Ain't It Cool News (www.aintitcool.com)
Movie News

Nordling Says That CARS 2 Is Enjoyable If You Don't Over-think It!

Nordling here.

The first CARS film told kids to stop and smell the roses once in a while.  In CARS 2 those roses are just a blur in the rearview mirror.  CARS 2 is a different animal altogether from the first film - while that film wasn't afraid to take its time, CARS 2 moves like the spy movies that it emulates.

I'm a Pixar enthusiast, but I always felt that CARS was the weakest film in their catalog.  For one thing, the world doesn't make any logical sense.  I realize that these films aren't made for me, but still, I don't understand the concept of the world.  I can only perceive the film on the level that my friend Jeremy describes - CARS is a sequel to MAXIMUM OVERDRIVE, and the machines won.  It's years later, and everyone's just so gosh-darn happy about all the humans being dead.  Taken from that aspect, sure, the world makes sense.  When I visited Pixar earlier this year, I asked one of the set designers, who was describing the influence of the vehicular world on the architecture, how a world without people in it functions the way the CARS world does.  "We tend to just not go there," he said, and I left it at that.  But the world bugs the crap out of me.  I ranted to the family on the way home that the world makes no sense, and the wife sighed and let me spout off.  But if the first film doesn't address how the world works, CARS 2 does things that defy even that film's world-building.  If you're wanting CARS 2 to explain the universe it inhabits, you may as well wish for a pony while you're at it.  

That said, I admired CARS quite a bit.  It's a beautiful film, sweet in nature, and yeah, I dig the message for the kids.  CARS 2 isn't CARS.  It's an action film through and through, homaging all the great spy films from James Bond, to THE IPCRESS FILES, to the Bourne films, and when it's sticking to the espionage angle, the film is actually quite riveting.  That's mostly due to the efforts of Michael Caine as Finn McMissile, who is easily the most interesting and entertaining character and I would have loved a full-length feature on him alone.  Emily Mortimer as Holley Shiftwell is also a terrific new character, an agent on her first real mission, and kids will love the gadgets and the action that come with both Finn and Holley.  Parents will too.

Unfortunately, they have to give up much of their screen time to Lightning McQueen (Owen Wilson) and Mater (Larry The Cable Guy), and their story isn't nearly as interesting.  McQueen is invited to race at the World Grand Prix in Tokyo, Porto Corsa, and London, and he takes Mater along.  Mater gets caught up in the espionage as he is mistaken for a master spy with vital information that McMissile needs to bring down a villainous group of lemon cars, led by a mysterious benefactor, and evil Doctor Z (Thomas Kretschmann).  They have plans for the World Grand Prix, involving a new type of fuel and a new weapon.  Mater must help Finn McMissile and Holley Shiftwell find the villains and stop them before their nefarious plot ends up killing his best friend Lightning McQueen.

I find it extremely difficult to enjoy Larry the Cable Guy's Mater.  He is a character that has never been and will never be written for my sensibilities.  You never grow used to him, you only learn to tolerate him.  I don't totally hate the character - he's very much an audience surrogate for the crazy happenings in the film, but if he's a surrogate for the audience, what does that say about the audience?  Mater is pretty much the main character of the film, with Wilson's McQueen offscreen for a good portion of the film's running time.  Kids love Mater, and grownups grit their teeth and bear him.  The first third of CARS 2 is a kind of endurance test when it comes to Mater, but Finn McMissile's character is so interesting to watch that he almost makes up for it.  It's when the story gets flowing, and you see the machinations of the villain's plan in the second half, that CARS 2 finds its pace and voice, and then it becomes more enjoyable.  I like the imagery of the film, especially the races.  Pixar has always been great at delivering the goods when it comes to fantastic visuals, and CARS 2 does the same.  The 3D works fine - 3D is usually at its best for animated films anyway - and really works in the action sequences in particular.

And again, those nagging questions arise... why would cars eat?  How could Mater mistake wasabi for pistachio ice cream?  How can there be ice cream in this world?  THERE ARE NO COWS!  If they take fuel, what do cars drink?  Why are there handles on the car doors if there are no people?  This is the part where the wife smacks me on the back of the head.  I should just accept it, right?  I'm sucking all the fun out of it.  

I recommend CARS 2, for the most part.  Much of it is fun, fast-paced, and exciting.  But I still have extreme reservations about the Mater character, and I think the film would have worked better if it had put Mater more in the background and concentrated on the espionage and Finn McMissile.  In the Pixar roster of films, it's probably below CARS on the bottom, but I still found enough to enjoy in the film that I can recommend it for families this weekend.  The kids at the screening adored the film, and if nothing else, the TOY STORY short in front is as charming as the original trilogy, and well worth seeing.  Plus, you get the BRAVE teaser and "Circle Of Life" from THE LION KING in 3D, which really was quite lovely.  CARS 2 has issues, but if your kids loved the first one, they'll likely love this.  The rest of us are counting the days until BRAVE.

Nordling, out.

Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • June 23, 2011, 10:24 p.m. CST

    Nice!!

    by achapin14

  • June 23, 2011, 10:25 p.m. CST

    Ready for Brave

    by WerePlatypus

    I'd almost subject myself to Cars 2 to see the teaser, but nah. . . I can wait.

  • June 23, 2011, 10:28 p.m. CST

    Pixar's first outright critical bomb

    by Nasty In The Pasty

    Fuck, more poorly-review than Bad Teacher?! I suppose the studio's streak of critically-acclaimed features had to end sooner or later, but this is every bit as distressing to me as when The Simpsons started going bad over a decade ago...you just expect BETTER from these people. But, like the wretched POTC sequels, this will make a MINT at the box office and another couple of billion in merchandizing dollars, so if this is what needs to happen to fund more movies like Brave, then I can grit my teeth and accept it (the first isn't *that* bad). Still...it has finally come to an end. *sigh*

  • June 23, 2011, 10:29 p.m. CST

    I'm just bewlidered

    by sullivansmith

    I mean, this looks like to be slightly above average kiddie fare... which for, say, Dreamworks, this would be par for the course. But for Pixar? I dunno, my expectations are higher. Then again, if making a slightly above-average "cash grab" of a movie means they have more money to play around with for something extremely outstanding later, then more power to them.

  • June 23, 2011, 10:29 p.m. CST

    Damn nordling!!

    by THE_CHOPPAH

    Did you write this during Bad Teacher?!? Professional.

  • June 23, 2011, 10:33 p.m. CST

    THERE ARE NO COWS!!

    by NivekJ

    That's it; I'm signed up. You had me at pistachio.

