Comments about Cars being Pixar's "weakest" film

Pixar's Feature Films Cars
#1

Some people keep saying this, and the fact is that if any Pixar movie is their weakest film, it’s A Bug’s Life. Why? Because A Bug’s Life is not better than Toy Story. If Pixar had not had Disney backing them up, A Bug’s Life would have finished them off. Thank goodness that didn’t happen, but the SECOND film a movie company releases should be better than the first. I have not been able to watch A Bug’s Life since it first came out on VHS, because I remember not liking it. Even if it is a good film… it is not better than Toy Story.

And people who don’t like Cars tend to be people who cannot comprehend how cars can be biological machines. I tried to explain to someone that in Cars 2 fans have surmised that a car might die because there is a scene in one trailer that looks like Lightning and Mater are crying, but the person I was talking to asked, “How can a car die?” And someone suggested a dead battery…failing to see that biological cars cannot running on batteries.

That the cars in Pixar’s world are biological cannot be denied. They, like other organic creatures, require food and have the need to relieve themselves. They make choices that robots wouldn’t be able to make unless programmed into them, except in stories where mechanical men break the Three Laws of Robotics.

Then someone else said that he could believe toys can talk and move around, and rats wanting to cook, and all, but he could not allow his suspension of believability to believe that cars could be biological in a world devoid of humans.

fMaybe the people who dislike Cars hate movies with so many lessons as well?

Cars teaches that one should not be self-centered, should not cheat, that their are personal values that are more significant than having a high-paying job. That eventually, if you persist in foul play, you will be found out and the public will hate you. That sometimes the things you never even thought existed can capture your heart and hold it forever. That there is beauty in simple things. That slowing down and experiencing life day by day is better than always being in the fact lane.

It teaches all this, and more. Yes, from what John Lasseter said, Cars 2 is not supposed to teach anything. But I am irked by people who insist on saying it will be terrible, when it hasn’t been released yet.

#2

Well that’s just like your opinion man.

Seriously though, I still would say that A Bug’s Life is better than Cars. Toy Story was first, but A Bug’s Life was the film that made me say “Wow, these guys are really creative.” I love both films, and Cars especially fills me with joy. This may occur with all Pixar films, but whenever I watch Cars I can’t help but store a big goofy grin on my face.

As for haters of Cars 2, Pixar Planet users call dibs on saying Cars 2 was going to be fantastic before the first reviews were made public. :trollface:

#3

A Bug’s Life is not horrible. And who said it had to be better than Toy Story? I never heard of this law that a second film is always better than the first. Where do you get this stuff from? And you should really quit being so confrontational. Most of the people on this forum who aren’t excited for Cars 2 only feel that way because they didn’t like the first one, which is entirely acceptable.

#4

Actually, after making this post I remembered that EVERY PIXAR FILM since The Incredibles has been called “stupid” before anyone saw it. In fact, someone said that they thought Finding Nemo would be terrible when it was advertised.

I’m still not used to this “OMG, what was Pixar thinking? They’re going to fail” statement before a movie comes out, then after the people who said this see the movie, going, “Best Pixar movie ever!” or even worse, a flat-out denial that they ever thought the movie would be bad.

It’s common sense that if a film company cannot match the quality of their first film with their second, they are doomed to failure, UNLESS they have a mother company supporting them, as Pixar did. Why do you think it was so urgent to bring Toy Story 2 out so soon after A Bug’s Life? Because they had to correct their error of not making a film that matched their first.

Not to mention that A Bug’s Life teaches kids that socialism is better than democracy…though luckily kids don’t understand this bit…only adults do.

#5

Everything you just said in this quote is not true. Bug’s Life wasn’t as huge a success as Toy Story, but it did prove to the world that Pixar could make another good movie, and that Toy Story wasn’t a one-of-a-kind fluke. It was not “so urgent” that TS2 come out, Pixar would not have been bankrupted by A Bug’s life without disney’s money. Toy Story 2 was not created to make up for Bug’s Life’s failure (as it didn’t fail), but it was wildly more successful than ABL, and overshadowed ABL’s success.

