Read Mixed User Reviews for Cars

5

LeeS.Sep 5, 2006

Pixar finally delivers a mediocre product. The story was slow and 100% predictable. If cars and racing aren't your thing, there's not much for you in this movie. My daughters were bored. The visuals were great.

1 of 2 users found this helpful

5

RobH.Jun 9, 2006

Lame, predictable plot and flat characters, but awesome animation and action. As pretty as Incredibles and Finding Nemo, but not nearly as emotionally engaging. You just don't care about the main character.

1 of 2 users found this helpful

4

NF123Aug 25, 2010

Pixar are known for intelligence and among the best in there field so it's mystifying why they made this. It's not awful but it doesn't even come close to the standard which they've set and normally achieve. Fart jokes don't belong in a PixarPixar are known for intelligence and among the best in there field so it's mystifying why they made this. It's not awful but it doesn't even come close to the standard which they've set and normally achieve. Fart jokes don't belong in a Pixar film and that alone should deter you from this quite depressing film, also the charachters are far below standard as is the story. Pixar have completely redeemed themselves and have created some of the best films ever made but while I've forgiven them, I will never forget this slip up… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

5

TetsuoJul 25, 2011

I know why it's considered Pixar's weakest flick. The animation is beautiful as always and like the design of the vehicles, the big drawback is that the plot is unoriginal as it takes plot threads from Doc Hollywood and Days of Thunder.I know why it's considered Pixar's weakest flick. The animation is beautiful as always and like the design of the vehicles, the big drawback is that the plot is unoriginal as it takes plot threads from Doc Hollywood and Days of Thunder. Another thing is that the characters are underdeveloped not even the voices of Owen Wilson, Paul Newman, George Carlin and the stereotypical redneck Larry the Cable Guy can save this from being a snooze fest. What really killed it from winning an Oscar for Best Animated Feature was the soundtrack (which includes Rascal Flatt's butchering rendition of Tom Cochrane's Life Is A Highway) and the merchandise including video games, toys books and those Mater shorts including the one where he battles against Japanese drifters which was shown before Bolt. It's almost as though Pixar thought made so many good films and need a weak one to even it out.
Those who loved Pixar from the beginning may have to skip it or give it a rental. It may entertain kids, but anybody over 12 might feel alienated.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

5

davenbettridgeNov 7, 2011

The animation is flashy but the story is as dull as any other animated movie. There was nothing that was special about this movie, the characters were forgettable, the scenes uninspired and the inner message falls flat. Cars is not bad but IThe animation is flashy but the story is as dull as any other animated movie. There was nothing that was special about this movie, the characters were forgettable, the scenes uninspired and the inner message falls flat. Cars is not bad but I rank it the lowest of all Pixar animations. Pass on this one.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

6

KadeemluvmusicJun 30, 2012

Cars is an okay movie, but the sequel is a mess. I'm not a fan of the merchandise they have so far and quite possibly the most overrated movie in Pixar's 17-year run. Although it can't match the success of the Toy Story series, Finding Nemo,Cars is an okay movie, but the sequel is a mess. I'm not a fan of the merchandise they have so far and quite possibly the most overrated movie in Pixar's 17-year run. Although it can't match the success of the Toy Story series, Finding Nemo, The Incredibles, or Monsters, Inc., but it has a lot of great racing action and a slew of characters like Lightning McQueen and Mater. Well, probably I'll rent the movie, but I hope Pixar could make a better Cars movie or else I'll stay home watching Toy Story 3.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

5

J-ShapAug 25, 2011

The premise is just dead on arrival. Really? Cars? That isn't an idea for a Pixar movie that's an idea for a second rate PC game to teach kids about the importance of sharing. In fact, everything about Cars feels second-rate. The story isThe premise is just dead on arrival. Really? Cars? That isn't an idea for a Pixar movie that's an idea for a second rate PC game to teach kids about the importance of sharing. In fact, everything about Cars feels second-rate. The story is surprisingly unimaginative and cliched, which I wouldn't mind so much if Pixar had done it well. But they didn't. Cars doesn't have the same touch that other Pixar movies did. It isn't as original as Toy Story. It isn't as well animated as The Incredibles. It isn't as touching as Finding Nemo. It isn't as inventive as Monsters, Inc. Cars feels like a lazy effort to ride on the coattails of The Incredibles and other Pixar movies. The drama is recycled, and surprisingly shallow, the animation is average by standards, and the comedy... don't even get me started.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

