Cars 3

cars_three_ver3STARS3Cars is officially a trilogy so we must now discuss it as we would the original Star Wars, Godfather and Lord of the Rings sagas.  All joking aside, there’s something almost comforting about the Cars movies.  They sort of offer proof that even the almighty Pixar is imperfect.  None of these films are terrible, mind you.   However, they aren’t particularly meaningful either.  Especially when you compare it to the high standard at which Pixar has always operated.  Given the setting, an automotive analogy is appropriate.  For Pixar, this what shifting into neutral and just coasting looks like.  These pictures are solid entertainment in the moment but don’t expect a timeless classic.

Cars 3 is a return to form, but let me reiterate.  I’m talking about a return to the quality of Cars, not the best Pixar movies. After Cars 2 shook things up by fixating on tow truck Mater over racecar Lightning McQueen, the franchise gets back to the basics of the original.  Here we revisit the focus on the joys of racing and not on an action-packed spy movie.  Cars 3 feels more like a sequel to the first Cars. Even Doc Hudson (Paul Newman, in previously recorded snippets) pops up in flashback offering wisdom from beyond the grave. It’s almost as if Cars 2 never happened.

The drama concerns the current season of racing at the Piston Cup competition. Older racers Lightning McQueen (Owen Wilson), Bobby Swift (Angel Oquendo) and Cal Weathers (Kyle Petty) find themselves surpassed by a much more technologically advanced upstart named Jackson Storm (Armie Hammer). It’s clear the senior guys can no longer compete at the same level.  A fresh generation is taking over.  One by one the seasoned racers throw in the towel and retire, but Lightning refuses to quit.  That’s a good thing, right?  Not so fast.  A desperate attempt to push himself to the same speed as Jackson Storm leads to a disastrous accident for Lightning.  He decides to regroup.  Lightning heads off to the Rust-eze Racing Center where he meets the new owner named Sterling (Nathan Fillion).  Sterling is a big fan of Lightning McQueen and wants to see him succeed.  Sterling introduces him to his young trainer, Cruz Ramirez (comedian Cristela Alonzo). As the narrative progresses, Cruz becomes a notable addition to the cast.

Now you might think that this is all leading to a feel-good tale where Lighting learns how to retrain, be the best again and triumph over adversity.  Nope.  Sorry. Not even close.  The events are actually rather subversive and it’s that unpredictability that beckons the viewer to keep following.  There’s a lot of entertainment value in the capricious developments of the story.  It’s never boring.  However every time the drama seems to be pushing toward a particular moral, certain plot contrivances flip the script in a different direction.  We’re misled a few times and the results can be a bit unfulfilling.  It’s like we’re noshing on several appetizers instead of feasting on one entree.  Ultimately the climax can best be described as poignant.  Hint: We do age and there will always be a younger generation to take our place.  That can be seen as both depressing and uplifting.  In the end, Cars 3 is a pleasant diversion. Perhaps more importantly for the studio, it will sell a ton of new toys. Now the real question is, will your kids want to play with Cruz Ramirez or Jackson Storm?


10 Responses to “Cars 3”

  1. I’m still waiting for them to make a sequel to Planes . . . (I don’t think that was Pixar though, was it?)


    • It’s a gray area. Technically that was Walt Disney Pictures which owns Pixar and was a spin-off of the Cars franchise. Despite not being produced by Pixar, the film was co-written and executive produced by John Lasseter, who directed the first two Cars films.

      Liked by 1 person

    • smilingldsgirl Says:

      They did make a sequel to Planes called Planes Fire and Rescue made by Disneytoons


  2. I agree, this was fine. I have a problem with characters being cars, because I can’t feel any emotions from their facial expressions. I have to rely solely on their voice tones. 3stars


    • Another conundrum, In other Pixar films that feature talking toys or talking animals, humans exist but they are out of sight. Here, cars appear to be the only living creatures. Humans don’t even exist, or at least, not anymore. Did the cars overthrow the humans? If human never existed then who built the cars? And why do they even have door handles?


  3. smilingldsgirl Says:

    A very fair review. I’m glad you enjoyed this film. It’s not one of Pixar greats but a nice return to form for the franchise. I liked it quite a bit


  4. Haha I agree with you that there is something strangely comforting about the idea about the Cars movies and that Pixar is imperfect. Great automotive analogy. I like the idea of the film being subversive and unpredictable, but I could totally see how it would be frustrating to be misled several times. I have somehow made it without watching any of the Cars movies, however whenever I read about them in comparison to all of the other Pixar movies I do see, I kind of feel like I’m not missing much.


    • I’m always amazed that they keep making sequels to Cars (2006) which has been one of my least favorite Pixar movies. Next year we’re getting The Incredibles 2. Now THAT makes sense to me.

      Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply to Evan Crean Cancel reply


You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo


Twitter picture


Facebook photo


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: