Shrek is subversive bullshit. Lord Farqwad is a good guy, he keeps Duloc clean and is even portrayed as being a clean lawless society which he has made himself. He desires a queen so he can have a heir to take over his kingdom and his reasoning for kicking out the fairytale creatures is that they where miscreants who caused trouble, look what they did to Shreks house when they invaded it and Farqwad even decides to have the creatures relocated if Shrek agrees to help him. Farqwad could easily kill the problematic creatures but he spares them and he spares Shrek even when Shrek invades him kingdom at the beginning of the film. His soldiers are even seen fighting each other in games implying hid kingdom is not in any war meaning he's managed to keep his kingdom out of conflict, with that being said, having soldiers fight but not kill each other is a good way to keep them fit and healthy and trained so they don't become weak for when something those invade the kingdom.
Shrek is Drek
>>216959875Doesn't he torture the little cookie guy.
>>216959875it was shrek's swamp. farquaad had no right to it, kings be damned, end of story.
He's a manlet so automatically unlikable
Wow ze epik Zoomer thread, You sure went against the Disney. Narrative!
>>216959875he's a manlet tho
>>216959975He gets eaten alive by a fox in the original story.
>>216959875It's clean because of his authoritarian short man's complex. Even though his guards are incompetent. He couldn't control some random creatures? Pathetic. Shipping the off to disturb some other guys private property is poor leadership. Those creatures could contribute positively to the kingdom if they had any respect for their leader, which is impossible when he is a manlet. When will they learn?
>>216960333this, he's literally a caricature of the kind of people who would ever come to a place like this and post this shit. pathetic weak men who feel a need to compensate by trying to assume control of everything.
>>216959875>Shrek is subversive bullshitWow, what gave that away? The ugly CGI slop appearance or the jewish "the joke is crass irreverence" writing maybe?
>>216959975Ginger is not harmed, he literally survives intact and this is a interrogation under duress, not sadism, Farqwad never executes him or mutilated him. >>216960237There is no evidence Shrek has legal title and the swamp exists inside Farqwads territorial domain and Shrek never claims ownership until it inconveniences him.Also if it is Shreks land, then the fairytale creatures are trespassers and while Shrek would be justified in wanting them gone, so would Farqwad be justified in kicking them out of Duloc.>>216960243So Farqwad is framed as evil through height jokes and sexual insecurity gags, your argument is basically short therefore evil. Also if Farqwad is evil because he's not perfect, then Shrek is evil because he's a fat ugly bald disgusting swamp.
>>216960237Fuck the king
>>216960473Yes, short and unfuckable so evil. I cheered when the dragon ate him because I knew that Fiona would find far more satisfaction at the end of Shrek's BGC than whatever limp, pathetic performance Fuckwad could give her.
ITT unctroons discuss movie made for kids
>>216960473If he didn't have a title why didn't farquad evict him? Because he's short and incompetent. When you you disgusting little creatures learn? His power only comes from his title which he didn't deserve and couldn't wield effectively. When will you disgusting little creatures learn?
>>216960541she didn't love farquaad and he tried to force a marriage. that's evil enough for me.
>>216959875
>>216960333You’re not actually rebutting anything, you’re just swapping analysis for insults.Calling Duloc “clean because of an authoritarian complex” doesn’t refute the fact that it is clean, peaceful, and stable. Outcomes don’t stop being real because you dislike the ruler’s psychology. If order is maintained, infrastructure works, and the kingdom isn’t at war, governance is objectively successful by medieval standards.The guards aren’t incompetent. They maintain public order, escort prisoners, and relocate populations without riots or civil conflict. Shrek walking in unopposed isn’t evidence of failure — he’s a freakishly strong ogre protagonist in a comedy. By that logic every guard in fiction is “incompetent.”“He couldn’t control some random creatures” ignores what the film shows. The fairy-tale creatures are disruptive, uncooperative, and cause chaos the moment enforcement is removed — proven when they trash Shrek’s swamp. Relocation is a low-violence containment policy, not tyranny. If you think they could’ve “contributed positively,” that’s pure speculation with zero on-screen evidence.The “private property” argument collapses on itself. If Shrek’s swamp is inviolable private land, then the creatures are trespassers and Farquaad was right to remove them. If kings have no authority, then Shrek’s claim is just vibes. You can’t argue absolute property rights and absolute anti-authority at the same time.Farquaad doesn’t execute anyone, negotiates instead of killing, agrees to rehouse the creatures conditionally, and plans succession to avoid instability. In fairy-tale terms, that’s restrained, competent rule.The fact that your final fallback is “he’s a manlet” proves the point: the movie frames him as evil through physical mockery, not actions. That’s authorial bias, not moral analysis.You don’t hate bad governance. You hate the aesthetic of order.
