So, I’ve noticed, out of all the Cars 2 threads here, there isn’t one for your own reviews! I know there are ones for central discussion and the critics reviews, but I thought that it would be nice to create a thread for you, the viewer, seeing as there is such a major disparity between the RT critics and audience score (one’s twice the other!) and that there are so many people that probably want to express how they thought the movie was. After all, what professional thoughts are nice, but when all is said and done, the thing that really matters is what you thought yourself. I hope this thread will help the people who haven’t seen the film yet decide. So without further adieu, I’ll start things off with my thoughts!
Warning: All specific plot spoilers are hidden, but there are some things that reveal the themes/deeper meanings!!! Also, this review is reeeally wordy, so I would skip to the conclusion at the bottom if you
don’t feel like reading a novel at this time. 
Obviously, if you can’t tell, I’m a big Cars fan. A huuuge one. (See what I did there? ) So I would ideally be able to say that this review will be completely unbiased, but there will obviously be some. However, keep in mind that the only reason I am a fan is because both movies have touched my heart in a special way, so it isn’t without reason.
Therefore, this next statement should come as no surprise: I think that all the negative reviews Cars 2 is receiving is extremely unfair and disheartening. While some of them do have merit, a vast majority of the negative ones are completely looking at the film in the wrong direction. In fact, I am going to identify a couple of factors that, if it weren’t for them, Cars 2 would’ve been one of the most critically acclaimed Pixar films.
1. Cars 2 isn't an action film spoof: It isn't a children's film. What it IS, is a legitimate action/spy/espionage thriller masquerading as one. This clarification alone would turn around most negative reviews. A common problem I see is that people dismiss Cars 2 as lacking the "heart" and "soul" of most other Pixar films. I do not disagree, certainly this is true when put up against films like TS3, Wall-E, and Up. But the thing is, Cars 2 was never supposed to be such a film. It is an action film in and of itself. Pixar has previously ventured into this area before. Take, for example the heist-like tank escape planning sequence in Finding Nemo, and the daycare escape set to caper music in TS3. However these were clearly meant to be spoofs or tributes to other movies, as they don't take up a very large part of their respective movies. But Cars 2 is different in that the entire thing is CENTERED around action. This would throw the people off who were expecting to be moved to tears. In Cars 2, the entertainment is derived from the action itself, unlike in previous movies where action served as a supplement to an intensive onslaught of heartstring-tugging. Therefore, it is inaccurate to compare this film more emotionally stirring ones. You don't see anyone bashing films like Casino Royale, The Italian Job, Ronin, Bullitt, The Bourne Identity, or Inception for having "no heart" yet they are all widely recognized as either being classics, or at least some of the best films in their genres. Again, this is a case of coming in with preconceptions, no one expected these movies I mentioned to be emotional tearjerkers, which is why they received good ratings, and Cars 2 didn't.
2. Cars as characters: Some of you might have already pointed out that the Incredibles received near perfect reviews, yet it was basically an action film too. This can also be explained. One of issues that lead to many negative reviews in both the first and second Cars was the fact the characters were talking cars. This isn't the issue, so much that the Cars universe that is the only that is completely separate and alternate from the human one. TS, Wall-E and Bug's Life have as equally as absurd characters, but they are easier to accept because the settings are at least consistent with the human world, and people like to imagine that those things actually happen behind our backs. (Who knows, maybe they do!) But Cars 2 is extremely hard to take seriously for some critics (see Richard Roeper's review) because of the alternative and detached universe. Still, if people can accept talking toys, robot romance, insect uprisings, and talking dogs, I don't see why it's so much of a leap to accept talking cars, even in a separate universe. If this wasn't an issue, I would expect Cars 2 to have gotten reviews similar to those of the Incredibles.
Hopefully my statement that most of the negative reviewers were just viewing from the wrong direction is starting to make a little bit more sense. Now, I will delve into the film itself.
I’ve touched on this above, but the thing I liked the most about Cars 2 was just the ACTION, and the sheer level of technical mastery put into the storytelling, editing, and “choreographing”. The level of raw tension is just terrific. The suspense generated by the double-storyline pretty much rivals and even succeeds the Bourne Trilogy and classic Bond films, and is second to none when it comes to animation. Elaborating on this idea, so is the editing, and both mutually enhance each other. Cars 2 has some of the most efficient and effective editing I’ve ever seen in a film, everything serves a purpose to the overall film, and nothing is superfluous. On particular scene I would like to analyze is [spoil]at Porta Corsa. In the series of shots in question, the villain car in charge of the entire operation is relaying his scheme to the lemons, all while Mater is hiding in deep cover, and clearly very nervous. As the villain continues in elaboration, interwoven are cuts of the racers burning out and shots of Finn and Holley trying to figure out what’s happening and finally springing into action.[/spoil] This sort of switching back and forth between different converging storylines, set to Giacchino’s excellent scoring, is a textbook example of brilliant planning, storyboarding, and editing at its best.
