thedriveintheatre

NOTE: I have tried to keep this as spoiler-free as possible, but I strongly advise readers to see the film first in case I reveal any minor plot or character details.

Pixar’s latest film has achieved an astounding feat, although it is not one its producers and fans have been hoping for. After eleven critically-acclaimed movies and sixteen years of feature film production, the award-winning studio finally created a movie that obtained a Rotten Rating on the movie review aggregator site, Rotten Tomatoes (at the time of writing, the rating sits at 35% with 159 reviews, a fortnight after its release). The sequel polarised fans more than the first ever did; most implored non-viewers to give the film a chance, saying it met their expectations, and for a few, even exceeded it. Others weren’t as forgiving, expressing extreme disappointment and even resentment at the studio. And there are those who remain ambivalent about their experience and said it was decent for the studio’s standards.

I am not here to discuss their opinions. I have covered that extensively in my past posts, and it has dawn on me that ‘secondhand reviewing’ is a weak, if seriously flawed way to judge a movie. This is why I believe I am now qualified to offer my opinion after having experienced the movie for myself first-hand. I will also not compare it with Pixar’s other films (besides the first movie), or recent animated films from other studios. I may do that in my next post, but I believe a film should be judged on its own merits. Lastly, I will not discuss this film in light of any real-life controversies surrounding it (such as the copyright claim lawsuit, or Lasseter’s late intervention and Brad Lewis’ rather unceremonious relegation to ‘co-director’ title). That will also be reserved for another post. I would also like to take the opportunity to inform you of my prejudices. It is my belief that a critic should always admit their biases and divorce their preferences or ‘conflict of interests’ from their assessment to remain as objective as possible. So here it is upfront; the first movie was what made me fell in love with Pixar. I have been disenchanted with the studio lately for many reasons, and it is with great trepidation and morbid curiousity that I walked into the theatre with a close pal of mine (one of my best friends, in fact) to watch one of my most anticipated movies of the year.

First off, let’s get the obvious out of the way. This is not Pixar’s best movie, not by a long shot. That would be still be any one of the ‘Big Three’ (my personal collective nickname for Ratatouille, Wall-E and Up, since these films represented the zenith of my affair with the studio), although Brave stands a good chance next year. It is also probably its ‘worst’, again, this being my opinion, and by that, I mean, it is not particularly revelatory, meaningful, or thoughtful as most of Pixar’s fare.

What it is, though, is one of the best action movies the studio has produced since The Incredibles. I have longed for Pixar to do a spy movie and a sequel to Cars, and I am pleased to say they have granted my wish. John Lasseter was right, this is a spy movie. There are plenty of allusions to great spy movies; the rooftop chase of one of the characters could’ve been straight from the Tangiers chase in The Bourne Ultimatum, the casino and torture scenes from a Daniel Craig or Timothy Dalton Bond flick, the plot about the control of the world’s resources probably inspired by The World is Not Enough or Quantum of Solace. Yet Pixar manages to take these references and make it their own (which they have done many times before with films like A Bug’s Life, Wall-E and Up). Not that there’s anything wrong with that. ‘Nothing’s original anymore’ is a maxim I believe in. What matters is the execution. And all I’ll say is that Pixar does this brilliantly with panache and verve.

Automotive enthusiasts will also find plenty to enjoy here; from the Karmann Ghia being a codeword (and any spy fan worth his salt would know that was one of cars driven by Maxwell Smart in the ‘Get Smart’ series), to the lemons sub-plot, and all the assorted celebrity voice-cameos in between. Oh, and I just discovered a few days ago that Siddeley the plane’s name is a reference to a British aircraft manufacturer company.

On a technical level, Pixar has crafted a visual masterpiece. I will compare this aspect to other films in another post, but I’m going to say that I was thoroughly blown away by the level of detail, like the breathtaking scenery of an Italian coastal town, the burning sparks of cinder in the aftermath of an explosion, the seafoam spraying from the crest of a wave in the dark of the night… the Special Effects, Modeling, and R&D Departments deserve kudos for pushing the envelope in bringing the Cars world to life.

The characters are nicely fleshed-out, especially the newcomers. It is hard not to fall in love with Finn and Holley, who have to be the most charming and suave characters the studio has ever created. Finn, deliciously voiced by the congenial Sir Michael Caine, is the vehicular embodiment of a spy, with more fancy gadgets than you can throw a portable mine at. I even found myself liking Holley as much as I liked Sally from the first film. I liked her character progression from inept tech geek to fully-fledged field agent, and her increasing exasperation at Mater’s antics is entertaining to watch.