As for the socialism thing, I’m pretty sure you’ve never seen this movie at all. You could not have missed the point any worse than this.

#6

I agree with reaper. I’ll also add that TS2 was created “so urgently” after ABL because Disney was going to make it into a direct to video release and Pixar had to step up and finish it in a record time.

And yes, you missed ABL point if you think it’s about teaching socialism.

About the main topic of the post, yes, I think Cars is definitely the weakest to date (which means it’s still a good movie)

It has nothing to do with me not accepting the concept (as you said, I couldn’t to accept that toys are alive and rats can cook either if I were like that) I can perfectly do that. It hasn’t anything to do with the lessons, either. What really makes Cars the weakest is a script that isn’t as strong as the other releases and a not so neat execution of the film.

What mostly fails about your argument is the statement that ABL is weak just cause it isn’t as good as Toy Story. And so what?

I would agree, though, that ABL is the second weakest.

#7

Nice thread, but I’m afraid hat this topic has been discussed many times before. But of course, I love a good debate!

First thing, though, you spelled ‘accusations’ wrong. Secondly, it’s not so much an accusation as more of a comment. According to FreeOnlineDictionary, to ‘accuse’ means:

  1. To charge with a shortcoming or error.
  2. To charge formally with a wrongdoing

The opinion that Cars is Pixar’s weakest film is neither a shortcoming, error, or wrongdoing. It is an opinion. I could believe Toy Story 3 or Wall-E or Up or Ratatouille was Pixar’s weakest film and I would be right. And wrong, at the same time.

So I’ve changed the title to reflect the sentiment more accurately.

With regards to your arguments, I believe Cars had some thought put into it, but it’s the Pixar world with the weakest logic. Some Pixar worlds have ‘logic issues’, like Wall-E’s one-company economy (how does an economy operate if there’s only one MNC to do transactions with itself) or Toy Story 2 (how does the Prospector ‘fart’ in the end credits?). But Cars has a lot of suspension of disbelief going on that leads to fan speculation, ie Where do cars come from? Who made the first car? Is there a concept of ethnicity or race? Can one choose what model one wants to be? etc.

This weak world-building structure is what leads to a lot of criticisms by cynical people. I personally don’t have a problem, as I like to play ‘fan speculation’ as well, but I can understand how some may be annoyed at not having all the ‘world mechanics’ handed to them on a plate.

As for the morals, I think Cars has a great message about humility and redemption. Not surprisingly a lot of people say it was inspired by Doc Hollywood. The recent superhero movie Thor also reminded me of Cars message in many ways.

What was your source? Well, that is kind of disappointing to hear. But judging from the trailers, I predict that there is a moral theme woven in there: [spoil]Stick by your true friends, because they will always be there to help you in times of need.[/spoil]

#8

I agree with this entirely. I bolded the Prospector thing because it made me LOL. Literally.

Anyway, I do think Cars is the weakest Pixar film, followed by ABL, TS3(I went there) and Finding Nemo. Now, note none of these films are bad. I don’t think any of them are bad, and I doubt many sane people do. But, Cars does stand out as a bit of a weirdo against the Pixar back drop of films. Personally, this is part of the reason I find it so entertaining. I like the tractor-tipping scene and the some what off Shrek-like humor. But, not everybody is into this stuff. Some people don’t like Cars as much because it’s just not the most universal thing in the world. And even if it was, there would still be people who didn’t like it. That’s how the world works.

P.S. I’m sorry if I offended anyone with the examples I used as my opinions of the “weakest”. I know most people probably resent me and disagree with me for the last two, but that is my opinion and I’m not changing my mind just because most people probably think I’m nuts.

#9

I do like A Bug’s Life, But I like Cars more. Both of them are good movies but never really cared for A Bug’s Life as much.