4

csw12Mar 30, 2012

Pixar has finally screwed up. The near perfection at making movie for children and adults falls flat. Cars seems to be appealing to only kids with massive stupidity everywhere. Lets just hope Pixar can find its magic again next year.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

6

anshimanDec 23, 2012

Although Cars is packed with visual stunners, it features a formulaic, bored plot that defines the slow death and decline of Pixar from films like 'Toy Story' and 'The Incredibles' to 'Brave' and 'Cars 2'.

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

6

SeriosityNov 9, 2012

A Pixar first in that the story is nowhere near as good as the animation. It certainly is not bad, but it is the first Pixar film that is not outstanding.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

6

YoursTrulyNov 9, 2012

The black sheep of Pixar films. Still...a quality movie.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

5

TTWRApr 25, 2013

This movie is just a ripoff of Thomas the Tank Engine and Friends, and even then Thomas was realistic and was way better this piece of crap. The fact that a superstar gets stuck in a lone, western city is very cliche. This not a good movie,This movie is just a ripoff of Thomas the Tank Engine and Friends, and even then Thomas was realistic and was way better this piece of crap. The fact that a superstar gets stuck in a lone, western city is very cliche. This not a good movie, no matter what the audience is. 5/10… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

5

AmongstYouAug 26, 2013

Cars is formulaic and boring. Hardly clever and stumbles in parts you'd think it succeed in.
Though, it's not terrible. It plays it safe just enough to only be mediocre, rather than awful. Besides... Cars 2 showed us that things could get far worse.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

5

joao1198pedroOct 31, 2013

after greatest films finnaly the pixar animation studios got wrong with this medium film,i was expecting a lot this film,but it didn't made anything good for the company.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

6

RayzorMooseNov 13, 2013

Pixar rides in another victory.
Cars is entertaining and fun with less story as its creators previous work. Lightning McQueen and the bunch find moments of emotion, but mainly just a fun flick.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

5

f3l1p3Sep 11, 2014

"Carros" nunca me atraiu tanto. Ele é um filme mediano que tem uma história também mediana. É um filme assistível,mas que pode ser passado direto por outros filmes da Pixar.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

4

MovieManiac83Apr 24, 2015

It’s a testament to the ludicrously high standards Pixar has set itself that Cars can be considered in any way a disappointment. It leaves the CG output of every other studio choking in its spectacularly rendered dust, yet somehow, somewhereIt’s a testament to the ludicrously high standards Pixar has set itself that Cars can be considered in any way a disappointment. It leaves the CG output of every other studio choking in its spectacularly rendered dust, yet somehow, somewhere in this well-oiled, staggeringly beautiful machine somebody has omitted a small but crucial cog. It just doesn’t quite run with the smooth hum of fun we’ve come to expect of history’s greatest animation house.

There is no question that Cars is Pixar’s greatest visual achievement. Those geniuses chez Lightyear have long recognised that the best computer animation is not obsessed with realism but detail (just look at the sinister Polar Express to see how off-putting it can be when that balance is out of whack). Everything in Cars is clearly of a bulbous, shiny cartoon world, but is so exquisitely crafted that the reflection off the hood of a speeding racer or the neon miasma bathing a midnight town is almost enough to make you openly weep in the cinema. There is not a single flaw on the face of this film; it’s like Angelina Jolie with hubcaps.