  • June 23, 2011, 10:37 p.m. CST

    You trash Thor but give Cars 2 a pass?

    by cinemixtape.com

    Absolutely ridiculous (and actually kind of funny). And I've seen both films.

  • June 23, 2011, 10:37 p.m. CST

    Nordling

    by THE_CHOPPAH

    Steve Martin said.. Free your mind and your body will follow. This film is getting a pass from me. Pixar can do no wrong. Good seeing you tonight btw.

  • June 23, 2011, 10:44 p.m. CST

    Dude, it's a fable, not SF

    by MrD

    It doesn't need to make sense in the way you want. I remember a few old WB or Disney cartoons centered around sentient cars or planes. This is basically expanding that world. Just accept it the same way you would accept a world in which talking pigs wear clothes and own property and interact as equals with with people who eat ham and bacon, while talking ducks and rabbits are still hunted like animals.

  • June 23, 2011, 10:52 p.m. CST

    Does ths take place after a nuclear exchange?

    by whatevillurks

  • June 23, 2011, 11:02 p.m. CST

    'Over-think' implies the movie makes you think too much.

    by Gerry Manderin

    Meaning it doesn't add up. It strains credulity. It's nonsense. It's bullshit, as we grownups say. And you fools are just catching on to Pixar's con job now? I'm sorry your Pixar heroes have let you down. On second thought, nah. I don't feel sorry for you. I'm gonna love watching Team Pixar rend its garments in despair. Pass the popcorn.

  • June 23, 2011, 11:02 p.m. CST

    @Nordling

    by Carl

    I don't know why the world of Cars doesn't make sense to you. It's pretty simple. A world where every living being is a vehicle. Even 5-year-olds get that.

  • June 23, 2011, 11:02 p.m. CST

    I'm sick of people acting like Cars was Shark Tale or something.

    by SAILOR_RIPLEY

    Sure, it's at the lower end of the Pixar filmography, yet still hands down better than most animated movies from other studios. I don't understand why everyone is so bothered by the whole Cars "world". It's no more ridiculous than talking bugs, toys, fish, rat chefs, inter-dimensional monsters, and houses flying by balloon power. Sure it's not in the league of Wall-E, Up or Ratatouille by try to remember these are essentially Kid's movies. My Kids loved Cars and so did I. BTW, the scene with the James Taylor song is one of the more moving things in any Pixar film.

  • June 23, 2011, 11:04 p.m. CST

    and how do the fuck?

    by Choohoo

  • June 23, 2011, 11:05 p.m. CST

    do they fuck?

    by Choohoo

  • June 23, 2011, 11:08 p.m. CST

    choohoo, UP THE TAILPIPE!!!

    by CreepyThinMan

  • June 23, 2011, 11:11 p.m. CST

    The reviews for this are baffling

    by darthvedder81

    I haven't seen it yet so I can't speak to the quality of "Cars 2" but almost all of Rotten Tomatoes reviews baffle me. Other than Ebert's they don't review the content of the movie. They all just repeat "It's Pixar's first dud" or "Pixar finally fails" or "It's not like Wall-E or Up". Yeah, no shit, it's a movie about talking Cars--in that context why did you hate it so much? Some even spend great lengths of time spreading doom and gloom about the future of Pixar. Don't review the company review the damn movie.

  • June 23, 2011, 11:15 p.m. CST

    "CARS" RULE !!!!!!!

    by PRESIDENT BALTAR

    HATERS DROOL !!!!!!

  • June 23, 2011, 11:16 p.m. CST

    I have only read Ebert's review so far...

    by SAILOR_RIPLEY

    ***1/2 stars.

  • June 23, 2011, 11:22 p.m. CST

    Nordling

    by dukeroberts

    I never got along with the Cars world either. Why have all of the things that humans use if there are no humans and the cars don't use them? Who created the things that would be used by humans if there are no humans? Cars invented them without purpose? Why are there houses and motels? The cars don't even go inside of them. Oh well... Despite that, and despite the horrible reviews, I will see it on Monday and hope I enjoy it.

  • June 23, 2011, 11:22 p.m. CST

    Suk

    by THE_CHOPPAH

    Enlighten me oh great one. What did you think Of GL or cars 2?

  • June 23, 2011, 11:26 p.m. CST

    Saw the movie. Even Pixar's mark of quality can't save it

    by Andy Pandy

  • June 23, 2011, 11:30 p.m. CST

    "It's enjoyable if you don't over think it" equals....

    by D o o d

    shit movie!

  • June 23, 2011, 11:39 p.m. CST

    I love Pixar but HATE Mater... I'm conflicted

    by Andrew Coleman

    I was worried that piece of shit would be the main focus. The reviews make it clear that he is. Not sure what to do here. Maybe wait for DVD and just mute every scene he's in. That might work.

  • No shit. I even made him a Green Goblin truck and it hangs out with Lightning McQueen all the time. According to my son, however, there is a serious lack of garbage trucks in both of those films. He often fantasizes about a "Maximum Overdrive" sequel and he frequently requests the soundtrack on the way to preschool. We'll be seeing "Cars 2" this weekend and we'll probably listen to "Who Made Who" on the way home.

  • June 23, 2011, 11:43 p.m. CST

    You don't understand the world??? COME ON...

    by moto

    Think like a child... remember... when you had some imagination and didn't need every little detail overexplained to you. CARS was a heartwarming film about Americana. It was about slowing down and seeing what really matters... friends. Family. What don't you understand about the world? Cars/vehicles are living and breathing. We get to see the different types of cars come alive in the attitudes and personalities that car lovers thought they would possibly have. How did they come to be? Who cares? How are they made and born? Who cares? Sometimes, as an adult, you have to let that cynicism go when those lights go down. It's no wonder that Cars has captured the imaginations of the young demographic. It's their favorite Pixar movie... even above Toy Story in many cases. Slamming this as a cash grab or anything like that is ridiculous. Pixar doesn't make sequels unless there's a story to be told. It's really hard to rail on this sequel, or its original, for lack of quality, and then you just have to wait and see how successful it really is going to be come tomorrow. I understand that maybe its not for some, namely those that are older or lack the imagination of their childhood. Maybe it takes having kids to get that back. I have two. Ages 2 and 5. And they go ape shit for Cars. They love Mater. Adults like you see a dimwitted deep south trailer trash idiot. Young children, and those not blinded by cynicism and whatnot, see Mater as a warm-hearted innocent who is the most loyal friend you could imagine. Cars 2. Gonna be huge. Say its not for you, but don't knock it as a money grab. Sure, Disney probably wanted a sequel since it's scored $18 Billion in merchandise, but Pixar doesn't do a sequel unless there's a viable story they want to tell. You really want to question a studio that is cutting edge, hasn't had a financial failure in its existence, and is the example to all other studios and filmmakers as far as how to properly craft a STORY and CHARACTERS?? Go ahead...