#10

I’m glad somebody brought this topic up. I am so sick and tired of hearing that exact phrase “Cars is Pixar’s weakest/worst”. What makes a film the weakest? Is it based purely on how popular it is, how big its fan base is? That’s how it seems to work and I firmly believe that Cars is not Pixar’s weakest. I understand that a lot of people don’t like it, but that does not make it a poor film. As for the good ol’ logic complaint (this isn’t directed at anyone, I’ve heard it a million times). Well, let me tell you this…it’s a movie. And a kids movie at that. Of course there will be loop holes and things that don’t seem totally realistic. That’s just how it is. All you need to do is use your imagination, transport yourself to the world of Cars and believe it’s possible and real. We’ve been trained like blood hounds to sniff out faults and forget that sometimes the real joy comes from dreaming and pretending. Is that not one of the biggest goals of a movie? To provide you with entertainment and allow you to escape into a story that sometimes takes place in a more creative world than our own.

*End of rant :stuck_out_tongue: *

#11

No, that’s not it. After all, Cars has one of the biggest Pixar fanbases.

Being the weakest among incredibly good films isn’t being a poor movie. Just a little below the quality of the rest. But never bad, no sir. It’s still an awesome film.

#12

Weakest Pixar film? Pah! No such thing!

Seriously, it’s been commented above; none of their films are bad. Not Cars, and certainly not A Bug’s Life. It’s someones opinion that Cars is the weakest of the films, but maybe it’s better not to bother “ranking” the films at all, and enjoy them as they come. Because, I may make bold statements about WALL-E being my favourite, but I actually want to watch Finding Nemo on that given day. Of course there will be films you have a soft spot for (ABL is mine), and agree that ABL and Cars get a lot of unnecessary stick, especially when you consider how many people actually liked them when they weren’t being compared, and how much effort and heart Lasseter and everyone else put into these films. So yes, if I were to make a big compiling list, Cars may well be the weakest. But I won’t. That put’s all 11 as equals. :slight_smile:

#13

Exactly, people need to stop comparing them. There is no best and there is no worst. That type of thing can’t be defined because it is a matter of opinion. Unless I hear John Lasseter say it himself then I will never believe that Cars, or any other Pixar movie for that matter is considered the “worst” or in this case, not as good as the rest.

#14

A Bug’s Life was the 4th biggest movie at the US box office in 1998.

#15

That comment doesn’t hold it’s own at all. If anything, A Bug’s Life prove that Pixar weren’t one trick ponies, and did the company a lot of favours both critically and financially. At the end of the day, it may be someone’s “weakest” Pixar film, but it isn’t a weak film; it has 91% on Rotten Tomatoes which is an exceptionally good score, and in terms of a strong story, likeable characters, good animation…well it ticks the boxes. Perhaps generically, you may argue, but hey, people like it.

#16

Yes, the problem about the arguments in the original post is that they doesn’t hold to the actual facts, like the critical reception and the box office.

#17

Now I don’t necessarily think Cars was the “weakest” Pixar film as I think they are very good. I thought the characters were good and the story was just fine. I would of been intrested to see what Cars “then called Route 66” would of been like in 1999 when Toy Story 2 was going to be a direct-to video sequel but Cars was scraped then in favor of TS2. Anyway, if I had to pick the “weakest” Pixar film I would go with Bug’s Life.

#18

Honestly, I’m not sure anymore which ones I think are the weakest. I believe Cars is not as good as Wall-E or Up, and I do not see that as disputable. But then come more subjective movies like TS3 and A Bug’s Life where people do argue on both sides, saying it is either the best movie ever, or not all that. But, I like all the movies, and none of the “strongest” or “weakest” Make my top or bottom spot, so I’m not sure I care anymore. I just like the movie because it’s entertaining. I mean, really. Admit it, most of the people on this forum will pay to see the Cars sequel in the theater. And in the end, that’s what matters. All of Pixar’s movies are so good that the animated sequel to their “worst” movie is worth $7.50+, plus maybe a DVD purchase. That says a lot on its own.

#19

I really like this point. You couldn’t be more right. Pixar doesn’t have a worst movie, they are all amazing in their own way.

#20

Thanks. :slight_smile: I thought it was pretty good, too, if I may say so myself. 8D But anyway, if we’re paying to see the sequel, then clearly the original isn’t that bad, or it wouldn’t be worth said small fortune. 8D