Pretty visuals are only part of what we’ve come to expect of the Pixar experience, though. As a piece of storytelling, Cars sometimes has a sluggishness that is all the more surprising considering it’s directed by animation god John Lasseter, back behind the wheel for the first time since Toy Story 2. With a core message about getting out of the fast lane and enjoying the slow scenic route, it’s a story designed for a middle-aged man, not a sugar-fuelled pre-teen for whom the fast lane is never fast enough — and like any middle-aged man, it’s carrying a little excess flab.

It starts lean and energetic. The opening, featuring cocksure racer Lightning McQueen whizzing around the track, is a breakneck action sequence that could sit happily in any live-action film. In animation, editing and pacing it is near flawless, and one of the most exciting scenes of the summer. So when a later motorway mishap lands McQueen in the derelict town of Radiator Springs, where the most spectacular auto is an emotionally unstable fire engine and a day when holidaying people-carriers pop through is considered eventful, it’s hard not to yearn for the heady roar of the race track.

It’s not that McQueen’s cohorts in the town are dull; it’s just that they’re not especially funny. With the possible exception of rustbucket tow-truck Mater, it’s unlikely you’ll remember any of them after the closing credits in the same way you do such incidental characters as Toy Story’s Rex, mini-Incredible Jack-Jack or that stoned surfer turtle from Finding Nemo. Pixar without funny is like Disney without animal sidekicks or Miyazaki without that bit you didn’t really understand but still kinda liked — it’s recognisable, but it just feels off.

In contrast with the film’s message, Radiator Springs is a nice place to hang out for a while, but you wouldn’t want to live there. Which makes it a great relief when the movie’s ending turns out to be such a humdinger. Bringing the slow and fast lanes together in glorious fashion, it makes sense of the movie’s duller sections and uses them to invest the action with emotion. It’s a finale so full of joy, imagination and technical brilliance that you forgive Lasseter the previous storytelling flaws and, teamed with what might be the greatest Pixar credits gag to date, means you’ll leave the movie on a petrol-induced high.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

5

moviemaniacsMar 6, 2016

With “Cars,” Pixar’s enviable streak of creative triumphs comes to a skidding stop. Despite representing another impressive technical achievement, it’s the least visually interesting of the computer-animation boutique’s movies, and — in anWith “Cars,” Pixar’s enviable streak of creative triumphs comes to a skidding stop. Despite representing another impressive technical achievement, it’s the least visually interesting of the computer-animation boutique’s movies, and — in an ironic twist for a story about auto racing — drifts slowly through its semi-arid midsection. Periodic bursts of cleverness brighten the festivities, but they’re too few and far between, and the trademark humor that appeals to adults and kids often misfires. Pic should still possess plenty of G-rated horsepower commercially, but falls short of being the coming-out party Disney doubtless hoped for to showcase its Pixar acquisition.

John Lasseter, Pixar’s leading creative force, is a self-proclaimed car enthusiast, and this marks his first directing effort since 1999’s “Toy Story 2” — preceded by “A Bug’s Life” and the original Buzz-Woody team-up. (Joe Ranft, his co-director, died last year after completing work on the film.)

Yet passion for the project notwithstanding, Lasseter discovers there are only so many car puns he and five other credited writers can exhaust. And while adults might chuckle over pop-culture references to, say, funny-car “Jay Limo,” both they and many kids will grow antsy after an introductory racing sequence.

That race introduces Lightning McQueen (Owen Wilson), a brash racecar with a lone-wolf attitude. Lightning eschews hiring a crew chief, and his competition against the surly Chick Hicks (Michael Keaton) and veteran legend the King (racer Richard Petty) sets up a showdown in California a week hence. As a sign of his go-it-alone mentality, Lightning balks at trying to drum up enough friends to fill the 20 tickets allotted him.

Heading cross-country, Lightning inadvertently winds up marooned in the moribund Route 66 town of Radiator Springs, where his daredevil antics run afoul of the local judge, Doc Hudson (Paul Newman). As punishment, Lightning is forced to repave the town’s decrepit road — a task he pursues with reluctance, given his goal of reaching California to win the Piston Cup.