  • June 23, 2011, 11:46 p.m. CST

    Hey Nordling I was banned with no real reason why

    by Phategod2

    someone said I was being Racist and never backed it up. I wonder why that was said. Is ther a reason why anyone who vehemently hates your reviews would be considered racist? I know this is off topic but I could give less then a shit about Cars 2, and thought I'd chime in on something I actually care about.

  • June 23, 2011, 11:48 p.m. CST

    Nevermind after reading some hater comments here...

    by Andrew Coleman

    I'm seeing it just to spite them. If you seriously hate Pixar you're a reborn Nazi. I get what Cars 2 is I just can't stand Mater. Still I bet even with all the problems this movie will be a billion times better than TF3. I get that they have to make this movie to get original stuff out there. It's like Nolan with WB. He agreed to do Dark Knight because WB made The Prestige. Then he made Dark Knight Rises because of Inception. So I get why Pixar makes these. The haters are those bitter fucks who just have to hate on everything. So I'm going to see it in theaters just for them.

  • June 24, 2011, 12:04 a.m. CST

    I hope Mater mispronounces "Grand Prix" as "Grand Pricks."

    by fustfick

    My kids love dick jokes and there tend to be precious few of them in Pixar films.

  • June 24, 2011, 12:16 a.m. CST

    This movie is critic-proof

    by krabklaw

    People will go see it anyway- I see a $75 mil opener

  • June 24, 2011, 12:20 a.m. CST

    This website is quality - If you don't over-think it.

    by Surfaces_are_supposed_to_be_FLAT

  • June 24, 2011, 12:37 a.m. CST

    I agree with Nord

    by SquireWamba

    Cars was always the weakest of the Pixar flicks for me. It's like it is in a different category...Pixar Movies! (and Cars). Anyway, I feel exactly the same about Mater and really have no interest in seeing this one. Looking forward to Brave and the Monsters U. movies. Keep up the good work!

  • June 24, 2011, 12:37 a.m. CST

    rip gene colan

    by john

    and harry better have his dad do the writeup man...i am bummed

  • June 24, 2011, 12:47 a.m. CST

    I'd like a pony.

    by lochkray

    Not so much worried about the reasoning of the world of Cars. Okay, there is one logistical thing that bugs me from the first one (my kids have watched it a bazillion times, so I've had lots of opportunity to contemplate it). In the first movie, the whole "Doc Hollywood" plot is set into motion because the Sherrif car attempts to pull over the Owen Wilson car for speeding. Due to age and speed, the Sherrif car starts to backfire. Owen Wilson car believes that the Sherrif car is shooting at him, and begins to drive wildly, thus resulting in the damage to the town that Owen Wilson car has to repair, and subsiquently travel along a road of self discovery that makes up the plot. Now here's my problem: Why would Owen Wilson car think he was being shot at? How would a car shoot a gun? What would it hold onto the gun with? What exactly would a gun shot do to a car, except make a hole in the trunk? I don't think I'll ever get an answer. I guess I should just stick to wishing for that pony.

  • June 24, 2011, 12:49 a.m. CST

    I share the sentiment Moto.

    by SAILOR_RIPLEY

    To the guy who has the four year old Maximum Overdrive fan...Nice parenting.

  • June 24, 2011, 1:38 a.m. CST

    It's a fun movie. I think it's better than the first Cars

    by SifoDyasJr

    The spy story was by far the strongest part--in fact I kind of wish they had just ditched the main Cars characters and went completely with that. You can tell that Lasseter knows his Bond references well. Mater got on my nerves, but, to be fair, that's sort of the point of the character. I figured out that Owen Wilson and LTCG are completely grating when in scenes together, but more tolerable when apart, which may be why I disliked the first one so much. This was definitely made for the kids, and definitely will help keep Pixar's coffers filled for the next 25 years. I was sad that there wasn't a 'Brave' preview before my showing. We got Winnie the Pooh instead.

  • June 24, 2011, 1:44 a.m. CST

    Ow!

    by Anthony Torchia

    I fell on my keys .... Cars is Pixar's weakest film, Cars 2 is their most pointless film, Wall-E makes me cry every time I see it. Nordling does the best he can, which is more than the assholes who excessively criticize him.

  • June 24, 2011, 2:05 a.m. CST

    It's funny to see people refer to Cars movies as failures

    by SifoDyasJr

    Kids under 10 are going to eat this up. They will LOVE it. It was made for that audience, and on that basis, it is a success. It will be replayed in DVD and Blu-ray players non-stop by those same kids when it's released for home viewing in the fall and Tow Mater's voice will drive their parents insane. Billions will be made off of toys and Pixar will go on to make more masterpieces with less financial pressure. Cars movies are a massive success. They are just not as good on an adult level as their other movies. They are still way better than 95% of other studios' CGI animated movies.

  • June 24, 2011, 2:09 a.m. CST

    Oh no, a cartoon world doesn't make sense! Mon dieu!

    by DerLanghaarige

    Boo hoo, Monsters Inc was illogical too! A world that is powered with the screams of kids? And fucking Mickey Mouse? Is he a mutant? What happened to the human characters in those cartoons? Why is Elmar Fudd able to understand what Bugs Bunny says and why is Bugs taller than Fudd?

  • June 24, 2011, 2:10 a.m. CST

    Is the Popemobile Catholic?

    by tomandshell

    That line implies that there were anthropomorphic cars running around two thousand years ago, and that a car version of Jesus was crucified in Carusalem and a worldwide organized car religion sprang up around him. Another example of why the entire concept of this world just doesn't work for me. Because lines like that just don't make sense in context. It's a very shallow world that doesn't hold up to scrutiny. Other films they have done have an internal logic that makes sense and marries imagination with sensibility. Cars is weak in a variety of ways and doesn't deserve the time and expense of a sequel.

  • June 24, 2011, 2:27 a.m. CST

    of course it sucks

    by Rupee88

    If you are over 8 y/o or I should say have the intelligence of over an 8 y/o, then you wouldn't like it. People who like every other Pixar movie think in a very childlike way too..not saying that is a good thing...means low IQ like a little kid. Pixar has had a couple of great movies, and a few good ones and a few crappy ones. And now they are DISNEY...not Pixar..they are a division of Disney. And this movie was made for $$$ with no artistic motivations whatsoever. There's nothing wrong with that, but they are just whores like the rest of Hollywood. You won't see another Toy Story or Incredibles come out of the Pixar division although many of you will probably delude yourselves to think otherwise..you are already in denial.

