Cars

2006 cartoon

Rating: 14/20 (Jen: 17/20; Emma: 13/20; Abbey: 20/20; Sophie: ?/20)

Plot: It all comes down to a final race between three cars with the winner, including a cocky rookie race car named Lightning McQueen, getting the Piston Cup. That's apparently a big deal. On the way, he gets stuck in a dumpy little forgotten town called Radiator Springs where he's forced to repave a road that he destroyed. Can he complete the task in enough time to get to California and the Piston Cup championship? Will his selfish feelings change as he gets to know the locals in Radiator Springs?

For me, it can be summed up in three simple words. More accurately, two words and a part of a word. Two and a half words. The words? "Get 'r done." A lot of the animation, especially the stuff at the tracks, is beautifully done, and I like Lightning as a good dynamic character voiced by Owen Wilson. It's my least favorite Pixar movie, and I wish the Pixar geniuses would tackle an Incredibles 2 instead of following up this or the monster movie.

Now, to be the opposite of randy since not enough people have participated in the poll to help me figure out the appropriate level of randiness, I'll force my children to type something about Cars.

Abbey: Cars the movie is the best movie ever because it has lots of action. I love how Lightning is a race car. When Lightning was in the truck, I liked all of the toys he had. At the end I liked how Lightning saved a racing car. I thought it was really nice when they found Lightning in Radiator Springs. They were all taking pictures.

Emma: A lot of movies are somewhat amazing and the other ones are kinda boring. But there is also a middle. Cars, in my opinion, is one of those in the middle. I like some of the parts like the whole idea of the movie but it was predictable... in some parts. cows are awesome. MOoO

Moo indeed.

11 comments:

  1. coryJanuary 7, 2011 at 6:01 PM

    Great racing scenes and a good ending make up for a slightly overlong film with a slow middle. Maybe Pixar is trying to improve on their two weakest movies (since they already made up for "Toy Story 2"). A 16.

    ReplyDelete
  2. ShaneJanuary 7, 2011 at 11:39 PM

    I thought you liked 'Toy Story 2'...I've heard some people claim it was better than the 'Toy Story' but I don't know what those people are sniffin'.

    I have a feeling that 'Cars 2' will be the first Pixar movie that I hate. Dylan said he saw a trailer and that it looked like it could be pretty good though.

    But seriously, why not an 'Incredibles 2'? That first movie sort of set up sequels, didn't it? And it's surely popular enough to be a good financial decision.

    ReplyDelete
  3. coryJanuary 8, 2011 at 10:31 AM

    I am all for an "Incredibles" sequel (especially since it is my second favorite Pixar). I liked "Toy Story 2", but after "Monsters, Inc." and "Cars", it is their third most disappointing film. At this point, I am willing to bet that I will never hate any Pixar film, at least not while they have the same people running the company. Their track record is unprecedented.


    Question: if you had to choose between Pixar's catalogue and all of the rest of Disney's combined, which is greater?

    ReplyDelete
  4. ShaneJanuary 8, 2011 at 10:43 AM

    I don't know. I'd have to look at my tiers ; )

    Without thinking, I want to say Pixar, just because of the consistency. I mean, a 14/20 is the low and that's because of point(s) being deducted for "Get 'r done"...One odd thing that I've noticed while watching 'Cars' again or 'Toy Story 3' again or some of the others: they fill me with more nostalgic feelings than the Disney movies that I grew up with. I don't know if it's because I've watched them with my kids as they grew up (something to remember is that Dylan was 1 when 'Toy Story' came out and he would sit and watch that all the time) or something else. I just don't think Disney movies ever had the heart and soul that the Pixar movies have. Creativity, beautiful animation, a willingness to experiment a little, groundbreaking ideas, wonderful characters, great voice talent, memorable moments...Disney's got all that. Not the heart though.

    I do understand this could mean that I'm a sucker for sentimentality though. I am, after all, a mushy guy, an easy-to-weep softy. The Pixar movies sentiments have more in common with silent movies that Disney, I think.

    I'm not sure if 'The Incredibles' is on my blog. I'll have to remedy that!

    ReplyDelete
  5. BarryJanuary 8, 2011 at 1:04 PM

    I give this thing a 12. I can honestly say I have never had the slightest desire to revisit this movie, since seeing it in the theater. Its flavorless cotton candy. It only gets a 12, because there are some very impressive visuals, and I guess saying goodbye to Paul Newman deserves at least double digits.

    Its between this and Wall-E as my least favorite Pixar movie. And I completely agree that they need to do an Incredibles 2.

    ReplyDelete
  6. coryJanuary 8, 2011 at 1:38 PM

    Ditto the movie-wuss problem for me. Kelly and I were moving stuff around the other day while I had "Field of Dreams" on. She can verify I teared up repeatedly. She probably won't verify that she now thinks less of me (if possible).

    I would also take Pixar (even with "Beauty and the Beast" against them). They are more complete movie experiences (including heart).

    Does this mean that "The Incredibles" have moved up from your "Tier 2 1/2"? We had an extensive discussion of whether it was better than "Ratatoullie" on the blog. We may need a tier update.

    ReplyDelete
  7. ShaneJanuary 8, 2011 at 3:10 PM

    I don't know what I typed to make you think 'Incredibles' has moved up. I've always liked it, but I still think 'Rat' is the better movie. And no, I'm not asking for a 'Rat' sequel.

    ReplyDelete
  8. ShaneJanuary 8, 2011 at 3:15 PM

    I don't know much about you, Barry, and if you'd rather keep it that way, feel free to ignore my question.

    I assume you saw this in the theater because you have at least one child. Seems obvious since you really don't seem to like cartoons much at all. Am I right?

    And 'Wall-E'...I have avoided seeing that one again because I'm afraid of what I'd think. I loved the first half so much, but that second half blows.

    ReplyDelete
  9. BarryJanuary 8, 2011 at 6:38 PM

    I dont have any kids. I actually took my Mom, for her birthday, to see Cars. She loved it because she grew up in New Mexico along Route 66. I did not have the heart to tell her that I didnt enjoy the movie all that much.


    I do like cartoons, but I hold them to the same standards that I do live action movies. I think The Incredibles was one of the very best comic book movies ever. I think Pinocchio is incredible, and Peter Pan is good. I admit that Beauty and the Beast is a fine film. (Dont tell Cory)

    Among the Pixar films I would give at least 16 scores to all the Toy Story movies, The Incredibles, Finding Nemo and Ratatouille. (A Bugs Life is close behind)


    I just think that movies like Up and Wall-E and others get kind of a pass from viewers because they are cartoons...like "Well that was pretty good, you know, for a cartoon."

    If they made Wall-E as a live action movie, it would have been ignored in the theaters. Instead its some sort of modern classic because its animated.

    ReplyDelete
  10. BarryJanuary 11, 2011 at 2:55 PM

    I was thinking about this movie again, trying to figure out why it was so bland for me.


    I finally figured it out. This movie is simply the Michael J. Fox movie Doc Hollywood, with cartoon cars taking the place of the actors.


    Its the exact same plot, with the exact same conclusion. I like Doc Hollywood better because I like Michael J. Fox more than I like Owen Wilson.

    ReplyDelete
  11. coryJanuary 12, 2011 at 4:22 PM

    And "Doc Hollywood" had Jennifer Warner walking out of the lake, which is better than anything I've ever seen in a Disney or Pixar cartoon.

    Nice catch, Barry.

    ReplyDelete