Bypassed by Interstate 40, Radiator Springs features the usual assortment of colorful characters, in an all-car cast that includes an attractive Porsche, Sally (Bonnie Hunt); the slightly addled tow truck Mater (Larry the Cable Guy); and a half-baked van that runs on “organic fuels,” appropriately voiced by George Carlin. The question is how long it will take for Lightning to revive the town, while simultaneously learning the meaning of friendship.

Alas, “too long” is the answer, and barring the boisterous antics of blue-collar comic Larry, there’s not much to make the time speed by. Granted, there are amusing sight gags involving the local bugs (in keeping with the automotive theme, Volkswagens with wings) and “tractor tipping,” but like Lightning himself, the action simply keeps running out of gas.

Even Randy Newman’s score isn’t particularly distinguished, or too frequently gets drowned out by the sound of roaring tires. Nor will the racing sequences galvanize those who aren’t NASCAR fans, despite an astounding display of computer-generated wizardry and detail — from the car-filled stadiums down to the little grooves on the track.

Still, nothing here approaches the undersea wonder of “Finding Nemo,” the childlike inspiration behind “Monsters Inc.” or the excitement and sly wit of “The Incredibles” — a high standard, admittedly, but the expectation bar against which all Pixar ventures inevitably will be judged.

Where “Cars” works best, frankly, might be in oiling the synergistic wheels of the Disney-Pixar marriage — offering the enticing prospect of theme park tie-ins, battery-powered toys and other assorted merchandising.

Ultimately, however, those benefits are only maximized if the movie delivers, and while the inventive closing-credit animation should send patrons out smiling, that breezy detour arrives at the end of a dusty, near-two-hour ride.

Pixar’s run of hits has been nothing short of amazing, rivaling Disney’s early animated classics. Yet after assembling its version of the magnificent six, the company has settled for at best a so-so seventh.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

6

DanBurritoSep 10, 2015

NOTE: OK, for some reason the site currently publishes all of my reviews as 0/10. I actually rated it a six, so please ignore the rating.This is by no means a bad movie but it's Pixar's weakest. I liked the character of Mater and the ideas inNOTE: OK, for some reason the site currently publishes all of my reviews as 0/10. I actually rated it a six, so please ignore the rating.This is by no means a bad movie but it's Pixar's weakest. I liked the character of Mater and the ideas in the movie are really clever but it goes on for too long and eventually you start wishing it was a bit shorter. Nevertheless, it's a visually dazzling and inventive film with fun characters though very young children may be a bit bored.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

5

MovieManiac1994Jan 4, 2016

The day will eventually come when the golden run will stall. Six hit movies out of six is a record just gagging to fall victim to the law of averages. But with Pixar chief Lasseter at the wheel of Cars, what could possibly go wrong?

Well,The day will eventually come when the golden run will stall. Six hit movies out of six is a record just gagging to fall victim to the law of averages. But with Pixar chief Lasseter at the wheel of Cars, what could possibly go wrong?

Well, it's not a classic. But neither is it the flop being gloated over in surlier circles. With Pixar so far ahead of the other players in the animation game, its movies can only really be judged in comparison to the rest of its output. As a technical achievement, Cars is peerless. But in terms of story and character, it falls short of the breath-catching emotional starburst of Finding Nemo or the knockabout poignancy of Toy Story 2. Nor does it quite ping with that instant-classic vibe of The Incredibles or Monsters, Inc. Instead, it hovers somewhere just above A Bug's Life: fun but flawed; slick but sappy.

As ever, it's a world full of typical Pixar ingenuity: the cars, from the sleekest speed demon to crappiest old truck, are alive and the team has faithfully crafted an environment for the characters. Witness Radiator Springs, a chunk of smalltown Ameri-car-na stuck in the middle of a desert backwater. Back when Route 66 was the main thoroughfare across the States, it was a bustling town. Now, while its locals have tried to keep the place going, it's dying from a lack of trade.

