It’s so shiny.
As they say at http://www.fordpinto.com, “Shiny is good!”
Pixar’s first-ever bidet joke! Dreamworks is so jealous.
Toilet humor. Why not?
This is not the first toilet humor (well maybe literally) for Pixar, even in a trailer. Toy Story 3 had the “I don’t think those were Lincoln Logs” line it its trailer.
From Finding Nemo had the mine bubbles as a fart, and the “Don’t you realize we are swimming in our our – SHhhhhhh!” line, Monster’s Inc had the yellow snow joke, and Up had the “bury poop” joke. There are likely others too, so it is odd that people are shocked Pixar uses toilet humor when they have been doing it for a while.
also Bug’s Life had a line about a “pu-pu platter”
Jay! Tell me you didn’t know all this off the top of your head! I’m already scared for myself that I remember them.
Let’s not forget that Monster’s Inc. had the first CG toilet flush.
I have three kids under 7 who love Pixar and Disney movies. After watching/hearing each of those movies a few dozen times you tend to vividly remember every scene and every line of dialogue :)
What do y’all think “Piston Cup” means anyway?
That one may even have made it onto merchandising somewhere.
There’s a brilliant line in the first “Cars” from Mater, “he did what in his cup?”
This trailer makes me feel much better about Pixar making another sequel.
Being that I love actual cars soo much, I can’t wait to see the vehicles they’re using in action!
Here’s a good list
Pixar, get ready for another $8 Billion! :)
This trailer doesn’t show me anything new than what I was expecting before, but only makes me feel a little better to see ‘Larry the Cable Guy The Movie’– I mean ‘Genre Shift To Cover Up All The Dead Voice Actors’– I mean ‘Cars 2′.
“Instead of saying ka-chow, he’s gonna go, KABOOM!”
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAHAAA *gasp wheeze* HAHAHAAAAAAHAAAA!!!!
Where do they even COME UP with this stuff?
It is spoofing James Bond jokes so it was likely intentionally bad.
I’m still not sold on Pixar doing spoof movies, but at least they go the whole nine yards when doing them.
Honestly man, I wouldn’t call this as going the whole nine yards if they were actually trying to spoof Bond. This looks more like a hodgepodge of different racing/action/spy films with a dorky slant.
And speculatively speaking, it might be an intentionally bad joke in the sequence, but as it stands out in the trailer . . . it’s just reading as a bad joke.
Hopefully Pixar will pull through with a good movie, but this trailer doesn’t bode well for me.
I’m not sure if this is spoofing James Bond or Phil Moskowitz*…
That’s actually my favorite joke in the trailers. Can’t explain why. I just like it.
I’m sure this will take the usual hits that Cars does, all I know is we enjoyed the first one and my kid can’t wait to see part two. Cars AND spies?!? He’s in heaven.
Interesting that egregious ethnic stereotypes are permissible in the forms of anthropomorphic automobiles, but Disney still won’t release SONG OF THE SOUTH.
If the boring,outdated sterotyped human stuff was cut out would any one even care? most people fast forward to the cartoon stuff any way.
Not me. When I saw Song of the South as a kid, I loved the cartoons all right, but I also loved James Baskett as Uncle Remus. His performance is brilliant. A shame it’s being left in the vault because of political correctness.
As for Cars 2…could be worse. Guess what Dreamworks has in its line up? A movie about a SNAIL who wants to go “ka-chow!” The movie’s called “Turbo”, and it’s about a snail who wants to be the fastest snail in the world, and thanks to a freak accident (maybe he got bit by a radioactive roadrunner), he makes his dream come true.
yeah i agree, but that’s not all the reasons why Song of the south isn’t being released….Song of the South makes the master-slave relationship look idyllic and then there’s that tar baby scene.
I still think Disney should release it though.
