princess Fiona's cousin Artie, a teenage slacker in a medieval high school. Shrek and his trusted companions, Donkey and Puss in Boots, set out to bring Artie back but find their mission is a bigger challenge than they expected.

Bad Qualities

  1. This film is inferior to the first two Shrek films, and it lacks any charm or charisma of the first two in terms of storytelling, characters, music, and humor, as almost every joke in the film is incredibly tasteless and unfunny compared to the first two, particularly when Shrek accidentally puts his sword into a guy's shoulder while practicing knighting.
  2. This film was actually a whim of DreamWorks since the real reason for the existence of this third installment within the Shrek franchise was that DreamWorks Animation wanted to face or be superior to other animation studios such as Disney (which was going through the second dark age), Pixar, Blue Sky, etc; therefore, it was not only a continuation of Shrek but also an opportunity for the studio to overload or oversell any product that belonged to or had the Shrek name on it. This in itself is more evident when in different interviews that were carried out, the producers of the film like DreamWorks affirmed that this film would be the one that would expand the Shrek franchise. On top of that, this movie was a way that DreamWorks wanted to reward itself after the financial disappointment of Flushed Away and the constant re-recording or poor reception on Bee Movie test streams.
    • On top of that, the studio made the difficult decision to deal with the other animation studios, constantly promoting a gigantic marketing campaign, far surpassing the one presented by the Pixar's Ratatouille movie.
    • Aside from the above, the original release date of November 2006; however, it ended ahead of May 18, 2007, to compete with the premiere of Sony's Spider-Man 3 (which had already been released for a week) and Disney's Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End (which was to be released a week later), where their marketing took care of everything possible that the public did not pay attention to the aforementioned films.
      • Although it should be noted that premiering in front of those two films that were of high level affected the film's box office performance, since Shrek the Third took a long time to reach or exceed 750 million, not to mention the fact that different box office screenings said that it was going to raise between 870 or 930 million. In turn for a long period of time, it was not known in a definite way if it's box office was 813 or 796 million dollars.
    • Apart from the aforementioned, it was also the study's decision that in all the posters, merchandise, or toys of the film, there are absolutely or nothing more than the new characters of the film such as Arthur, Merlin and the princesses (not to mention the fact that all of these characters except Arthur are not important to the plot of the film), to sell marketing.
      • Also, in the next film, the TV specials, the short films, Puss in Boots and the Puss in Boots' tv series, all the characters that were introduced in Shrek the Third, except Shrek’s kids, don’t appear or even mentioned.
  3. Executive meddling: Originally and almost officially, the film was going to have the work of Andrew Adamson, however, because he was busy directing the sequel to The Chronicles of Narnia, by decision of the studio they removed him from the project, in fact, DreamWorks was the main responsible. Due to the rewriting of the script, in addition to the fact that several original writers of the saga, left the project by decision of the studio, at the same time it was the fault of the producers of DreamWorks, that the film suffered a setback as continuous progress, since during production, not having a script to work with, they constantly changed the story that Andrew Adamson wrote before leaving the project, they ordered the creation of different scripts of which only 3 approved, several of the scenes they had in mind to create had to be eliminated and others that did not even reach the final product (although they were to be included), in addition to the fact that it was also the studio's decision to include too many voice actors for this film.
    • Production hell: Although it may not seem like it, this film went through problems during it's production, since Andrew Adamson, who was the director and main screenwriter of the second Shrek, had to abandon both the direction and the development of the script of this third film (since he was the director of the "The Chronicles of Narnia" films) so due to scheduling problems he had not worked on the main script of the film, despite presenting some drafts. The same thing happened with the scriptwriters of previous Shrek films such as J David Stem, Joe Stillman, David N. Weiss, Kelly Asbury, Cody Cameron, and Conrad Vernon, who like Andrew did not work on the production of the film's script, apart from the aforementioned this film despite the fact that it had Chris Miller's job, DreamWorks literally had to improvise with different writers to complete the story.
    • Speaking of the subject of the scripts, this third film itself had the participation of people outside the concept presented by Shrek, but who were closer to the concept presented by the Madagascar films, in fact at the time of creating the story the scriptwriters created up to three drafts that ultimately failed executives like DreamWorks producers, who ultimately had to combine each of the drafts to make the main script.
  4. The film completely misses a good premise (Shrek trying to be king). Instead, he decides to implant or jump in different contexts throughout the film, which contributes little or almost nothing to the plot.
