A persistent production company like DreamWorks is worthy of admiration. After all, not all cartoons can withstand this toss. Few movies can be shot five consecutively. "Star Wars" has been completed for two decades; "Indiana Jones 4" also dared to be launched when Harrison Ford was almost in his twilight years; "Pirates of the Caribbean" III The ministry was completed based on the mentality of making a fortune. No cartoon has such vitality, especially when they don't tell their children beautiful lies. "Shrek" intends to shoot the fifth part, can there be so many familiar fairy tales that can be dismantled?
Shrek in the third part was finally unable to hold it. On the surface, it used the revival of the villain to make trouble, but it actually described a real fairy tale world and kingdom. Although King Arthur's way of countering rebellion is unique, it still has an old-fashioned truth in his bones: "repay you who you are." A topic of philosophical significance has been brought to the table in a simple way: character determines destiny? It's not that others think you are a scumbag or a bad person, you are really a scumbag or a bad person. You are up to you to decide what kind of person you are. The comforting words repeated by countless parents a thousand times became a comedic turning point in Arthur's peace. The arrangement of the whole plot is far less profound and provocative than Prince Charming's words in the tavern. Shrek is more and more like a teacher who speaks dry principles, illuminating our hearts with truth. It's a pity that the storyline is not as beautiful as his reasoning.
If "Shrek 1" is taking a subversive route, then preaching has already begun from the second Shrek movie. There are so many reasons and contradictions in the third book that are unprecedented in complexity. The first two films are only limited to the heavy tests of long-term relative love. When it comes to the third one, things suddenly become more troublesome: the throne is threatened by bad people; Arthur, who was abandoned by his father, needs to get rid of the shadow of a coward; to become The father's Shrek needs to learn to take on the responsibilities of his father; there are even princesses who no longer wait for the princes to help, and call for self-awakening. In fact, so many elements and principles can be completely separated into chapters, but they are all instilled in an ancient framework of search and discovery, sacrifice and rescue. The appetite of the audience was stunned, but the explanation was incomplete.
Is "Arthur Abandoned" a fact, or is there another reason? Is "Shrek's father phobia" afraid that he is not a good father, or is he instinctively afraid that his life is gone forever? The director and screenwriter both gave ambiguous answers to the two main stories. We know from Arthur’s life in school that Arthur indeed lives in an environment where everyone regards him as an idiot. From the plot of their soul-appreciating method in the mage, we have also discovered " Abandoned by his father" deepened the frustration of his "loser" to him. Arthur’s final confession seemed to say, “It’s not that others say that I am a scumbag, I am a scumbag. I think it’s enough for me to be a strong one. If I think I’m a strong one, I can become a strong one.” The words are very beautiful and should be. Won applause. Is this necessarily related to the psychological shadow of "abandoned"?
Shrek's dream on the ship, it is estimated that everyone who is about to become a parent has done it. When children appear in marriage, the primary fear comes from the absolute end of the "two-person world". The chat content of the next few princesses also seems to imply this. But sober Shrek’s dialogue with Donkey and the words to enlighten Arthur made us feel that Shrek was worried that he would not be a good father, a role model for a child. Perhaps this combined inexplicable fear is very realistic, but the film failed to show its seamless integration, exactly like two Shrek worrying about two different problems.
This chaotic and vague psychological appearance makes the whole film not coordinated and lacks the necessary harmony. The plots of a few open lines or dark lines can't mutually produce that kind of influence from one to the other in a story. The story of King Arthur, the story of Shrek, and the story of Princess Fiona are all separated from each other. There is no overlap in the middle, and naturally there is no mutual influence. It seems that the three people live in three worlds. When everyone gets together at the end, each suddenly welcomes a new life with a brand-new attitude and psychology.
Of course, in the end, the country a long, long time ago finally ushered in their happy life. King Arthur’s preaching to the bad guys seems to give everyone confidence, so that people can become what you want to be and do what you really want to do. This kind of ending fairy tale has the strongest flavor and can become a model for almost all fairy tales. Although there are no legends of heroes and beauties in this world, there is no plot of magical changes, but the kind of idealized realm where people get their own places and perform their duties, the most let children sleep peacefully.
As for life, I'll talk about it when I wake up.
View more about Shrek the Third reviews
