I went to see the "new" Shrek movie today and - unbeknownst to me - it was presented in Real-3D. I didn't even know that cinema could show such movies. So: Shrek was the first 3D movie I saw and I'd like to take a moment to reflect on each, the 3D and the movie.
First: Shrek Forever After. If you ignore the "milking the franchise dry" aspect of a fourth part I think it was pretty well done. It had a story that tied in with the other three Shrek movies and the animation was as good as always. Which might be the problem: people expect better stuff with every new part and the Shrek movies were pretty much a well done example of keeping up a steady technical quality. I think they are watchable back-to-back without any big leaps in style or technique. But with all other movies raising the bar all around Shrek, the subjective quality might look as if it was degrading.
The story didn't drag and didn't go too fast for me in any places, so I was pretty happy with that. Since it was a dark story, there weren't as many jokes as in previous parts - I can live with that. More jokes would have degraded the story IMHO.
It is nice eye-candy I can say that. I don't want to see ALL my movies in 3D. What bugged me most is that 3D seems to be hard on the eyes when it comes to "unnatural movement" - like moving camera crane shots. My prime example would be the scene with the King and Queen of Far Far Away going to see Rumpelstiltskin(sp?) and the camera would fly all around their coach. Nice. But in 3D it's probably going to make many people sick. I think movie makers need to find the right amount of 3D action in a scene yet. Too much of anything isn't a good thing.