  5. Some scenes can be way too dark and edgy because there is a surprisingly large count of casualties... in a PG-rated film. Particular examples include a scene where Shrek accidentally causes a ship to sink as dozens of people are killed in the process, as well as the deaths of King Harold and Prince Charming, respectively.
  6. The film, just like Ice Age: Continental Drift and Collision Course, despite presenting a premise that would be with the death of King Harold, the search for a new king, and a coup to the kingdom, is also quite childish even by DreamWorks standards as well as the first and only in the franchise to be like that, since the actions of the characters is very innocent as the guards literally do not arrest Shrek since Arthur says he is an actor, with the villains singing in the middle of a game, the villain practices and dances to act out a play, the princesses make ambiguous comments when stopped, have King Harold fake his death or make strange sounds, or most obviously of all, the villains leave the room wrong with Arthur's speech.
  7. Another major problem with this film is that it does not know how to correctly distribute the theme or main story of the film, in addition to this being a film that has an excessive number of subplots precisely fifteen (being more than four or five that were adequately developed in Shrek, Shrek 2, Shrek Forever After and Puss in Boots), this being a serious problem since the film does not define which plot is the main one of the film, for mention that only three subplots stand out, while all the others have terrible development or execution that makes them feel rushed and out of context, as well as not being adequately resolved.
  8. Shrek's character arc of becoming a father with babies is botched in terms of execution; in Shrek 2 he was afraid of losing Fiona, reinforced by well-written dialogue and somber scenes of contemplation. The way this film treats this involves visualizing his fears of raising babies in the form of a nightmare, which is rather uncompelling in terms of execution.
    • This plot of Shrek about to become a father also feels very unnecessary and forced, there are only a few scenes that focus on this and the ogre babies are only there so that the movie can have a happy ending but other than that, this contributes nothing to the film.
  9. Even though the first two acts have their decent moments, however, the third act falls to a predictable and unfunny finale.
    • On the topic of predictability, if one looks closely at some of the promotional posters, trailers, and even the DVD cover for the film, then it was realised that the ogre babies are seen, which just spoils the ending.
  10. King Harold's death is very tasteless, as he does not one, but two fake-out deaths, before he dies for real this time; his death is also supposed to be heartbreaking and serious, but it is instead filled with pointless and unfunny gags, like when he eats a fly after his second fake-out death and it's not really a good idea to make this scene like this, it RUINS everything in the emotional scene!
    • Speaking of the death of King Harold, it at some point feels forced, because the character although he had a leading role in Shrek 2, the truth is that he was used in a relatively short time within the franchise, so that his death does not make it emotional or endearing as was the case with the deaths in the Kung Fu Panda and How to Train Your Dragon trilogies respectively.
    • Another problem with the death of King Harold is that it is not memorable since his movement is pretty flat and it reaches some grotesque point (mainly when he fakes his death) and the panoramic view that is made only focuses on his face, completely ruining the moment.
    • The attitude of the characters who witnessed his death (mainly Puss, Shrek, and Fiona) do not show an attitude of humanity or melancholy, but of almost disinterest and apathy.
    • A very notorious problem is that John Cleese's voice as King Harold sounds too overwhelming, muffled, and feigned causing his voice to cause laughter or involuntary comedy, this is more evident when in the international dubbing of the films, the voice actors of King Harold use tones to express sadness.
    • Apart from the above, his death does not cause emotional damage or development to the main character (Shrek) or the deuteragonists (Donkey, Puss, Fiona, Lilian, or Arthur), not to mention that it is easily or completely forgotten during the second and third act.
      • This is proved in Shrek Forever After, where his death is ignored, being in the credits where it is confirmed that he died, however, if the final credits are omitted the fate of the character remains ambiguous, the same can be said of the flashbacks of Shrek the Third in the end credits, with the scene of King Harold in his bed eating a fly (after faking his death), which also becomes ambiguous, this also applies in the shorts.
  11. The film has far too many protagonists, including new characters such as the princesses, Arthur Pendragon, and Merlin the Wizard, and as a result, the story becomes confusing and muddled.
    • In fact, there are only 3 relevant characters in the story: Shrek, Arthur and Prince Charming since the others (even Fiona who only tells Shrek that she is pregnant and allies with the princesses against Charming) don't or barely contribute anything to the story and given that much to do this time.
    • On top of that, all the characters from the previous movies have a one-dimensional attitude or personality, the same goes for the new characters.