>>Song of the South makes the master-slave relationship look idyllic<<
In point-of-fact, "Song of the South" takes place post-slavery. Remus is free to leave the plantation ("the only home I know"), and in fact does in Act III when Miss Sally unfairly forbids him to see Johnny or tell any more stories. He packs up his belongings and leaves for a new life in Atlanta (in a carriage by broad daylight) and returns home at the climax to unify the family by his own free will.
Doesn’t Song of the South take place during the RECONSTRUCTION? I have a bootleg of it and I re watched it recently for an article I was working on. No one is referred to as a slave. In fact, it appears that the people who do work get paid. Meaning that no one in the film is a slave. In fact, the main plot has to do with Johnny and his mother moving out of Atlanta to avoid VIOLENCE toward them because of Johnny’s father and his editorial position on a newspaper. In short, their father is a pro-Republican newspaper editor, this is implied very heavily in the early dialogue in the film. Remember that during the Reconstruction, Northern Republicans (Carpetbaggers) came into the Democratic controlled South, monitored elections and took over editing at newspapers. It wasn’t popular, which is why there is such tension amongst other socialites and the boys mother. This leads to tension between the mother, the boy, and Uncle Remus. Which is why she tells Uncle Remus repeatedly to stay away from Johnny. She’s not being racist, she wants to make sure that her son doesn’t get hurt. However, she relents after her son IS hurt by a bull.
I wonder if the real reason isn’t so much racism as it is a white washing of the Reconstruction. It also raises all sorts of questions that some parents may not want to answer about the Civil War, Reconstruction, pre-”Redemption,” and the roles of both the Democratic Party and the Republican Party in that era. Remember, this was when Democratic Congressmen were running around in hoods, nailing people to buildings, and lynching any Republican they could get hold of in the name of “Southern Solidarity.”
That said, Cars 2 looks amusing, but I feel that the trailer is probably misleading. There are sections in the Tangled trailer that are not in the film. They just seem to be there to sell the film as an action comedy. I would not be surprised if they address both the loss of Doc Hudson, and feelings of mortality in Cars 2. I feel the trailer might be a bait and switch. Remember when we saw all those funny moments for Up and then the first 15 minutes are.. yeah. This is Pixar. I’m not taking the trailer at face value.
Democratic Party and the Republican Party in that era. Remember, this was when Democratic Congressmen were running around in hoods, nailing people to buildings, and lynching any Republican they could get hold of in the name of “Southern Solidarity.”
Now gNOp/teabagged party is busy doing that!
Yeah, right. You work for NPR or something?
I’ve been to japan and can totally relate to that toilet joke. Can’t say the same about the car characters. Pixar used to come up with original concepts until now, why have they stopped? I can see how it is easier to market something that is already a brand but still, just because a huge part of relies on sequels they do the same? -Lets hope they put the money from those projects to good use and go back to developing original content.
Pixar is just as much a business as any other studio. Cars made them billions of dollars, that’s why they’re making Cars 2.
If Pixar hadn’t made Cars 2, Disney was going to. Pixar didn’t want to see their original characters wind up in a film on par with all of Disney’s “direct to DVD” sequels of the late 90′s early 2000′s.
Not only that, but since Newt was cancelled, Cars 2 was pushed up an entire year in the production schedule. With an entire year gone, there just wasn’t as much time to fix some of its story issues.
That’s my take on it, anyway.
My feelings for this couldn’t be more mixed. I mean, it has a lot of interesting action elements, but it doesn’t look the least bit funny.
I’m totally with you Stephen.
I can’t wait for this…I don’t care how much flack it’s going to get, because as tgentry said, it’s pretty much inevitable.
I trust Pixar… but man… there’s nothing in that collection of clips that’s currently selling me.
I liked the earlier trailer better. that trailer gave the impression that the action might be a little more mature with a more overall clever tone for the movie. This trailer doesn’t do much for me. All of the dialogue seems so flat and characterless (with the exception of Mater’s). And yes, that ‘kachow, kaboom” line was pretty bad. I’m still hoping this is a winner though.
