Sunday, November 26, 2006

Kicks just keep getting harder to find (on Route 66)

So I saw Cars on DVD. I'm sorry to say that I really didn't like it. There have been plot holes in Pixar stories before, like Toy Story and (especially) Monsters Inc. But here the very conception of the film raised too many questions for me to willingly suspend my disbelief. Talking cars is one thing, but driverless ones? Then why do they exist?

Plus the limited-by-necessity design of the film stopped me from getting too into it. Toy Story could bring in any kind of toy. Even The Incredibles, which sets itself in a quasi-realistic (albeit cartoony) world had as much variety as there are kind of humans.

But...at the risk of sounding like a car bigot ("they all look alike to me"), a car is a car is a car. And there's only so much you can can do to put the breath of life in a car, and it's an idea probably better off not stretched to feature length.

For the first time in a Pixar film (and this is rare for me with any kind of cartoon), I found myself thinking more about the vocal performers than characters. This was not helped by their allowing Larry the Cable Guy (who otherwise actually did a fine job) to use a couple of his catchphrases.

This is something Pixar used to be better about. You didn't hear Tim Allen using lines from Home Improvement or Sam Jackson doing the bible-quote scene from Pulp Fiction as their Pixar characters.

But, suddenly Mater's spouting off with "That's funny right there, I don't care who you are, that's funny."

No it ain't. And neither, for the most part, in my (admittedly apparently minority) opinion, is this movie.

1 comment:

jeopardygirl said...

I agree with you on this completely. I was forced by three others to go see this in the theatre, and I left feeling gyp'd. I also had trouble thinking of Bonnie Hunt's character as anything other than Bonnie Hunt. See? I can't even remember the character's name.

(For the record, though, I loved Monsters, Inc., and didn't care about the plot holes)