  12. Prince Charming is supposed to be the main antagonist of the film and is actually a reasonable choice in terms of his motivations; however, he's basically treated as a butt-monkey, which makes the film's audience feel a bit of sympathy for him when they aren't supposed to; he is also bland as the main villain of the film and is not as threatening or entertaining as Lord Farquaad (Shrek), Fairy Godmother (Shrek 2) or Rumpelstiltskin (Shrek Forever After), instead he literally behaves like a spoiled brat and you can't take him seriously.
    • The most pathetic thing about Charming is that his evil plan basically consists of setting up a musical play in which he intends to kill Shrek in front of the kingdom, and when this happens at the end of the movie, he's not taken seriously by absolutely nobody (not even the viewer) due to his childish behavior (and awful singing) to the point where Charming's play becomes a Shrek's stand-up in which he constantly ridicules him.
  13. The casting choices that were made in the film are completely dubious or questionable, although the main cast returns for their respective character, the new characters or supporting characters are played by actors who had more experience in the field of film acting than in dubbing, the most questionable being that of Justin Timberlake for Arthur since he was chosen not for his experience in the dubbing medium but for his fame in the musical medium, the same can be said of the actor's Eric Idle, Seth Rogen, Maya Rudolph, Amy Sedaris, Amy Poehler, John Krasinski, Ian McShane, and Susanne Blakeslee, who were chosen simply for their fame or for gaining public attention.
    • However, as in the case of its premiere date, this decision was at some point detrimental since the performance of the new members of the voice cast was disappointing, this being more visible in Justin Timberlake, Eric Idle, Ian McShane, and, Susanne Blakeslee, whose performance is out of place or out of tune with the movie atmosphere.
  14. Although the soundtrack is good, some of the music is far from being flashy or innovative in the scenes that the characters appear with the environment, the background music is completely banal, firstly there are scenes where there is no background music and at other times the music that accompanies the characters it does not connect or does not match the atmosphere of the scene, in fact there are serious or sad moments that have happy music in the background making it used incorrectly in some scenes:
    • One scene attempts to use Led Zeppelin's "Immigrant Song", but it gets the timing of the scream completely wrong and then proceeds to play a different song shortly after.
    • Some of the song choices themselves are questionable that do not fit the tone in some scenes, with the biggest offender being the Damien Rice song "9 Crimes", since the scene it plays in is supposed to be sad and dour, but it becomes confusing when a song about infidelity is being played; there is also Live and Let Die from the 1973 James Bond film of the same name, which plays during King Harold's funeral.
  15. The subplot of Puss and Donkey's bodies being switched in the style of "Freaky Friday", while hilarious, is rather pointless and serves no reason to exist other than to give the duo something to do in this film.
  16. Another big problem with the film is that some of the dialogue is terrible; far from being dialogues between animated characters with human feelings, they feel more like the improvised dialogue between two indifferent characters, which is terrible if you assume if in the last two films the characters they had witty dialogues or scripts that connected with the franchise, however in this film, far from being transversal, it lacks the wit and causes embarrassment to the viewer.
  17. As previously mentioned, the majority of the attempts at humor are tasteless and offensive, especially Shrek's infamous "Well, someone better be dying!" line right before the scene immediately cuts to King Harold on his deathbed.
  18. The background that is given to the film is disastrous since the film has a hasty execution, at the same time slow, that all it does is oversaturate the film to the extreme, causing that the premise that is presented does not cause an impact. emotional or personal with the viewer, something that was handled perfectly well in Shrek, Shrek 2, Shrek Forever After, or Puss in Boots, in Shrek the Third terribly combines humor in moments that are supposed to be serious, so when one of the characters is about to take damage, you no longer care that it is full of humor.
  19. The film makes the serious mistake of "showing not telling", since a good part of the events that take place in the film are narrated by characters, causing it to become filler, in turn, several of the events prior to the film are not are set correctly in the plot.
  20. The animation, although still good as mentioned down below, has an unpleasant color palette, with the background colors being just brown, gray and dark yellow, unlike the previous films that were more colorful.
    • Speaking of the animation of the film, there are very notorious moments (mainly in the harbor, the house of Merlin, and the kingdom of Far Far Away) where the exterior shots of the landscape like the clouds and the wind are too static.
    • At the same time, some renderings are poorly polished, textures look fake (or are game-like), and various background characters lack expressions.
  21. Not great direction by Chris Miller and Raman Hui whose takes are always static in this film.
    • It's more glaring knowing that Chris Miller directed Puss in Boots and did a really good job.
