Tuesday, June 19, 2007

The Case for Thirds

It has been a season of thirds so far at the movies. Spiderman 3, Pirates of the Carribean 3 - and this week I saw another number 3, Shrek the Third.

And in this case the third film definitely proved to be the least. It was a film full of whining, mainly by Justin Timberlake's character. There was the odd scene of unadulterated and pop-culture laden insanity, but these were spread far and thin in between large tracts of land inhabited by the Moaning people of SelfDoubting land. Princess Fiona was relegated to a minor role, as she was left behind while the boys ran off to have their none-too-adventurous adventure. And the climactic reunion scene was a little bit of a fizzer really.

Perhaps I am being too harsh. It is kiddie fare after all, and the babies that sprung up all over the place were disgustingly cute. But I suppose I had been led to expect a whole lot more after the first few films. This one seemed just seemed a shadow of former Shrek greatness. Not much else to write really.

Verdict: The second Happily Ever After should have been the last.

4 comments:

Not Kate said...

Now, I know there are several arguments where the sequals were better than the originals..... but has there ever been a third installment that was the best???

The third LOTR won all the Oscars, but I don't think it was the best.

R said...

Hmmn, you pose a difficult question. I shall try and wrack my brain for a "wonderfl third", but I think you might be right...

How was "Citizen Kane", BTW?

fish said...

sequals?

Kate - 1
Fish - 1

R said...

Wonderful (fl?) Third declared by SpecialK - "Lord of the Rings: Return of the King" (if you like that kind of thing). Still trying to think of another...