Another thing that just amazes me is the level of detail that went into this film. Love them or hate them, you can’t deny that both Cars films have the highest quality animation and visuals in their respective time periods. From the hustle and bustle of eternally lit Tokyo, to the pristine sparkling waters of Italy, the movie just oozes unrivaled photorealism and beauty. While I will acknowledge that many studios are catching up, this is Pixar really asserting its 25-year-old stake in the world of animation. Some elements that are extremely hard to animate photorealistically, such as water, explosions, rippling cloth, and the complexity of thousands of rounds of gattling gun shells bouncing on the ground, are rendered with such adeptness that one wonders if they are really watching an animated film at times. (I’m sure any of you budding animators out there will agree). This level of attentiveness to detail, consistency, and dedication is reflected in the Cars world as well. Things that we humans are accustomed to see or use in everyday life (bars, handshakes, guns, birds, etc.) seem to transition seamlessly into the Cars world into their Cars equivalents. If you think about it, the raw amount of creative thinking needed to accomplish this, let alone an entire espionage action film with cars as the characters, is an amazing feat in and of itself.
However, just because I spent quite a lot praising the technical aspects of the film doesn’t mean this film lacks the emotional aspects. I mean, come on, this is Pixar we’re talking about here folks! In spite of what the reviews say, and the fact that the movie is set in an alternate universe completely different than ours, Cars 2 definitely is bursting with heart and stirs up issues and emotions that are unarguably very human:
Friendship: The most obvious emotional message and the de facto moral of the entire film is the true power of friendship. Cars 2 shows us that yes, there will be fights and bumps in the road, but true friends will always resolve their differences afterwards. If you examine Mater and Lightning, they are the quintessential pair of best friends. I mean, it takes an extremely unfaltering bond to stay together through the losing the world’s biggest race, an international conspiracy plot, mistaken espionage, and multiple assassination attempts!
Individuality: Equally as important and stressed in the film is the importance of remaining an individual and acting like oneself, even if they are perceived negatively by others. This is recurrent theme is seen with Mater, who learns that the entire time, he has been laughed at by nearly every single car he has met. However at the end, it is the very act of being himself that allowed him to see the truth about [spoil]Sir Miles Axlerod[/spoil] that no one else would’ve even guessed, and this saved the lives of many of the characters we’ve come to know and love.
Note #1: This is a little off the subject but many have pointed out that Mater’s idiotic and bumbling personality is annoying to point of effectively ruining the entire film experience for them. Although I do agree that he was only supposed to be a comic relief character in the first movie, I still disagree with this statement. Not only does this show that they’re ignoring the underlying message of the movie, but I also think that putting Mater as the lead role is more effective than if Pixar had used Lightning. Think about it, as we have all viewed Lightning’s transformation from a young, cocky, racing hotshot into a humble, respected and well-loved car in the first Cars, logically we are probably more attached to him than Mater. By placing McQueen directly in the line of Axlerod’s assassination, this makes the danger seem much more intense and imminent than if Mater had conversely been the one targeted and Lightning had to save him. Also, casting Lightning as the passive character and keeping him out of the loop makes the enemy seem many times more menacing and powerful, because we have already come to think of Lightning as such an unbeatable character, and here he doesn’t even know the level of danger he’s in. This makes for some excellent dramatic irony and tension that drives the films double plot along at top speed.
The big oil/alternate fuel dilemma: Ahhh, the age old controversial issue rears its ugly head in Cars 2, and proves that the film is anything but an unintelligent mash of mindless violence, as some reviewers say. Whereas other studios (not going to mention any names!) would rather focus on pop culture reference and jamming in as many celebrities as possible, Pixar shines through it that it is never too predictable, orthodox, or unwilling to delve into the complex and pressing issues of the real world. This exemplifies why Pixar can always be enjoyed by adults and children alike, and I don’t think that is any different when it comes to Cars 2.