  22. Unlike the first, second, and fourth films that most of the shots towards the characters were American shots, medium-long shots, and wide shots in all the scenes in which they appeared (which gave a good reflection of the environment and the exterior), practically all the shots that are made of the characters in Shrek the Third are limited only to the very close-up, close-up or medium close-up, and in a few exceptions to the general medium shot, which in addition to limiting too much.
  23. The design of the characters, although original at first, are extremely simple, since a good part of the design of the characters is recycled from the first or second films, in addition to that all the characters have the same face, body, and facial features, for example:
    • While Arthur's character design is admittedly cute for a teenager, it's practically identical to Prince Charming only with a more orange skin tone.
    • Merlin has the same design to the wizards from the first movie only with a longer beard and no hair.
    • The princesses literally have the same face as the physical features of the human version of Fiona, only with changes in her hair and height.
    • Villains as a villain in fairy tales share practically the same physical features (In fact, all pirates are fat and witches have the same face), with the only difference being the costume they wear.
    • The students and the teachers the academy in Worcestershire have the same face as the same physical features of the princesses (who are copies of Fiona) and the pirates.
      • Speaking of Worcestershire, this academy is never mentioned in the rest of the Franchise and don’t appear.
  24. Poor editing that makes Far Far Away looks more like an avenue than the realm of the second movie.
  25. The ending is sadly stupid since literally, Charming wants to be crowned king in a musical play where he tells his hardships in a presumptuous or annoying way, in front of a subjugated people, while Shrek is more than scared "Because they are going to kill". He takes it as if it were a joke, although we take into account that despite his song and attitude, Charming is capable of killing him, and then all Shrek's friends appear that instead of attacking what they only do is pose and nothing else., then being ambushed by the villains of Fairy Tales, and at the end, Arthur arrives "In an inexplainable way" to tell them very indirectly "Stop being bad, you have not had other goals in your life" something pathetic since the villains give up just by hearing those words, and then see the death of Charming crushed by a tower, with Arthur crowning himself king while people without even knowing him praise him as a new king and then see a scene that it ends with Shrek with Fiona taking care of her children.
    • Regardless of taking into account what happened in Shrek the Third, this film has one of the most absurd and useless outcomes in the history of DreamWorks, since everything is solved in a very convenient way, the characters do not suffer any damage and everyone lives happily forever, which far from looking like a DreamWorks ending looks like a Disney sequel ending.
    • Speaking of the ending, the credits (depending on your view) are terribly nondescript, as the only thing about us is that Donkey and Puss sing "Thank You (Falletin 'Me Be Mice Elf Again)" while Shrek's babies make a mess "to put the names of the actors in the film".[1], [2].
  26. As in the case of Cars 2, the plot, the events, and the characters presented in this installment have no relevance in the subsequent films, since the only thing that matters is the death of King Harold, while everything else is not acknowledged or surfers retcon.
    • In fact, in the shorts, they contradicted several events that happen in this third film, the most important being that Arthur was king, Charming is dead, and that the villains rebelled against the kingdom. In said fourth film, the shorts, the TV specials and Puss in Boots, Arthur doesn’t appear and is never mentioned, Charming is alive and the villains seem to never rebelled against the kingdom. Merlin and Rapunzel don’t appear and are never mentioned in the next film, TV specials, shorts and Puss in Boots. The princesses only appeared in the credits of that said film and never returned in the shorts, TV specials and Puss in Boots.
    • The Worcestershire college and the Merlin island don’t appear and are never mentioned in the rest of the franchise again.
    • The Rumpelstiltskin from Shrek the Third is very different from the Rumpelstiltskin that appears in the rest of the franchise.
  27. False advertising: In the different posters that came out of the film, Shrek can be seen wearing a king's suite with a king's crown. However, Shrek only wears this suit for 3 minutes, and at no time in the film is he seen with a Crown. That also implied that Shrek was actually going to become the new king when in the film after finding out that he's supposed to be the new king, he rejects this and goes looking for Arthur so that he can be it.
    • Speaking of which, several posters, or posters that were distributed of the film, have more to do with the video game, than the plot of the film.
  28. While this film didn't ruin or kill the Shrek franchise as mentioned below, it was originally intended to expand the Shrek universe, with more sequels, spin-off movies, prequels, TV specials, and television series, however, due to mixed-to-negative reception and not meeting box office figures, all these projects were canceled or frozen, causing the only sequel to be Shrek Forever After, the same case with the spin-off with Puss in Boots and its sequel, which is going to be released at the end of this year.