Hmm, I read somewhere that Cars (the original) didn’t do as well internationally as it did in the states so perhaps Nascar isn’t for everyone?
With that in mind and with the huge success of the toy line from the first movie, Cars 2: World Grand Prix’ sole purpose is to relate to a wider audience. Wider audience=shift more toys.
John Lasseter said how the idea was conceiving “I was on vacation in Europe and I thought, would’t it be funny if Mater were here, driving on the wrong side of the road in England, the pestering scooters in Rome like mosquitoes and racing around NÃ¼rburgring.
What he really meant was: “I was sitting in my office and I thought, wouldn’t we make more money from the merchandise if we appealed internationally?”
I know that Cars the diecast toy line has been incredibly successful with new characters released every month or so and that’s 5 years after the movie!
So, to basically sum this film up:
The funny thing is though, because I love Pixar movies, i’m still going to pay to watch this move and will buy the London bus and the london cab and the range rover royal guard because Im English and because I live in London.
Pixar Cult, you’ve done it again!
Trailer looked good. Will definitely see it.
Does anyone remember when Pixar teasers and trailers were more like short films introducing audiences to the characters. Mike and Sulley playing charades. Mr. Incredible trying to get his belt on. Marlin and Dory asking for directions.
I really miss that.
I loved those old trailers. At least the present ones are good about not giving away too much of the film. There was barely a hint that Ellie existed in the Up trailers, and you hardly saw any footage of Wall-E on the ship in those trailers. At least, in the ones shown before the films were released.
The little purple car summed it up for me. “You’ve got to be joking.”
And yet another airline security joke. Maybe I’d find them funnier if I were lucky enough to afford to travel.
I admit it: I laughed!
This looks like a hella lotta fun.
Austin Powers? Oh wait. It’s Cars again. My bad.
“Is the Popemodile Catholic?”
I got a good laugh from that one.
Yeah I’m cool with this movie cause it does look like a dumb popcorn flick. Last few pixar films have been tear jerkers, this should be the one buddy comedy of the summer for the casual movie goer. But it does do one of the movie sins, by covering one of their characters in shit. It’s almost like they’re shitting on their own movie. If they find a way to make a monkey side-kick car then we’re really in trouble.
I predict it WILL be the weakest of the Pixar movies ever, but I’ll see it.
That Popemobile gag got me too!
I guess I’m an easily-amused Catholic.
I have no clue why I should care about these characters apart from they are friends from the first movie and Michael Caine is in the movie.
I do trust in Pixar but I don’t know why I should go see this movie. Maybe I am to old, but that was never a problem with any other Pixar film! I can enjoy Toy Story as much now as the first time I watched it for the first time many years ago… That is one of Pixar’s greatest strengths, that is to cross audiences and appeal to anyone.
I know it’s only a trailer and I might be unfair but I’m being honest and this is what I think. Can’t wait to be proved wrong, but I’m not holding my breath…
Looks like Pixar won’t rob another Oscar this year.
It might be worth seeing if they have the Barbie/Ken short playing before it. Maybe.
Not even Woody and Buzz can get me to see the sequel of my least favorite Pixar film. Or the Muppet movie, for that matter. (Jim Henson R.I.P.)
Looks dumb and boring to me. A loud action-packed video game instead of a story. ooo, explosions.
i’m usually ALL for monocles on things, but this professor car… no.
I wouldn’t probably find it so boring if there were any characters instead of Cars.
I mean, this basically looks like earlier Pixar movies, like the underrated A Bug’s Life, which were less ambitious but also funnier and free of over-sentimental stuff (I do like some of the Pixar emotional scenes, but they abuse of it sometimes). But Cars are boring as characters. I’ve never been a huge fan of Cars as cartoon characters. I thought Suzy, the little Blue Coupe was ok, and Little Johnny Jet, but didn’t love them.
