I don’t see how “international” neans “American,” even a hyphenated American.
I have actually create a thread awhile back on this topic of racial identity in the world of Cars.
But yes, the distinct lack of African representation (not absence, clearly evidenced by the presence of Flo, who unfortunately has been depicted as Caucasian in a few fanarts to my amusement) is certainly a worthwhile point of discussion.
Heard of the Dakar Rally? I’m actually a little disappointed that Pixar hasn’t featured a representative from Africa as a jeep or ATV.
As a theoretical aside, I find it quite interesting that African-Americans, Native-Americans, Latino-Americans, and Asian-Americans are semantically-represented as a continent, whereas European-Americans are expressed as distinct nations (Italian-American, Irish-American, etc.). Occasionally we might hear someone being described as Pinoy-American, or Mexican-American, but very rarely do we hear European-American, Senagelese-American, or American of the Apache Nation.
But “international”, by definition, should include cultural-subsets of nations. This means Japanese-Americans, African-Brits, Chinese-Australians, Singapore-Malaysians, etc.
This is where it gets confusing in the Cars world logic, because a Chevy Impala is not manufactured in Mexico (to my knowledge), yet it is codified as a ‘Latino’ because it just happens to be a very popular vehicle in that ethnic group’s culture. Likewise, a Bel-Air, while not an ‘African’ car per se, has an African-American voice (as opposed to a South African, or Botswana accent), because she is a ‘Motown’ singer, who are typically black artistes.
Still with me?
This of course, raises more conundrums. I wrote a crossover fanfic with Cars and 24 awhile back (I’m not posting a link, but you can search it up). The main character, Jack Bauer, is an American of Germanic descent. Does this mean he should be an all-American car like a Ford Mustang, or a BMW?
In a nutshell, I’m all for more racial representation, African, African-American, or otherwise. It’s just that the Cars world poses a problem because of the disparate development of automotive technology all over the world.
@LOF:
This.
I too am all for representing all races in this movie…besides, what does this really have to do with anything anyways? I don’t understand what kind of a point you are trying to make LOF.
Want to know why there are no African cars in the Cars world? Because they would have nothing to differ them from other cars without a backlash.
In the Cars world, Cars are all different colors, regardless of where they’re from. So you couldn’t make Black/brown cars, as we wouldn’t identify them with Africa.
That leaves actual quirks. We know Finn is British because of his accent. We can tell Japanese Cars from their eyes and small looks.
How would we tell African Cars? Specifically African American cars? Have a gangster like appearance or voice? Make them look poor/damaged?
There’s no way to depict them without it looking racist.
That’s not true,I don’t know what your angle is with this post but that is a very ignorant way of portraying it. You could tell Flo was black could you not? Ok then… 
Actually, there is. As xCarsLuverx pointed out, Flo is African-American and she is portrayed in a respectful and charismatic manner. She doesn’t have a gangster-like appearance or voice, or poor/damaged.
In fact, I’m kinda wondering why you gave those examples as ‘signs’ of an African car. 
Lewis Hamilton will be in Cars 2, and he’s a sophisticated-looking sportscar. For all we know, Holley could be a black British (many black British people have very English accents!).
As you’ve said, it’s not easy to codify race into the Cars world. But there are tell-tale signs: the accent, the name, the car model (Ramone is a lowrider, a culturally-significant vehicle type in Latino car culture), the nationality, etc.
If I were to portray an African-American car, I would pick any American car and give it an African-American accent. If I were to portray a car from the African continent, I would choose a sturdy jeep, ATV, or SUV, or open-back truck, because of the harsh climate. These aren’t any more racist ways of depiction than if I were to choose a minivan to portray an American suburbanite or a kei car for a Japanese.
So this is a hard review to write. On one hand, Cars 2 is better than 95% of what any other animation studio is putting out (that five percent is home to the odd DreamWorks movie that is actually great like How to Train Your Dragon, and one-off successes from great filmmakers like Henry Selick’s “Coraline” and Gore Verbinski’s “Rango”), but on the other hand it’s a significant step down from the excellence bordering on perfection we’ve come to expect from Pixar. True, a step down from excellence is still good, but considering the pedigree it’s somewhat disappointing; therein lies my quandary.
Cars 2 tells a broader story than the original Cars, taking place in many locales across four different countries. In Cars 2 Lightning McQueen has just come back from a Piston Cup race and is getting ready to settle down after the end of Racing Season, but all the while invitations are being sent for a World Grand Prix, a tournament across three different countries featuring the world’s best racers and McQueen is invited. He takes Mater along for the ride and through a series of coincidences Mater eventually gets mistaken for an American Spy by British Intelligence Agent Finn McMissile (think James Bond voiced by Michael Caine). High speed races and spy movie action set pieces ensue, and there are many fun moments and good laughs along the way. The visuals are stunning, as are to be expected with Pixar, and the voice work is just as wonderful as it always is in a Pixar film (Michael Caine absolutely steals the show). However, there are elements that hold it back from greatness.
The whole affair feels very safe and almost unambitious, there’s nothing in the film that really wowed me and while I enjoyed myself the movie never really gripped me like other Pixar films do. As a member of the audience, I felt like I was just watching a movie rather than being caught up in a story, the characters were fun, but I never connected with them in the same way I’ve connected with Woody, Marlin, Flik, Carl Fredricksen, or WALL•E; I didn’t even connect with Lightning McQueen or Mater in the same way I did in the first film. They were entertaining characters, but they just didn’t have that same spark of life that makes them feel real. It didn’t have the same magic that I’ve come to expect from Pixar.
Again, this is my problem. Looking at what I’ve written, I keep comparing it to other Pixar films and not looking at it on its own merit. It doesn’t necessarily seem right to hold Cars 2 accountable for Toy Story 2, Ratatouille, and WALL•E; completely on its own merit Cars 2 is a fun, entertaining film with great visuals and good characters. I can think of much worse ways to spend a Friday night, and I would definitely be willing to see it again. However, that comparison is inevitable due to the fact that Pixar has established such a strong precedent of not just quality, but excellence over the past 25 years. As a follow up to 11 of the best films of the past decade and a half, it’s a bit of a letdown. It is by no means a bad film, and the current Tomatometer rating it has is an absolute travesty. Pixar’s reputation has not been tarnished and they’re still, by far, the best studio in Hollywood.
Even though Cars 2 is a bit of a disappointment, I think it’s probably healthy for the studio. I was discussing it with my dad and he brought up the point that working under the pressure of your audience expecting a masterpiece every single year must be a nightmare, and while Cars 2 is disappointing, the fact that Pixar released a film that’s just good instead of great gives them some more room to breathe. The critics have had their chance to give Pixar hell (and I’m sure there were many who were eagerly awaiting such an opportunity) and Pixar was able to make a film that didn’t need to be a masterpiece to be entertaining.
So now I’ve got to put an actual score on this thing. Ergh- I was dreading this moment… I’m going to cheat a little bit here and give this film two scores, one accounting for Pixar’s history and the expectations that brings with it, and one that does not. So treating Cars 2 as the followup to Toy Story, A Bug’s Life, Toy Story 2, Monsters, Inc., Finding Nemo, The Incredibles, Cars, Ratatouille, WALL•E, Up, and Toy Story 3, Cars 2 gets a:
C+
Now, judging Cars 2 completely by itself, without the legacy of Pixar as a factor it earns a:
B
NOTE: I originally posted this in the Central Cars 2 Discussion thread, but I decided that this would be a better place for it.
I just got back from Cars 2 and I think I can say that I didn’t find it to be the trash that some of those harsh reviewers mentioned seemed to suggest. In fact it actually left me feeling that Mater is probably a very misunderstood Pixar character. I understand that a lot of the general disdain for both films and even the franchise has to do with people who just don’t like Mater as a character. There are people who just see him as being the big dimwitted stereotype. There are a lot of modern cartoons on television that have that kind of trend of being all about the “idiot character” and completely run with how obnoxious they can be because that’s what’s perceived to be funny. But I felt that Pixar did something with this film that impressed me: they used the story to acknowledge to both the audience and Mater himself that he does get seen by others as being the fool (as Finn McMissile put it) because of his clowning around, and when Mater contemplates that he starts feeling ashamed and believes that he’s just an embarrassment to Lightning [spoil]and before he wakes up in the clock tower they show that he’s haunted by all the silly things he’s done earlier in front of Lightning, which until then a lot of us were seeing as just the usual gags[/spoil]. It’s true, Mater isn’t completely bright and does have a real goofy personality, but I think that he still has his own charming qualities that keep him more separate from that whole “idiot character” genre I mentioned. You could say the same thing about, I don’t know… Walt Disney’s own Goofy.
But I should get back to talking about the rest of the film besides Mater. I think my only real issue is that the story does get a little fast-paced like others have said, and that’s kind of a complete contrast to the slow-pace of the original (which I defend as being part of the major story point of slowing down in life). It’s because of this that the ending’s reveal of the true villain and how Mater figures it all out was a little difficult to follow. I think it may take some multiple viewings for me to analyze everything that happens and put the pieces together as to how they lead up to one another, because I was under the impression that Professor Z was the main villain. I also liked the Doc Hudson reference and thought that the rest of the Radiator Springs characters got a fair amount of screen time, Sally included.
Hawaiian Vacation was great also. It seemed a little too short for my taste, but it was still nice to see more of the Toy Story gang.
So all-in-all I liked Cars 2. Like I said, I did not find it as bad as people believed it would be. Once I got engrossed in the story I felt like some of my concerns were being put to ease and I could walk out feeling like I had an enjoyable time, and feeling more confident in the idea that Pixar doesn’t make bad films. Least favorable ones, maybe, but not bad. And the experience was probably more meaningful in that I was seeing it with my closest friend, and that was pretty much a major theme of this film as well as the first.
Now bring on Monsters University!
You took the words right out of my mouth, Flik-E… all of them. 
Including the part about seeing it with my closest friend!
But yes, a lot of people seemed to have a problem with Mater being the protagonist for some reason. It’s like they couldn’t see what you were talking about. What were they expecting after seeing that bit in the trailer with “Idiot? So that’s how you see me?” “That’s how everybody sees you”, etc…? 
I’m glad we can discuss the movie a little more freely here without covering every little thing in spoiler tags. I came out with really mixed feelings. I waited 5 years for the sequel to my favourite movie and it wasn’t anything like I expected, both good and bad. I for one didn’t like the shift of spotlight. In the first film there is a lot of focus on Lightning, Sally, Doc and Mater. In the sequel it felt like everything was focused onto Mater while Lightning wasn’t even that impotant and Sally was cast into the corner as a shadow. Doc lost his spot too for obvious and understandable reasons. I really appreciate that they touched on his death while it could have gone a tiny bit more in-depth. I was confused by why Lizzy would still be around when Doc isn’t? Well, I like her anyways so I’ll let it slide. I was surprised by the maturity of this film in a couple ways. There was death, violence, alcoholic references etc but it was a nice change seeing that not all Pixar fans are little kids. The spy aspect was quite interesting but didn’t blow me away, I found the race scenes to be brilliant though, I wish there was more of that. And I loved the parts with Guido and Luigi, that surprised me. I mean come on, that was the most adorbable thing EVER when [spoil]Guido was crying![/spoil]. The critics are right though when they say it lacked emotionally, besides the theme of friendship there wasn’t much else. Minimal romance was something I didn’t like about the movie but I’m a total SalQueen shipper so that can be expected from me. 
I really loved the bit at the end though when [spoil]Holley called herself Mater’s girlfriend[/spoil]. I honestly didn’t think I would like that going into the movie but after watching it I actually thought it was quite cute. Overall I liked the movie, it just wasn’t exactly what I would have liked to see for a sequel.
Well, I thought this movie was alright. I expected something better out of Pixar. I liked Flynn & Holley, I liked the eye candy of the international scene.
But I can’t overlook the fact of Mater being the main character. Lightning was rarely even there, let alone the rest of the Radiator Springs Cast. They were the main reason I loved the first movie so much. Also I felt that the Doc tribute was too short and brushed over. Also, I all those cool supporting characters like Carla and Schnell, and they didn’t even say a word? I am disapointed with all those character summeries Pixar released. It made me look for something that wasn’t there.
I’m going to see the movie again, and hopefully I’ll enjoy it more a second time. But I enjoyed Rio, Rango, and even Kung Fu Panda 2 much more than I had with Cars 2.
^Agreed, agreed, agreed. There was so much “eye candy” I couldn’t even take it in all at once. Once I buy the DVD I’m going to watch it a million times for the purpose of actually seeing it all. And your point about Mater is so correct. I like his character but Lightning was kind of thrown under the bus. I mean normally when you watch a sequel the main character is still very prominent, and he wasn’t at all. I too missed the RS cast, their parts were cut even more than I thought they would be. And I won’t repeat this
because if I did I would just be saying the exact same thing. One scene I really liked though was the scene up at Wheel Well. They totally transformed the place, it was stunning. That was probably my favourite part of the film. And Francesco really stole the show for me, his character is just hiliarious.
I thought they handled the Doc Hudson tribute well, but I totally agree with you about the supporting characters! After seeing their turn-arounds and reading their descriptions on the website, I was looking so forward to seeing them talk in the movie… and they didn’t! Especially Carla Veloso (sp?), she seemed pretty cool.
I’m glad you both know where I’m coming from and share some of my thoughts. I do want to see the movie again. Maybe I’ll be less overwhelmed by it and enjoy it more from a second vieweing.
Yup. I liked it for the most part but there were a lot of things I didn’t like either. I think I could benefit from watching it at least a few more times once it hits DVD.
Agreed. Especially since the Blu-Ray should have a Cine-Explore commentary like the other Pixar films, so we can at least hope that John and Brad will give more insight into how the film came together the way it did. Maybe I should save any final judgments of the film until then, because for now I just feel like the film was okay.
My dad and little brother saw the movie tonight. They’re both fans of Pixar, especially Cars. They were quoting the movie when they got home! My dad said it was alright, but funny too!
Hahaha! I love quoting movies! A good friend of mine and I used to do it with Cars every chance we got. 
My younger brother actually said he liked the sequel better than the first. Probably because this one had more action and stuff.
This movie was better than Toy Story 3.
braces for flame attack You’re brave to say that, I think it was about as good as Toy Story 3. That’s mostly just 'cause I’m a Cars fan so I’m biased sometimes.