Good Qualities

  1. The animation is still good despite the criticism as mentioned above, and is an improvement from the previous two films.
  2. A couple of funny scenes, such as Puss in Donkey's body doing his cute eyes thing only for the guards to find him weird, and where Pinocchio tries to avoid Charming's interrogation by trying not to say "yes" or "no", as well as one scene where a guy assumes Shrek's appearance to be a costume.
    • Speaking of which, the subplot of Puss and Donkey's bodies being switched in the style of Freaky Friday is hilarious, despite serving no point to the story, as mentioned in BQ#16.
  3. Despite not given that much to do this time, Gingerbread Man, Pinocchio, Big Bad Wolf, the Three Little Pigs and the Three Blind Mice actually does have more screen time here than in the other movies, which is great as they cause some admittedly fun moments, similar to the Amigos from Happy Feet.
  4. Unlike some other animated sequels, none of the characters was flanderized, with Shrek, Fiona, Donkey, Puss, Lillian, Harold (despite his badly executed death as mentioned above), Dragon, Dronkeys, Gingy, Pinocchio, Wolf, Piggies and Blind Mice are still as likeable as they were before.
  5. Depending on your view, the baby ogres are cute and likable.
    • On a similar note, while Arthur's design in practically identical to Prince Charming only with a more orange skin tone, it's admittedly cute for a teenager, as mentioned in BQ#23.
  6. To add to the previous pointer, the movie has an interesting concept of giving a story about Shrek having a bad dream of having babies, and actually having babies.
    • Not to mention, the end credit sequence with Shrek's babies making a mess to put the names of the actors in the film is arguably one of the most creative credit sequences of 2007.
  7. The dubbing of the films despite their errors in some translations is good.
  8. The phrase of Onkey Donk from school has been a precursor to a series of theories about the Shrek franchise.
  9. In one scene, the school band at Worcestershire Academy plays "All-Star" by Smash Mouth from the first film, which is a nice touch.
  10. It features a raw reflection of the debilitating concerns of entering fatherhood, despite the plot of Shrek becoming a father with babies being poorly written and executed in this movie.
  11. Decent cameo from Seth Rogen, which is almost unrecognizable.
  12. Even though the soundtrack is good mentioned above, some of the song choices are decent:
    • Royal Pain fits very well with Shrek’s routine trying to be a king, but failing.
  13. The fight between the Princesses and the Knights is action packed.
  14. Though weak as an antagonist and is just the same villain from the second film, Prince Charming's motivations to take over Far, Far Away and avenge his deceased mother are very justified and reasonable.
  15. The scene when Shrek and Arthur talk about their respective fathers is nice and heart-warming.
  16. It reunited John Cleese and Eric Idle, who were known for being on Monty Python.
  17. Arthur's speech at the end is a very nice message, nevermind how clichéd it is.
  18. As it was said before, this movie has very good ideas that had a big potential, although they were poorly executed, most notably Shrek becoming a father and Charming wanting revenge.
  19. It has a bit more humor than the next film and its spin-off, despite most of the attempts being poor.
  20. Doris, from Shrek 2, has more time in this movie and is one of the main characters.
  21. Amazing voice acting, thanks to the cast reprising their roles, Mike Myers, Eddie Murphy, Cameron Diaz, Rupert Everett, John Cleese, Julie Andrews and Antonio Banderas and all the voice actors from the first two movies that are here.
  22. In one scene, we can see the hands and the laughter of Lord Farquaad, the villain from the first film.
  23. At least this film didn't kill the Shrek franchise. If so, we wouldn't have the fourth film in 2010, which is three years after this film and is a slight improvement over this one.
  24. Depending of your view, the death of King Harold, to think about its bad execution, it can also be emotional and sad.
  25. The appearance of the other villains of the fairy tales is a great and decently executed idea, same with their reformation.
    • Also, the appearance of the princesses of the fairy tales is also a great idea.
  26. Prince Charming has a sign of character development in the film, as it is revealed that he has apparently moved on from trying to take Fiona.

