Cars 2: It stinks!

[Teggy]

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/cars_2/

I'm not really surprised, it seemed like a bad idea from the get-go. This will probably be the first Pixar movie I don't see in the theater.

[leo8877]

Isn't the Cars series basically just for kids?  I thought the first one was awful, but everyone I know with kids say that the little ones love it.

[Razgon]

I liked the first one a lot, actually, but hey, I love disney movies :-)

[leo8877]

I liked the first one a lot, actually, but hey, I love disney movies :-)

Hey I love disney movies too, but Cars was a miss for me.  It's pretty much the only Pixar flick I haven't liked.

[Teggy]

Yeah, I've definitely heard from more than one parent that Cars is kid crack. Put it up on screen and the kids are good for 90 minutes or so.

[ibdoomed]

Yeah, I've definitely heard from more than one parent that Cars is kid crack. Put it up on screen and the kids are good for 90 minutes or so.

Something about filthy comics doing clean comedy that hooks them? They think they are getting away with something?

[Devil]

I liked the first one a lot, actually, but hey, I love disney movies :-)

Hey I love disney movies too, but Cars was a miss for me.  It's pretty much the only Pixar flick I haven't liked.

Same here. Thought the first one was yuck.

Taking the kids Sunday, so we'll see how it goes this time. Not promising.

[gellar]

What a shocking and unexpected turn of events!

[Chaz]

I like the first one alright, especially on repeat viewings, as a pretty harmless comedy with some funny bits.  Not nearly as good as the rest of the catalog, but still enjoyable.  The reviews for the second have pushed it into Netflix territory, which is sad.  It looked pretty questionable from the trailers, but I thought Pixar might pull it out.  Apparently not.   

[wonderpug]

What a shocking and unexpected turn of events!

It is to me!  Toy Story 3 could've been just as much of a disappointing cash-in but it was just as good as the previous ones.  Cars 2 sounds like it's a step backward even if you're viewing it through "it's more for kids" goggles.

[Bullwinkle]

Cars is my kid's least favorite Pixar movie (she and my wife didn't even bother finishing it).  It's toward the bottom of the pile for me, too (neck and neck with Wall-E).  That said, it's still a Pixar movie and is better than most of the other dreck they churn out for kids.  I think a big issue is that the theme and real story don't kick in until well into the film.

I thought the idea of Cars 2 looked better, so my hopes were up.  Now I'm sad.

This is an unexpected turn of events, given Pixar's history.  It looked like you were being sarcastic, gellar, but statistically it doesn't make much sense if you were.

[gellar]

I'm not actually.  I thought the original Cars was pretty poor relatively speaking.  It was enjoyable to me as a car guy, but the it completely lacked the magic of other Pixar movies.  It was pretty clear early on (to me) that Cars 2 existed solely to further the marketing machine that churns out lots of toys and shit kids buy.  Of all the other Pixar movies that could've had a sequel, Cars was last on the list.  It moved to the top cause it moves the most merchandise.

[PR_GMR]

Yeah, 36% at RT.. I'm gonna skip it myself.

[PR_GMR]

I'm not actually.  I thought the original Cars was pretty poor relatively speaking.  It was enjoyable to me as a car guy, but the it completely lacked the magic of other Pixar movies.  It was pretty clear early on (to me) that Cars 2 existed solely to further the marketing machine that churns out lots of toys and shit kids buy.  Of all the other Pixar movies that could've had a sequel, Cars was last on the list.  It moved to the top cause it moves the most merchandise.

Agreeing with gellar here. I finally saw 'Cars' late last year because it came bundled with my PS3. It's hands down the worst of all the Pixar films (and I've seen them all). But, it's John Lassiter's favorite film because of his attachment to cars and Rt 66. I guess he wanted to a sequel made.. so what he says goes.

[Lordnine]

I had no interest in the original Cars and only ended up seeing it because Amazon had the Bluray on sale for about $10 last Christmas.  That said, having actually watched it I don't think it deserves the hate it receives.  It IS my least favorite Pixar film but I still found it quite enjoyable.  Cars 2 on the other hand looks downright embarrassing.

[Bullwinkle]

I'm not actually.  I thought the original Cars was pretty poor relatively speaking.  It was enjoyable to me as a car guy, but the it completely lacked the magic of other Pixar movies.  It was pretty clear early on (to me) that Cars 2 existed solely to further the marketing machine that churns out lots of toys and shit kids buy.  Of all the other Pixar movies that could've had a sequel, Cars was last on the list.  It moved to the top cause it moves the most merchandise.