However it gets a lot worse when they are done in CGI. Apart from Mater most of the Cars are totally rigid. They look like machines, not characters.It’s a saga that would really work better in 2D.
It doesn’t help I’m not interested in car races and I’m not James Bond’s biggest fan.
I loved Benny The Cab in Who Framed Roger Rabbit, he was even my fave character in the picture, but that’s all.
Computer animated models are more rigid than hand drawn animation, but there are much more cartoony vehicles than this. Case in point, look at the Klik leader on here. It’s NSFW due to nudity, but it’s censored in this version.
Look at the squash and stretch on the streetcar as the guy gets thrown inside by a giant arm.
Also, there’s still virtual 3D drawing which is currently evolving with SANDDE. If that catches on and people use it without the computer tweens, then 3D computer animation is going to be just as good as 2D in this respect.
Hey, it’s the sequel that no one over the age of 6 asked for!
Gotta disagree with you there. Every single parent of every kid under the age of 6 who has watched his movie countless countless times is aching for something new.
It’s all of the merchandise we’ll have to buy that makes us cringe.
I’ll admit that I was going to write this one off, that it would be the first Pixar film that I was gonna skip and then accuse the studio of selling out. Seeing this trailer didn’t change my mind too much but there’s still a good level of quality in there.
Pixar’s a business but a business that has produced over a decade and a half of really good movies, not just in terms of animation but general film making. People are going to disagree with me (and this is probably going to make me sound like a major tool) but I say let them sell out for a bit. They’ve worked hard and they need to make money during the time of a crappy economy. Besides, they’re not going to be making sequels forever, are they?
Lets hope not Nick, lets HOPE not.
I’m 100% with ‘Jens’ when she said:
“Lets hope they put the money from those (sequel) projects to good use and go back to developing original content.”
Life’s too short for franchises and apathetic filmmaking.
I hope they prove me wrong.
“They’ve worked hard and they need to make money during the time of a crappy economy.”
They made BILLIONS off Cars merchandise, please explain.
Actually, Disney merchandising makes billions off of Cars merchandise; I doubt that any of it actually goes directly to Pixar. Just because the one company is owned by the other does not mean their profits conglomerate into one bank account. I don’t know anything about where Pixar DOES get their money for their films, but this here is common sense. PIXAR has no marketing department. All Pixar merchandise is made by Disney or commissioned by Disney, and therefore all of the profits from the merchandise go to DISNEY which is, once again, a SEPARATE company.
I know everyone likes to ignore all of this and pretend it’s as easy as “How dare Pixar try to make money! ‘THEY ALREADY MAKE SO MUCH’!” but it’s really not that simple.
I wouldn’t really consider this selling out, or jumping the shark. Pixar is still full of great ideas I’m sure.
NASCAR and spy film fans rejoice! For me, it’s a Redbox run for sure.
This trailer made me want to vomit. I am sick and tired of DreamWorks and their reliance on sequels, pop culture and big celebrity voices to make a quick buck. I mean, who needs another Madagascar or Cars? The first films sucked. The only reason Jeffrey is making this movie is to sell toys.
I assume you’re implying at Cars is not made by DreamWorks, Mr. Pixar Fanboy?
Hey, I loved this trailer. Boy, John Lasetter sure knows how to make sequels with integrity. I mean, Cars is really popular and maybe this one will be AWESOME. Because it’s Pixar. Right? Gee, Jeffrey could learn a whole lot from this guy.
I did a double take and then gave you your well deserved upvotes.
I love it! Nice 1 pixar fanboy. Nailed it right on the head!
Don’t get me worng, I want to like it, but for some reason…..I am just not feeling it. Maybe it’s because I wasn’t a big fan of the first one? I dunno.
^ Agree with the poster above.
Cars was without a doubt the weakest Pixar movie, and the least deserving of a sequel.
