Shrek/WMG

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 them.

Donkey is one of the kids from Pinocchio that drank the potion disguised as beer
All of the other creatures seem to be from a fairy tale or story. In chapters 31 and 32 of Carlo Collodi's The Adventures of Pinocchio, children who stayed in Toyland would turn into donkeys.
 * I always figured he was one of the Town Musicians of Bremen. For those not in the know, it's a German tale about a bunch of Talking Animals who want to go to Bremen and become...er...musicians. Hence Donkey's singing, humming and generally just being annoying.
 * This is further supported by the fact that Donkey says he received wedgies in school. This could be a nonsense throwaway joke, or it could mean to imply he once had human form.

Dragon was a pink Pegasus Pony (magic potion) during the events of Shrek 2
She 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.

Shrek's father is also named Shrek
One 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 without knowing it, since in the end of the book.
 * 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/transsexual 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...

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  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.
 * 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 kids
The 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 story
One of their kids wants to become one of King Arthur'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 dispell her curse.
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, 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.

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 curse was actually Fairy Godmother's magic as it forced her into a human form during the day, teaching her to think of that as her "true" form. However, due to either the Fairy Tale nature of the Fairy Godmother's magic or the 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.
 * Or, it would have turned her back to an Ogre no matter who she fell in true love with, but that wouldn't matter since, well, it's true love. If it all went according to plan however, Prince Charming would have saved her, faked "true love" until they could kiss, and his mother would simply change the curse, making Fiona permanently Human as though her Ogre self had been a part of the curse.

Prince Charming is Artie's Father
They 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.
 * 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.

The fourth movie will include many swipes at One More Day
The 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.
 * Animals and ginger-bread-men don't walk and talk; men who marry the King's daughter don't become the next King (they become Prince Regent, ranking beneath the Queen); and so on, and so on. The fact that real world narcolepsy doesn't work exactly the same as the "Beauty falls asleep a lot" joke is no indication that Beauty doesn't have narcolepsy.

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...

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 Exclusively 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 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 isn't intelligent enough to be a jester. Court jesters, contrary to popular belief, were actually brilliant(and careful!) satirists who acted under the guise of foolishness in order to criticize the king without being executed. Now does that sound like Donkey to y-...Wait.

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 it
No 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 was deposed, 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.

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.

All of the fairy tale folk not seen in later movies were killed by the villains
That'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 story
The 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 Mermaid
The villain will be a female who is a queen or a witch trying to take over the kingdom (possibly Far Far Away).