Shrek Forever After (C- or 1.5/4 stars)
Well folks, the Shrek franchise could finally be over. I loved 2001's 'Shrek'. But the subsequent films have done nothing for me. I entered this 4th film with trepidation - turns out that I wasn't much more enthused time around, either. Our friendly green ogre Shrek (voiced, as always, by the versatile Mike Myers) is given the chance (thanks to some lazy writing) to see life flash before his eyes as it might have been if he'd never met Fiona. How'd that happen, you ask? Well, bored with his domestic lifestyle (& the fact that being an ogre doesn't scare people anymore - they want him to autograph his torches & pitchforks, haha), he wishes to go back in time when his roar meant something & he had his mojo. The mischievous Rumpelstiltskin (Walt Dohn) overhears Shrek's wish & offers to grant it for him; by making a pact. Foolishly, Shrek doesn't read the fine print in the contract, & finds himself in a twisted, alternate version of Far Far Away.
Not only that, in this alternate existence, Rumpelstiltskin is king, Donkey (Eddie Murphy) is forced to pull carriages for the witches, Puss-in-Boots (Antonio Banderas) has grown lazy & fat, and ogres are hunted more ferociously than ever. Luck unites Shrek with Donkey, who is skeptical of his fantastical tale (of being duped by Rumpelstiltskin). To get his old life back, Shrek must fulfill an escape clause in said contract, which requires him to find his wife Fiona (Cameron Diaz) & land a kiss of true love with her. There are problems, of course. In this reality, Fiona is a warrior queen who has never met Shrek, & no longer believes in 'true love'. Furthermore, Shrek fails to make a good impression during their "1st" encounter. And unfortunately for Shrek, Rumpelstiltskin knows of this escape clause & is hell bent not to let Fiona remember Shrek. Can Shrek (& company) reclaim Fiona, & restore his fairy tale world?
This film made $70 million in its opening weekend. Impressive. But it's actually the weakest opening (by far) for a Shrek film since the original. That's because there's been such little buzz surrounding it. The jig is up. There's little more for these characters to do. They, & the storyline, have been exhausted. Shrek, Fiona, Donkey, Puss ... all have been happy & settled since the last movie. So why create an alternate reality for Shrek? The film feels more obligatory, than resoundingly essential for the closing of a franchise. I mean, at least it's better than the putrid 3rd Shrek; and it's only around 83 minutes long -- this is a good thing.
Don't get me wrong. I enjoyed the opening. There are FAR worse films out there. I've always appreciated the hodgepodge conglomeration of fairy tale plotlines mixed with contemporary pop cultural references in the Shrek franchise. There are some funny spurts in this 4th film. I laughed at Donkey's loveable antics, Puss-in-Boots' character arc, an army of ogres condemned by the Pied Piper to line-dance, & Shrek's babies. I like the heartfelt sentiment attached to these loveable characters; nostalgia goes a long way. I just don't know that this film was necessary; further damaging the Shrek name, rather than reviving or giving respect to it. There's an element of excitement that's completely missing from this film (as if it were merely 3 TV episodes strung together).
The franchise has been stale for some time (recycled jokes/songs). There's little impact. Shrek, as a character, has been an engaging mix of animation, voice, & personality - the heart & soul of these films; yet, I don't think I'll be itching to see him again. Animation-wise, nothing is improved upon from the 1st film 9 years ago. And I did not like the characterization, nor the visual representation of Rumpelstiltskin, either. It's just time for Shrek to end. There's talk of a spin-off film with Puss-in-Boots. I'm curious to see if that pans out, & how successful it would be. I'd guess barely. So long, Shrek. I will always think back fondly on your first, fresh, original film from 2001 where inventive animation, pop standards, ironic situations, witty one-liners, fun musical numbers, & edgy humor took precedent.
Not only that, in this alternate existence, Rumpelstiltskin is king, Donkey (Eddie Murphy) is forced to pull carriages for the witches, Puss-in-Boots (Antonio Banderas) has grown lazy & fat, and ogres are hunted more ferociously than ever. Luck unites Shrek with Donkey, who is skeptical of his fantastical tale (of being duped by Rumpelstiltskin). To get his old life back, Shrek must fulfill an escape clause in said contract, which requires him to find his wife Fiona (Cameron Diaz) & land a kiss of true love with her. There are problems, of course. In this reality, Fiona is a warrior queen who has never met Shrek, & no longer believes in 'true love'. Furthermore, Shrek fails to make a good impression during their "1st" encounter. And unfortunately for Shrek, Rumpelstiltskin knows of this escape clause & is hell bent not to let Fiona remember Shrek. Can Shrek (& company) reclaim Fiona, & restore his fairy tale world?
This film made $70 million in its opening weekend. Impressive. But it's actually the weakest opening (by far) for a Shrek film since the original. That's because there's been such little buzz surrounding it. The jig is up. There's little more for these characters to do. They, & the storyline, have been exhausted. Shrek, Fiona, Donkey, Puss ... all have been happy & settled since the last movie. So why create an alternate reality for Shrek? The film feels more obligatory, than resoundingly essential for the closing of a franchise. I mean, at least it's better than the putrid 3rd Shrek; and it's only around 83 minutes long -- this is a good thing.
Don't get me wrong. I enjoyed the opening. There are FAR worse films out there. I've always appreciated the hodgepodge conglomeration of fairy tale plotlines mixed with contemporary pop cultural references in the Shrek franchise. There are some funny spurts in this 4th film. I laughed at Donkey's loveable antics, Puss-in-Boots' character arc, an army of ogres condemned by the Pied Piper to line-dance, & Shrek's babies. I like the heartfelt sentiment attached to these loveable characters; nostalgia goes a long way. I just don't know that this film was necessary; further damaging the Shrek name, rather than reviving or giving respect to it. There's an element of excitement that's completely missing from this film (as if it were merely 3 TV episodes strung together).
The franchise has been stale for some time (recycled jokes/songs). There's little impact. Shrek, as a character, has been an engaging mix of animation, voice, & personality - the heart & soul of these films; yet, I don't think I'll be itching to see him again. Animation-wise, nothing is improved upon from the 1st film 9 years ago. And I did not like the characterization, nor the visual representation of Rumpelstiltskin, either. It's just time for Shrek to end. There's talk of a spin-off film with Puss-in-Boots. I'm curious to see if that pans out, & how successful it would be. I'd guess barely. So long, Shrek. I will always think back fondly on your first, fresh, original film from 2001 where inventive animation, pop standards, ironic situations, witty one-liners, fun musical numbers, & edgy humor took precedent.