We have now arrived at
the wrongfully hated sequel, “Cars 2,” released in 2011. Roger Ebert started
his review out by saying, “While I was watching "Cars 2," an elusive
nostalgia tugged at my mind. No, I wasn't remembering Pixar's original
"Cars" from 2006. This was something more deeply buried, and finally,
in the middle of one of the movie's sensational grand prix races, it came to
me: I was sitting on the floor of my bedroom many years ago, with some toy cars
lined up in front of me, while I used my hands to race them around on the floor
and in the air, meanwhile making that noise kids make by squooshing spit in
their mouths.”
Ebert went on to say, “In
this memory, I was completely engrossed with my cars. They were as real as
people, and I played favorites and identified one car as my surrogate. Maybe my
hands were swooping around with toys, but my imagination was somewhere else,
and I performed the dialogue for the cars: Oh, yeah? Take that! We'll see!
Eeeeyowww!”
Ebert goes on to say, “This
memory was not random. I think it was inspired by the spirit of John Lasseter's
movie. I believe in some sense, the great animator was sitting Indian-style on
the floor of his Pixar playroom and hurtling his cars through time and space
with sublime reckless delight. We learned from "Cars" that Lasseter
loves automobiles, and here we learn that they can serve him as avatars in an
international racing-and-spying thriller as wacky as a Bond picture crossed
with Daffy Duck.”
I think Ebert is right
when he said, “I have no idea what kids will make of the movie. At a time when
some "grown-up" action films are relentlessly shallow and stupid,
here is a movie with such complexity that even the cars sometimes have to pause
and explain it to themselves. It mixes concerns about fossil fuels with
spycraft and a lot of grand prix racing where more is at stake than who wins.”
This time the protagonist has changed: The red NASCAR Lightning McQueen is covered
by the rusty, buck-toothed tow truck Mater, who was just a supporting car in
the first film.
A plot synopsis would put
us into confusions, and the movie isn’t about a plot as much as the action it contains.
Shortly, Sir Miles Axelrod, voiced by Eddie Izzard, has created a new fuel that
doesn’t drain the planet’s shrinking oil reserves and wants to prove it in a
World Grand Prix to be sold in England, Japan and Italy. Ebert said, “This is a
masterful way of introducing new backdrops into the races, and the movie is so
visually complex that I imagine Lasseter and his colleagues slipped details in
just for fun.”
Ebert pointed out, “At
one point, in a shot so brief you don't want to blink, we even learn that the
Popemobile travels in its own Popemobile. This inspires the theological puzzle
of whether the one inside is the pope. One of my fellow viewers said she didn't
even see a Popemobile. Maybe I dreamed it. In any event, there are no humans in
the movie who could be the pope, although much is made of the dinosaurs who are
a source of fossil fuels. Actually, I believe oil originated from ancient
plants and microorganisms and not so much from dinosaurs, but in the Lasseter
universe, it no doubt comes from gas-guzzling dinosaurs like in those old
Rambler ads.”
This is all beside the
point though. Lightning McQueen finds himself in a championship race with the
Italian driver Francesco Bernoulli, voiced by John Turturro. He and Mater end
up being in the middle of a undercover race between the power of fossil and
alternative fuels, also having the British secret agents Finn McMissle (Michael
Caine) and Holley Shiftwell (Emily Mortimer). Ebert joked, “Having recently
admired Steve Coogan and Rob Brydon doing dueling Michael Caine imitations in
"The Trip," I noted that Michael Caine does a pretty good one
himself.”
The first film was a speech
to a past when America drove around Route 66 and now-classic cars were the
icons in American lives. The cars in “Cars 2” have evolved a wide variety of
new upgrades. Ebert noted, “They extrude so many wires, spikes, weapons and
gimmicks they must really be shape-shifters, and Mater in particular is expert
at disguising himself. This is not surprising, because a lot of the guys you
find around tow trucks are pretty good at using paint jobs to dress up beaters.”
However, “Cars 2” is fun.
Ebert ended his reason by saying, “Whether that's because John Lasseter is in
touch with his inner child or mine, I cannot say. There remains one bone to
pick. Although the hero of the 2006 film was a Hudson with the step-down design
and there are AMC Gremlins in this film, as nearly as I can tell, Lasseter
entirely ignores the greatest independent American automaker of them all,
Studebaker. Maybe I missed one. I don't think so. There is a more obvious
reason. Introducing a Studebaker Golden Hawk into this film would make all of
the other characters look shabby.”
As I have already stated before,
this film was wrongfully hated. I understand the complaint that maybe it was
violent for children, but I think it upgraded the first one by showing how cars
have evolved now and that they are using natural resources like hybrid,
electrical and solar power. This is rightfully showing how car manufacturers
are trying to use other resources instead of oil because of how deadly that can
be. Also, it’s for saving the environment and we all need to think about the
Earth. I took a couple of my younger cousins to the theaters to see this and we loved it. Definitely see it and give it a chance because it has been hated a lot
and it doesn’t deserve it. Plus, I understand making Mater the central focus
was the wrong idea, seeing how people are not fond of Larry the Cable Guy's style of humor, but think of the whole picture instead of nitpicking, which
for a kid’s movie like this, it’s wrong.
I’m not surprised to know
that they will be coming out with a “Cars 3,” I think next year. Let’s see what
they have in store for us in that one because I think it will be good.
Now I’m really excited
because tonight I’m going to see the new Disney’s “Moana” movie, but I will
probably post a review on that tomorrow. We’ll see so stay tuned for that
because I have been hearing a lot of good reviews about it so I can’t wait to
see it.
This was a great defense review. It was very detailed and excellent. I was underwhelmed by the film when I saw it but thought it was ok. You defence makes me like it more. My dad things Cars 3 will be good.
ReplyDeleteMy brother didn't like it because of the fact of making Mater the central focus and having the movie around the Southern humor. Although I understand that, I still think this movie isn't really so bad. My brother and I also both think Cars 3 will be good
Delete