Planes: Fire & Rescue

[Buzz Bumble]

ComingSoon.net has a new trailer and character images for the next movie in the Cars / Planes franchise ...

The New Thunder Trailer for Disney's Planes: Fire & Rescue
Walt Disney Pictures has released both a new trailer and a set of character images for Planes: Fire & Rescue. Check it all out at ComingSoon.net.

[Scar]

Was the first Planes movie really all that successful to warrant a sequel? I seem to recall that it got a lot of negative reviews.

[EricJ]

Actually, it got a fair amount of positive reviews, too (you could draw a line dividing the critics who, ahem, already KNEW it wasn't a Pixar movie, and therefore had no need to drag old Cars 2 grudges into it)--And having been made on a DTV budget, got a lot of support for parents' end-of-summer August cleanup title, and cleared its profit easily.

Now, they just have to get past the problem that the characters here just don't look as likable.

[LotsoA113]

Yep, 26% on Rotten Tomatoes just screams "positive reviews". In my own personal opinion, though, the film wound up being even worse than those reviews; it was just utter garbage that didn't even deserve a direct-to-DVD release. Maybe being shot into the sun would suffice for this dreck...

[EricJ]

Again, just look at how many of those critic reviews were "Pixar shoving more Cars down our throat!"
(Sorry, just pushes a few more old buttons of mine about seeing the first GI Joe movie punished by critics who wanted to go back and beat up Transformers 2.)
And not like, ahem, some fans were exactly immune to the problem of old unresolved pipe-bomb-throwing grudges either.

The first movie did what it was supposed to, namely clean up in an unpretentious August slowdown weekend with no competition, and did a less painful job of that than G-Force, Underdog or The Smurfs did.
By that point, most audiences and critics knew it was a former DTV filling vacant theater space, and going to a theater at least got you out of the house as opposed to renting it later.

[Scar]

Even the positive reviews I read of the film admitted it was a cliched story that would be an amusing enough distraction for kids but it's hardly justification for a whole new franchise.

[Ben]

Eric...just where does he make this stuff up from!?

I tried to watch Planes and got about half an hour through it. Possibly the worst thing released Under the Disney Pictures label, animaion wise. And "DTV budget" (which it wasn't) or not...if you're putting something out as a Disney Picture in the summertime, it's expected that this is a quality product...there should be no excuses for something that just isn't very good.

As a DTV, you could get away with saying, "yeah, this is more from the world of Cars", or even "this is like Cars but nothing to do with Cars" (except it is)...but not as a theatrical feature. Made by Disney Animation or not, they put it out as if it was a major Disney movie spin-off from Cars...and it just was not worthy of even that designation...

[Dacey]

Ben, you NEED to watch the rest of Planes so you can see the traumatic World War II flashback. In it, several heroic young planes fly to the Cars' world's equivalent of Pearl Harbor, where they are gunned down, explode on camera, and plunge to their deaths screaming, all as a haunting boys choir sings in the background.

I'm not kidding.

[Scar]

As a DTV, you could get away with saying, "yeah, this is more from the world of Cars", or even "this is like Cars but nothing to do with Cars" (except it is)...but not as a theatrical feature. Made by Disney Animation or not, they put it out as if it was a major Disney movie spin-off from Cars...and it just was not worthy of even that designation...

The sad thing is that Disney Animation has released quality animated movies in theaters before so they do know how to make it work if they really try. I remember enjoying the Ducktales movie a lot as a kid and that was by Disney Animation.

[TitusTodd]

Jeeze... why all the Planes hate? Yes, it was not originally even going into theaters but it did well enough to warrant another go with a sequel in theaters. It wasn't all that bad. No, it didn't get the story treatment that comes with a bigger budget movie meant for bigger budget quality but it sure beat a lot of dreck thrown out there on DVD/Blu-ray.

Animation or not, they put it out as if it was a major Disney movie spin-off from Cars...and it just was not worthy of even that designation...

Never saw it billed so strongly as a MAJOR Disney movie spin-off nor did it pretend to be. It is what it is. The audience enjoyed it and so it continues. Look away. It wasn't meant for you.

[EricJ]

Animation or not, they put it out as if it was a major Disney movie spin-off from Cars...and it just was not worthy of even that designation...

Never saw it billed so strongly as a MAJOR Disney movie spin-off nor did it pretend to be. It is what it is. The audience enjoyed it and so it continues. Look away. It wasn't meant for you.

In fact, come to think on it, I can recall parents going into rages over Ducktales:Lost Lamp when it was in theaters, saying "Is THIS what classic Disney animation has been reduced to??", since they thought any movie coming out in the big hi-profile 90's Renaissance was, like, an actual big-budget "Classic" movie from the main studio. It does help to read the credits once in a while.

Most people knew Planes was a DTV filling empty August space, and those who didn't, well, that's what happens when you're wrong in public.
And then, when they found out it wasn't a studio feature and wasn't from Pixar, even that was tried to be spun into something bad: "Are they going to make us pay for it in theaters now?"

[Scar]

Never saw it billed so strongly as a MAJOR Disney movie spin-off nor did it pretend to be. It is what it is. The audience enjoyed it and so it continues. Look away. It wasn't meant for you.

Nearly every trailer for the film billed it as "From above the world of Cars!" so it's clear they were hoping Pixar fans would get fooled by it.

[EricJ]

How so? It's FROM "the world" of Cars (specifically, some deleted storyboards from Cars 2), which is no worse than saying Dreamworks' Puss in Boots was "from the creators of Shrek", despite sharing no story continuity and very few creative talent...Or that Dragon 2 was, either.

"From" is an all-encompassing term, no matter how much "evil" spin you may wish to put on it just to "punish" it.

[Ben]

Planes was sold as a Cars spin-off, Pixar name-check or not.

It was released as a major summer Disney animation release with no indication to the average moviegoer that it was a DTV in theatrical clothing. Plus, having the Cars reference, it indicated a certain kind of quality that it could never live up to.

Those are the basic facts.

[Bill1978]

I admit I enjoyed the first Planes movie (even more than any of the Cars movies), even if it was a retread of the first Cars movie. I guess I just not a fan of car related movies (live action or animated), but yet can tolerate plane related movies. Or perhaps I'm clouded by the fact that my then 3 year old godson had his first ever cinema experience with the movie and had a blast. I agree with Dacey though, the WWII reference needs to be seen. Haven't seen anything as heavy in a G rated movie since Toy Story 3.