Someone once got me Larry the Cable Guy’s book as a gag gift, figuring it would be one of those “so bad it’s good” situations.
Turned out the book was so vile that it wasn’t even funny ironically.
My point is this means Larry the Cable Guy is obviously the top choice for a children’s film. Way to go, Pixar!
People could make that same argument against the great George Carlin being in Cars, or Denis Leary in A Bugs Life.
These comics are there to voice act, not do their incendiary stand-up routines.
My issue is not “this comic does edgy humor.” Rather, Larry the Cable Guy specifically is very bigoted. Many of his jokes are “observational” humor about how gays and foreigners are weird, confusing, and stupid. Furthermore, his audience is meant to sympathize with those observations, rather than laugh at how absurd and stupid his character is. His “comedy” is by a bigot, FOR bigots. That’s a problem.
His book might as well have been titled “Minorities Sure Are Ridiculous!! By: A White Guy”. I honestly can’t figure out why Pixar is fine with hiring this man, seeing as that he constantly takes potshots at gays just for being gay.
Hmmm… on the subject of Pixar sequels- Ellen DeGeneres had a funny little segment about on her show:
That was amazing…
And I agree with Ellen. To date Finding Nemo is still my favorite Pixar film and I actually don’t think a sequel for it would be half bad. I assume it could actually be very good if Pixar treated it the way they treated the first. But I know Andrew Stanton has moved on and wouldn’t necessarily want them to make a seuel just to make one.
I honestly do wonder why the Cars sequel though. Aside from the money and popularity tied to the first, I’m sure there are other reasons the film was decided to be made and I wish I could here them straight from the crew, just out of curiosity. THOUGH, maybe it really is just the money and the seven year old kids who loved the first.
I think I heard somewhere that John Lasseter was traveling and he kept imaginging what Mater would do in all of those places. I guess John Lasseter just does whatever he wants.
I would actually want to see “Old Timey Bicycles”. :)
From the looks of this the tagline should be:
Cars 2 : Middle Of The Road
A potty joke, they actually went there and made a potty joke.
Oh well, at least this means Rango will win at the next year’s oscars.
Well, if you’re making a sequel to Cars, it might as well be completely crazy, and full of ‘splosions.
I have the feeling I’ll like this better than the first one (which was… okay).
I for the longest time have said that Cars was the worst Pixar movie. I was entertained by it but it did not impress me like most of the other films did. However, I have been told many times by friends that Cars is their childrens favorite Pixar movie. Just like Wall-E was a great movie for adults and only okay for kids, I think the Car series is great for kids and only okay for adults. This looks like it will be a high quality adventure that will entertain many families. I think it will, for better or for worse, be more popular with kids then adults.
For what it’s worth, my kids’ co-favorite Pixar movies are Cars and Wall-E. Go figure.
CARS was filled with gorgeous technical achievements, just like RATATOUILLE. It bored me horribly, just like RATATOUILLE. I re-watch both of them, but with the DVD sound off and some good music playing.
Does mention of the “Popemobile” imply the existence of a human Pope, or is the car itself the pontiff? Pixar’s CARS movies raise many peculiar questions.
Really he should be a Cartholic.
And instead of kids riding the popemobile, he’d ride them!
Is the popemobile catalytic?
This looks like a fun ride, and I’ll bet it does quite well at the box office.
Yes, the flak will come, but there’s always gonna be flak, since no studio can please everyone. Nor should they try.
I do not think the idea of a sequel is bad at all. There have been many sequels better than the original films, and Pixar has every right to do one if they feel good about it (and their track record, if I’m not mistaken, is better than any studio in the history of film) so I say “bring it on!”
Besides, Pixar’s worst would still be better than most studio’s best, so I’m looking forward to this.
