Has Cars 2 been unfairly criticized?

[The_Iceflash]

After watching it, I don't understand why so many are saying it's bad. Why? What's so bad about it? I think a lot of the criticism given to it has been extremely unfair and over the top. Agreed or no?

[REINIER]

Afraid I disagree.. Nowhere near as "good" as the original. The story- material is thin, at best.. I mean there's just nothing to do with cars besides chase/race.. The whole premise of the original showed us that, altough I know there was more to that story than meets the eye I still say that this will never be a good movie series, mainly to do with the stiffness that comes with animating cars.. Also the big goo-goo eyes Pixar is so fond off is seriously getting old by now...Not a Hater, just not a fan either!

[Jäger-Rose]

I didn't like the first Cars movie, actually. I considered it pretty boring. The sequel was in my opinion better because of the jokes. This one HAD jokes - the first not so much. Both stories aren't the best but the humour in Cars 2 made this one better. For me!

[TheValentineBros]

The first Cars movie was somewhat decent. And now, I call this the second worst Pixar movie ever, since I finally got my hands on Cars 2 last night when I rented and watched it on DVD. And yes, I consider Cars 2 an okay kids movie, but also a disappointing Pixar movie too. That's what happens when Pixar do a movie franchise about talking vehicles.

[PatrickvD]

I feel no emotional connection with any of the characters. Just because Mater sells millions in merchandise doesn't mean he's a good character.

There are many stupid yet lovable cartoon characters out there. Dopey, Pumba, Spongebob, Dory, Scuttle, I could go on and on. Mater simply isn't even close to any of these. No, he's in Jar Jar territory: annoying as hell.

So while the concept of a sequel to Cars is already fundamentally flawed, focusing it entirely on Mater was just a disaster in the making.

[seanjonmc]

Yes.

Strictly looking at the film itself, it is just OK. It is a decent film. It is not great, nor is it bad. Cars 2 was heavily bashed when it was released, which IMO it didn't deserve the beating it took.

The problem with Cars 2 is that it came from Pixar. Had it been another studio it wouldn't have been the drama that it was. Critically, Pixar's last few films were slam dunks - Wall-E, Up, Toy Story 3. The studio had something of a perfect record, and looking at all their releases, Cars 2 is undoubtedly the worst, which says a lot about their films. It didn't help that Cars 2 was a sequel to what many thought of as Pixar's previous "worst film," and featured Mater, a character that wasn't too popular.

[Flanger-Hanger]

The movie deserved every criticism it got, not just because it was from Pixar. Mater's annoying beyond belief, the spy-based polt doesn't really need to have car characters and the story feels like someting for a direct-to-video sequel. That it came from Pixar too, just made it sadder.

[toonaspie]

Cars 2 had numerous writing problems.

First off the idea of a doofus working with spies is not an original concept.

The second is with Mater himself. In both Cars movies, there seems to be a constant push on the audience to like Mater. Even Sally tells Lightening in both films that we should practically pity Mater, but why? Just because he's simple-minded? This is the thing about writing characters: if you push too hard on an audience to like a certain character despite their numerous flaws, it will only make us hate that character even more and to me Mater was a huge case of this in the second film. Mater's redeeming qualities were very little. Instead we're treated to the dumbed-down cliche of Mater being brought along out of pity having him act like a complete idiot and Lightening feeling bad for yelling at Mater even though he deserved it. We need a reason to like him upfront. Neither film really does that.

[PixarFan2006]

I stand by my opinion by saying that Cars 2 is the worst thing that Pixar has ever made. The plot looks like an eight-year old came up with it. Mater is the Jar Jar Binks of the Pixar universe. I hate beating a dead horse, but it's true. He was (barely) tolerable in the first film, but here, he is incredibly annoying. The jokes are just poorly written and mainly rely on car puns ("Like a good neighbor, Mater is there" = worst Pixar joke ever). That's all I have to say. You can disagree if you want.

[Tae]

I saw it in theaters, and honestly, I liked it.
But I do believe it deserved all the criticism it got. Pixar didn't make it because they had a good idea, a good script, not even because the first one was critically successful. They made it to cash in on merchandise sales.
The animation is beautiful (I especially liked the Big Ben scene, it was neat comparing it to the climax in Great Mouse Detective), but the plot, characters, story... it's like an hour and a half advertisement for Cars toys.
I think it could have been a good movie, if they had discarded the idea of it being a sequel, used all new characters (preferably humans, or something less clunky looking then cars), had the main character be likable instead of someone we're told to like, and re-written the script to stand up not just for kids, but for adults as well. As is, it's not bad, exactly, but for a Pixar movie, it's not very good, either.

[slave2moonlight]

Reading through this, it seems there are 3 main reasons people hate on Cars 2:

1. We expect better from PIXAR. Cars was their weakest film before this one, and so deserved a sequel the least, especially such a contrived one. It all points to cashing in on Cars toys and other merchandise.

2. PIXAR or not, the plot is extremely contrived in terms of being a follow-up to a film nothing like this, and it is oft criticized for being unoriginal too.

