Cars 2 - 3 out of 5
In my opinion, Cars will be the worst film Pixar has ever made--and even their worst isn't really that bad. I don't hate Cars, it's just the last film made by the company that gave us the amazing Finding Nemo and Toy Story that I will watch. I always felt the film was the least creative. Everything else Pixar gave us was something unseen before and unique, so seeing a bunch of cars just get voices felt more like something Dreamworks would have made, not Pixar. But the movie made tons of cash and Pixar can't be expected to only make sequels to the Toy Story franchise so Cars 2 was made.
Even McQueen is sad about his lack of screen time in Cars 2.
Because little boys all over the world fell in love with Mater, the film centers nearly entirely around him. Lightning McQueen, our hero from the first film, falls far behind in the race that is this story as Mater is thrown into a world of espionage and secret agents. It seems there is a conspiracy by lemons to take out the world of vehicles that has spurn and forgotten them. A wealthy and eccentric billionaire named Sir Miles Axlrod (voiced by the awesome Eddie Izzard) sponsors a Grand Prix in order to sell his new Eco-friendly fuel; Allinol. However, it seems that the fuel is causing some of the racers' engines to explode and its up to Mater, who is mistaken for a super spy by Finn McMissile and Holley Shiftwell (voiced respectively by Michael Caine and Emily Mortimer), to solve the problem and save the day.
More Mater doesn't mean more laughs.
Like the first film, I walked away with only a feeling of 'meh' to this one. The animation looks great and that's expected with Pixar and the voice acting is impeccable--I mean, John Turturro, Jeff Garlin and Bruce Campbell are in this one! However, the film's premise of talking cars still does little for me in the creative department--it still feels really cheap, Pixar. I find it surprising that the company that came up with the amazing idea of a lone robot with a mission to clean up Earth and ends up discovering love would make something that has been a stable of cartoons since the car was invented.
Eddie Izzard is awesome even in animated car form.
Even the story is a slight improvement from the first one--that's if you can get passed all the Mater this film throws at you. Now, I could easily say my dislike for the character of Mater has to do with the fact that Larry the Cable Guy provides the voice--and that is definitely one big reason--but Mater is such a generic redneck, moron character that only children can find him entertaining. He's so generic, Larry was pretty much destined to be the voice because you would be hard pressed to find another generic comedian to do it.
Now, if you're able to get passed the overwhelming amount of Mater, you might be able to enjoy the story. However, I was very surprised at the level of violence and action the film packs in--you didn't get to see that in the last one. But sometimes the film gets so violent, that kids probably shouldn't be watching it. For example, cars are actually murdered and killed in this. But this element of the film becomes a double-edge sword. The film can be too violent for some kids but the jokes and emphasis on Mater's bottom-of-the-barrel antics are insulting to adults. So who exactly was Pixar making this film for?
Without arms, how exactly do cars have guns installed? And why do cars need guns anyway?
Cars 2 is, at its foundation, the exact same formula as the first one. A premise that lacks any real creativity and a story that lacks the medium that both adults and kids can enjoy together. And then there's Mater...way too much Mater.