  • compared to adults. The point is that anyone is dumb who thinks that all of Pixars films are better than Dreamworks. Kung Fu Panda and HTTYD are better than 75% of Pixar's output. Toy Story 1 and 2 and Incredibles are the only superb Pixar Films. There are some others like Monsters Inc and Wall-E that are kind of good. Then there are the rest like Finding Nemo and Up that are substandard. Stop drinking the Pixar Koolaid and wake the f&ck up.

  • June 24, 2011, 2:32 a.m. CST

    or I mean high IQs

    by Rupee88

    it's 3am..give me a break.

  • June 24, 2011, 2:32 a.m. CST

    Pixar is a victim of their own success

    by darthvedder81

    I haven't seen Cars 2 but after reading many of the reviews it's clear the critics don't get the movie. I think a lot of that has to do with the expectation set up by the last 3 or 4 Pixar productions. If you think about it, Ratatouille through Up (and even Toy Story 3 to a degree) aren't "kids"movies or "cartoon" movies in the traditional sense. We've come to expect Pixar to deliver movies with a such a strong, almost adult dramatic undercurrent that when they see a "cartoon" movie with silly talking cars it's seems out of place. None of the negative reviews I've read really get into the nitty gritty of what's so bad about Cars 2. They just dwell on how it's "not like" the more cerebral Pixar efforts. OK, but how about actually reviewing the movie guys?

  • Cars meets Maximum Overdrive. I always figured there's a reason why Lightning, Mater and the other vehicles have those greyed-out side-windows....that's where the cars have hidden away the rotted and decaying human remains.

  • June 24, 2011, 2:46 a.m. CST

    This site is enjoyable if you don't over-think it!

    by noiretblanc

  • June 24, 2011, 2:55 a.m. CST

    Cars is a creepy movie

    by CuervoJones

    That movie scares the shit out of me. A world with talking cars! It´s like Maximum Overdrive 2.

  • June 24, 2011, 3:19 a.m. CST

    MOVIE FOR CHILDREN.

    by catparade

    MOVIE FOR CHILDREN. /discussion.

  • June 24, 2011, 3:35 a.m. CST

    and i have just seen the trailer for spy kids 4

    by emeraldboy

    awful. just awful. ricky gervaise as a talking dog....

  • June 24, 2011, 3:59 a.m. CST

    Fantasy

    by midgarddragon

    I'm not going to argue that Cars 2 is a great movie (haven't seen it yet, though Cars is a MUCh better movie than it gets credit for). BUT, when did we stop being allowed to just let fantasy bee fantasy? Why do we have to EXPLAIN everything? This is a children's film FFS. They didn't explain how the bugs or toys could speak English in A Bug's Life or Toy Story. They didn't explain WHERE the super powers came from in Incredibles. Those things just WERE. Let it be for f*ck's sake. This constant need to take the magic out of everything is the reason so many movies get bogged down in technical bullshit that makes them dull as fuck to watch nowadays.

  • June 24, 2011, 4:12 a.m. CST

    by Cobra--Kai

    MASTURBATION Is Enjoyable If You Dont Over-Think It! (otherwise a bit of self-loathing can creep in)

  • June 24, 2011, 4:19 a.m. CST

    For one thing, the world doesn't make any logical sense

    by tomdolan04

    Next up, Nordling reviews re-releases of Knight Rider on Blu-ray: <p> "I'm puzzled. The car. It talks. How farfetched" <p> Short Circuit 2 <p> "How can a robot with only 500MB of Memory be so human"? <p> Flight of The Navigator <p> "So you're saying at some point in human history, Sarah Jessica Parker looked half-human" <p> Actually scrub the last one, that is a bit stupid.

  • June 24, 2011, 4:23 a.m. CST

    Why would cars eat?

    by tomdolan04

    Next Up - At the end of the Goonies, how did they know the exact value of the diamonds and how did the contractors looking to buy the houses accept defeat so quickly. <p> In Raiders of the Lost Ark, the gravity and moving velocity of the boulder chasing Indy would have surely outpaced Harrison.

  • June 24, 2011, 5:21 a.m. CST

    It's PIXAR - They make everything WORK!

    by CeejayNightwing

  • June 24, 2011, 5:26 a.m. CST

    Over 15 million DVD's sold!!! = $247,901,839

    by CeejayNightwing

    That's its Box Office potential minimum! Makes sense to me if I was a studio exec!

  • June 24, 2011, 5:32 a.m. CST

    All right, I'll take a shot at explaining the Cars world

    by Jim_Kirks_Crunchy_Delicious_Chair_Apple

    People do exist. The cars simply don't see them. It's a grand denial. The cars delude and comfort themselves that they're doing all these things for themselves. It would have been a mindblowing scene if one of the characters briefly saw people, wondered what they were, only to blink and have them disappear from view again. There. At least it's a way of making it make a little sense.

  • June 24, 2011, 6:03 a.m. CST

    by Cobra--Kai

    jim_kirks_crunchy_delicious_chair_apple... HOLY SHIT DUDE! What an amazing idea. That would beat the pants off Soylent Green, Planet Of The Apes and the Sixth Sense combined. Certainly is a better idea than the Pixar guy who just shrugged weakly and said we dont go there. You get the gold star of the day!

  • June 24, 2011, 6:41 a.m. CST

    4 year old watches maximum ovrdrive?

    by WerePlatypus

    What did he think of Pet Semetary? It must be okay for kids, it has animals in it. . . .

  • But yes, if they decided to just do a mindblow here and explain exactly how the cars got to be alive, that would be fucking awesome.

  • June 24, 2011, 7:33 a.m. CST

    LOL

    by Truxton Spangler

    Apply the same standards to the vast majority of the movies targeted toward the demographic of this site and see how they'd fare. At least the Cars' universe is set inside a world imagined entirely *in a cartoon*. Every consider the notion that the vehicles are proxies FOR people? And, you'd better stay away from The Little Engine That Could. You'll probably have issues with that one as well.

  • June 24, 2011, 7:45 a.m. CST

    sounds stupid

    by CT1

    i mean "for kids"

  • June 24, 2011, 8:07 a.m. CST

    I keep seeing MASTURBATOR when you write Mater.

    by knowthyself

    Why is that?

  • June 24, 2011, 8:09 a.m. CST

    The real ending to the cars trilogy.

    by knowthyself

    McQueen is a beat up car in a lot ready to be compacted. All three films have all been in his head. Just a fantasy before the humans crush him to bits.

  • June 24, 2011, 8:09 a.m. CST

    The Irony is that clearly Nordling is...OVER THINKING IT lol.

    by knowthyself

  • Wow 38% Fresh? They need to stop with these sequels....

