Cars
2006, Pixar/Walt Disney
Arriving after a long string of brilliant successes, Cars wasn't up to their usual lofty standard, but it's still a quality ride. The automotive-themed gags border on being excessive, while the story fails to deliver the emotional payback one comes to expect from the studio. Granted, since I'm not a racing enthusiast, I wasn't drawn to the theme, and some of its humor was probably lost on me. But at least the animation was top-notch, as one would expect, so it's more than satisfying for CGI junkies. Of note, this was the first film Pixar produced after being bought by Walt Disney (for a staggering $7.4 billion).
DKS 12/17/17
Rev 4/6/22
GRUMPY OLD FART-O-METER® Rating:
Cars 2
2011, Pixar/Walt Disney
How did Pixar ever green-light this turd? It's difficult to find anything worthwhile here: the uninspiring story was matched by uninspiring animation. Usually Pixar will find ways to build upon prior releases, at the very least offering some groundbreaking new visual effects, but the result this time was more like technicolor vomit; evidently their staff hit cruise control while the studio was running on fumes (abusing automotive-related gags just as Pixar had). The most poorly-reviewed Pixar film of all time, it earned a measly 39% Rotten Tomatoes score. Skip this loser and proceed directly to Cars 3—you'll be glad you did.
DKS 12/17/17
GRUMPY OLD FART-O-METER® Rating:
Cars 3
2017, Pixar/Walt Disney
In the making-of docs, Pixar acknowledged Cars 2 was a misfire. The docs also reveal the renewed effort they invested in the story this time, and it shows: they not only rescued the franchise, but actually improved upon it. My age and life experiences likely contribute to how the story resonated with me; regardless, Cars 3 represents a thunderous return to form for Pixar. Supporting a terrific story, however, is some of the very finest CGI animation I've seen—and I'm quite close to having seen it all. Pixar has taken effects and rendering to a whole new level. Most astonishing is the sequence at the ghost track: the dust, dirt, gravel and mud are breathtaking, and I recall inhaling reflexively as the cars are reflected in a puddle as they speed past, the air behind them subtly ripping the water. The visuals alone are awesome; with a superior-quality story behind them, this has become a favorite for me, even though Rotten Tomatoes gave it the second-lowest Pixar film score of 69%.
DKS 12/17/17
GRUMPY OLD FART-O-METER® Rating:
Planes
2013, Walt Disney
Obviously capitalizing on the premise of Pixar's Cars, Disney spun off a film about talking aircraft. In the eyes of most babysitting adults looking for something to hold their interest, the results never got off the ground (ahem). Of course, being a "cartoon," one may question the point since the target audience is not about to debate a film's technical or aesthetic merits; as long as the tykes are entertained, who cares if it fails to sustain the interest of their parents?
DKS 12/17/17
GRUMPY OLD FART-O-METER® Rating:
Planes Fire & Rescue
2014, Walt Disney
Once again, Disney returned to a tainted well for some quick cash, leaving us adults feeling fleeced. After the dismal Planes, one might have thought they'd want to avoid making the same mistake twice, but no... anyway, it's not the first time Disney dropped a turd just to make a buck, and likely won't be the last.
DKS 12/17/17
GRUMPY OLD FART-O-METER® Rating: