Plots(1)

Shrek (Mike Myers) embarks on another whirlwind adventure with Donkey (Eddie Murphy) and Puss in Boots (Antonio Banderas) to find the rightful heir to the throne, the awkward Arthur (Justin Timberlake), after his frog-in-law suddenly croaks. Unfortunately the envious Prince Charming (Rupert Everett) has designs on the throne himself, joining with other fairytale villains in a coup d'etat to seize the crown. Can Shrek, with a magically misguided Merlin (Eric Idle), a powerful posse of princesses, and a bundle of unexpected arrivals, manage to save the day? (Dreamworks Animation UK)

(more)

Videos (3)

Trailer 3

Reviews (8)

lamps 

all reviews of this user

English Shrek didn't deserve such a brutal tarnishing of his reputation. Everything that was so brilliant the first two episodes is here unbelievably mechanical, stilted and unfunny, the story is silly and unexpectedly boring, and Prince Charming is one of the least likeable characters ever to appear in an animated film. The old friends may have stayed on and tried hard to keep the story afloat, but not even a real first-class actor can resurrect a bad film, let alone computer-generated, albeit extremely likeable, characters. I suffered through it once, I never want to see it again. 40% ()

3DD!3 

all reviews of this user

English No fun. And if a family comedy isn’t fun, what’s it good for? The jokes are either lame or stolen from past episodes (kitty eyes). And what happened to the real Shrek? Just a poor caricature of past episodes is all that’s left. I’m all for character development, but not in the wrong direction. The only ones I was actually pleased with were the dronkeys. On the level, I don’t want a part 4. ()

Ads

Stanislaus 

all reviews of this user

English Shrek the Third is an illustrative (and a little sad) example of how two great films can be followed by a very mediocre sequel that lacks the cool atmosphere that the audience was used to. I'm not saying I didn't have fun at all, but I was distracted by several things (or characters). I’m talking about the uninteresting new characters of Arthur and Merlin, and the annoying Prince Charming. Even Shrek's coming to terms with his new role in family life didn't entertain me as much as it probably should have. The gang of princesses like Charlie's Angels had its charms, though. Three and a quarter stars! ()

novoten 

all reviews of this user

English You cannot enter the same river twice. But perhaps on the third attempt, you will successfully, albeit stumblingly, ford it. Andrew Adamson is gone, replaced by a team of screenwriters who believe in themselves to a noticeably lesser extent than their predecessors, but I consider both to be positives. Not that references to popular culture have completely disappeared, this flaw persists at the expense of storytelling, but the story, despite various clichés or variations of familiar plots, races forward at a surprisingly brisk pace. Donkey still teeters on the edge of humor and obnoxiousness, Puss in Boots is the ideal partner, Fiona a devoted wife, and Shrek somehow still comes along unwillingly. And to my surprise, I am entertained by all of it. 70% ()

Isherwood Boo!

all reviews of this user

English A concentration of awkwardness and wretchedness meet in an intrusive farce that trumps, in its vileness, even Disney family shenanigans with children and animals. Children will probably laugh and clap at it, but the pop-culture-craving viewers will cry like never before. The beloved characters are the losers you pity for not having a script to read during the redaction process - they wouldn't do this again even for record financial offers. At the same time, I would like to know who embezzled the $160 million budget because it’s nowhere to be seen in the film. ()

Gallery (64)