What went wrong?

It was a cash grab rather than an actual sequal

>>91447197
The guys who wanted to make fun of Disney jews were also jews

File: images.jpg (5KB, 225x225px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 225x225px

>>91447197
>It's a 'side villain from the previous film becomes becomes the main antagonist in the sequel' movie

>>91447197
Even the fourth movie sucked, it felt like a extended episode of a tv series.

>>91447197
everything.

>>91447197
Babies. That gross shit was unnecessary.

I heard the Puss in Boots movie was good though.

>>91447197

There's not a lot of stories you can tell about "angry ogre who goes through ironic fairy tale stories that he hates" before you run out.

Shrek 2 was really all they had left. Puss-In-Boots was pretty cute though.

>>91448317
it is, you should see it

the 4th one was surprisingly not bad also

>>91447197
Nothing, it's a good film.

>No one gives a shit about Charming
>No one gives a shit about Captain Hook
>No one gives a shit about Arthur
>No one gives a shit about Merlin
>No one gives a shit about Princesses
>Plot of "Go from A to B and then back to A" for the third time in a row, except stretched out to be only plot point
>Pretty much none of the original writers or directors involved

Also after both Shrek and 2, so many studios hopped on the "but it's ironic/parody/cheeky/sorta modern" that it was a little played out.

It didn't have Rumpelstiltskin

it didn't spawn enough good ogre fiona porn