It’s also nice to see the returning characters, although this is expected of a sequel. At times, I felt like I was meeting old friends and returning to a place I haven’t visited in a while - it was pleasant to see how much Radiator Springs has changed since we last saw it. Doc’s absence was handled decently, even though I wish they made it more obvious to the viewer that his departure was permanent. The supporting cast also have a bigger role in the story at certain parts; Filmore unexpectedly plays a crucial role in the film’s climax, and one of the more memorable scenes was when we discover the backstory of Luigi and Guido and how their relationship mirrors Lightning and Mater’s at that point in the movie.

On that note, I found myself empathizing with Mater. I mean, don’t we feel like a fool every now and then, especially if we find ourselves out of our element? For our intrepid tow-truck, the disorientation is two-fold; he joins Lightning on a whirlwind tour of the world and encounters foreign cultures and unfamiliar settings, and he gets mistaken for a secret agent and finds himself embroiled in international espionage, terrorist organisations, and global conspiracies. His naivety and direct honesty places him in many sticky situations, which makes for huge comedy and drama potential.

Unfortunately, this leads me to one of my biggest gripes with the movie: the conflicting message. In the first movie, Lightning’s developed from a selfish, self-centred loner to a more humble and big-hearted individual. In this outing, the focus is on Mater, who is now the protagonist and must undergo the biggest character arc of the story. To my disappointment, this was not handled well by Pixar, mainly because he remains the same character he was at the start of the film, a goof of a klutz. The only difference is that he accepts his fault without making any effort to change it, and inspires others to look at him in a kinder light. This results in a typical “Be yourself” message which feels contrived and contrary to the first movie’s moral of “Become a better person.” I felt they could’ve made Mater less of a clueless buffoon and have him at least attempt to behave in the presence of Lightning and his fellow racers during the party, only to be snubbed. Or made him be aware that he was being mistaken for a spy, and have him try to impress his new ‘friends’ by proactively pretending to be a spy, instead of having him guilelessly strung along for the ride.

On a personal note, I would’ve liked to see more of Sally. I find it hard to believe that Lightning would choose his best friend over his girlfriend to take on a whirlwind tour of the world, although it is plausible. Even then, I wonder why she couldn’t have been part of his pit crew, or why he couldn’t have just bought an extra ticket for her. I can just imagine a scenario with Sally after the Tokyo race which would’ve been great, but I won’t discuss that here.

I also felt the exposition was too quick, which might fly over the heads of the kids and confuse the adults who are not as familiar with the franchise as their younger charges. Even at one of Pixar’s longer runtimes of 2 hours, the film flew by too fast for me to appreciate the nuances of character or keep track of who is doing what. More adept viewers might be able to keep up, but I felt they could’ve paced the movie better.

There were also a couple of cringeworthy scatalogical gags that wouldn’t have looked out of place in a ‘lesser’ Dreamworks movie, but stick out like a sore tire from a studio of this calibre. Mercifully, most of them were already shown in the trailer, but I just wish they didn’t include them and devoted more time to character development or exposition.

Lastly, many reviewers, both professional and amateur, have not made mention of Giacchino’s score, which probably shows how unremarkable it is. Granted, it certainly is an interesting use of surf music, and it lends a very 70s Sean Connery or Roger Moore feel to it. Sadly, the hook, while catchy, is repeated too often, and there is very little variation to the tracks from memory. I might listen closely on a repeat viewing, but there are very few standout tracks, even those during the important scenes. And of course, the use of contemporary music is interesting (I am in fact listening to Polyrhythm as I type this), but this is the exception to usual Pixar soundtracks which rely almost entirely on score. Again, this is not really a bad thing, but it won’t stick in your mind either.

As I said in the beginning of this review, no other Pixar movie has generated this much controversy in the studio’s entire history. For once, the verdict is not unanimous; the critics wished it was never made, the fans think the critics are misguided, and the fence-sitters have little to praise about it. What do I think? Well, it depends. If you’re a Pixar fan, automotive enthusiast, or spy flick conoisseur, this is a must-watch. If you didn’t like the first film, Mater, or the idea of a world inhabited by talking, living cars, you’re probably not gonna like this one either (although I still recommend you watch it, as it might change your mind). If you’re hoping that Pixar has made another winner, I’m afraid it’s not this year. If you think Cars 2 is not worth watching in theatres, I can tell you that I saw it in 2D, and I immensely enjoyed it. It’s worth watching, preferably with your best friend. I might plan a rewatch in IMAX 3D, if only to provide more comments in a subsequent IMAX review and watch the Brave trailer for the first-time in all its glory on the big-screen.

The best line in Cars 2 sums up the open-minded and cautiously optimistic approach you must adopt should you choose to undertake the ‘dangerous’ mission of watching it:

“No one realizes they’re being fooled, because they’re too busy laughing at the fool.”

You said it, Finn.