Shrek The Third (Shrek 3) | 
 enlarge | Actors: Mike Myers, Eddie Murphy, Cameron Diaz, Justin Timberlake, Seth Rogen
Studio: Dreamworks Home Entertainment
Category: DVD
List Price: £19.99
Buy New: £3.83
You Save: £16.16 (81%)
New (29) Used (12) from £1.82
Avg. Customer Rating:  108 reviews
Sales Rank: 465
Format: Dvd-video, Pal
Language: English (Original Language)
Rating: Parental Guidance
Number Of Items: 2
Running Time: 89
Aspect Ratio: 1.44:1
Shipping Weight (lbs): 0.2
Dimensions (in): 7.4 x 5.4 x 0.6
EAN: 5051189133831
ASIN: B000F2XU0K
Release Date: November 26, 2007
Availability: Usually dispatched within 1-2 business days
Shipping: International shipping available
Condition: Ships from Australia, to the UK! Orders take approximately 2 weeks via Airmail
|
| Similar Items:
|
| Editorial Reviews:
Amazon.co.uk Review
It's not easy being an ogre, but Shrek finds it doubly difficult for an ogre like himself to fill in for a king when his father-in-law King Harold of Far, Far Away falls ill in this third Shrek movie. Shrek's attempts to fulfill his kingly duties play like a blooper reel, with boat christenings and knighting ceremonies gone terribly wrong, and to say that Shrek (Mike Myers) is insecure about his new role is a gross understatement. When King Harold (John Cleese) passes away, Shrek sets out with Donkey (Eddie Murphy) and Puss-in-Boots (Antonio Banderas) to find Arthur (Justin Timberlake), the only heir in line for the throne besides himself. Just as Shrek sets sail to find Artie (as Arthur is more commonly known), Fiona (Cameron Diaz) shocks Shrek with the news that she's pregnant. Soon after, Prince Charming (Rupert Everett) sends Captain Hook (Ian McShane) in pursuit of Shrek and imprisons Fiona and her fellow Princesses as part of his plan to install himself as King of Far, Far Away. Shrek finds an awkward Artie jousting with his high school classmate Lancelot (John Krasinski) and, while Artie is certainly no picture of kingliness, Shrek is determined to drag him back to Far, Far Away to assume the throne. Mishaps and comedy abound, including a spell gone wrong that locks Donkey and Puss-in-Boots inside one another's bodies. While Fiona and the other Princesses prove they're anything but helpless women, Artie and Shrek battle their own fears of inadequacy in a struggle to discover their own self-worth. In the end, Shrek, Artie, and Fiona each learn a lot about their individual strengths and what truly makes each of them happy. Of course, it's the pervasive humour and wit that make Shrek 3 so side-splittingly appealing. --Tami Horiuchi
|
| Customer Reviews: Read 103 more reviews...
 gets better with each viewing, September 16, 2008
When you compare this film to shrek 1 and 2 it doesen't stand up as well, i did a bit of research and found out the director was a first timer, which is a classic Hollywood mistake, that i personaly find insulting. Why give a huge summer movie like shrek to a first time director? Clearly the first timer shows that he's not really up to the job, it is as if he missed the point of shrek completely. Where the first two shreks were kids films that parents could enjoy and laugh along with as well, its as if this is neither for kids or parents and misses the mark in several places. It is clear they have overfocused on glossy CGI production,(which is really beautiful) and not thought through the core of the story and jokes etc. Where as shrek 1+2 were built around moral tales, it seems as if the moral angle has been thrown in as an afterthought here and yet attempts to be the core of the story, but it is as if the person directing the movie just doesn't understand what the essence of telling stories is all about. Whereas shrek 1+2 acomplish this directly,this one doesn't. Things i liked from the first two have been left out, like the fairy tale opening and the song at the end, and some of the jokes a child just wouldn't get. Clearly having a first time director for a big movie like this is not a wise choice. Get serious Hollywood, i have no experience directing movies and i wouldn't expect my first effort to be my best, so why does Hollywood hand these projects over to novices? Answer: because they knew shrek 3 would make tons of money so they didn't care who directed it, and like the disasterous spiderman 3 ( did you know the director of spidey 3( sam rami) and his brother wrote spiderman 3, both with no experience writing movies/scripts or books, and boy it shows!) Shrek 3 fails in the same way, wrong decisions made by the movie corporations put both those projects in the wrong hands. You would think they would have learned the old adage by now, "If its not broke don't try to fix it!"
