Tag: cars-2

  • ‘Cars 2’ Honest Trailer Burns ‘Pixar’s Worst Movie by a Long Shot’

    (L-R) Grem (voice by Joe Mantegna), Acer (voice by Peter Jacobson), Siddeley (voice by Jason Isaacs), Lightning McQueen (voice by Owen Wilson), Mater (voice by Larry the Cable Guy), Finn McMissile (voice by Michael Caine).“Cars 3” is coming out June 16, so Screen Junkies decided to do a joint Honest Trailer for “Cars” and “Cars 2,” naming the latter Pixar’s worst-ever movie for going “full Minions” with Mater.

    “From the studio who brought you ‘Ratatouille,’ ‘Wall E,’ and ‘Up,’ comes the movie that paid for all of them – toys! I mean, ‘Cars’!”

    They quickly realized they didn’t have many complaints about “Cars,” which is just an “above average kids movie,” so they moved on to “Cars 2”:

    “From the studio who brought you ‘Ratatouille,’ ‘Wall E,’ and ‘Up,’ comes a tedious cash grab dumpster fire that’s Pixar’s worst movie by a long shot – ‘Cars 2!’”

    Yikes. The trailer lists all the “firsts” “Cars 2” set for Pixar, like their first time stretching a thin comic relief character with their own movie, their first “rotten” on Rotten Tomatoes, and their first movie to not be nominated for a Best Animated Feature Oscar.

    The trailer also asks A LOT of deep-thought questions about the cars in this universe, including why there are no humans in these movies, and if there are no humans, why do the cars still have door handles?

    Watch the trailer:Picking a “worst” Pixar movie is like deciding which type of cookie you crave the least — it’s still a treat, and better than most of what’s out there. “Cars 3” is going to be awesome, we just know it, and it opens June 16.

    Want more stuff like this? Like us on Facebook.

  • ‘Cars 3’ Director Brian Fee on Going From Story Artist to Filmmaker

    It’s no secret that Pixar bigwig John Lasseter loves cars, and it’s this love of cars that birthed the first “Cars” film (which he directed) and the sequel (which, after a period of development with another filmmaker, Lasseter ultimately took over and directed). So it’s really saying something that he was able to let go of his baby, handing the keys to “Cars 3” over to Brian Fee, a relatively unknown story artist within the much larger Pixar framework. Fee had been a part of the first two “Cars” films but this was something altogether different; he’d have to wrangle hundreds of artists and animators and take the franchise back to its roots after the sequel threatened to derail the series. That’s a lot for any filmmaker, much less a first-timer.

    But if that sounds like a stressful proposition, you wouldn’t be able to tell by talking with Fee. I got to sit down with the director at the Sonoma Raceway, a beautiful track in northern California (and a perfect backdrop to talk about all things cars) and he told me about his history with the franchise, the third act to Lightning McQueen’s story, and how Ron Howard’s “Rush” inspired the look of the film.Moviefone: Can you talk about your history with this franchise?

    Brian Fee: I started on “Cars” as a story assistant. And what that meant was that I helped the real story artists get their work done. Because we were all drawing on paper, so I helped them finish their drawings. They would draw the important stuff and I would do the background, which just had to be traced over from drawing to drawing. It was busy work, really. But it was to help them get their work done. The story supervisor at the time, the late Joe Ranft, I wanted to stay at the company and asked him, “How do I stay here?” And he said, “Make yourself indispensable.” It was the best advice I ever got. Because it was all about doing the very best you can and don’t show it to anybody until it’s the best it can be.

    I gave myself a very high bar and that helped me become an actual story artist. So, one day I got the big boy pants and they let me be a story artist. I learned on the job, learned from everybody I could, and worked on “Cars 2” with John Lasseter. By that time I was considered more of a veteran story artist. It’s weird to be the young green kid and wake up one day and realize that I’m a veteran now. But I think a lot of people have that experience. So I worked with John on “Cars 2” and then worked with him in development of “Cars 3.” I was working on ideas and things and that’s when I was called into John’s office, unexpectedly. That’s when John told me, not asked, that I was directing “Cars 3.” Ed Catmull was there and he was the one who said, “We realize we’re not asking you. We know that.”