When racer Lightning McQueen (Wilson) literally crashes into town, they initially see him as an annoying and painful symbol of the world that has bypassed them. It's a fertile touchstone for character design, and the Radiator residents add to Pixar's ever-growing roster. Lightning is your regulation Hero With A Journey, but the town's citizens are a loveable - if a little stereotypical - mix, crackling with soul and personality. Even throwaway elements such as the tiny Volkswagen bugs are crafted with style and heart to spare.

But it's the visuals that really sing - with eye-zapping flair and groundbreaking detail close up and lurking in every seemingly irrelevant corner. There are more ideas and mini-ideas on screen in one frame here than in the whole of lesser animated efforts (repeat viewing of Madagascar, anyone?). Chrome sparkles, hoods dazzle, light and speed-sensitive reflections bounce off each other. The environments are so finely crafted, there are times when they feel almost photo-realistic, with character motion seeming strangely overlaid, Bedknobs And Broomsticks-style.

That trickiest of animation touches - melding emotion to the imagery - is mostly bang-on. The racetrack introduction to Lightning and his rivals perfectly nails the primal thrill of the race and pumps a thrusting, seat-shaking pace into the early minutes. In a completely different way, our first look at Radiator Springs is a measured lesson in how to present a multitude of quietly desperate but good-humoured characters. Everything feels organic and unforced.

But the problem starts when Lasseter and his writers slam on the brakes to divert Cars down a reflective and dewy-eyed elegy to Route 66, America of the past and the '50s/'60s golden age of motoring. Unusually for a Pixar movie, the pace slows to a crawl, and while indulging a passion for the rickety-wheeled wonders and worthy ideals of yesteryear is one thing, force-feeding it to an audience who expects a kooky movie with talking motors is another. It's here where Cars slips over into culturally specific nostalgia and jarring melancholy.

For once, it feels like a team whose mantra famously insists that story is king has settled for one or two pedestrian plot beats. Whereas the likes of Finding Nemo and Monsters, Inc took well-used tropes and gave them an elegant, intelligent, uniquely Pixar twist, a burgeoning romance between McQueen and motel-owning convertible Sally (Hunt) feels a little factory-preset, and the buddy banter between Mater and McQueen is nowhere near as fresh or feisty as Dory/Marlin, Sulley/Mike, Buzz/Woody???

And while, say, Monsters' finale is based around a mould-breaking, visually spectacular chase, Cars closes on an inevitable face-off which, for all of its onscreen heat, makes for an ending that's as frustrating as it is satisfying.

Still, while not everything here is as envelope-shoving as the standards set by previous efforts, when Cars hits top gear, it's still universal, unstoppable entertainment for all ages. Business as usual, then...

Amazing bodywork, but one or two duff parts under the hood... It's still a wild ride, just not as smooth as Pixar usually demands.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

5

FilmMasterEdJan 6, 2016

It’s a testament to the ludicrously high standards Pixar has set itself that Cars can be considered in any way a disappointment. It leaves the CG output of every other studio choking in its spectacularly rendered dust, yet somehow, somewhereIt’s a testament to the ludicrously high standards Pixar has set itself that Cars can be considered in any way a disappointment. It leaves the CG output of every other studio choking in its spectacularly rendered dust, yet somehow, somewhere in this well-oiled, staggeringly beautiful machine somebody has omitted a small but crucial cog. It just doesn’t quite run with the smooth hum of fun we’ve come to expect of history’s greatest animation house.

There is no question that Cars is Pixar’s greatest visual achievement. Those geniuses chez Lightyear have long recognised that the best computer animation is not obsessed with realism but detail (just look at the sinister Polar Express to see how off-putting it can be when that balance is out of whack). Everything in Cars is clearly of a bulbous, shiny cartoon world, but is so exquisitely crafted that the reflection off the hood of a speeding racer or the neon miasma bathing a midnight town is almost enough to make you openly weep in the cinema. There is not a single flaw on the face of this film; it’s like Angelina Jolie with hubcaps.