Agreeing with gellar here. I finally saw 'Cars' late last year because it came bundled with my PS3. It's hands down the worst of all the Pixar films (and I've seen them all). But, it's John Lassiter's favorite film because of his attachment to cars and Rt 66. I guess he wanted to a sequel made.. so what he says goes.

I'm not arguing with Cars being the weakest of the Pixar canon (though as I said, I'm with Lordnine that it's still only relatively weak), but the idea that there as no way Pixar could have pulled it together for a good sequel doesn't seem to hold water, given their history.

[Moliere]

Yeah, 36% at RT.. I'm gonna skip it myself.

You base your movie attendance by its RT score?  

Car 2 might have a low critic score, but it has a 77% audience approval rating.

[PR_GMR]

Yeah, 36% at RT.. I'm gonna skip it myself.

You base your movie attendance by its RT score?  

Car 2 might have a low critic score, but it has a 77% audience approval rating.

Hey! 50% is still betta than a 36%. 

[Rumpy]

I see Cars as being more about the merchandise and less about the movie itself. It's all about the opportunity to sell toys. Generally, Pixar movies have something both for kids and adults, but I feel this is the one franchise where that ideology fails. I think what makes it a difficult concept for me to accept is the fact that, in this world, the world is devoid of any human contact and somehow ruled by cars. I don't mean to get into the technical aspects of why this is, but it's one of things about it for me that prevent it from being watchable, at least to me. I guess it's similar to Thomas The Tank Engine, which is again something for very young kids which uses a similar concept. So, this movie will likely make loads of money like the first one made, mainly due to the kids and the merchandise. And I hear it was moreso Disney that wanted a sequel, where they originally didn't want to do one.

[gellar]

I'm not actually.  I thought the original Cars was pretty poor relatively speaking.  It was enjoyable to me as a car guy, but the it completely lacked the magic of other Pixar movies.  It was pretty clear early on (to me) that Cars 2 existed solely to further the marketing machine that churns out lots of toys and shit kids buy.  Of all the other Pixar movies that could've had a sequel, Cars was last on the list.  It moved to the top cause it moves the most merchandise.

Agreeing with gellar here. I finally saw 'Cars' late last year because it came bundled with my PS3. It's hands down the worst of all the Pixar films (and I've seen them all). But, it's John Lassiter's favorite film because of his attachment to cars and Rt 66. I guess he wanted to a sequel made.. so what he says goes.

I'm not arguing with Cars 2 being the weakest of the Pixar canon (though as I said, I'm with Lordnine that it's still only relatively weak), but the idea that there as no way Pixar could have pulled it together for a good sequel doesn't seem to hold water, given their history.

I'm not saying it was doomed to failure, I'm just saying I was expecting it.

[metallicorphan]

when i started to watch the first one i was about 20 minutes in thinking it was going to suck,but by the end of the movie i loved it....was hoping number 2 was going to be good as well

looking at the list of Pixar films,i will agree it probably is the worse,but i still liked it(not seen Toy Story 3,but everyone says that's great)

EDIT:okay i just looked at the list of Pixar films and i have not seen 'Up' or 'Ratatouille' either


ooh and i just found out there is going to be a prequel to Monsters Inc. called Monsters University ...looking forward to that one

[Malificent]

Where's my Incredibles sequel? I'm looking at you, Brad Bird.

[Razgon]

For some reason I could have sworn they made The Prince of Egypt and Eldorado, but nope - not them. I have to agree though, Incredibles was the finest movie they ever made.

I mean, even the music style was inspired - everything just clicked!

[EngineNo9]

For some reason I could have sworn they made The Prince of Egypt and Eldorado, but nope - not them.

But...those were traditional animation...?

[Razgon]

For some reason I could have sworn they made The Prince of Egypt and Eldorado, but nope - not them.

But...those were traditional animation...?

aye,my bad - I tend to get Dreamworks mixed up with Pixar in my head for some reason, sorry about that

[ATB]

First movie was the only Pixar movie that totally sucks. TOTALLY. SUCKS.  Up was not great, but Cars TOTALLY SUCKS.  We couldn't even finish it.