It doesn’t matter if grown-ups may just think it’s an okay film. As long as grown-ups take the kiddies, that’s all that matters to the bottom line. I predict it will do better than the new Pooh Movie. Now there’s a franchise that has been strip-mined ’til hell won’t have it. There are so many Pooh spin-offs, the grown-ups may think they’ve seen it before or can’t tell the difference…or think about the million Pooh DVDs and videos they already have lying around the house. I do think the Pooh movie may be a better film artisitically but not in what it makes dollarwise.
It looks like they decided to compete against puss-in-boots, but I’m not worried, I think Pixar has a second film coming this year, it’s called Newt and it’s an original film at least !!!
I’m sure of it I read it on the internet.
Newt got the boot.
why? two words: Rio.
Hmmm… If what you say is true, what’s the reasoning? Are they afraid Rio is going to be a lot better than what PIXAR is capable of? So much that they prefer not having a film at all ? “Fear” would be an understatement.
Rio must be an amazing film if it’s causing PIXAR to cancel their only original film this year. On the other hand, let’s suppose Rio end up being a bad film, PIXAR will have canceled a film for nothing.
Newt was cancelled a while ago.
This is more of competition with ‘Kung Fu Panda 2′ as they both come out around a month apart. ‘Puss in Boots’ comes out in the fall.
Oh ok. It looks fun, but really only because of the setting and the novel fact that everything is car-a-tized.
I dig the Newsboys track at the beginning – very fitting. Also, check out the high-res stills here: http://pixarblog.blogspot.com/2011/03/four-hi-res-cars-2-stills.html It’s great to see all of the lush detail.
Hey, who got Dreamworks in my Pixar?
Well at some point Pixar had to transform into Disney don’t they?
Sign me up for the Blue Ray when this comes out.
Oh well, the little kiddies will surely love it, moms and dads will buy a few billion more Cars toys, and the rest of us can look forward to the 2012 Pixar releases.
What a technicolor yawn.
I thought all the characters from the first movie were pretty bland, especially for Pixar, but I had serious apathy for Larry the Cabbletruck.
So as befuddled as I am that they are making a sequel, I’m downright disappointed that he seems to be stealing the spot light.
I think every time a new Pixar movie is poking around the block, everyone seems to forget that their trailers never really show much of the movie at all. The trailer for Toy Story 3 told us it was an escape film, and it told us we’d see Andy all grown up and that he was leaving for college… but it never told us anything about the emotional ride the toys would go through or the fact that we’d see them sitting in a fiery pit about to get incinerated.
My point saying this is that everyone loves to harp on the new trailers… and that’s fine, that’s what the trailers are for: to generate interest. But they’re certainly not about giving away the plot of the film (good trailers anyway) and Pixar trailers have always made sure to keep the emotional story secret until the film is released. They give away the basic plot and a few jokes, but they never give away the punch. They do want you to have a reason to SEE the full movie after all.
And more than everyone loves to harp on trailers, they just looove to hate on Cars (I wish people would give it a rest already; it’s really not as ‘bad’ as so many seem to think). But underneath the racing and the pretty lights, even the first Cars had an emotional storyline that was at least sweet. No, it certainly wasn’t Pixar’s best work, but it wasn’t heartless garbage which is what so many like to say it was. I think we can at least expect the same of the second film. It probably won’t be as nostalgic as Toy Story 3, nor as intelligent as Up, nor as unique as WALL-E… but I’m sure it will at least be fun, with a good story.
I wish people would stop acting like Pixar was ever their little buddy arthouse studio. It never has been and never will be.
perfectly captured what I feel, sir. Well said.
I mean Maam! haha sorry :)
Who cares about emotional through lines? It’s about Cars with eyes on them. It sucks. Who cares if it even has heart? It’s not cool. NOT COOL! Out of all the things that could be made in feature animation, this crap was made. It’s awful. They’re using toilets and jumping into vats of car poop. I am not seeing or supporting this movie in any way.
