Continuity mistake: Rumplestiltskin looks completely different in this movie than he did in the previous film Shrek The Third; Prince Charming momentarily talks to Rumplestiltskin in the tavern during the third film, and the character looks completely different, has a different voice and different demeanor.Purple_Girl
Plot hole: In the second Shrek movie, we find out that Fairy Godmother and the King had a deal that Prince Charming would save Princess Fiona from the keep, hence becoming her true love and breaking the curse. In the fourth movie, we start with Rumple monologuing about how he almost had the Kingdom by signing a deal with the King. Why would the King be so desperate to try and reverse the curse by signing a deal when he knows he has a prior attempt through Prince Charming, assuming it would take the same time for the messenger to return with news about Charming and Fiona either way?
Question: Why did the king and queen disappear when the king signed the contract? The deal was that Fiona will be saved from the curse if he did - but Fiona wasn't saved at all. Was the contract void from something?
Question: In the beginning, the king and queen are shown riding in a carriage. However, before watching this movie, I viewed Shrek 3 where the king had turned into a frog and died. If he died in 3, how did he come back to life in this movie? This was before the king and queen signed any contract and vanished, so magic was not involved in his being alive.
Question: What happened then to Prince Charming or Fairy Godmother? In Shrek 2, they did mention that it was the Fairy Godmother who cursed Fiona. So how come Prince Charming never rescued her instead of Shrek (since he was never born in Rumpelstiltskin's timeline)? The King and Queen may have disappeared but at least Prince Charming could have still saved her.