3. Mater is annoying and was being pushed on us more than ever here.

All this may be true, but to play devil's advocate a bit:

For all of us who can't stand Mater, there are probably even more people who love him. I assume this because Larry the Cable Guy is one popular S.O.B. in certain, very large circles. Personally, I can find him funny in his films (I don't care for his stand-up much, give me Ron White), and I think he works as Mater. However, I don't think Mater is as great as PIXAR thinks he is. I didn't need a Mater movie or tons of shorts about him when I like all of PIXAR's other characters more. However, the shorts are fine and enjoyable, and in all honesty, when I rewatched Cars 2 at home after buying the blu, as I suspect a lot of us did here, even some of the haters, I actually found it much more enjoyable (when I ignored the fact that PIXAR should be giving us something better). It's just an entertaining popcorn flick, but I would have preferred something as well done as Incredibles for a new PIXAR action flick. If anything from them begged for a sequel...

The plot was contrived and unoriginal, no doubt. I DO have to mention though, that some better PIXAR films aren't that original either. A Bug's Life is Three Amigos, Cars 1 is Doc Hollywood, and though they had interesting elements/spins, Incredibles is largely a standard superhero team film and Toy Story is a reluctant-buddy pic.

And, I do agree with what some folks think, that if this film came from a different company, it'd be considered pretty good. The fact that it is from PIXAR definitely raises the bar of judgement. But, it works that way for everyone. If we know you could do better, we're going to call you on it.

I also have to agree with comments about the cars themselves not being a great idea for a world of movies. When you remove the human element from cars, they make absolutely no sense. I'm fine with living cars, I'm a huge Herbie fan. I love Speed Buggy and Wonderbug, and Susie the Little Blue Coup. But, why do these cars have doors and seats and steering wheels? Why? A world of cars with no people is just frustratingly stupid. As was said before, all they can do is races and chases. I don't imagine "Planes" will be much different, and I can't help but feel Lasseter is giving us the finger with that one, when he took so much praise for shutting down direct to video sequels but then comes out with this kinda stuff... Oy.

Anyway, my point is, all the complaints are correct, but don't there aren't a ton of people who love Mater, and in truth, Cars 2 IS entertaining if you just allow yourself to accept it. But, PIXAR usually has such good ideas, even when they're a total ripoff like A Bug's Life, that they shouldn't be giving us lame things like this nonsensical world of Cars TWICE (and then some!).

[DarthPrime]

I admit I didn't like Cars 2 at first. I was bored in the theater, but picked up the Blu-ray during the holidays and actually found it enjoyable. Its sort of grew on me since. Its not a great film, and I agree its one of Pixar's weakest (if not the weakest) films, but its... not bad.

If it didn't have Pixar attached to it, I think it would be looked at a lot different. Pixar has raised the bar with their movies, and this one fell short. I actually enjoyed that it abandoned the emotional stuff that has been in recent Pixar films (Up, Toy Story 3, Wall-E). I'm not saying those are bad films, far from it, but just having a fun story/"popcorn flick" was a nice change of pace.

[Semaj]

The problem with Cars 2 is that nobody really asked for a Cars sequel.

Part of why Pixar has had so much respect is because they managed to avoid much of the trends that have characterized modern film-making. And didn't John Lasseter just teach Disney to get over their own sequel fetish?

If Pixar is going to start making films based from the "bottom line", then of course people are going to start second-guessing their films, and of course critics and award shows will deny them the acclaim that their previous films deserved.

[jazzflower92]

I have a feeling the reason they made Cars 2 is remember John Lassestor is a big car fan and one of the reasons he made Cars was the fact that it was a pet project to his fasination.

I theorized that Cars 2 was made because he wanted to do more with his pet project and thought since people didn't mind sequels to Toy Story then they wouldn't mind a sequel to his pet project.

[Sotiris]

No. The original Cars was not criticized enough.

I think Cars 2 being made has less to do with merchandising opportunities and more to do with Lasseter's ego. He loves cars, spy movies, and identifies with the Mater character and he wanted to do a sequel despite the fact that audience and critics disliked the original.

[jazzflower92]

In TV Tropes, Mater would be called a "Creator's Pet" which was formely named "The Wesley".Mater is the character adored by Lassetor but hated by many.

[The_Iceflash]

and yet, in spite of its criticisms, it still ends up being better than other studios' animated output.

[PatrickvD]

and yet, in spite of its criticisms, it still ends up being better than other studios' animated output.

Nope. Kung Fu Panda 2, Puss in Boots, Rango and Pooh were all better. And not just by a little.

[Super Aurora]

After watching it, I don't understand why so many are saying it's bad. Why? What's so bad about it?

Why is Cars 2 bad?

It promote car pollution. Think of the poor ozone layer, man.

[The_Iceflash]

and yet, in spite of its criticisms, it still ends up being better than other studios' animated output.

Nope. Kung Fu Panda 2, Puss in Boots, Rango and Pooh were all better. And not just by a little.

Pooh was definately better. The other three you mentioned, definitely not.

After watching it, I don't understand why so many are saying it's bad. Why? What's so bad about it?

Why is Cars 2 bad?

It promote car pollution. Think of the poor ozone layer, man.