(Insert stupid Blog name here) - CarZzzz...

RSS Bot · June 30, 2006

Despite the blog title, Cars isn't really a boring film.

Unless you're a little kid. Say, under 5. Maybe 7. Not having kids, it's a little hard for me to judge at what point stuff becomes boring for them (and it's been a lonnng time since I was 7). But based on kids in the audience (one of whom repeatedly kept asking "is it over yet"?), I don't think bringing really little kids to this film is a good idea.

I went to see Cars last week, and I have to admit, it's a much better film than I expected it to be. The teaser trailer didn't look very good, and nothing I'd seen since had much appeal either.

But the movie does work - after awhile. It takes some time to get going (pun not intended), since initially, the main character (Lightning McQueen) is a self-centered jerk, and there's no audience empathy with him. We don't care why he wants to win the big race, nor if he does. It wasn't until probably halfway into the film that I got into the story, as Lightning began to care about things other than himself (although he still wasn't an interesting character). As the characters developed, the film became more enjoyable, although that's about the point where the kids started losing interest, since they couldn't really care less about character arcs.

Pixar made a rare-misstep here in casting Owen Wilson as Lightning. He just isn't able to create much of a personality with his voice. (The same problem happened with Flik (Dave Foley) in A Bug's Life.) He's just kind of bland, and all of the interesting character moments belong to everyone around him. This would be fine if he were a good straight man, but he's really not. His reactions to what's happening around him seem very run-of-the-mill. Mater (a rusty tow truck), although an almost painful "country folk" stereotype, is actually the heart and soul of the film, and is not only a good comic foil, but provides some of the more heartfelt moments in the film as well. But just once, can't animators design "country folk" stereotypes without buck teeth? And I hereby throw down a challenge to all animation studios... I dare you to make just one film - just one - without a single fart joke in it.

Sally - the love interest - doesn't make much use of Bonnie Hunt's comedic talents, and seems to fall for Lightning for absolutely no reason (since this begins to happen while he's still a jerk). The villain - Chick Hicks - is pretty unimportant story-wise, and has almost nothing important to do in the film until the very end. Other characters have some fun moments, although they're largely restricted to variations on the same handful of jokes, since most of them are fairly superficial stereotypes. Paul Newman provides the voice of the local curmudgeon (carmudgeon?), but he's basically just an old grouch, and not a particularly likable one.

There are some genuinely funny moments in Cars, but not as many as in previous Pixar films. There is one particularly funny scene at night with Lightning and Mater, which Pixar manages to milk several more times in the film. Most of the best jokes, however, are in the end credits.

At times, I felt more like I was watching a video game, than a movie. Perhaps it's just an issue of perception, but it took me a long time to get into a world where there are only cars (or more accurately - vehicles), despite the fact that everything looks like it was built for humans to occupy. The filmmakers made some very awkward concessions towards the cars, too, such as the odd telephone-device that Lightning uses to call his agent. Perhaps there wasn't a more elegant way to get around that, but it just seemed very forced. Also, there were little toys on the shelf in Lightning's trailer. Kid-sized toys. Who would play with them? Why were they made? How did they get up on the shelf? (Cars have no opposable thumbs.) Odd little things like that abound in the film, when you completely remove humans from the equation.

One thing that surprised me about the film, was its predictability. Once the main situation in the film is set up, so many hints are dropped as to what's to come, that there are really no surprises left. There's a slight plot twist at the end of the big race, but it's completely inconsequential, since the end result would be the same anyway. Unlike most Pixar films, there wasn't any one moment in the film (except the night scene with Lightning and Mater), that just came out of nowhere and completely surprised me.

There are some great visuals throughout the film, and numerous things that race fans will appreciate (two words: Plymouth Superbird). Cars is certainly Pixar's best-looking film to date. Some of the visuals are stunning, and the attention to detail is, at times, remarkable. Design-wise though, I'm not sure that choosing to use the cars' windshields (instead of headlights) as eyes was the best choice, as they just seem too freakishly huge at times. But I guess they did this to avoid obvious comparisons to Chevron ads.

I think I would have loved this film when I was around 12 - 15. I was obsessed with cars as a kid. Hot Wheels. Model kits. Drawing pictures of cars. Cars would have probably been among my favorite films at that age. It's still a good film, but I can't say it's a great film. It's worth seeing if you like Pixar films, or animation, or NASCAR races, but it's not their best story, and most of the characters are rather forgettable. If you're thinking of bringing children along, I think there's way too much talking in it to keep little kids entertained for the film's nearly two-hour running time. For us older kids though, it's still an enjoyable enough of a ride to recommend. I'd give it 7/10.

http://www.atariage.com/forums/index.php?a...;showentry=1677