Pretty visuals are only part of what we’ve come to expect of the Pixar experience, though. As a piece of storytelling, Cars sometimes has a sluggishness that is all the more surprising considering it’s directed by animation god John Lasseter, back behind the wheel for the first time since Toy Story 2. With a core message about getting out of the fast lane and enjoying the slow scenic route, it’s a story designed for a middle-aged man, not a sugar-fuelled pre-teen for whom the fast lane is never fast enough — and like any middle-aged man, it’s carrying a little excess flab.

It starts lean and energetic. The opening, featuring cocksure racer Lightning McQueen whizzing around the track, is a breakneck action sequence that could sit happily in any live-action film. In animation, editing and pacing it is near flawless, and one of the most exciting scenes of the summer. So when a later motorway mishap lands McQueen in the derelict town of Radiator Springs, where the most spectacular auto is an emotionally unstable fire engine and a day when holidaying people-carriers pop through is considered eventful, it’s hard not to yearn for the heady roar of the race track.

It’s not that McQueen’s cohorts in the town are dull; it’s just that they’re not especially funny. With the possible exception of rustbucket tow-truck Mater, it’s unlikely you’ll remember any of them after the closing credits in the same way you do such incidental characters as Toy Story’s Rex, mini-Incredible Jack-Jack or that stoned surfer turtle from Finding Nemo. Pixar without funny is like Disney without animal sidekicks or Miyazaki without that bit you didn’t really understand but still kinda liked — it’s recognisable, but it just feels off.

In contrast with the film’s message, Radiator Springs is a nice place to hang out for a while, but you wouldn’t want to live there. Which makes it a great relief when the movie’s ending turns out to be such a humdinger. Bringing the slow and fast lanes together in glorious fashion, it makes sense of the movie’s duller sections and uses them to invest the action with emotion. It’s a finale so full of joy, imagination and technical brilliance that you forgive Lasseter the previous storytelling flaws and, teamed with what might be the greatest Pixar credits gag to date, means you’ll leave the movie on a petrol-induced high.

Judged against previous form, this is not Pixar firing on all cylinders, lacking the sophisticated comedy weve come to expect.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

6

tdickensheetsFeb 19, 2016

Cars was good movie.

Cars is better then Cars 2.

I have the DVD.

Same people who made Toy Story.

I like Toy Story too.

You need speed.

Do you want race or lay back?

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

6

reviewfrom19842Oct 5, 2016

A okay movie but a week Pixar movie.

Pros: the ending is amazing and some of the charters are likeable

Cons: the main charter is a douche and the story is really chicle

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

6

MattS.Apr 7, 2007

I was very sad after this movie ended, not because of the movie's plot, but rather the fact that this movie represents the first movie Pixar has made that has been truly average. Up to this point, PIxar's movies have been comedic I was very sad after this movie ended, not because of the movie's plot, but rather the fact that this movie represents the first movie Pixar has made that has been truly average. Up to this point, PIxar's movies have been comedic adventures, keeping the film rolling from place to place and never trapping us in one local. Cars is entirely different - the first fifteen minutes promise a cross-country romp, but instead we soon find our favorite red racecar trapped in a small desert town. He tries to escape, again and again, and who can blame him? As is usually the case with small towns, it is incredibly boring - but as if also often the case with small towns, it is a great place to moralize. As a result, Cars quickly runs out of gas, and becomes a good-looking but so-so entry into a field of computer animated films that is already becoming oversaturated.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

billyb.Dec 6, 2006

I feel that pixar is just trying to make movie after movie that has no originality from the last boring, petty joke film that they have made. And this film is a good example of that. come one pixar!

