The Dragon became a unicorn when Donkey drank the 'happily ever after' potion.Or a pegasus, i mean come on what else would she become
- Confirmed by Word of God
Humpty Dumpty wasn't entirely made of gold.He would have been as heavy as or even heavier than the other golden eggs otherwise.
Fifi was Rumpel's Familiar.
Fifi was the mastermind behind Rumpel.
Fifi was more than a pet to Rumpelstiltskin.
The reason Shrek's father tried to eat him...He was a runt. Listen when he goes to the AU, one of the ogres says he's kind of small. He definitely looks much smaller than the others.
Dragon was a pink Pegasus Pony (magic potion) during the events of Shrek 2She was too "ashamed" to leave her cave, which is way she doesn't come to see her husband as soon as the children are born. The little Donkey-Dragons were more than just a few hours old - at least two days. Or three. Or a week.
- More or less confirmed: Word of God (s) is that she was a Pegasus.
If FGM's master plan worked, she would have turned into an ogress and started dating Shrek.
- Because, why not?
Shrek's father is also named ShrekOne of Shrek and Fiona's kids is named Shrek in Shrek the Third, thus explaining its title. If this is the case, then the big guy himself must be Shrek II / the Second. Thus, Shrek's father, he who bathed his son in barbecue sauce and put him to bed with an apple in his mouth, must have been Shrek the First, and perhaps even the one from the book, whose adventures are totally different from Movie Shrek's.
- If so then Movie!Shrek must be royalty without knowing it, since in the end of the book Book!Shrek meets an even uglier ogre princess (Fiona?).
- Jossed: Shrek Forever After officially names the children as Fergus, Farkle, and Felicia. Then again, this doesn't sound out-of-context either: maybe Shrek himself could be Shrek the Third, with his father being Shrek the Second, and his grandfather being Shrek the first.
- I think that one is true, mainly because shrek almost becomes king, maybe the title alludes to shrek being "king shrek the third"
- Jossed: Shrek Forever After officially names the children as Fergus, Farkle, and Felicia. Then again, this doesn't sound out-of-context either: maybe Shrek himself could be Shrek the Third, with his father being Shrek the Second, and his grandfather being Shrek the first.
Dragon is a transvestite/transgender or is a hermaphrodite. Donkey only called Dragon a "girl" was because "she" has a feminine appearance. However, considering how things are in the Shrek universe, it's highly possible that (like the Wolf), the Dragon simply as a penchant for "dressing up" (in the matter dragons do) like the opposite gender/sex. An alternate possibility is that Dragon is a hermaphrodite (IE: Having both male and female reproductive organs *Note: You cannot see a male reptile's...erm...naughty parts without closer inspection*) with a feminine personality/appearance. This would explain why "she" was able to have babies.
- The Dragon DID look happy that Donkey called "her" a girl, considering the ONLY clues that were given were the facts that "she" appears to be wearing eye-liner and make-up. But, then again, guys in drag can wear make-up too...So...um...yeah...
- Wouldn't the half donkey, half dragon babies Joss this?
The Fairy Godmother has a body composed of the tears of her charges, with her true self hidden away somewhere else.She finds weepy princess-types, then uses the tears and emotion as physical and magical components for setting up her Water(tear)-golem Lich bodies. Shrek 4 or 5 will involve a deformed, swampwater-based Fairy Godmother seeking vengeance for Charming's "death" in 3, or as close as doesn't matter after someone unknowingly drops her Soul Jar into Shrek's swamp. And she would have gotten away with it, too, if it weren't for letting Fiona become a self-reliant dragon-fighting Martial artist. although she could have been trying to prevent that, considering the Queen's skills in 3.
- So, she's like Pain from Naruto?
- Sort of jossed, but that doesn't sound like a bad plot either.
Shrek 3 was simply a combination of bedtime stories told to the kidsThe kids had gotten a little older and demanded bedtime stories from Fiona, Shrek and Donkey, all in different rooms. The three can -just- hear each other, but the kids can't. They build stories based on each other's wild mass improv. This theory explains the low quality of the third film; it was just a mish-mash created by the character's improv and the kid's demands of the stories. "And then, and then, and then there was a shipwreck! And the captain was never seen again! And Rapunzel stinks!"
- So, Shrek 3 was written by Tropers on the WMG page? ...Makes sense to me!
Shrek Goes Fourth will be about one of Shrek & Fiona's kids going through the original storyOne of their kids wants to become one of KingArthur's knights (double-Aesop points if it's his daughter Felicia) and Shrek is deeply uncomfortable with it, given that knights are usually trying to kill him and/or are Prince Charming.
- But Why would Shrek or Fiona be unsupportive of that, they seem to be on pretty good terms with Arthur.
- Because A) Knights are always trying to kill Shrek, and B) Arthur might turn out to be a boorish jerk once he gets a taste of kingly power, gets vengeance upon the jocks (including, most likely, Defeat Means Subordinance by Launcelot) and cheerleaders, and spends a few years drinking mead, feasting on food, and questing for Cool Stuff. Depending on how not-for-kids they want the fourth movie to be, it could even take place after Launcelot takes Guinevere, and Shrek and Fiona try to distance themselves and the kids from the resulting mess of tyranny and jerkishness.
Neither Farquaad kissing Fiona at their wedding nor Prince Charming kissing Fiona at the ball would have worked to keep her human.Both Fiona's original curse and the "Happily Ever After" potion specify that it has to be TRUE LOVE'S kiss that breaks the spell (curse)/keeps the spell permanent (potion). Fiona and Farquaad were marrying each other out of convenience, not love, so that one's obvious. But I don't think Charming's kiss would have worked either, since if Fiona had taken the potion, she would have been magically induced into falling in love with Charming. That doesn't count as "true" love.
- Actually, Fiona believed Farquaad was Charming (she wasn't aware of the real one we see in 2)- so it wasn't marriage out of convenience.
- But that wouldn't have made a difference, Fiona didn't love Farquaad and Farquaad didn't love Fiona.
It was Fairy Godmother who cast the curse on Fiona.Fiona says in the first movie that it was a "witch," but how hard do you think it would be for the FG to disguise herself?
- They actually do hint at this in the second film. Since it was FG who turned King Harold into a human after Lillian fell in love with him as the Frog Prince, he figured he owed her a favor, so they set up a Gambit Roulette so that Fiona and Charming would wed as soon as he got to the tower (but as we all know, Shrek beat him to the punch) - the Roulette is even more played into the theory as Fiona actually had no idea about Harold's plan beyond sending her away to the tower - which she calls school in her girlhood diary.
- She also has the dragon to eat potential rescuers and take the fall when Prince Charming does arrive.
- All that is certainly in line with traditional fairies.
- An ogre might just be a cross between a human and a frog.
Ogres are part frog, part human.Since Fiona's father was a frog despite his human form he still carries frog genes as such Fiona's true form is that of an Ogre her "cure" was actually Fairy Godmother's blessing as it allowed her to have a normal childhood as a human during the day but due to either the Fairy Tale nature of the Fairy Godmother's magic or as an Evil Plan to take control over Far Far Away the "curse" would turn her into the form closest to her true love with their first kiss.
- Fiona's 'true form' is not an ogre. She is born a human, but cursed to become an ogre at night. She takes on the form of an ogre after kissing Shrek, because - well. "Take love's true form", anyone?
- Also, dude, punctuation is your friend.
Prince Charming is Artie's FatherThey both have similar hair styles, and are both royalty. So it is possible that Artie is both Charming's son, and Fiona's cousin (yet still have Charming be able to legally marry Fiona) if Fiona's mother had a sister who married Prince Charming (making Charming not biologically-related to Fiona). This may also mean that Charming's real name is Uther Pendragon (the real King Arthur's father).
- Not only that, but check out the characters' movements/facial expressions when Charming starts to cry in the beginning of the movie, and Artie pretends to cry to get Merlin to help. They do look very eerily similar, almost a frame-for-frame copy.
- But wait........FIONA WANTED TO MARRY CHARMING IN THE FIRST MOVIE!!!!!
- So? It's not like incest is anything new to royalty. Or maybe Artie is just related to Fiona on his mother's side.
- Well, not exactly incest, but inbreeding did definitely happen in royal families. I recall in middle school science class during a unit on genetics that this may have been a contributing factor to the prominence of hemophilia in the House of Hanover.
- Both Artie and Prince Charming also give pretty long speeches to people. I'm thinking of Charming give his speech at the Poison Apple bar and Artie's speeches at his school and at the stage play.
- More likely, Charming and Arthur are half-brothers with the same father—they're too close in age to be father and son. This would explain why Charming's a prince in the first place.
The fourth movie will include many swipes at One More DayThe plot seems to match up too well to not do it. Given that the owner of their main competition also owns Marvel now...
Sleeping Beauty suffers from narcolepsy.The Real Life condition where you keep falling asleep all of a sudden. Obvious, isn't it?
- Narcolepsy doesn't work like that.
The fourth movie will not be the last Shrek movie, though it is being set up as such.Just had to put it out there...
- It depends if you count Puss in Boots as a Shrek movie or not...
The fourth movie will be the last Shrek movie, but not the last Shrek 'Verse movie.The fifth movie will be subtitled "A New Book/Story", both breaking the Numbered Oddly Named Sequels and referencing that it's no longer Shrek's story. It will star either one of Shrek's children (as guessed above), the characters of the alternate FFA fighting against the rise of Rumplestiltskin or another villain, or Shrek's father from the book (who, in a montage at the end of the film, will have and enjoy having a kid but Wangst about having to give him up by ogre law, and will act like an Always Chaotic Evil ogre so Shrek doesn't feel so bad about being abandoned).
- Confirmed, however none of these scenarios are the setting for the next film. It will star Puss in Boots and chronicle his backstory before Shrek 2.
Shrek's very existence somehow caused the near-genocide of his species.In the main version of the story, you never see the dozens of other ogres (who would have no reason to hide, what with Shrek's reputation from the first film, him being one of the smallest full-grown ogres, and a distinct lack of King Rumplestiltskin). The only time they appear outside of the It's a Wonderful Plot is in the after-film dance party, which is evidenced by Harold's living portrait to be as non-canon as FFA Idol from the second film (if he could be brought back to life after the beginning of the third film, or was still alive in picture form, it wouldn't have been such a big thing when he croaked [and then subsequently died], and Lillian would have to be at least a little batty [wall-induced brain damage, maybe?] to be acting that way toward a Broad Strokes version of her husband).
Donkey was a jester cursed into being a donkey.This in no way conflicts with him being the donkey from the Bremen Town musicians. It does explain why he's got such a memory for songs and (although it needs no explanation) why he acts like such a fool (no pun intended). He may, in fact, have been a jester in the court of the king and queen of Faerie, after Oberon went back to fetch that funny ass Titania had made of the mortal and turned him all the way into a Donkey.
Donkey is Bottom, from Shakespeare's A Midsummer Night's Dream.The spell that was placed on Bottom to make his head look like a donkey's slowly started to effect his whole body, so he ended up looking like a donkey.
AU!Fiona did not free herself from the tower, Rumpels did itNo matter how twisted the contract is, it is still a contract. And you always get what you were promised in it. In this case, the royals of Far Far Away got the freedom of Fiona from the tower. Rumpelstitskin's intervention probably consisted on getting rid of the lava and the dragon (hence why none of them are there when Shrek and AU!Donkey go there later and why Dragon is Rupelstitskin's captive/property in the final act of the movie), thus making Fiona able to escape the tower. Since she had no way to know about the contract, she came to the conclusion that she liberated herself.
In the Shrek Forever After alternate timeline, Charming was killed attempting to rescue Fiona.Shrek beat Charming to the dragon-guarded castle by less than a few months, and Fairy Godmother wanted to keep Fiona there at least until her son arrived. Since Charming didn't rescue her, and neither Charming nor his mother appear in Forever After, something went seriously wrong with their plan. The easiest way Rumpel could assure his throne, removing what would have been dangerous competition in the form of the Fairy Godmother (backed by Charming and Fiona), would be to somehow make sure Charming failed. Devastated by the loss of her son, Fairy Godmother would no longer be a threat.
- Or Charming simply had no reason to save Fiona once Far Far Away was signed over to Rumple.
Duloc was the Wicked Queen's kingdom.After the Wicked Queen's death, Farquaad becomes ruler. This would explain how they got hold of the Mirror.
In Shrek 4, there was one other day Rumpelstiltskin could have taken for great effect.Losing a day implies that the traded day never existed to the character who traded it. Everyone else continues on as if the day was there, but the character seems to be erased from existence that day. As well as any memories of that day being erased. In the movie, Rumple takes the day Shrek was born because it extends the effect for all time. But there was at least one other day Rumple could have taken away that would have caused plenty of problems: the day Shrek met Donkey. Think about it. The day Shrek and Donkey met was also the day (or night as the case was) he started his trek to Du Loc. So, Shrek wouldn't have be able to start the first movie's quest until after that day. Meaning assuming he would still decide to leave his swamp to go to Du Loc, there's no guarantee he even becomes friends with Donkey, which in turns means he might have to deal with Dragon alone. But even if, he still manages to become friends with Donkey and the plot still turns out exactly as it did in the movie or if he manages to save Fiona by himself the damage would be done. Delaying his quest by a single day means the Rumple would succeed in his deal with the King and Queen because it took them until last second to receive the new originally.
- So effectively, Far Far Away would turn into what we saw in the alternate timeline in 4 anyway, but with differences. The most likely forms of alternate timeless are like this
- 1. Shrek and Donkey don't become friends. Shrek fails at saving Fiona without Donkey distracting Dragon. This pretty much replicates the AU in Shrek 4, the only difference being that Shrek disappears not because he never exist but instead he died trying to save Fiona.
- 2. Shrek and Donkey become friends. Shrek succeeds in saving Fiona. Shrek and Fiona share true loves kiss. Rumple completes the deal with King and Queen. Shrek 2 and 3 never happen. In this timeline, despite Shrek never saving Donkey, Donkey still attaches himself with Shrek. Because of this, there is nothing stopping the story from continueing like in the first Shrek. Ultimately, though Rumple would most likely try to capture the Ogre's like in the AU in 4. Shrek would be a part of the resistance from the beginning. In this timeline, Shrek would continue to exist after the day was over, but the new world would persist just like Rumple mentioned the AU in 4 would. In this version, Donkey would also already be a part of the resistance too. As a result, Donkey may not know how to figure out the exit clause (which would need to be different from True Love's Kiss as Fiona and Shrek would still be in love).
- 3. Shrek and Donkey don't become friends. Shrek succeeds in saving Fiona. Shrek and Fiona never kiss. Donkey is one of the key reason both Shrek and Fiona finally admit their true feelings. It is possible without Donkey there to convince both of them to open their shells, they may never had. This causes a future similar to the AU 4, but once again Shrek will not disappear at the end of the day. Fiona would disappear when True Love's Kiss doesn't happen between her an Farquuad. She'd eventually fall in with the Ogre resistance, which Shrek would eventually be brought into as well. They get a second chance at True Love, but this time instead of starting from scratch they have previous relationship wrinkles to iron out.
- 4. Shrek and Donkey don't become friends. Shrek succeeds in saving Fiona. Shrek and Fiona share True Love's Kiss. Same as what I said in 2 above, but without Donkey.
- Another problem can arise if the only reason Shrek's memory remains unaltered in the fourth movie is because Rumple took the day he was born and therefore Shrek is an outsider in the timeline. If Rumple took a day, that does write Shrek out of time then its possible that Shrek's memory could have been overwritten. So taking away the day Donkey met Shrek could have made Shrek completely forget his friendship with Donkey. Without knowledge of his and Donkey's friendship he may have not have picked-up Donkey during His Day as an Ogre. Which funnily enough, completely changes the events of the fourth movie in Rumple's favor as Donkey is a key element in saving Shrek at least twice and maybe three times. So if any of the possible futures I mention above happen (except number 2), it would have ended with the events being stuck as an AU, if Donkey hadn't been there to help Shrek. It shows how important Donkey and Shrek's friendship is. And to think Shrek was the one who suggested that day. Luckily, Rumple was more worried about writing Shrek out of existence and didn't realize the significance of Donkey. Otherwise, most of the alternate timelines I can think of actually give Rumple a better chance of winning. Though granted it is impossible to say how exactly things would have ended. It just goes to show you how much an effect a single day can have.
- Wow. This is awesome. This not only shows just how important a day can be, but how important 1 friendship can be for altering history. Excellent theory.
- Also, Rumple could've worked Shrek into his plot. The request was to free Fiona from the tower, right? Delay it by one day and they'd have signed the contract already, he could let things progress almost exactly as they had and he'd be keeping his end of the bargin, as Fiona is still freed and technically speaking the curse is broken because of true loves kiss with Shrek, so by letting things progress just a little later than he did, he'd have been completeing the contract. And Donkey still could've met Shrek because all the magical creatures were sent to Shrek's swamp, so they'd have met that way. However, the key difference here is Far Far Away was only visited in the second movie because Fiona's parents summoned them. If Rumple rules Far Far Away, then they never leave the swamp and live happily ever after there without interfering with Rumple so long as he prevents them from knowing about it. So in a way, by erasing Shrek from time and preventing him from rescuing Fiona, he put the Spanner in the Works in place where as if he'd taken that day instead, that would've delayed Shrek by a single day or maybe even a few more minutes after the contract had been signed, then he'd probably have won. Scary.
- All very good points. This theory really brings a new perspective to Rumpelstiltskin's, "I don't know who that is," response to Shrek's joke about erasing the day he and Donkey met.
The new movie about Puss in Boots will not be set anywhere near Far Far Away.Look at the teaser trailer and you'll see that the humans look slightly cartoonier than in the previous films. Either we're in a different country in the Shrek universe, or the movie is about another of Puss's nine lives and we might not be in the Shrek universe at all.
- They look the same to me. The only difference I see, is that they're much more hispanic. So I think it takes place in Spain, and that can be seen in the theory below.
Shrek takes place in England, Scotland, and Ireland, while Puss in Boots takes place in SpainIt makes sense, since Shrek has a Scottish accent, so he could be in a swamp in Scotland. Far Far Away could be in England, and based off of the architecture in Puss In Boots, PIB probably takes place in Spain.
All of the fairy tale folk not seen in later movies were killed by the villainsThat's why we don't see them anymore.
If their is a sequel to Puss and Boots it will be based on the orginal Puss and Boots storyThe spin-off film was just an orgin story explaing how he became a hero and got his boots, and why he is spanish. If their is a sequel it will have him venturing out of San Ricardo with Kitty Softpaws and finding themeselves in a Far Far Away type kingdom tormented by an evil shapeshifting oger.
A Puss in Boots sequel will feature a plot inspired by a princess tale like The Little MermaidThe villain will be a female who is a queen or a witch trying to take over the kingdom (possibly Far Far Away).
The Fairy Godmother is an impostor, and is actually the Wicked Fairy of Sleeping BeautyThe Fairy Godmother acts nothing like her storybook counterpart should. Now, while this may seem reasonable considering the Fractured Fairytale nature of Shrek, note that most of the characters have distinctive traits of their archetypes. The Fairy Godmother's spells all have some catch to them—Harold became human at the cost of giving his daughter, and with her, the crown to Charming. Many of the trapped princesses are in towers, and Charming believes that Fiona is a sleeping beauty until he figures out she's actually an ogress. The Fairy Godmother's eye color and the eye color of her portraits are different—she has blue eyes, her images have brown eyes. When Shrek takes Happily-Ever-After Potion, his eyes stay the same. This difference in eye color between the Fairy Godmother and her portraits, combined with the Fairy Godmother's magic and personality, may mean that the "fairy godmother" we see in the film is an impostor—the Wicked Fairy, who took the place of the real Fairy Godmother to take control over Far Far Away.