You’re reducing an entire film into two jokes. If you don’t like the film and don’t think it should be supported, by all means stick up for what you’d rather see in animation. But I also think that if you want to talk about how ‘bad’ it is as an animated film, you could state so without saying things like “It sucks!” which really doesn’t mean anything to anyone. ‘It has toilet jokes’ doesn’t say anything either, and “It’s not cool.” is another meaningless statement that doesn’t give anyone any information on why you think the movie is bad; it only makes you look like a jaded viewer who can’t properly articulate why they dislike something.
Your kidding yourself if you think the first Cars had a emotional storyline that was sweet. And the filmmaker, John Lasseter, is a heartless filmmaker that’s destroyed many films (Bear and the Bow by Brenda Chapman, Rapunzel by Glen Keane, American Dog by Chris Sanders) and killed each one of these filmmaker’s voices. Ironically, Chris Sander’s How To Train Your Dragon owns Cars 2 in terms of heart, filmmaking, and sincerity. John Lasseter is a pretty heartless filmmaker, and Cars 2 stinks of his touch throughout this trailer.
I have to say I disagree with you about John Lasseter.
But I did love How to Train Your Dragon and like Chris Sanders’ work as well.
I think you are putting too much weight on John Lasseter’s work. One man alone could not have done what you claim Lasseter has. He has a lot of influence as creative officer at Disney & Pixar, but he’s not powerful enough to shut down productions on his own, ‘destroy’ whole movies, etc. Films take hundreds- thousands of people, and John is just one. There are other people to support or deny his decisions, so it’s rather ridiculous to suggest that he is the only one to ‘blame’ for films not turning out the way that you wanted them to.
And that’s the other thing. Who are you to say that ‘Tangled’ and ‘Bolt’ are not better in their final form now than when they were drafted under Keane or Sanders? I’m not saying they are better, because I don’t have any idea what they were going to be like under Keane/ Sanders. But even if they may have turned out with better stories, etc. if Sanders’ vision hadn’t been changed or if Keane had been given more creative freedom(?), you are essentially blaming John Lasseter for doing what Disney and other studios have always done. If the studio wants to go in another direction, it will. If the people in charge don’t like how the movie is coming along, they will want to change it (and sometimes, the people working on it). This is not John Lasseter’s evil bidding, it’s the way big studios are run. This happens in movie-making everywhere else too, not just at animation studios. Obviously you don’t like it, but it’s silly to blame John Lasseter for your let-downs from Disney. Contrary to popular belief, JL cannot just waltz around Disney and do whatever he wants. If you don’t like what is going down at the Disney studio, then say that. But pointing your finger at John is really odd.
You can call John a heartless film-maker if you’d like but not many people will take your opinion seriously, since it really seems like you just have it in for the guy because you didn’t like a few movies he was involved in.
“It’s not cool.” is another meaningless statement that doesn’t give anyone any information on why you think the movie is bad”
Yes it most certainly does. Do you know anything about the history of animation prior to “A Bug’s Life”? If you did then you’d know CARS is NOT COOL. Especially in terms of what the animation medium is capable of.
Fantasia, Pinocchio, Bambi, Dumbo, and even more recent fair like the Iron Giant, The Lion King, or even Kung Fu Panda are all cooler than CARS. Have you ever watched “Toot Whistle Plunk Boom” or a truly awesome Warner Bros. short by Chuck Jones like “Chow Hound”? How about UPA’s “The Tell Tale Heart”? Or Bruno Bozzetto’s “Allegro Non Troppo”? Think about it. Where does CARS truly belong in the larger context of the great history of animation? I’ll tell you where…pretty much at the bottom of the barrel. The first one had Sheryl Crow songs featured in it for Pete’s Sake! And a REMAKE of “Life is a Highway”! A REMAKE! That song came out in ’92 or something!
If CARS 2 succeeds it will not be good for the animation medium. It will set a precedent that an animated film can be made just to sell billions of dollars worth of toys to 5 year olds. You should feel ashamed of yourself for defending this film in any way. This trailer is utter crap. Pure and simple. Even if the film has a modicum of heart it doesn’t matter, this film is BAD NEWS for any artistic integrity animation would hope to achieve in every possible way. Everyone with a love for this medium should boycott it, and pray to God that it fails.
Trailer didn’t tell me much, but I didn’t expect it to do so. Nor did it change my mind: I expect that I’ll be going to see this at the earliest opportunity.
Pixar trailers traditionally underwhelm. That way, when the picture comes out, it’s usually more of a “wow!” than the trailers would let on.
If anything, the “Toy Story” sequels should have shown one and all that sequels do not have to such, and do not do so automatically!
This just in: kids are idiots. Film at 11!
‘Look at Pixar’s Cars. It makes cars look cute when they’re destroying the planet. It’s awful.’ – Sylvain Chomet
(My last comment on CB was censored for no apparent reason, but I thought I’d try again because this is such an incisive statement.)
About time we get a sequel to The Incredibles! Wait…Cars 2…never mind…
I may give it a chance, though I wasn’t a big fan of the first one. Not because of what Pixar did with cars, i’m just not a big car fan, aside from having a good car to get me where I need to go I really have no desire to watch a movie about cars.
THIS IS GREAT BABYSITTER MATERIAL!
I never found the character designs appealing enough to ever watch the first film let alone a sequel trailer. All I can think about is Tex Avery’s “One Cab’s Family” when I see these awful knock offs.
I always think of the Chevron talking cars commercials.
I liked Cars. With that said, I’m not so sure about turning a movie about a small, redneck town into a spy thriller in order to sell toys.
Find it hard to get into these characters – given their otherwise realistic design, have a basic problem with the concept of the cars eyes (what is that, opaque white glass?) and I dunno, boy cars and girl cars…can’t they just dispense with the obligatory gender stuff for what is apparently meant to be a ‘boy’s’ movie anyway?
As always with Pixar though, nice luminous backgrounds.
You guys need to lighten up. This film is going to make SO MANY (shareholders) happy!
if anyone remembers the first comments on trailer for rango
and rango the movie was even far worse than the trailer.
some people like it, some don’t… looks like we have gridlock.
Cars is a fine example why one should never make “Pet Projects.”
The first one was a colossal bore and this one is just a waste of time.
I enjoyed the first 35 seconds.
At the first sight of all that neon two words crept into my brain: “Speed Racer.” Here’s hoping that Pixar doesn’t leave audiences with the same kind of headaches that SR did.
this is the worst thing ever.
I actually never saw the first Cars movie.
Something tells me that next years Oscar for best motion picture may actually go to a non Pixar movie. However, that’s just my opinion.
Also, I thought the Nostalgia Critic was kidding when he said the cars were going to be secret agents…
Pixar is a class act in the animation industry. This doesn’t necessarily mean all of their products will appeal to the general moviegoer and fault-finding animation purist (on CB) alike. lol
Quality animation is undeniably their strong suit regardless if the world is on board of their latest release or not. Pixar makes me proud to be American!
(I hope Lasseter or Jobs are reading. I really want to work for them. lol)
This looks like fun. My brother is going to love it!
there is an extended trailer online now: http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=75104
This is a much better trailer.
I definitely want to see this now. It wont be known if the movie is strong until it is seen.
You’re very right! This trailer is better than the one given to the States. Not 100% sold for the project, but it gave me a better chance of faith.
Can anyone please explain the , ” is the pope-mobile Catholic?” joke to me? Thx!!
Normally, it would be “Is the Pope Catholic?” He obviously is, so it’s a question equivalent to answering yes to somebody.
But the Pope usually travels in his Popemobile in public events. So in a universe where everyone is a vehicle, it turns into “Popemobile”, where the Popemobile is the Pope instead.
You may now laugh.
I will pass this one.