[Bullwinkle]

First movie was the only Pixar movie that totally sucks. TOTALLY. SUCKS.  Up was not great, but Cars TOTALLY SUCKS.  We couldn't even finish it.

You totally lost it on the "Up was not great" comment.

[Reemul]

My 4 year old loves Cars, hey it's aimed at him and he will no doubt love the 2nd as well. he can be a movie critic when he gets a bit older, for now any old fodder he loves is good enough for me.

[Bullwinkle]

BTW, if you want to drive the young set crazy, keep referring to the main character as Butterfly McQueen.  They love it.

[YellowKing]

My 22-month old is obsessed with Cars. She has never been this way for any other animated show or movie, but when the Cars 2 commercials comes on she screams, "DARS!!!! DARS!!!!" then goes into instant zombie mode. I dread the commercial coming on because I know I'll be forced to rewind it 10 times and play it over and over for her.

If she was older I'd suck it up and take her to see Cars 2 even though I'm not interested, but fortunately my wife and I agree that her attention span is not long enough for a 90-minute movie. We tested this by popping in the original Cars and she made it about 20 minutes before running off and playing in the other room.

I actually enjoyed the original Cars more than I thought I would, but it still remains near the bottom of my Pixar movies list.

[TheEgoWhip]

I see Cars as being more about the merchandise and less about the movie itself. It's all about the opportunity to sell toys. Generally, Pixar movies have something both for kids and adults, but I feel this is the one franchise where that ideology fails. I think what makes it a difficult concept for me to accept is the fact that, in this world, the world is devoid of any human contact and somehow ruled by cars. I don't mean to get into the technical aspects of why this is, but it's one of things about it for me that prevent it from being watchable, at least to me. I guess it's similar to Thomas The Tank Engine, which is again something for very young kids which uses a similar concept. So, this movie will likely make loads of money like the first one made, mainly due to the kids and the merchandise. And I hear it was moreso Disney that wanted a sequel, where they originally didn't want to do one.

Now that Disney owns Pixar outright get used to sequels and decisions made purely for financial reason as opposed to the artistic freedom that Pixar enjoyed for its first 10 movies.  Of the entire Pixar library, only Toy Story has any footprint in the merchandising segment at all, apart from Cars.  If you consider that Toy Story has 3 movies out and Cars was a single less popular movie,  its pretty impressive that Cars sells so many toys.  Disney has made a commitment to not making ANY movies that don't either cross over into massive merchandising or set up as massive tent-pole movies capable of multiple sequels.

[Bullwinkle]

I see Cars as being more about the merchandise and less about the movie itself. It's all about the opportunity to sell toys. Generally, Pixar movies have something both for kids and adults, but I feel this is the one franchise where that ideology fails. I think what makes it a difficult concept for me to accept is the fact that, in this world, the world is devoid of any human contact and somehow ruled by cars. I don't mean to get into the technical aspects of why this is, but it's one of things about it for me that prevent it from being watchable, at least to me. I guess it's similar to Thomas The Tank Engine, which is again something for very young kids which uses a similar concept. So, this movie will likely make loads of money like the first one made, mainly due to the kids and the merchandise. And I hear it was moreso Disney that wanted a sequel, where they originally didn't want to do one.

Now that Disney owns Pixar outright get used to sequels and decisions made purely for financial reason as opposed to the artistic freedom that Pixar enjoyed for its first 10 movies.  Of the entire Pixar library, only Toy Story has any footprint in the merchandising segment at all, apart from Cars.  If you consider that Toy Story has 3 movies out and Cars was a single less popular movie,  its pretty impressive that Cars sells so many toys.  Disney has made a commitment to not making ANY movies that don't either cross over into massive merchandising or set up as massive tent-pole movies capable of multiple sequels.

Wow, is that misinformed.

The guy who runs Disney Animation is John Lasseter who was the one who drove Pixar to artistic freedom and success.  He's been turning the company around for years, too.

The only person Lassiter answers to is CEO Robert Iger, but he can pretty much do as he pleases.

[ibdoomed]

I think I'm the only one just not into pixar movies. Toy story never grabbed me, I didn't like cars, wall-e was meh, and Up was annoying.

I can't imagine seeing Up in the theater either. Who thought making the kids cry at the beginning instead of the end was a good idea?!