  • June 24, 2011, 8:14 a.m. CST

    The Car Called Flintstone...

    by slappy magoo

    Another cartoon that didn't make all that much sense that made ridonkulous amounts of money, those Flintstones did...

  • June 24, 2011, 8:19 a.m. CST

    Nordling sounds like another loser w/o a family.

    by BilboRing

    Who goes to any Pixar film expecting anything other than a movie for kids? Loser. They are kid movies first and foremost. Sure some are deeper and more complex than others but do you really need to know why the world of Cars exists? Are you that empty? Sorry a movie about talking cars does not live up to your deep intellect and high cinema standards. What the hell were you expecting with a movie about cars? They can't do much other than drive around. I figure it's going to be a pretty simple movie that has laughs and just a lot of fun and action. Kind of like the first Cars movie. You people need to get a clue. Fist lesson, if the theater is full of kids and you are sitting alone with your wife or your buddy, you are a loser and in the wrong theater.

  • June 24, 2011, 8:22 a.m. CST

    Choppah's Bad Teacher Review

    by THE_CHOPPAH

    Pretty much everything you see in the Red band trailer is the gold, but unfortunately it works better when its strung together. I too am not a big fan of Diaz..every time I see her I want to punch her in the face. I dunno. But here she is just trying to hard to be BAD, wheras Billy Bob was just plain bad. he lived it. he breathed it. I believed it when i heard him tell a a woman mid coitus that she wasnt gonna shit right for a week. Here, Diaz lines fall flat. Her arc is forced and I really dont believe the sudden transformation at the end, which if you didnt know was coming, you need to see more shitty romcoms. The sole saving grace of this film is the support cast. Im not talking about JT, who for some reason was grating here. Im talking about Alannah Ubach, Thomas Lennon, John Micahle Higgins, Cameron form ModFam, Phyllis from Office, Paul Bates (where defuck have YOU been?!?!), Dave (Gruber) Allen. Jason Segal is charming in is usual way. I like him and cant wait to see what he doing with the muppets. To be honest i laughed more at the people playing off of Diaz than Diaz herself, which aint a good thing if this is your starring vehicle. I think the movie falters when they ease the reins on the "bad" aspect of Diaz's character. I have to go back and watch BAD SANTA again to see why it worked so much better in that film. Off the top of my head I think it was the fact that Billy Bob was an unapologetic asshole the whole time nd at the end they slip in an even bigger asshole for you to hate. In BAD SANTA they "shell game" the story but here they want you to sympathize and support her redemption. The "..I've changed" angle is a little too late. I had a SCHOOL OF ROCK feel initially when she first walks into class...but the kids in this movie really get nothing to work with. The goody goody girl and the sad sack kid are too generic so Diaz's interaction with them is meaningless. When the whole teaching profession is all about the kids and then you make a movie and kids have virtually nothing to do with it....you are failing. THAT is where this movie could have turned around...but it doesn't. I like to give a shout out to the actress who play the rival teacher. she gave it 150% as a manic goody-two-shoes. She made the film worthy of my 90 minutes. But for some reason, she remionded me of Jerry Hall in Batman when she was wearing the porcelain mask..her sunken eyes or something...creeepy. It has a couple laughs. Not horrible but I mourn for what could have been. I guess we'll wait for the inevitable UNRATED EXTREME EDITION. I have a feeling this will be out on dvd by the end of the summer. I thought this would be a GAME CHANGER for Diaz but it was more of a FALSE DAWN for her and Timberlake. 2/5 CHOPS

  • June 24, 2011, 8:34 a.m. CST

    Nordling, wait for 'Rise of the Planet of the Cars'

    by Stabby

    It explains EVERYTHING!

  • June 24, 2011, 8:36 a.m. CST

    So...

    by truenotes1

    You're a Nazi if you dont like Mixar? Sorry to tell you, they aren't perfect as much as you may think. And everything they do wrong they tend to get a pass. But let it be DW or any Ice Age movie for example, those companies are generally bashed. Is it right, no. But to everyone brainwashed, its rightfully so. Regardless of what you believe, can you honestly say that Mixar made a better enjoyable movie in the past 3 years than DW? Or so far this year? So far Rango is the best i've seen this year. And I also enjoyed KP2. Will I still see Cars2? Probably, but more for my son, he loves animated movies, regardless of who made them.

  • It's their attempt to make a goofy balls out action spy romp.

  • June 24, 2011, 8:55 a.m. CST

    truenotes1

    by BilboRing

    Pixar can do no wrong IMO because even their less spectacular films (Cars, Bug's Life) are not just a bunch of crude fart jokes strung together by weak stories. Or a bunch of stale jokes, bad language (Surfs Up), general stupidity, dancing/singing to modern or 80s songs, slap-stick, etc. The only Non-Pixar movie that I have seen that I gladly let my kids watch over again is How to Train Your Dragon. It was one of the very few non-Pixar movies that actually had some feeling and depth to it.

  • June 24, 2011, 8:56 a.m. CST

    I freaking love those little Car toys.

    by OnO

    I mean detail is right out the fucking park with those toys. Oh by the way, your wife needs to leave you at home because yes your sucking the fun out a movie probably more for her than you. Only the self absorbed A-holes really worry about Pixar failing to make an UP every damn time meant for their cinema tastes alone...screw the kids, little assholes! Cars ruined Pixar. Shut up. Fucking Universe with talking and emoting cars... That doesn't compute... I need to consult my Star Fleet Manual and contact the Vorlons about this grievous insult to the Jedi Council, while I gather my Decepticons from my basement defenses to rant on a message board about Talking Cars and them eating Ice cream. Here's a better review. If you hated Cars then don't go see it. If you have kids go see it. If you find yourself really annoyed at this movie because it has no Humans.... you failed your childhood.

  • June 24, 2011, 8:59 a.m. CST

    Two underrated animated films from other studios are...

    by SAILOR_RIPLEY

    Robots and Flushed Away. Thankfully I have kids, or I would never have seen half of these movies. Pixar is still tops though.

  • June 24, 2011, 9 a.m. CST

    Roger Ebert gave it 3-1/2 stars.

    by Royston Lodge

    Then again, he gave three stars to the first Cars movie...

