.: Roberts' Reviews - Movie Reviews :.

Ahhhhh, I remember 2001 like it was yesterday. Pearl Harbor, Planet of the Apes, Lord of the Rings: Fellowship of the Ring and a small animated film by Dreamworks SKG called Shrek.

With computer animated films being released on what felt like a weekly basis, this animated masterpiece about an Ogre on a quest to save a princess was a box office smash and walked away with the first Academy Award for an animated film.

Shrek 2 was released a few years later and the continued story of our favorite Ogre, Donkey and Fiona went on to spin more box office gold than Rumplestiltskin can weave on a full pot of coffee and a bag of bennies.

Shrek the Third was therefore a foregone conclusion. Franchises as lucrative as such don't come by that often and the only surprise here was that it took three plus years to bring the next installment of the story to the mass audience.

Should have waited a few more years.

Shrek the Third is a disaster from beginning to end. What inspiration, life and humor that was present in Shrek and Shrek 2 is completely lost in Shrek the Third. There are few laughs, even fewer pop culture references and each and every one of the characters that we fell in love with for the past six years seem squeezed of all their creative and humorous juices that their drier than moms thanksgiving stuffing in December.

We pick up shortly after Shrek 2 and Shrek and Fiona (voiced by Mike Myers and Cameron Diaz) are entrusted with the Kingdom of Far Far Away after the King croaks. Not feeling his royal obligation, Shrek seeks out the only other heir to the throne - a young Arthur voiced by the multi-talented Justin Timberlake. Of course, he takes along his trusty sidekicks Donkey and Puss n Boots (again voiced by Eddie Murphy and Antonio Bandares) for what you would expect to be belly laugh out loud kinda fun, but fun is about the last thing I had while sitting in the packed theatre that was void of laughter even from the hundreds of children that were restless and surprisingly quiet during the 93 minutes of non-hysterical torture.

The plot of Shrek the Third seems unimportant to both the audience and to the screenwriters that came up with this mess. The only thing that can be deduced is that the writers (which did not include Michael Myers) thought that throwing multiple Disney characters (Snow White, Captain Hook etc) together with iconic creatures that sit on DVD's in about one out of every five households in North America would result in no one really caring that the story was about as bland as Tapioca pudding.

I have thought long and hard since the screening to try and find some redeeming quality outside of the animation - to which is top top rate. But as the hours whittle away, I can't think of one thing that I liked about this junk. The quiet sequences - to which there are many - are awkward, and if an audience of children don't seem to be enjoying themselves, how can the adults being dragged by their purse strings to the theatre be expected to find a moment or two of snickering indulgence. Even the expected sing-a-long finale that the first two films left us humming is gone.

Shrek the Thrid is the second film in just a few weeks that disappointed greatly as a third in a series. Spider-man became too wrapped in its own fame and Shrek the Third is even worse. Yet, like Spider-Man, Shrek is critic proof. Expect over $200 million at the ticket counter by the end of its theatrical run even if the critics pan the film more than their weekend morning eggs.