[TheEgoWhip]

I see Cars as being more about the merchandise and less about the movie itself. It's all about the opportunity to sell toys. Generally, Pixar movies have something both for kids and adults, but I feel this is the one franchise where that ideology fails. I think what makes it a difficult concept for me to accept is the fact that, in this world, the world is devoid of any human contact and somehow ruled by cars. I don't mean to get into the technical aspects of why this is, but it's one of things about it for me that prevent it from being watchable, at least to me. I guess it's similar to Thomas The Tank Engine, which is again something for very young kids which uses a similar concept. So, this movie will likely make loads of money like the first one made, mainly due to the kids and the merchandise. And I hear it was moreso Disney that wanted a sequel, where they originally didn't want to do one.

Now that Disney owns Pixar outright get used to sequels and decisions made purely for financial reason as opposed to the artistic freedom that Pixar enjoyed for its first 10 movies.  Of the entire Pixar library, only Toy Story has any footprint in the merchandising segment at all, apart from Cars.  If you consider that Toy Story has 3 movies out and Cars was a single less popular movie,  its pretty impressive that Cars sells so many toys.  Disney has made a commitment to not making ANY movies that don't either cross over into massive merchandising or set up as massive tent-pole movies capable of multiple sequels.

Wow, is that misinformed.

The guy who runs Disney Animation is John Lasseter who was the one who drove Pixar to artistic freedom and success.  He's been turning the company around for years, too.

The only person Lassiter answers to is CEO Robert Iger, but he can pretty much do as he pleases.

So Lassiter's idea was for Pixar to do 3 sequels in a row? Toy Story 3, Cars 2, Monsters University..

[Devil]

Saw it today. Not "Planet 51" horrible, but far from Pixar good.

[Bullwinkle]

I see Cars as being more about the merchandise and less about the movie itself. It's all about the opportunity to sell toys. Generally, Pixar movies have something both for kids and adults, but I feel this is the one franchise where that ideology fails. I think what makes it a difficult concept for me to accept is the fact that, in this world, the world is devoid of any human contact and somehow ruled by cars. I don't mean to get into the technical aspects of why this is, but it's one of things about it for me that prevent it from being watchable, at least to me. I guess it's similar to Thomas The Tank Engine, which is again something for very young kids which uses a similar concept. So, this movie will likely make loads of money like the first one made, mainly due to the kids and the merchandise. And I hear it was moreso Disney that wanted a sequel, where they originally didn't want to do one.

Now that Disney owns Pixar outright get used to sequels and decisions made purely for financial reason as opposed to the artistic freedom that Pixar enjoyed for its first 10 movies.  Of the entire Pixar library, only Toy Story has any footprint in the merchandising segment at all, apart from Cars.  If you consider that Toy Story has 3 movies out and Cars was a single less popular movie,  its pretty impressive that Cars sells so many toys.  Disney has made a commitment to not making ANY movies that don't either cross over into massive merchandising or set up as massive tent-pole movies capable of multiple sequels.

Wow, is that misinformed.

The guy who runs Disney Animation is John Lasseter who was the one who drove Pixar to artistic freedom and success.  He's been turning the company around for years, too.

The only person Lassiter answers to is CEO Robert Iger, but he can pretty much do as he pleases.

So Lassiter's idea was for Pixar to do 3 sequels in a row? Toy Story 3, Cars 2, Monsters University..

Yeah, Toy Story 3 was clearly a cash-in move.

Also, Brave is coming before the Monsters, Inc. prequel.

[Sarkus]

Looks like it opened with $68m, which makes it the 4th biggest openining of the year so far.  And Toy Story aside, that's about has high as Pixar films have opened in recent years.

Unless it tanks overseas, I think they will be fine with the numbers.   Critics may not like the film, but it appears that the gulf between what crtitics like and what moviegoers like is getting bigger based on what has done well this year so far.

[Ironrod]

You guys are serious about your cartoons.

(For myself...didn't see the first one, won't see the second. Both sound too childish for me).

[rshetts2]

Looks like it opened with $68m, which makes it the 4th biggest openining of the year so far.  And Toy Story aside, that's about has high as Pixar films have opened in recent years.

Unless it tanks overseas, I think they will be fine with the numbers.   Critics may not like the film, but it appears that the gulf between what crtitics like and what moviegoers like is getting bigger based on what has done well this year so far.

Transformers 2 did $108 mil its first weekend.  There is not always a direct correlation between a movies quality and its 1st week numbers. 

[Purge]

I'd rather watch Cars 2 than Barformers.