  • June 24, 2011, 9:01 a.m. CST

    For Those Who Are Bewildered by Cars and Cars 2 . . .

    by kevinwillis.net

    Think multi-billions of dollars in initial and secondary rights. Franchising, licensing . . . it's a multi-billion property, easily worth as much to Pixar as Star Wars is to Lucas. And the movies are fun. I love Paul Newman as Doc Hudson in the first Cars. Mater is also great. Nordling should watch the "You're Getting Old" Southpark. He's very much got the same condition Stan came down with. Worried about the logic of the world? I assume you despise David Lynch then. And you must've hated Aronofsky's Fountain. The movies are (a) a love letter to the automobile, reflecting John Lasseter's love of and interest in cars (and car aficionados often imbue their automobiles with personalities, and name them) and (b) a tribute to the pioneering early animation work by Tex Avery and Max Fliescher where anthropomorphized characters and worlds, including cars, feature heavily. Man, Nordling must have just despised Rubber, too. Right? No, wait, Nordling was just dying to see a movie about a self-aware tire with psychic powers! Because that males *so* much sense. That world is totally explained. http://www.aintitcool.com/node/48717 Bah. The original Cars was good, and this looks fun. I bet my youngest daughter will love it, and that makes me more than happy.

  • June 24, 2011, 9:02 a.m. CST

    I still wish they'd gotten Roger Moore to voice the spy car.

    by Royston Lodge

    Michael Caine as a comedic faux-Bond is such a cliché now.

  • June 24, 2011, 9:02 a.m. CST

    Ebert sure does love his cars...

    by THE_CHOPPAH

    Thats why he was so pissed when Ryan Dunn died. Destroying such a beautiful piece of machinery like that...

  • June 24, 2011, 9:04 a.m. CST

    Bashing Dreamworks: Really?

    by kevinwillis.net

    Kung Fu Panda got raves (deservedly so) as it did How to Train Your Dragon. Dreamworks has some great stuff going on. And has done some great animated work (Prince of Egypt is a classic). And I enjoyed Spirit. That was a very good film. Dreamworks does great stuff. People can be more the happy with the great work done on the Cars movies and acknowledge that Dreamworks does some greak stuff. Blue Sky hasn't reach the level of Dreamworks or Pixar yet, but they've still made some very good movies (I was smitted with the first Ice Age film, back in the day).

  • June 24, 2011, 9:06 a.m. CST

    Only Lightning McQueen is alive

    by bah

    And the movie is all his delusion, trying to make sense of his existence. He can't see people and he imagines all the other vehicles in the world are talking to him.

  • June 24, 2011, 9:17 a.m. CST

    Elaborate theories about the Cars world are ok...

    by CreamCheeseAlchemist

    if you joke about them with friends after the movie. Cars was the last movie I saw with one of my friends before he died. We ended up talking about gas prices, possible origins for this world, model T's, and what the fire truck symbolized... But with the perspective that this was a kid's film, not some avant-garde commentary on Route 66.

  • June 24, 2011, 9:20 a.m. CST

    Ryan Dunn gave it zero stars

    by lostboytexas

    until his obit is posted!

  • June 24, 2011, 9:21 a.m. CST

    Bets Part of Cars . . .

    by kevinwillis.net

    Where Michael J. Fox sees Julie Warner coming topless out of the lake. Also, when Barnard Hughes takes him to school on what's really wrong with a young boy who swallowed some of his dad's chewin' tobaccy . . . classic! Not to mention, David Ogden Stiers as Mater.

  • June 24, 2011, 9:26 a.m. CST

    Ryan Dunn Obit for LostBoyTexas

    by THE_CHOPPAH

    Ryan Dunn died as he lived. With a car up his ass. Now shut the fuck up and Move On with Yer Life Bitchy McWhine

  • June 24, 2011, 9:40 a.m. CST

    Houses of Parliament...who f*cking built it? JCB?

    by marineboy

    Why would a car design buildings with a human aesthetic? Wouldn't they just design car-parks? Yes...Cars & Cars 2 are F*CKING STOOOPID :s

  • June 24, 2011, 9:44 a.m. CST

    Cars=for kids=Pixar hate

    by redkamel

    The reason adults don't like Cars and Cars2 is that it is strictly for kids. The other Pixar films were adult films on some level. Car always just seemed a lot more....juvenile I guess. When compared (even subconciously) to films like Toy Story 3, Wall-E, UP, etc that had people crying in the theaters and requesting it as their dying wish..then yeah, Cars 2 is seen as a dud. Although its fine for kids. I don't have a problem with Cars, but let me explain Nordlings problem. I have it all the time with movies, especially shitty ones aimed at adults. The problem with the Cars world is that it is not internally consistent. Most fantasy worlds are essentially normal, with one or two premises that integrated in the whole world. The world is normal, but James Bond is the man. It is the future and we have warp drives. Toys come alive at night. Aliens are real. There are two earths. Physics and logic still exist in these worlds, just a few rules and constants we take for granted are different. We learn the difference, and the world makes sense. Thus, I enjoy the movie. But what if the world makes no sense at all? Example: Cars, at all times, rule the world. But it looks EXACTLY like it does now except there are no people. Not "cars can talk". Not "cars come alive at night". Not "cars are secretly in charge of the world that people think they rule". It is really distracting when shit is consistently not adding up in the fantasy land while watching it. You can get away with an inconsistent world in a short or a concept film, but a two hour movie with a plot built on spies? doubtful.

  • June 24, 2011, 9:56 a.m. CST

    Nordling - get a grip dude

    by jpt

    I'll be taking my oldest this afternoon to see it. I guarantee she'll love it.

  • June 24, 2011, 9:58 a.m. CST

    Surprised about all the Cars hate.

    by Mooly

    Personally, I couldn't be bothered to see cars when it first came out. I didn't see it until years later when I bought it for my son on BR, and I actually loved it. I don't get why so many were bored or disliked it so much. Maybe I'm biased because I grew up in a small town during its "prime" and now that town is just a shadow of its former self. I don't know. I'm still taking my kid to Cars 2, but I think the focus on Mater is a horrible idea. Making it a spy movie? Making McQueen secondary? I think that this will be the film that people point to when Pixar starts pumping out crappy sequals and direct to DVD just to keep the Disney corporation happy. Cars 2 will be the one they blame.

  • June 24, 2011, 10 a.m. CST

    Nordling... you are making big assumptions...

    by jimmy_009

    ...when you're saying that adults hate Mater or that you're a redneck idiot if you enjoy him. Just because -you- don't like him doesn't mean he doesn't go over well with others. You're basically saying every adult hates him because you do. I'm not a redneck, don't live in the south, I'm not into NASCAR or car culture in general. I think he's actually a good character that people bash mainly because he represents what they see as "the South". And since bashing the South is acceptable in lieu of out and out racism and stereotyping, some people relish in it. Hence the Mater hate. I haven't seen Cars 2 yet, but simply based off the first film and the shorts I don't have a big problem with Mater. I'm looking forward to watching the film (on the west coast) and seeing a bunch of adults laughing at Mater despite your broad stroked comments.