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

ZackSOct 27, 2006

I thought this movie was good... But not the best. I would not recommend anyone to buy this for a gift. Even though I am an adult I do not want my kids to really watch this movie. Also, that

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

RonS.Jun 10, 2006

Good graphics as expected from Pixar but no plot and quite boring story line.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

GrantS.Jun 10, 2006

Pixar's first real lemon. Undeniably astounding visuals, but a very tired and ultimately unentertaining ride. Please let this not be a harbinger of things to come under new ownership.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

ToshJun 15, 2006

Ireally don't understand what's the big deal with this movie. yes, the graphics are really impressive, but other than that I don't see anything that stands out from the rest of the animated movies. The story line is absoultely Ireally don't understand what's the big deal with this movie. yes, the graphics are really impressive, but other than that I don't see anything that stands out from the rest of the animated movies. The story line is absoultely predictable which is the biggest 'minus' for the movie. Over The Hedge was much more fun... at least for me.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

AndrewJun 20, 2006

On the bright side of boring. Hardly stunning, but thankfully the tickets did not cost us anything.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

MaseJun 25, 2006

Sorely missing one thing all pixar movies have had up untill this point. A sense of andventure, a sense of fantasy in a human world. Really this is just a plain old fish out of water story with surprisingly underdeveloped stereotyped Sorely missing one thing all pixar movies have had up untill this point. A sense of andventure, a sense of fantasy in a human world. Really this is just a plain old fish out of water story with surprisingly underdeveloped stereotyped supporting characters which is normally a strength for pixar pictures. The suporting characters. But oh well it wasn't that bad really, just not up to the very high expectations.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

KenG.Jun 26, 2006

Harmless but hardly ihspired. It was very wholesome (almost painfully so) and at times a certain warmth threatens to break through, but filmmalkers felt no inclination to develop this. Movie is also sappy, and completely unorginal. Still, Harmless but hardly ihspired. It was very wholesome (almost painfully so) and at times a certain warmth threatens to break through, but filmmalkers felt no inclination to develop this. Movie is also sappy, and completely unorginal. Still, preteens will likly be more enchanted then adults. The kids might no even notice how much this movie rips-off Michael J. Fox's "Doc Hollywood". (Since "Cars" wants very much to send the right messages to kids, how's this for a message to the kiddies "thou shall not steal")… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

AnAnimatorJun 22, 2006

Very disappointing for a Pixar film. The lighting and environments were the best they've done yet, and the animation was terrific as always, despite the absurdly limiting character design. But the story--usually Pixar's strong Very disappointing for a Pixar film. The lighting and environments were the best they've done yet, and the animation was terrific as always, despite the absurdly limiting character design. But the story--usually Pixar's strong point--just didn't hold my interest. Hopefully this is just a glitch, and the next one will be better!… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

WalkenM.Jul 25, 2006

For the first time in my life, I have to agree completely with the SF Chronicle's Mick LaSalle. A huge dissappointment following a string of gems from Pixar, but to be expected given the tremendously flawed concept. The film asks us to For the first time in my life, I have to agree completely with the SF Chronicle's Mick LaSalle. A huge dissappointment following a string of gems from Pixar, but to be expected given the tremendously flawed concept. The film asks us to identify with the personalities of mechanical monstrosities; mistakes of nature with heart, but no real way of reaching out to eachother. How do cars have sex? That may seem like a ridiculous question, but the filmmakers spend so much time establishing the details of this world (and even a romance), that it's a question that begs to be asked. And I'm left cold by the lack of response. Unless the film is some sort of metaphor for how Americans have become increasingly socially isolated, I have to see it as a massive failure. Not to mention that it's socially irresponsible to release a movie glamorizing American car culture with this country and planet rapidly deteriorating due to our reliance on oil. And that's not a leftist rant, that's plain fact.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

mrdr4gonDec 15, 2017

"Generic kids movie" on autopilot. It's as if this film is driving itself in the same way the characters are. Predictable and fairly dumbed down throughout. Pixar have shown that they can deliver better many times over. This is just a"Generic kids movie" on autopilot. It's as if this film is driving itself in the same way the characters are. Predictable and fairly dumbed down throughout. Pixar have shown that they can deliver better many times over. This is just a soulless cash-grab.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

buzzsparkApr 16, 2018

Kind of boring. 90% dull characters in a dull looking town with a weak as hell plot. While some parts of it are iconic and well known, the rest is very mediocre or plain sub-par.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

FnafGamer123Apr 30, 2019

Well Cars is a good movie, it was the only Pixar movie to have everything to young children, but nothing for older teens and adults, it grabs kids' passion over toys, books, and games, I mean couldn't Pixar make a wierd object film thatWell Cars is a good movie, it was the only Pixar movie to have everything to young children, but nothing for older teens and adults, it grabs kids' passion over toys, books, and games, I mean couldn't Pixar make a wierd object film that everyone would be interested? But I'm just saying.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

BrunoVn00Mar 22, 2020

I don't think Cars is as bad as people think it is. Sure, it's a letdown compared to the Pixar movies prior to this one, but it doesn't do anything offensively bad but I know that it also doesn't do anything outstanding. The story is theI don't think Cars is as bad as people think it is. Sure, it's a letdown compared to the Pixar movies prior to this one, but it doesn't do anything offensively bad but I know that it also doesn't do anything outstanding. The story is the typical movie about an unlikeable protagonist who goes through a journey outside his luxuries to learn humility. It doesn't try anything new storytelling wise. It has clichés and tons of filler scenes (That's probably why the movie feels slow) and it doesn't communicate to the audience a powerful or deep message or anything, it just lacks that "Pixar magic". Probably my biggest problem with the movie is the world building. Why are they cars? This is probably the dumbest concept and the dumbest world Pixar has ever had. It just makes the wolrd building so confusing, like, how are they able to hang pictures or posters in walls if they don't have hands or thumbs? How are they living? How the hell do they AGE ?(because Doc Hudson is supposed to be an old guy) How do they have children? Why is everything feeling like the human world but it isn't supposed to be a human world but instead, a world of cars? HOW??? WHY??? WHAT??? This story could literally work with humans driving cars, at least if it was that way I wouldn't be complaining about how stupid this idea was.

The movie does have some positives, of course. Like I said, it's not as BAD as people say it is. Sometimes the score is pretty good, I like the "Our Town" song, specially the scene it is being played, like, that is probably my favorite scene of the movie because that is the only semblance of "Pixar magic" this movie has...And I think that's it. The rest of the aspects were pretty...Meh.

Overall, this movie was pretty meh. It's still much better than most of Illumination's catalog and this is probably the "best" out of the Cars trilogy. If you don't want to watch it, just watch the "Our Town" scene or just listen to the song, you're welcome.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

Sarcastic_DevisDec 6, 2021

Probabilmente il 6 più generoso che abbia mai dato per un film Pixar finora.

Ha forse uno dei worldbuilding peggiori che abbia visto per un film animato. Poi i personaggi non lasciano chissà che impressione (ad eccezione di Saetta McQueen,Probabilmente il 6 più generoso che abbia mai dato per un film Pixar finora.

Ha forse uno dei worldbuilding peggiori che abbia visto per un film animato. Poi i personaggi non lasciano chissà che impressione (ad eccezione di Saetta McQueen, Doc Hudson e Cricchetto, ma quest'ultimo negativamente). L'unico motivo per cui di il voto è il messaggio di fondo che, per i giovini, non è male, e anche il piccolo sguardo sulla salvaguardia dei cimeli storici americani non mi è dispiaciuto. Per il resto, di per sé la storia funziona, tranne che per i motivi già citati.

Consigliato? Sta a voi.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

geewahJan 27, 2021

Pixar's worst movie.
Same plot we have seen so many times before, it's just that this one lacks the wit to keep anyone above 6 or 7 interested.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

FLInfiniteJul 7, 2021

Lightning McQueen? More like Lightning McMean. Talk about a cocky character. YOU NEED TIRES, YOU IDIOT!
Anyway, Chick Hicks is cool. Enough said.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

4

RandUm801eeeSep 13, 2022

Down with Mater and Sally! Throw them into the Wall-E trash compactors! They are meant to be the heart and soul of the movie, yet they only serve as a glimpse of the empty black void that is at the center of Cars (2006).

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews