ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel
  • »
  • Entertainment and Media»
  • Movies & Movie Reviews

Carl the Critic: Reviews "Puss In Boots" [Caution: Contains Plot Spoilers]

Updated on January 20, 2012

"Puss in Boots" Poster


"Puss in Boots" Trailer

"Puss In Boots"

Experience/Expectations: When making a franchise there are several types of movies you may find:

  • The First Movie (otherwise known as "The Money Film" which establishes the franchise, fan base, and tries to earn enough money to ensure more sequels).
  • The Expansion (this is the film that uses the money from the first film to fix what didn't work, introduce new characters, new setting, new rules, but at the same time try to keep to the spirit of the first film).
  • The Art Project (this is also know as the "Bad Movie" because the only people this was made for was for either the filmmakers own selves, or the fans of the franchise and by doing so no thought or effort is put into it.)
  • The Apology (This one is made by the film makers for the fans whom they offended. This is an attempt to gain back the fans, in the hope that the franchise can live on.)

    But when this one fails then there is plan R. What is Plan R?
  • The Reboot/Spin-Off (This is when the film makers try to find a way to start a new franchise, with a new fan base, but with material they are use to. This is usually more successful than "The Apology", and now there is a chance for a much bigger fan base)

Not every movie franchise has all of these movies, but if there is one that comes to mind it would be Dreamworks™ "Shrek". "Shrek" is based on a best selling book for children by William Steig and is the first animated movie to win an Oscar® for Best Animated Feature (the nominees that year were "Monster's Inc." (Pixar™) and Jimmy Neutron: Boy Genius (Nickelodeon™) ). Winning an Oscar actually increases the gross of the film, so in addition to being a box-office success, it was no surprise that "Shrek 2" was in the works. This film was also a success and it seemed to put the money from the first film to good use. Then we get "Shrek the 3rd" which is the worst movie in the franchise by far, failing to have a good story, and was a major disappointment to the fans. In one last attempt to gain back the fan base, "Shrek Forever After" was made as an apology. I thought that it wasn't a bad movie at all, but at the same time I felt like it wasn't a Shrek movie either, it was more like "It's a Wonderful Life" with the Shrek Characters, and Rumpelstiltskin. So even though "Shrek Forever After" received mixed reviews, and did really well at the box office (the second highest grossing animated movie of 2010 behind "Toy Story 3"), it was still not enough to save the franchise completely, and thus we have "Puss in Boots".

I guess because he wasn't in the first one it would make sense to have a prequel explaining where Puss came from, but I was expecting the film to be the original story of "Puss in Boots", instead of what I saw on screen. Because what I saw on screen... Was quite good. It might have forgotten it was a 3D movie at times but it really wasn't that bad. The story is weird though.

Story: The film is about Puss being an outlaw in his home town, because Humpty Alexander Dumpty- Yes his middle name is Alexander, because it's a funny name I guess- framed him as a thief. In attempt to pay back the people of his home town he sets off to find Jack and Jill to get Jack's Magic beans (You'd Think that what they did was take Jack from "Jack and Jill", and Jack from "Jack and the Beanstalk" and combine them to be the same person, but you'd be wrong) so that Puss can climb the beanstalk to find the giant's castle and steal the golden eggs to right his wrong. But after running into another cat trying to steal the beans, Puss is discovered and has to wait for the opportunity to steal them again, only this time he has Kitty Softpaws and Humpty Dumpty who also want to steal the eggs. This is the only originality the actual story has, everything else is just cliché, slow, predictable, stupid, and absolutely perfect for kids.

Critique: It's not an awful movie, but it's not for me. If I was about 10 years old I guess I would like it more. The animation is very good, acting is good, and the music was good. This is the kind of movie that I would put on for my kids on a long car ride to shut them up. The story is not what I find interesting, and it's very predictable for anyone who's not under the age of 10, or has the intelligence of a 10 year old. I'm not saying I didn't have fun, but the story just doesn't do it for me. It's got funny dialogue/moments, but the story... It's just... I can't really put into words why I don't like the story. I guess anything involving Humpty Dumpty is kind of hard to take seriously, but I guess that's why I have trouble liking the story, because I'm thinking too hard. When you try to think about the story and not enjoy the mindless fun you really wont like it. Take my advise, turn your brain off, and just watch it for what it is, and what it is is 2 cats and an egg with a face try to get magic beans, then try to get the golden eggs, screw the golden eggs, steal a retarded gosling who can some how lay golden eggs even though it's a baby goose, try to run away from the scary macguffin, chop down the beanstalk, learn about the egg with the face is betraying Puss, Puss goes to jail, learns that the scary macguffin is the gosling's mother, get rescued by the other cat, the egg with a face has a change of heart, try to save the gosling, the egg with a face dies (I think), gosling is saved, the town is saved, Puss reconciles with the woman who adopted him (who I really didn't care about), but Puss is still an out law, and there's a catchy musical number at the end. That's all I got from the film, oh yeah it was suppose to be in 3D too, just watch it in 2D there's no real difference except you wear these funny looking glasses that make you look like Buddy Holly. At times when I was watching it in 3D I was thinking "Boy this would look cool if it was in 3D... Oh wait!" The beginning was the only time I really thought that it was good. But oh well, "Puss in Boots" is definitely a kid's movie, it's not like "Kung Fu Panda 2" where it is so good the whole family will enjoy it, but it's harmless kid movie fun (and I wouldn't have it any other way.)

Overall: I give "Puss in Boots" a 7.5 out of 10.

What about you?

(You know the drill) If you saw "Puss in Boots" what did you think?

See results


    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • CarltheCritic1291 profile image

      Carl 6 years ago

      Well to each his own I guess, the only time I noticed the 3D was at the very beginning. While the story was progressing I kind of forgotten that it was in 3D at times but I felt like it was really unnecessary (in my opinion.) But of course you are entitled to your own opinion and am glad you said this because I'm sure many people feel the same way. As for "Kung Fu Panda 2" vs "Rango" I guess we'll have to wait and see. Thanks for stopping by and commenting :)

    • Stevennix2001 profile image

      Steven Escareno 6 years ago

      I don't know if I agree with you about the 3-D, as I was actually rather impressed by it. But then again, I wasn't impressed with the last 3-D effects for "Transformers 3", but people keep telling me that it was awesome in 3-D lol. Go figure. I guess to each their own on that one. I think in terms of story value, I definitely agree with you that "Kung Fu Panda 2" was better, but I still say "Rango" is the best animated feature this year by far. Although it should be interesting to see where they take this new franchise from here, as it's definitely open for a sequel.

      Personally, I thought this was a good movie though. Sure, it's not as great as the first two "Shrek" movies, but it was a lot of fun to watch. Plus, I can see where there's a lot of possibilities with it, to maybe expand on it a bit. Although, like you, I was surprised they didn't stick to the original fairy tale. But then again, we have to keep in mind that this movie was more of a prequel spin off to shrek rather than it's own creation; thus introducing a cat that can't talk until it gets magic boots would contradict the satire world that "Shrek" established in the previous films. However, you do support your arguments well though. Anyway, keep up the good work buddy. :)

    • CarltheCritic1291 profile image

      Carl 6 years ago

      Yeah I figured, it's really made for kids. But thanks for stopping by, always good to hear from you :)

    • Robwrite profile image

      Rob 6 years ago from Bay Ridge Brooklyn NY

      Nice review. I'm not really planning to see this movie. "Shrek" was never one of my favorite franchises to begin with (amusing but it didn't really grab me) so I'm not rushing to see a spin-off.

      Thanks for the review,