I just went to RT and was surprised to see that Cars 2 is doing so poorly with reviewers. Right now, it is the lowest rated Pixar movie and the only one that is rotten at 50%. Looks like this might be Pixar's first disappointment. This is like how Pocahontas killed Disney's momentum in the 90s. http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/cars_2/ I think the biggest problem is that the first Cars just wasn't very good. It felt like an average film from Dreamworks and not the unstoppable Pixar. I have a bad feeling that this movie will do poorly.
Depite my initial reluctance, the first Cars completely won me over when I saw it... but I can't say I have any interest in seeing the sequel. It just looks too much like some silly, hyperactive cartoon that's aimed only at little kids.
The first Cars was decent, I guess. However, it lacked that magic spark that the rest of Pixar's movies have. I guess it shouldn't come a surprise that the sequel is on track to be their first critical disappointment, along with the first Pixar movie that I ever skip in theaters.
I have been a big Pixar fan, but Cars was the only one of their films that I found to be completely predictable and by-the-numbers. So, no, this will probably be the first Pixar I won't see in the theater. --Justin
I love Pixar movies but don't care about the whole Cars franchise. However, forget this place, RT, or other fanboy barometers, and also forget the critics in judging animated movies. They are hugely popular among parents & kiddies, globally, which isn't something you can measure here. They'll measure it at the box office. Cars 2 will do fine.
Yeah, I don't think I've ever finished watching Cars. There's just something about it that I find so awkward. Maybe it's the fact that they're talking cars, but I think it's probably their only series that appeals more to kids than to equally as adults, with the franchise being fueled by merchandise. While the Toy Story movies have talking vehicles and objects, it's at least framed by the human world in which they're in. Cars on the other hand seems void of anything else but the vehicles, and the world feels empty as a result. So, I dunno. I kind of feel it would be better if they were to reveal that this is all happening as an extension to the Toy Story world, where the cars are having adventures when their drivers are gone.
Cars is not especially good, but John Lasseter is a HUGE car fanatic, which is why the first movie got made. Moreso than any of Pixar's other properties, Cars is really his baby. It has also made more than $8 billion in merchandise revenue for Disney, hence the studio's interest in a sequel. I didn't like the first one, and I'll be skipping this one -- there's simply nothing to draw me in. I'm sure that it will move a metric fuckton of merchandise, though.
Cars was the only Pixar film I didn't really care for. It wasn't horrible but just didn't have that extra something that makes it special. I was disappointed when I learned that California Adventure's expansion would include a "Carsland" area based on the Cars universe. That just doesn't sound all that fun to me, and as a huge Disney lover (especially of the parks) it pains me to say that. I'm sure that Cars 2 will do fine in theaters, bring in money from the parents taking their children, but it won't be a beloved classic by any means.
I'm not. The original was Pixar's least-acclaimed film of the decade. Won't happen. Kids love it; the issue is that, like its predecessor, it has significantly less appeal to Pixar's periphery demographics than other Pixar movies.
My son was 4 when the first Cars came out and it was the first movie that he truly loved, so it was such a joy to me watching him watch it. I liked it just fine, but I much prefer The Incredibles, Ratatoullie, and Toy Story. My daughter likes the movie as well, so we will be seeing it this weekend.
While Cars is my least favorite of the Pixar films (and really that's not saying much), I still loved it. I went in expecting to not like it because I'm not a car person at all but it was a great spirited adventure with wonderful characters. That being said, I didn't think it needed a sequel and I'm not sure how I'll like it without Paul Newman, George Carlin, and Joe Ranft, but I will hold off judgment until I see it (which I full intend to do even though I'm currently on deployment).
Yeah, I always thought it was creepy that there were no humans in the Cars world. Where do baby cars come from? What do they look like? What will happen when that world runs of gas? Am I thinking too much about this?!
Here's one answer, courtesy of Tex Avery. "One Cab's Family" is basically the prototype for Cars, although it depicts a world where humans and sentient cars coexist, so it doesn't fully answer your question. I'm with most of the others -- Cars is my least favorite Pixar film, and I don't have much interest in the sequel.
I had no interest in the first one and have the same feeling about this one. My best friend though saw "Cars" with a friend of his and he couldn't stop raving about it. So he is very much looking forward to the sequel this weekend.
I've always liked that one. There was a similar one where the father was a prop-plane that worked for the army and the son wanted to be a jet plane, as I recall. As for Cars 2, we'll go see it, sure. There was a free ticket in one of the Disney blu-rays we bought but we'd be going anyway. My daughter will enjoy it at the very least and I'm sure it'll be fun for us too. I very much liked the first one. In my Pixar top 3 with Wall-E and Finding Nemo.
My morbid theory about why there are no people in the Cars world is that an alien race visted Earth and accidently killed off the entire population of humans. In order to make amends, the aliens brought all the cars to life and gave them intelligence.