Cars 2

Brad Bird wrote the following narration for Anton Ego in “Ratatouille”: “In many ways, the work of a critic is easy. We risk very little yet enjoy a position over those who offer up their work and their selves to our judgment. We thrive on negative criticism, which is fun to write and to read. But the bitter truth we critics must face is that, in the grand scheme of things, the average piece of junk is more meaningful than our criticism designating it so.” It appears that some critics (many of whom praised “Ratatouille”) missed that message. I was watching rottentomatoes.com in the days preceding the release of “Cars 2” like it was the playoffs. I wanted to see if Pixar’s newest animated feature would go 12 for 12 in attaining critical “freshness” and it was heart wrenching to see it fail in doing so. Then I saw the film and I realized what was going on. I would bet that a lot of critics were waiting for Pixar to release a dud and now that the company has released a moderate film, the critics quickly voiced their disappointment that they have been waiting to give for years. Some people love to watch something mighty fall. They wait for one mistake and then exaggerate it. Not only that but they will not let Pixar forget it. I on the other hand, like some notable critics such as the late Roger Ebert, found “Cars 2” to be just fine. I am also not alone in my belief that if any other studio had made this movie, it wouldn't have been underrated. The story may be a little convoluted the first time but it could have been much worse. The film looked amazing in 3D also. Pixar continues to advance technology. The complexity of the settings was very impressive.

Even though the story of “Cars 2” wasn’t terrible, there were mistakes that I don't mind admitting. The story of this film reflects those in the spy genre. There appears to have been a genuine attempt at creating a spy tale rather than purely spoofing it and that makes the movie sort of fun. The first film however was not a spy movie and when you change the genre of the franchise like in the “Pirates of the Caribbean” movies, imperfections arise. The genre of the first three Toy Story films never really changed over the course of 15 years. The story of "Toy Story" entailed trying to get back to Andy and the sequels had similar motifs. Even though "Toy Story 2" had a rescue motif and "Toy Story 3" had that plus an escape motif, those story patterns included the all important goal of the characters to get back to Andy. I think "Cars 2" would have been better if the focus of the film was on Lightning McQueen & Mater’s relationship as well as on racing and not on the spy angle. The plot is not only a little confusing when you first see it but it had a fast pace. You have to watch it a second time in order to understand everything. I like the scene where McQueen gets advice in Italy concerning his difficult relationship with Mater but the characters that give him that advice are new as of that scene. I would have liked it better if Guido or Luigi talked to McQueen as opposed to Luigi’s uncle. It feels like Mater is the star of this movie instead of McQueen and I would rather it have been the other way around. When you create a supporting character, they usually cannot fill the shoes (or wheels in this case) of the main protagonist. The subsequent Pixar films "Monsters University" and "Finding Dory" were able to get away with this but not "Cars 2". There are scenes where the relationship between Mater and Shiftwell is developed but it is not as genuine as in past Pixar relationships. That had a fast pace too. One good thing I can say about the story is that I like how the plot point of leaking oil is reprised in the movie such as during Mater’s dream sequence. The audience must remember that moment for the end of the movie. The first time I saw "Cars 2", I could tell that it was a clue but I still did not suspect the car that ended up being the mastermind behind this secret plot. It was a good twist at the end of the movie. I find it weird that the Queen knighted Mater when he is not a British citizen. Not even Basil of Baker Street and Dr. Dawson were given that honor in “The Great Mouse Detective”. I do like the how McQueen and Bernoulli become friends at the end of the movie but some others might say that it seems a little too convenient. I think I would have enjoyed "Cars 2" better if it was like "Rocky 2" and the relationship troubles between McQueen & Mater were set around McQueen trying to win his first Piston Cup. Despite these shortcomings, "Cars 2" was still entertaining so that is what matters most.

There are elements in “Cars 2” that make up for the story problems. The action is more enjoyable upon multiple viewings first of all. Secondly, Pixar continues to add complexity and advance technology with each passing film. There is a Pixar “wow moment” in this movie and as with the first “Cars” movie, we see it towards the start of film. I was quite impressed with the opening montage of Tokyo with its lighting and complexity. The characters also look even more detailed and shiny than before. The 3D really helps with this. The characters of McMissile and Shiftwell are perfect specimens in showing the advancements that Pixar has made. All the characters and settings in this movie appear more real than those in the first film. I like being able to spot hidden jokes that other audience members don't see but some of them seen in “Cars 2” would take too long to explain. I liked how “The Incredimobiles” was showing at the Radiator Springs Drive-in Theater and I liked seeing “Gastow’s” in Paris. Another funny moment was the "LasseTyre" ad during the London Race. All the returning cast members did great. It was nice to hear Pixar alumni such as John Ratzenberger, Guido Quaroni, Bonnie Hunt and Jeff Garlin. I found nothing wrong with Michael Caine’s performance. He made Finn a reputable spy but it was hard to forget completely that he was playing that character. Other Pixar characters are cast in such a way that you forget the actor playing the voice but Caine's voice was a little too recognizable for me. It was cool to hear Jason Isaacs, Joe Mantegna, Eddie Izzard and Venessa Redgrave in this movie too. John Turturro was the perfect choice as Francesco Bernoulli.

Pixar will continue to make great movies but as mentioned, critics will always bring up "Cars 2" because they love "blood in the water". I think people should stop putting monkeys on other people's backs just because they can. I think there are some good possible reasons as to why this film is not as good as other Pixar movies. Half way through production, John Lasseter suddenly became the director and so maybe Pixar knew that “Cars 2” wasn’t working and they needed to save it. By that point, it might have been too late to make it a critical hit but I believe that Lasseter is the reason why I enjoyed this movie as opposed to being disappointed by it. Another possible cause for the film’s critical letdown was that maybe Pixar was focusing a lot on “Toy Story 3” and not enough attention was given to the story of “Cars 2”. I don’t mind that because I would much rather “Cars 2” be a failure than that movie. I also think that following in the shadow of “Toy Story 3” brought unfortunate critical consequences for “Cars 2” in the same way that the original “Cars” suffered because of “The Incredibles”. Funny enough, "Cars" was supposed to be released first until release dates were changed. "Cars 2" will appeal to kids the most but thank heaven Pixar did not screw it up completely. I really should not doubt Pixar when others do but I will admit it is getting harder with the current trends of Hollywood. Starting with the first “Cars”, I have always felt fear that every new Pixar film might disappoint me. So far, Pixar continues to entertain me. Sure “Cars 2” wasn’t perfect but sequels rarely are. Pixar worked hard on the “Toy Story” films because of their reputation but the status of the original “Cars” was not as high and therefore this sequel maybe did not have as much pressure to perform. No one is perfect and even Walt Disney made mistakes but Pixar for over 15 years was able to contradict the laws of Hollywood. We should not forget that fact because Pixar can easily “brave” new frontiers and come out just fine.

4 Stars out of 5