I understand people move on and do different things ( Andrew Adamson, the man behind the first two shrek films is doing the Narnia films now, ) but even with people moving on, you don't go and hand the movie to a novice, even if they are surrounded by a studio of expert filmmakers , this poor choice, ruins this movie.
In the right hands, ( the people who did the first two shreks, ) i think this would have been as great if not better than the other two.
However, with these points understood, i re-watched shrek 3 , deciding not to compare it with the other two, to view it as a stand alone movie in its own right, and i actually thought it was pretty good, if you take in to consideration that it is a first time director, and that most of the original shrek creators have moved on to different things, then as a first served basis its actually enjoyable. I would say this movie falls in to the catagory of being one where if you want to find fault with it you can and you will , but if you want ot enjoy it for what it is, you can and you will, and since kids tend to be much less judgmental than adults i think kids will enjoy it fine, i have given four stars because on its own its a fun enjoyable well produced movie that misses the mark in a few places, it only becomes less than that when compared to other shrek movies.
 STOP NOW NO MORE PLEASE September 3, 2008
As Usual Hollywood hits on a formula then milks it dry. The original shrek remains funny whenever I watch it now, it was fresh and original and utilised Murphys and Myers skills well.
The sequel was ok, and had its moments. But it lacked the heart of the original. The third in this frachise is suprisingly unfunny and Murphys donkey is criminally underplayed. There are just too many 'stars' involved now, and as a result dilutes what made the original work so well.
Stop now, no more please
Just about watchable but those gags sure are wearing thin September 1, 2008
0 out of 1 found this review helpful
OK so Puss does his sad face, the blind mice fall over, the frog king takes a long time to 'croak' and Shrek is the focus for gags about ear wax, barfing, burping and pooping. But is that enough? I really don't think so. The original movie was hugely entertaining and the sequel just about pulled it off, with some splendid new characters and enough humour to keep youngsters and their parents entertained most of the time. To be fair, Shrek the Third does have a couple of laugh out loud moments (hence it is just saved from being a lone-star movie), but much of the remaining 89 or so minutes is weak and often downright tedious. I actually found Eric Idle's Merlin reasonably funny, but the lengthy high school scenario fell very flat. The bitchy heroines had plenty of potential (the narcoleptic Sleeping Beauty being the pick of the bunch), but suffered from an uninspired script. Even the choice of music this time around was dull dull DULL!
Please don't make a 4th Shrek movie!
Enjoyable but not the best Shrek movie July 26, 2008
1 out of 2 found this review helpful
In a way I think Shrek the Third suffers a little from the success of the previous movies. They were exceptional and anything that doesn't quite live up to that is going to get panned. But this is unfair. Sre, so Shrek 3 is not the greatest movie out there, but amoungst the seemingly endless flow of kidult aniamtion this still stands out as one of the best.
The makers manage to bring something new to the characters (Shrek contemplates becoming a father, Fiona loses her dad) while staying true to the franchise. But most importantly it's funny and entertaining. And what could be more important than that given we are now facing six weeks with the kids on holiday?!
Decent enough July 25, 2008
My children loved the first two films in the series, and they were good enough for adults as well. Given that we have sat through some childrens films that are utter, utter rubbish - 'Over the Hedge', 'Shark's Tale' - this is nowhere near as bad as some of the reviewers on this site claim. Giving it 1 star is really pompous. The story is okay, the jokes are okay (and appeal to a younger audience) and even the characters are okay. I am not sure what people expect when they go to see an animated film like this. If you are looking for a childrens film that is okay for adults as well, then I believe that this is good as it gets.
|
|
|
