Seriously though, yeah, they are.
Disney Pixar's Cars
Disney/Pixar's CARS
After various topics about PIXAR's quality, I think its time we finally addressed Cars...PIXARS black sheep, but a triumph nonetheless.
What I love about Cars is all the various characters that grow on you. Similar to Rango, the townsfolk just seem to grow up on you. One can't help but have a favorite. Also, in retrospect, this film pioneered PIXARs emotional ending hook. Lightning helping out The King seems to have genuine pathos to it...something most overlook.
Feel free to tear me down(*cough* Eric J. *couch*) but I feel that, with its sequel on the horizon, its time to really see if tehre are any other Cars fans out there.
What I love about Cars is all the various characters that grow on you. Similar to Rango, the townsfolk just seem to grow up on you. One can't help but have a favorite. Also, in retrospect, this film pioneered PIXARs emotional ending hook. Lightning helping out The King seems to have genuine pathos to it...something most overlook.
Feel free to tear me down(*cough* Eric J. *couch*) but I feel that, with its sequel on the horizon, its time to really see if tehre are any other Cars fans out there.
I love all things cinema, from silent movies to world cinema to animated cinema to big blockbusters to documentaries and everything in between!
Re: Anyone else think Cars was underrated?
Um...
"Cars" made well over $200 million, got its own spin-off series, has a ton of merchandise, and is getting a big budget theatrical sequel this summer.
Can't say that it really seems "underrated" to me.
"Cars" made well over $200 million, got its own spin-off series, has a ton of merchandise, and is getting a big budget theatrical sequel this summer.
Can't say that it really seems "underrated" to me.
"Yesterday is history, tomorrow is a mystery, but today is a gift--that is why it's called the present."
Re: Anyone else think Cars was underrated?
I'd do no such thing--I've been defending this one against (*cough*JimHill*cough*) reactionary idiots trying to tool the reviews to fit the box office since it came out.LotsoA113 wrote:After various topics about PIXAR's quality, I think its time we finally addressed Cars...PIXARS black sheep, but a triumph nonetheless.
Feel free to tear me down(*cough* Eric J. *couch*) but I feel that, with its sequel on the horizon, its time to really see if tehre are any other Cars fans out there.
It's not my favorite-favorite Pixar (our hero is, frankly, a jerk for most of the movie, and if the plot's going to follow "Doc Hollywood" right down the line, I still say Woody Harrelson would have made a better Mater...), but if it's not TS2, well, what could be? I'd still watch it again over Nemo.
The only thing that made it a "black sheep" was Disney's opening-week faux pas about bragging over the grosses--And then, when audiences were told the movie had "flopped" because the numbers hadn't lived up to somebody's imagination, reasoned, "Oh, yeah....I musta hated it, then!
"Happy Feet getting the Oscar that year was more of a tantrum against Cars than a praise of the Penguin movie. If that doesn't seem to make sense today, well, things were funny back then.
Last edited by EricJ on March 29th, 2011, 2:30 pm, edited 2 times in total.
-
GeorgeC
Uh, you did notice the topic said underrated, did you? 
(That means, not enough people liked it.)
Carl's TS3 thread was just trying to trot out a thread from three years ago to cash in on current Oscar timing, while Ibrmac's thread was just an old Oscar discussion from two years ago thinking Carl's thread was real.
Lotso's thread was, for a change, actually talking about the MOVIE, and not a symbolic thread about what studio might or might not be "overexposed".
(Which, btw, was one of the reasons Cars was so persecuted in the first place--
It's one of the vaguaries of human nature that after Nemo, the public was, and is to this day, almost literally drooling to see Pixar get their first flop, "like everyone else".
Nothing could do Nemo's '03 box office, but when Incredibles did only the usual box office the next year, analysts were jumping on "Does that make it a flop now, does it, does it, huh?
", and trying to come up with audience "explanations" why it must have been.)
(That means, not enough people liked it.)
Carl's TS3 thread was just trying to trot out a thread from three years ago to cash in on current Oscar timing, while Ibrmac's thread was just an old Oscar discussion from two years ago thinking Carl's thread was real.
Lotso's thread was, for a change, actually talking about the MOVIE, and not a symbolic thread about what studio might or might not be "overexposed".
(Which, btw, was one of the reasons Cars was so persecuted in the first place--
It's one of the vaguaries of human nature that after Nemo, the public was, and is to this day, almost literally drooling to see Pixar get their first flop, "like everyone else".
Nothing could do Nemo's '03 box office, but when Incredibles did only the usual box office the next year, analysts were jumping on "Does that make it a flop now, does it, does it, huh?
", and trying to come up with audience "explanations" why it must have been.)
I think Lotso is calling Cars underrated, because most people (myself included, though I do like it) consider it to be Pixar's worst film. Though, frankly, if Cars is your worst film, you're doing pretty well for yourself.
And I think Happy Feet winning the Oscar can be attributed to not just how well-received it was at the time, but its environmental theme. That was the big political talking point at that year's awards. Remember Al Gore going on stage to say it was the first green Oscars, not to mention An Inconvenient Truth winning two of the awards. When voters looked at their ballot with wanting to promote environmental awareness in mind, would they vote for the film that starred gas-guzzling cars or the one with the cute penguins saving one another from melting polar ice caps and beer circly things (sorry, blanking on the name)?
And I think Happy Feet winning the Oscar can be attributed to not just how well-received it was at the time, but its environmental theme. That was the big political talking point at that year's awards. Remember Al Gore going on stage to say it was the first green Oscars, not to mention An Inconvenient Truth winning two of the awards. When voters looked at their ballot with wanting to promote environmental awareness in mind, would they vote for the film that starred gas-guzzling cars or the one with the cute penguins saving one another from melting polar ice caps and beer circly things (sorry, blanking on the name)?
Re: Anyone else think Cars was underrated?
Even if "Happy Feet" hadn't won, I wouldn't have felt that "Cars" should get it. "Flushed Away" was the best animated movie of 2006 anyway.
"Yesterday is history, tomorrow is a mystery, but today is a gift--that is why it's called the present."
-
American_dog_2008
Re: Anyone else think Cars was underrated?
"Ice Age 2" was one of the best movie of 2006.
Re:
Yeah, I can read. Doesn't make the topic any less stupid. This makes it more stupid though:EricJ wrote:Uh, you did notice the topic said underrated, did you?
American_dog_2008 wrote:"Ice Age 2" was one of the best movie of 2006.