  • June 24, 2011, 10:01 a.m. CST

    Nordling does indeed have a wife

    by THE_CHOPPAH

    I saw her last night at the screening. Not bad champ. Not bad.

  • June 24, 2011, 10:02 a.m. CST

    no subject

    by THE_CHOPPAH

    CHOPPED

  • June 24, 2011, 10:09 a.m. CST

    Ryan Dunn = Random Hero = OBIT where?

    by lostboytexas

    huh?

  • June 24, 2011, 10:11 a.m. CST

    by Cobra--Kai

    Nordling's wife has been posting here under the username teh suk. They have a kinda literary s&m thang going on.

  • June 24, 2011, 10:14 a.m. CST

    cobra-kai...

    by jimmy_009

    Sounds like a Peter Coffin type of situation.

  • June 24, 2011, 10:17 a.m. CST

    Why I don't like Mater

    by bah

    He's not his own character. He's Larry the Cable Guy in CGI form. That's exactly what I dislike most about non-Pixar CG movies -- they tend to model the characters after the actor. That and the whole idiot thing. Doesn't it bother you, jimmy, that he is the epitome of the stupid Southern hick stereotype?

  • June 24, 2011, 10:18 a.m. CST

    LostBoyTexas

    by THE_CHOPPAH

    I'm sorry that you have such a limited scope the world that a man, nee--a person--like Ryan Dunn is looked upon as a hero. I remember in college when i saw someone cry when Soundgarden broke up. I laughed for days. I bet you cried when you found out he died. You did..didn't you? I will laugh at you now. BLACK HOLE CHOPPED

  • June 24, 2011, 10:21 a.m. CST

    too funny cobes

    by THE_CHOPPAH

  • June 24, 2011, 10:38 a.m. CST

    A get well card for nordling

    by luke_lymon

    Apparently Nordling is not feeling too well. I mean after all, anyone who thinks its even remotely possible to overthink a movie like Cars can't be feeling too well.

  • June 24, 2011, 10:50 a.m. CST

    I think we forget that Pixar movies are aimed at children..

    by kidicarus

    Children don't come in with stupid fucking logical preconceptions about how a world is supposed to be like. "Where are the humans?" "Who makes the cars?" "Why are there buildings if there aren't people?" Kids have the wonderful ability to pretty much accept any possibility, and have fun with it. That's something that we adults (especially anal film dorks) struggle with. It looks like Cars 2 is the straight kids movie that Pixar wants to make. Wall-E was for us, the adults. To this day I cannot get my nieces to sit down and watch the entire movie without falling asleep. So if I have to sit through another Cars 2 to be able to see a Wall-E, or an UP!, more power to Pixar.

  • June 24, 2011, 10:54 a.m. CST

    Nordling, you need to relax the logic crap

    by Inexplicable_Nuclear_Balls

    Thank god you don't review pornos.

  • June 24, 2011, 11:19 a.m. CST

    Yikes.. no need to STONE Nordling to death..

    by mcgillj

    I think he DOES make a valid point.. The WORLD in which Cars exists.. doesn't make sense.. And yes.. I GET the love of the old idea of cars and their relationship to MAN in the first film.. the first film was completely DRIPPING with that sentiment.. and it was a beautifully rendered and even written film, even if I too like most of the site can see where they lifted a bit from Doc Hollywood (at least they are stealing FUN material). someone mentioned the film "Rubber" which I did TRY and watch.. and thought it was awful.. and I actually have ZERO problem with the IDEA of the tire.. not even needing an explaination.. but the whole plot device with the Jack Plotnick and the people watching WTF was that?!! I guess maybe people do tend to OVERTHINK things.. in fact its part of the debate of MOST of the movies here.. IF they had done this. The question is, will that keep you from enjoying a film that while it may have some things that pick at you.. I actually did wonder maybe not QUESTION the world.. but wonder.. how did it come about? I mean.. Bug's Life. Nemo.. even Monster's Inc and Ratatouille.. those are very RELATABLE worlds.. in fact worlds which exist within OUR world. I do agree with the assessment of UP.. started such a serious film.. and there are wild tonal shifts in the film. Wall E? its a sci fi conceit.. but we understand HOW it happened.. its all in there.. and we could have inferred it. Cars is a world that defies explaination. The thing is.. are you going to let that keep you from enjoying a film? I mean.. would Bond REALLY still be allowed to work for ANY government pulling the crap he does? Would Bourne.. have actually LIVED if a government WANTED him dead? one sniper and BAM.. all she wrote. He's a super spy, not super human. The thing is sometimes to enjoy a film, you do have to just shut your mind off. IF you can't do that.. then its a sign the movie is NOT made for you.. or there's just too much else WRONG with the movie. I ENJOYED the first Cars.. but the sequel.. while it looks INCREDIBLE, really does look like a wait for video to me. I love the spy genre.. but it definitely feels like a lesser (the least?) Pixar effort thus far.

  • June 24, 2011, 11:22 a.m. CST

    I hear the 3D quality in Cars 2 is close to Avatar 3D

    by Titus05

    looking forward to seeing a well made 3D animated movie...

  • June 24, 2011, 11:33 a.m. CST

    Kidicarus, what Pixar films did you see?

    by jerseycajun

    Pixar films are aimed at people. Full stop. Helen suspects Bob of infidelity in "The Incredibles" and is a driving plot point. Carl has to deal with the death of his beloved wife with whom he's shared a relationship that spanned nearly their whole lives. The toys in Toy Story 3 face the real prospect of death. These are all handled in ways that are safe for kids to watch, but they aren't subjects aimed primarily at kids. For the most part, Pixar aims their films squarely at the whole of "General Audiences". If Cars 2 really does aim only at kids, as has been suggested by several reviewers, it will be a step backwards.

  • June 24, 2011, 11:36 a.m. CST

    I have no interest in CARS, let alone CARS 2.

    by blackwood

    But I am totally willing to turn critical eyes away from their cash-cow merchandising commercial for little kids who watch Thomas the Tank Engine. Everyone I know who has children incidentally owns CARS-branded bed sheets, lunch boxes, t-shirts and a shit-ton of toys. I think it's possible the negative critical reception of this film is the result of adults upset that the film doesn't pander to them like most Pixar films have. I want to see this BRAVE teaser. C'mon, internets.

  • There's plenty of gearhead talk, as well as a storyline that I think some adults will appreciate the time and attention-to-detail. Though for those who felt Cars was too slow, Cars 2 slams on the accelerator quite a bit, which could explain why Lasseter jettisoned Randy Newman and went with Michael Giacchino for the score. Plus, there's a great jab at the big debate of 'why eyes on the windshields and not as the headlights?' It's rather...shocking.