Reception

Critical response

Unlike the previous two Shrek films, Shrek the Third was not as well-received, as it was met with mixed reviews from critics and the audience, making it the weakest Shrek film. The film currently holds a 42% rating based on 211 reviews with the consensus reads, "Shrek the Third has pop culture potshots galore but at the expense of the heart, charm, and wit that made the first two Shreks classics". On Metacritic, the film has a weighted average score of 58 out of 100, based on 35 critics, indicating "mixed or average reviews". Audiences polled by CinemaScore gave the film an average grade of "B+" on an A+ to F scale, a step down from the first two films' "A".

Box office

Shrek the Third grossed $813 on a budget of $160 million, becoming the fourth highest-grossing film of 2007 and was the box office success, however, DreamWorks deemed it a bad investment as they expected Shrek The Third raised a minimum of $910 or $930 million, at the same time that its net profit was greatly reduced by the gigantic marketing campaign, as well as the payment to the actors (in fact, this is the first and only film of DreamWorks in having more than 50 voice actors), which reportedly generated a net profit of $450 or $500 million ($450 million less than Shrek 2, $200 million less than Shrek Forever After or Shrek, and $150 million less than Puss in Boots).

Controversy

During the beginning of the movie, in Prince Charming's dinner theater, coconuts are revealed to be the source of the horse's hoof beats. the same joke was used in Monty Python and the Holy Grail, which also starred John Cleese and Eric Idle. Idle left the premiere accusing the film producers for the unauthorized use of this gag, while the producers claimed that they were honouring Cleese and Idle by using the scene. Also, the Conserative Illinois blog criticized the use of Doris the ugly stepsister, saying that they were using the character to "desenitize" children and parents to transgenderism.

Trivia

  1. This is the only film where Shrek doesn't roar.
  2. Despite being directed by Chris Miller, his character the Magic Mirror does not appear in the film making this the only Shrek movie to do so.
  3. The scene where Prince Charming and the Fairy Tale villains invade Far Far Away is somewhat similar to real-life invasions such as the bombing of Pearl Harbor as well as Germany invading Poland, along with the German Blitzkrieg. The film version of Pearl Harbour was released the same year as the first Shrek film.
  4. Mike Myers (Shrek) and Justin Timberlake (Arthur) were both in The Love Guru, also distributed by Paramount Pictures.

Videos

Trailers

Reviews

References

External links

Comments

<comments/>