Charming's father died (Possibly like a knight by dragon or monster) or travelled to an alternate dimension.The former comes from the fact that he's never seen, unless this is a case of there's always one parent in fairy tales. The latter comes from the fact that Charming is called Junior at times by Godmother. I assume that his father either still died, or travelled to Disney's Cinderella's dimension while Godmother was pregnant and married Cinderella.
A Puss in Boots sequel would be Darker and Edgier than the first film.The Puss we saw in Shrek 2 was much more hardened, killing ogres for money. Obviously something big happened to him between the first Puss in Boots film and Shrek 2.
- He wasn't really all that hardened. It didn't take a whole lot to convince him that Shrek didn't actually deserve to die. For all we know, the king probably made Puss think that Shrek was a traditional, evil ogre. Puss stopped trying to kill Shrek almost as soon as Shrek showed even slight kindness. Doesn't sound like a hardened criminal to me, more lie somebody was mislead to think that somebody else was evil.
Shrek actually does eat peopleAll those eyes in the jars you see lying around have to come from somewhere.
Fiona is actually this universe's BelleThey have the same bangs, and there's no other Beauty and the Beast characters present, except for a small cameo by Cogsworth and Lumiere in Shrek 2. In the third movie, Belle is not a part of Fiona's group of princess friends, even though every other princess is there, even an ugly stepsister. This whole story is basically just a retelling of Beauty and the Beast. Except, this time they end up Beast-Beast instead of Beauty-Beauty.
- A couple problems: Belle is not a princess on her own so until she married her Beast Fiona would have no reason to know her (Every person at Fiona's baby shower had a reason to know her, even Doris was friendly with Shrek and Puss and was Cinderella's step-sister) and the Beauty and the Best story is set much closer to present day than the others so it likely just hasn't happened yet.
- And this troper figured they never included Belle in Fiona's princess friends because she was already a capable, intelligent princess while Snow White, Cinderella, Sleep Beauty, and Rapunzel were meek and spoilt and so contrasted with Fiona and got some Character Development.
Between the time of the Puss in Boots Movie and Shrek 2, Kitty Softpaws was killed by an ogrePuss was claimed to be the only one willing to personally go after Ogre bounties in the tavern King Harold goes to, since he has a vendetta towards them after losing her. He was brooding and bad-ass like any other mercenary when first given the job, but soon realized that Shrek isn't like other ogres. That's why he quickly warms up to him and helps him out through the second half of the movie. Maybe even letting go of a grudge towards the ogre race because an evil one killed his love interest.
- Hopefully not, she's just offscreen.
If there is a Puss In Boots 2, it may be about Puss finding his familyIn the scene where Puss first meets Shrek and Donkey, he begins to talk about his family. He could easily be lying, but this Troper doesn't think so.
Shrek shares the same universe as How to Train Your DragonBoth films are owned by Dreamworks, and both have dragons in them. "Shrek" and "How to Train Your Dragon" also both depict the characters in some sort of Medieval setting.
Shrek, Donkey, and some others may returnThe Shrek franchise was big, so we can just assume that our favourite ogre and his pals may at least make cameos somewhere (like the possible sequel of the Puss in Boots movie, or another Dreamworks Animation film).
Goku will appear in the fifth movieShrek became so powerful in the last installment that Goku is the only fairytale character they could use as villain.
Predictions for the fifth movie
- It will likely be a sequel rather than a reboot, considering Mike Myers' and Eddie Murphy's involvement in discussing the movie.
- Cameron Diaz won't return, and Fiona will be Killed Off for Real prior to the film's events. Her death will be milked for all the tears that it's worth, and the movie will deal with Shrek struggling as a single father.