  • It's like when Apple releases a product that is a dud. Suddenly everyone piles on, mainly because they succeed so well every other time, whereas Microsoft (and Dreamworks) screw around so much that it's just business as usual, and more of a surprise when they do come up with something good.

  • June 24, 2011, 12:17 p.m. CST

    Pixar and Dreamworks Animation:

    by SifoDyasJr

    Almost all of the Pixar films will hold up 50 years from now, just as most Disney films have. Put Shrek into the holodisk player for your grandkids in the future and they'll stare blankly at the screen as the barrage of 2001 pop culture references and toilet humor soars completely over their little heads.

  • June 24, 2011, 12:38 p.m. CST

    RIP Peter Falk. Seriously.

    by D Ropaela

    I can't wait until all the DunnTards start complaining in the talkback of the Falk obit.

  • June 24, 2011, 12:54 p.m. CST

    That's funny rite there..i'll tell ya what..

    by openthepodbaydoorshal

    I will never watch this or support it in any way, because it keeps Larry The Cable Guy in fresh T shirts and overalls. Didn't we learn from Dane Cook? Stop supporting the beast and it will die.

  • June 24, 2011, 1:07 p.m. CST

    Peter Falk Obit?

    by THE_CHOPPAH

    As you wish.

  • June 24, 2011, 1:08 p.m. CST

    If you're a fan of white minstrelsy,

    by D Ropaela

    you'll love CARS 2!

  • June 24, 2011, 1:10 p.m. CST

    Metaphor

    by CreamCheeseAlchemist

    I once came across a Disney blog post with all these comments from people creeped out by the idea of a rat preparing food. I dared to suggest the rat symbolized a human being and got such a nasty response.

  • June 24, 2011, 1:16 p.m. CST

    Nordling: Suspension of disbelief

    by William Smith

    So you can accept the "Toy Story" world and not the "Cars" one? Examples: Why do the toys sometimes feel pain and sometimes not? Why is Buzz attracted to Jessie? Does he want to screw her? Can he? Do the toys eat? Who manufactured them? Are they spiritually imbued/created? Do they reproduce? How can they do what they do without a power source? Who invented the "rules" that toys cannot reveal themselves to humans? Who decided Bullseye is a dumb animal that can't speak, when Rex and Slinky can? If you think about it, similar questions can be asked of almost all the Pixar films. Interesting that pretty much all animals in the Pixar universe (Nemo, Remy, etc.) understand English? The answer is that in fantasy/fables/fairy tales, none of that matters. Pixar creates a universe that's not meant to be about the universe, but rather about the characters in them. That's why they're so special. You comment about not thinking too hard is well-placed, but should not be focused just on the Cars world.

  • June 24, 2011, 3:06 p.m. CST

    Cars is undertake

    by MandrakeRoot

  • June 24, 2011, 3:06 p.m. CST

    Cars is undertake

    by MandrakeRoot

  • June 24, 2011, 3:16 p.m. CST

    Cars is underrated.

    by MandrakeRoot

    I put off watching it for years because of the negativity, but found it was quite a good movie. Who honestly cares if the world doesn't make sense? It doesn't have to. And my guess is if this were the product of any other animation studio, it would have many more positive reviews. People have come to expect perfection after a streak of 10+ excellent movies, that a mere "good" movie will be seen as a disappointment. The reviews seem to indicate exactly this, as many discuss the studio instead of the film.

  • June 24, 2011, 5:21 p.m. CST

    Did everyone like A Bug's Life?

    by sunwukong86

    I thought it wasnt that great

  • June 24, 2011, 5:52 p.m. CST

    worst review ever

    by gun_will_travel

    Overthink? It's a world populated by cartoon cars. Wondering why they eat ice cream and wasabi is not "over-thinking," it's failing to get the basic concept. And besides, if you saw the first movie, you would know that there ARE cows in the Cars world - they just call them "tractors." Here'a clue: When the premise of the film is that the world is populated by cartoon cars instead of people, you need to accept that all of the laws of physics, biology, chemistry, and the other hard "thinking" subjects that you may have had in school do not apply. Trying to apply them doesn't suck the fun out for others, it just gives others a license to make more fun - of you.

  • June 24, 2011, 6:08 p.m. CST

    Why are there handles on the car doors if there are no people?

    by Ivan Alexeev

    Why do men have nipples? Why do we have appendixes? Did Adam & Eve have belly buttons? Who cares?

  • June 24, 2011, 6:37 p.m. CST

    Don't overthink a kids movie about talking cars

    by jimmy_009

    Thanks for the advice.

  • June 24, 2011, 10 p.m. CST

    FINALLY saw a legit preview of this on "At the Movies"

    by Triple_J_72

    Looks like shit to me.

  • June 25, 2011, 12:23 a.m. CST

    Not a single mention of Bruce Campbell?

    by Riff_Randell

    Fuck this.

  • June 25, 2011, 12:50 a.m. CST

    this is sick shit

    by WINONA_RYDERS_PUSSY_JUICE

    the Pixar cult at AICN is pretty creepy, man. You can't accept that they finally made a shitty movie? I demand a negative review of Cars 2 from Harry!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • June 25, 2011, 1:25 a.m. CST

    RYAN DUNN is NOT a hero

    by ihatefanboys

    anyone else sick of hearing about this "jackass"..he's NOT a hero, he was a reckless moron that disregarded the safety of not only his passenger, whom he murdered, but everyone else on the road.

  • June 25, 2011, 1:30 a.m. CST

    about CARS

    by ihatefanboys

    i never gave the world of CARS a second thought. it's obvious that its a world with cars instead of people... its a cartoon, with talking cars, is it any different than any other animated movie with talking animals ? surely thats not realistic either.

  • June 25, 2011, 7:51 a.m. CST

    Weakest Metaphor Ever?

    by CharlesG

    "If you're wanting CARS 2 to explain the universe it inhabits, you may as well wish for a pony while you're at it." Seriously, "wish for a pony"? Most of us probably could get a pony if we really tried -- how about something more nearly as impossible as explaining the CARS 2 universe, like a time machine or an honest politician?

  • June 25, 2011, 12:55 p.m. CST

    Anthros are really people

    by CreamCheeseAlchemist

    Whether it's the cast of Cars, Shrek, the TMNT or Dr. Tony Tony Chopper... Any viewer with an ounce of perspective understands these characters are more human than not.

  • June 26, 2011, 7:09 a.m. CST

    Cars earned Pixar several gigadollars...

    by Suskis

    I agree that Cars was (until now?) the worst Pixar movie. But it was the movie that performed best at boxoffice + merchandising. I don't think Cars 2 will harm Pixar at all. I am going to see it and, for bad it can be, it will always be better than any superhero crap we have seen lately.