>>216960748>Shrek walking in unopposed isn’t evidence of failure — he’s a freakishly strong ogre protagonist in a comedy. By that logic every guard in fiction is “incompetent.”Not reading the rest, can't take you seriously after contradicting yourself here
>>216960541This isn’t a rebuttal — it’s just sexual projection.You’ve abandoned any discussion of governance, ethics, or actions and reduced the entire argument to “I like imagining the hero having sex more.” That’s not moral reasoning, that’s fanfic brain.Whether Fiona would enjoy one partner more than another is irrelevant to whether Lord Farquaad is a competent ruler. States aren’t judged by bedroom performance. Kings aren’t evaluated by sexual desirability. That’s a modern, adolescent lens being forced onto a medieval fairy-tale setting.You cheering his death isn’t proof he was evil — it just proves the movie trained you to enjoy his humiliation. That’s authorial framing, not analysis. If execution by dragon is justified because the audience finds the victim “unfuckable,” then morality has been replaced entirely by aesthetic preference.Notice how none of this addresses:that Duloc is peaceful and orderlythat he avoids warthat he negotiates instead of executingthat he relocates rather than massacresthat he plans succession to avoid instabilityYou didn’t refute those points. You ignored them and switched to sexual disgust because that’s all that’s left.If your standard for evil is “I wouldn’t want to fuck him,” then you’re not making a moral argument — you’re admitting the villainy is purely cosmetic.Which is exactly the criticism being made of Shrek in the first place.
>>216960895are you on the spectrum? do you really think i'm going to read a fucking paragraph long rebuttal of a shitpost?
>>216960895not reading all that. my refutation: you get no bitches and you are a manlet
>>216960586“If Farquaad had power, why didn’t he evict Shrek?”Because eviction isn’t free, instantaneous, or bloodless — and Farquaad consistently chooses low-violence governance.Shrek lives in a swamp on the edge of the realm, causes no trouble, pays no visible cost to public order, and actively avoids society. From a ruler’s perspective, forcibly removing an isolated ogre risks casualties, unrest, and escalation for zero gain. That’s not incompetence — that’s cost-benefit restraint.Notice the pattern in Shrek:Farquaad doesn’t execute Shrek when he storms the capitalHe negotiates instead of sending troopsHe delegates a quest rather than starting a crackdownHe agrees to rehouse the creatures conditionallyThat’s effective use of authority, not failure to wield it.“His power only comes from his title” is meaningless in a fairy-tale monarchy. All legitimate power comes from title and recognition. By that logic, every king is illegitimate by default. The film shows Lord Farquaad exercising that authority successfully: Duloc is clean, peaceful, economically functional, and not at war.Repeating “short,” “disgusting,” or “didn’t deserve it” isn’t an argument — it’s just asserting aesthetic disgust as moral proof. If your case depends on insulting his body instead of addressing outcomes, you’ve already conceded the substance.You’re not showing he couldn’t wield power.You’re showing you don’t like who wields it.Those aren’t the same thing.
So much racemixxing propaganda, shrek and the princess and donkey and the dragon
>>216960948Not really since the children come out looking as monstrous abominations.
Farquad's government is detestable - Duloc proper is literally Pyongyang meets Disneyland. The magical creatures themselves aren't really doing anything other than being annoying to interact with, and the forced deportation is naked eminent domain trying to get more Lebensraum (or more likely, something gay like King's hunting grounds)But Farquad acts as the only backstop against far more powerful freaks - Fairy Godmother, Rumpelstiltskin - from enslaving the human and magical populations alike. He's probably not even aware either of them exist, he just sent someone to get Fiona to crush some pussy.
>>216959875Wasn't Farqwuad (fuckwad) supposed to be Michael Eisner?
>>216959875Farqwad is a dysgenic manlet. He hides behind fiction of titles and properties from the reality of power and violence.
>>216960941>it’s just asserting aesthetic disgust as moral proofYes? You need more of an argument?
>>216960895>>216960941Using AI to write for you because you're too retarded to put words to thought, eh?Deeply and unforgivably pathetic
>funny thread topic gets ruined by AI postingthis site is dead, jeets and technocrats have ruined everything
>>216960748You make excuses, he couldn’t control shit and got killed by a stranger he hired to try and win a wife
>>216960473he breaks off his legs though?? Ginger has to use a candy cane for the rest of the movie
>>216959975It's an enhanced interrogation technique, it's not torture
>>216961170Yes. And the reason Farquaad's so short is because the real Eisner is over six feet tall and 5'5" Katzenberg decided that turning Eisner into a manlet even shorter then him was a perfect addition to his Disney hatefic.
