<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>The Movie Banter &#187; Shrek 4</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.themoviebanter.com/tag/shrek-4/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.themoviebanter.com</link>
	<description>Uncut &#38; Raw : Talk about the ins, outs and stories of anything movie related</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 29 Jul 2010 16:51:31 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
		<item>
		<title>“Shrek Forever After”…One “Shrek” Too Many?</title>
		<link>http://www.themoviebanter.com/2009/11/%e2%80%9cshrek-forever-after%e2%80%9d%e2%80%a6one-%e2%80%9cshrek%e2%80%9d-too-many/</link>
		<comments>http://www.themoviebanter.com/2009/11/%e2%80%9cshrek-forever-after%e2%80%9d%e2%80%a6one-%e2%80%9cshrek%e2%80%9d-too-many/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Nov 2009 12:00:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Nick Ondras</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Movie News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sequel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Shrek 4]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Shrek Forever After]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://themoviebanter.com/?p=4504</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<a href="http://www.themoviebanter.com/2009/11/%e2%80%9cshrek-forever-after%e2%80%9d%e2%80%a6one-%e2%80%9cshrek%e2%80%9d-too-many/"><img align="left" hspace="5" width="60" src="http://themoviebanter.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/shrek151-1024x576.jpg" class="alignleft wp-post-image tfe" alt="shrek151" title="shrek151" /></a>Is the fourth "Shrek" film one "Shrek" too many?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img class="alignleft size-large wp-image-4518" title="shrek151" src="http://themoviebanter.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/shrek151-1024x576.jpg" alt="shrek151" width="562" height="316" />When <em>Shrek</em> first came out in 2001, it took the country by storm. The movie grossed $484.4 million worldwide in its run in theaters, and every quote-unquote “smart” person in Hollywood knows that a movie that hauls in that amount of cash definitely calls for a sequel. Enter 2004’s <em>Shrek 2</em>, one of my favorite sequels ever to a movie. And one that, in my opinion, was better than the first. Nearly a billion dollars later, another sequel was in the works. In 2007, <em>Shrek the Third</em> was released into theaters. Oh my God, what a terrible movie that was.</p>
<p><em>Shrek Forever After</em> has been rumored for a while now. Although <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/life/movies/news/2009-11-24-shrek-forever-after_N.htm">USA Today</a> on Tuesday released some further detailed information about DreamWorks Animation’s film. First of all, this <em>Shrek</em> will be the first one in 3-D, a given for most animated movies nowadays. Second, the first official trailer for the comedy, which is being released May 21<sup>st</sup>, will debut before the highly-awaited <em>Avatar</em> on December 18<sup>th</sup>. <em>Whoa!</em> Those previews are only reserved for the <em>biggest</em> of movies! I’ll let you read the plot for yourself:</p>
<p><em>After rescuing a princess, getting hitched and fathering triplets, Shrek is feeling over-domesticated. &#8220;He has lost his roar,&#8221; says director Mike Mitchell. &#8220;It used to send villagers running away in terror. Now they run to him and ask him to sign their pitchforks and torches.&#8221;</em></p>
<p><em> </em></p>
<p><em> </em>Wait&#8230;<em>Mike Mitchell</em> is directing? If you remember Mitchell, he’s the creature who spawned <em>Surviving Christmas</em>, <em>Sky High</em> and <em>Deuce Bigalow: Male Gigolo</em>. However he was a creative consultant on <em>Kung Fu Panda</em>, an actor in <em>Monsters vs. Aliens</em> and a producer on 2011’s <em>Tortoise and the Hare</em>. I suppose he’s just one of those people who think that if he spends time on an animated movie, he’s good enough to be a director. So could <em>Shrek 4</em> be a combination of the poop humor in <em>Surviving Christmas</em> and the crude un-funniness of <em>Deuce Bigalow</em>?</p>
<p>The usual cast of Mike Myers, Eddie Murphy, Antonio Banderas and Cameron Diaz return to voice, in addition to Kathy Griffin and <em>Flight of the Conchords</em>&#8216; Kristin Schaal as witches who hunt ogres; Walt Dohrn is the “vile schemer” (not Paul McCartney as previously rumored); and <em>Mad Men</em>’s Jon Hamm is the leader of an “underground resistance group.”</p>
<p>Hey, if it’s got someone from <em>Mad Men</em> in it, it’s worth checking out. Hopefully <em>Shrek Forever After</em> will have the quirky charm that the first two <em>Shrek</em> films did, and not the star-powered yet story-less mess that was <em>Shrek the Third</em>. These characters and this idea is so fun and refreshing, but could <em>Shrek Forever After</em> be just one <em>Shrek</em> too many?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.themoviebanter.com/2009/11/%e2%80%9cshrek-forever-after%e2%80%9d%e2%80%a6one-%e2%80%9cshrek%e2%80%9d-too-many/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
