Pixar has created a remarkable shift in animation over the course of the last decade. Previous expectations in the medium included simpler writing that relied more on its characters to make an impression and visual artistry to tell most of the story for us. Pitches were made via storyboards rather than treatments. The power lied within the idea and the idea flourished at the hands of the animators (and in the case of the Disney Renaissance era, the music). However, Pixar has built its success in the writing process with strong character-driven works of literature. "Toy Story" became the first animated feature to be nominated for an Original Screenplay Oscar in 1995 and, with "Toy Story 3," 6 of Pixar's last 7 films have had their screenplays nominated for an Oscar. Take a guess at which of their offspring kept it from being a perfect 7 straight?"Cars" was more along the lines of a film Pixar might have done in the late 90's while they were still testing the waters of feature length CGI animation. Its story had moral value but it just didn't have the literary clout that "Finding Nemo" and "The Incredibles" had established before it. The dialogue wasn't as mature and the emotions weren't as potent. "Cars 2" follows along similar lines and overwhelms us by adapting many elements of our world into the world of the cars. In a casino, the cars are seen rolling a pair of fuzzy dice and in London that big famous clock tower is now called Big Bentley. These bits may be clever and amusing, but it's relatively shallow entertainment. DreamWorks Animation has proven their capability for wit in many films, but only a few of those have stood the test of time.
Amongst Pixar's films, the plot here ranks right behind "The Incredibles" as we get to enjoy an intricately laid out spy thriller but the character development stands dead last. The "Cars" franchise seems to suffer from relatively stock characters. They don't root themselves in our imaginations the way Woody, Buzz, Marlin, Dori, Carl Frederickson, Russell and even Doug the Dog do. Mater takes center stage and he's just as funny as you expect him to be but there is not as much depth to his existence. He is a simple-minded character but so was WALL-E and that didn't stop him from being a complex creation.
The Cars universe takes a few more liberties than Pixar's other formations. Toy Story, A Bug's Life, Monster's Inc, Finding Nemo, and Ratatouille explore an aspect of the world but still do it in respect to reality. Real life cars exist for the people and without people why do these cars operate? More specifically, why do they have a need for windows or side mirrors if there are no people in them? Our image and perception of this world is projected into a setting where that image is less fitting. Film critic Richard Roeper poses another question: why are there buildings in this movie? Do the cars live in buildings?
It boils down to the fact that we like cars because they can go faster and do whatever other cool stuff our imagination concocts. This movie delivers on that idea and we get some splendid action scenes, including a very exhilarating opening sequence that is sure to impress. But it's all short-lived. "Cars 2" is fun to watch but there's little to digest afterwards.
