johnlink ranks SHREK THE THIRD (2007)
I watched and ranked the first two Shrek films way back in May of 2010. I started the third but only got twenty minutes in before getting distracted. I never returned to it. Since then, I had a son. He’s three now. He loves PUSS IN BOOTS (a movie I’ve seen in pieces, but not absorbed all the way through). I told him there were more films with Puss in Boots and he got very excited. So we watched SHREK THE THIRD.
I watched SHREK THE THIRD (2007) on 12.19.13. It was my first viewing of the film.
The second SHREK is a fairly dismal and uninspired experience. The third film starts similarly, but does find a bit of a groove. Ultimately, this is an inoffensive, if unimportant, entry into the world of Shrek.
The movie has Shrek (Mike Myers) searching for Arthur (Justin Timberlake) so that the latter can become King. Meanwhile the evil Prince Charming (Rupert Everett) has banded together all of the villains from fairy tale lore. They are out to rewrite their stories. Only, really, this is a drastically underplayed plot point which never really develops other than to have bad guys who are one step ahead of stock characters.
No matter. The movie is funny enough to work. Shrek and Arthur (or Artie, as he likes to be called) have some humorous interactions. Donkey (Eddie Murphy) and Puss (Antonio Banderas) are similarly useful, even if the bit when they switch bodies goes on a bit too long. Again, nothing ground breaking, and nothing horrendous.
The roles of the female characters are drastically underwritten and schizophrenic. We live in a post BRAVE world now, and its a good thing. Anyone other than Fiona (Cameron Diaz) is a real waste of time, sadly.
The climax has some irony. Prince Charming has Shrek captured and puts on a musical play which attempts to skewer Disney with myriad references to canonical films. Only this is the third Shrek movie in what has, even by then, become a billion dollar franchise. The cuteness of this little movie making fun of the big bad corporate storytelling machine has lost all of its luster. The effect is somewhere between sad and pitiable. Shrek, as a franchise, is no different than any of the other animated worlds regurgitated ever 3 to 4 years in order to have a big honking hit.
Is that terrible? Certainly not. I watched this once. My son was not impressed. He wants PUSS IN BOOTS back in and to see Humpty Dumpty again. I wasn’t offended by SHREK THE THIRD, but I can’t imagine ever watching it again.
SCORES
With animated films, acting considers all the work (both vocal and animated) which goes into creating character.
FILM: 4; MOVIE: 6; ACTING: 5; WRITING: 4
4+6+5+4+0=19
FINAL SCORE: 4.75
johnlinkmovies 
Mostly agreed. It’s okay. Not great. Not inspiring. Just okay.
Yeah. It is just sort of… there.
Agreed. I’d even suggest that’s pretty much true of all the Shrek sequels. The first was excellent. The rest . . . just exist.
Seems that way. The third is marginally better than the second. I’ll probably see the fourth anyway since I am a glutton for punishment.
The fourth is definitely the worst, but again not so terrible as to be unwatchable. Just as to be unmemorable.