Class conflict/discrimination: Perhaps something that you may not have caught on the first viewing, but these big topics play a very major role in movie. It was this that lead to Axlerod gaining influence in his followers, and the rise of the lemons can be seen as the direct result the discontent from being discriminated upon and labeled as the bottom rungs of the socioeconomic ladder. This leads to the next point:
Moral ambiguity: One of the biggest things that distinguishes a brilliant film from a merely “watchable” one is its recognition that the complexity and relativity of morality aren’t black and white or set in stone. In other words, there is no definite “good” or “bad” and Pixar is undeniably a world thought leader in this area of film. The brilliance of Pixar is that there are no mad scientists who want to take over the world. Every single Pixar villain, be it Sydrome, Lotso, Stinky Pete, Auto, or Muntz has some reason to be the way they are, there evilness isn’t irrationally asserted upon the viewers. The viewer can always understand why the villian wants to thwart the protagonist, be it for revenge, following orders, etc. In the case of Cars 2, the audience can certainly understand why the lemons would be angry, upset, and resentful of being the laughingstock of the rest of the world for as long as they can remember. I almost felt bad for Professor Z when he teared up at all the names he had been called before. With a stretch, one can almost see the lemons as revolutionaries against an oppressive society, which is usually portrayed in Hollywood to be an admirable thing. However the beauty of Pixar is that while the villians do have some valid points, they always end up doing too much, they always have a fundamental character flaw that pushes a cause that would otherwise be view with sympathy into the irrational and morally unacceptable. In the case of the lemons, it is the financial incentive from big oil that activates an unsavory character trait: greed. This is why they are the villains, and Finn, Holley, Mater, Lightning, and the rest of the gang are the heroes. However, while there is a good and bad side in Cars 2 (after all, there needs to facilitate plot advancement, this is true for any film or literary work), the distinction more blurred than just an absolute dividing line between the two. Indeed, throughout the course of the movie, we can see quite a few cars kick the bucket due to our heroes (most noticeably when [spoil]Finn basically takes out an entire oil rig of cars single handily, er tire-dly[/spoil]).
So in case you still are unsure if you should see Cars 2 in theaters, here’s a helpful flowchart that I have created that may aid you in your decision:
Note #2: The argument has been raised stating the hypocrisy of loyal Cars fans defending Cars 2 as a fun film that’s not supposed to induce emotional tears, while at the same time bashing similarly styled films from other studios. I would (respectfully) disagree with this. Pixar has always been unafraid to deviate from what’s generic and expected. Even in a less emotionally tolling movie like Cars 2, this can be seen in many instances. A specific moment that illustrates is near in end in [spoil]London when Mater and the gang are surrounded by a horde of baddies, and he tries to worm his way into their hearts and out of the situation by coming up with an inspirational empathetic speech that shows that he understands the pain of all the lemons, but becoming rich and powerful won’t fix that.[/spoil] For most studios, this would’ve been the game changing moment in the plot where the protagonist turns all the misunderstood villains to his side, and they all team up together to fight the main baddie. However, Pixar plays on this cliché and what you’d expect to happen, by having one of the villains reply, “well, it’s worth a shot!” and then the fighting continues. In this, Pixar once again shows us why its films are never predictable, and that there is virtually no such thing as a Pixar cliché. The strength in the storytelling of this film lies in that the plot is always moving, there is not any pointless standing still. Compared to films Wall-E (don’t get me wrong, it’s near the top of my film list) which is noticeably slower-paced and requires more emotional investment, Cars 2 requires less emotional preparation, and can be viewed with enjoyment at any time. With films like Wall-E and Up, I can only watch them on certain occasions, when I’m in the mood for a rigorous regimen of emotional drainage.
To basically sum things up in a few sentences: Cars 2 is a sleek, compact, fun, high-octane, action packed film that boasts enough technical mastery in tension, suspense, and storytelling to give Bourne and Bond a run for their money. Despite nearly out Michael Bay-ing Michael Bay, it still has plenty of heart, emotion, and complexity. If I was a professional critic, I would personally put my reputation on the line by telling you that if you come in with an open mind and discard all preconceptions about Pixar having to make you cry, you will immensely enjoy this film.
2 thumbs up, 4 stars, 5/5, 10/10, 100%, whatever scale you choose, I can safely say that I personally thought Cars 2 was virtually flawless, and I have no problem with it being the crux of a quarter century of brilliant animation.
Not that anyone will listen to a blind fan. [spoil]
I can’t wait to tell you guys what I thought!
