What is old gets made into a sequel

Rating: 5/10 (27 May 2007)

Ever since I was a little kid, I had a love/hate relationship with movies and books. I loved how they both created worlds of extraordinary people and creatures that I came to think of as friends. I hated that no matter how many follow up projects were made, eventually I would only be able to visit these characters by re-watching or re-reading their adventures. These visits were nice but not nearly as exciting since I already knew the outcome of the stories.
Shrek the 3rd (2007) is a movie that brings back characters I know and love from the previous two films. There is the ogre Shrek (Mike Myers), the grumpy curmudgeon who has learned to make friends and care about other as well as his wife Fiona (Cameron Diaz), a princess that has learned to accept her inner beauty regardless of her outer looks. Donkey (Eddie Murphy), the lovably obnoxious mule that has learned nothing so far is back as well as the adorable and suave Puss N' Boots (Antonio Bandaras). All the characters are exactly as I remember them. Come to think of it, everything is exactly as I remember it. Nothing has changed for any of them.
For me, Shrek the 3rd is like having friends come over to visit but they have nothing new to say. Every sentence starts "remember when" and no new memorable moments are created. Your only hope is that since everyone is a bit older, they will not stay as long. Unfortunately, this movie lasts as long as the more entertaining and original films it is following.
As the movie begins, Shrek, Fiona and the gang are in Far, Far Away helping to run the kingdom while the king is sick. Eventually the frog king croaks (hey, if they can use lame humour to make this film  I can use it while discussing it!) and Shrek is told he is next in line for the throne. He doesn't want to be king so he sets out with Puss and Donkey to find the next heir to the throne. While away, Prince Charming (Rupert Everett) tries to steal the throne with the help of other fairy tale villains and it is up to Fiona and the other princesses to stop him. By the end of the film, everything is back to normal with the exception of a few additions to the cast.
So, Shrek is grumpy, Donkey is obnoxious and Puss N' Boots is cute. All the jokes surrounding these character traits feel recycled from the first two films which only add to my feeling that this movie was only made to cash in on the successful franchise. After all, there is no reason to invest in a better script when crowds of families will come and see whatever these characters are in. I know that all Hollywood movies are made to make money but I feel less a victim if they at least appear to care about the final product.
Sequels and prequels are not automatically void of artistic value and merit. Not only can they continue to tell a story that is too large for one film, like the Star Wars Trilogy (or is it now considered a sextet?), these films can also concentrate on other characters in their universe to give them a chance to tell their stories. Does the lack of originality for Shrek the 3rd indicate that these characters have no new stories to tell? Should we be satisfied with mediocrity just as long as we get to see characters we enjoy? Well, since Shrek 4 and a Puss N' Boots spin off film have already begun talks, I guess only time will tell if they are going to breath life into this franchise. Until then, I will have to be happy revisiting these friends through the first two films and try my best to forget that the 3rd film even happened.