    What was your reaction?

    I was extremely honored they considered me for this; it was an honor they thought I was ready for this. And I was so excited because these characters were like family to me and I was excited to tell their story. At the same time I was terrified because I hadn’t directed anything before and I had a lot to learn in a very short amount of time.

    What was the biggest surprise when making the movie?

    I wouldn’t say there was a surprise, but the hardest thing was the story. I came from story but that is still the hardest thing. Everything else was less difficult because I can trust everyone. Everyone is an expert. I’m dealing with the best people in the business. So it’s my job to inspire them to do great work and once they do that work I judge it against one thing: Is this helping us tell our story and is it not helping us tell our story? And if it’s helping us tell our story, great! If it’s not helping us tell our story yet why is that? What can we do? And try again.

    I know the studio is now mimicking real lenses in the computer when it comes to photography. What was your approach to the visuals and what lenses did you use?

    Having never done anything in live-action, I didn’t know the first thing about lenses, so, luckily, my DP knew everything about lenses. So all I had to do was describe the look. So he could take care of all the technical stuff. We could just get in there and play with the look. And he [DP Jeremy Lasky] brings a lot to the table. A lot of the scenes are incredible because of his fantastic work. We talked early on about not wanting any of the races to feel overly conservative. And by that I mean any of the angles. It’s just like, let’s find the right times to push these angles on the characters to emphasize the grittiness of a real race. It’s a very extreme thing — the speeds and everything that happens down there. I wanted to take what was already done and push it a little bit more.

    Were you referencing anything, either live-action or animation, when it came to the racing?

    We looked at a lot of stuff. I really liked that movie “Rush” and how they shot that. So there was some really great racing things in there. But we had to be really careful because our cars are characters. So anytime you go below the nose, because you think low angles are really dramatic, but once it goes below the nose you lose the eyes. So there were some limitations and tradeoffs. It became: Is this shot about them being a car or a character? So it was always a balancing act.

    You’ve talked about how this is the third act of Lightning McQueen’s story. How would you chart his adventure?

    In “Cars,” he was the latest greatest; he was the new kid on the scene. He was the hotshot rookie. In “Cars 2,” he’s maintaining. In “Cars 2,” you can easily say you have a little bit of an older McQueen and he’s at the top of his game and at the top of his celebrity. So how do you have that character fall from grace? And age is the most obvious thing. We talked to Jeff Gordon and he said that, when he was young, he would go really hard but you would wear out your car. And the older he got, the more experience he got and he realized he didn’t have to wear out his car. And the young guys would pass him. He’d say, “He might have passed me but he’s wearing out his tires and using all of his gas. In 10 laps, I’ll pass him.” And 10 laps later, he’d pass them.

    So the problem was, when those young people passed him and 10 laps later he didn’t pass them, that’s when he realized he’d lost some of the charge he had. That happens with every athlete. We started looking at — you can’t do everything forever. But if that’s all you know and that’s your self-worth, how do you deal with the fact that you’ll never be what you once were?

    These movies obviously go through a thousand iterations. What was the story on the very first version of this movie?

    Very first version? There were hints of a mentorship between Lightning and Doc. There was a Cruz character. It was a boy, not a girl. It took place in California, not the south. And Cruz was a farmer. Think Route 99. There was a scene where the sign got tipped upside down. That was the beginning. McQueen was going through more of a midlife crisis. There was a mistaken identity and McQueen didn’t look like himself. But that was bizarre territory and we quickly moved away from that.

    Obviously, John Lasseter is going to have to retire at some point, just like McQueen. Did he contribute anything story-wise?

    He contributed a lot, story-wise. For him, on a personal level, I think the mentorship sank in more. Later in the process, his son won a student Academy Award. And John felt the pride of watching his son receive the award. The pride matched or even surpassed his own experiences of receiving awards. That had a profound effect on him. And I’ve looked at John as a mentor from day one, even as a story assistant, I was watching how John did it. Because he’s a master at it.

    “Cars 3” opens June 16th.

  • How ‘Cars 3′ Will Reclaim the Series’ Legacy

    In terms of Pixar films, the first “Cars” ranks up there alongside “A Bug’s Life” as one of the studio’s most underrated films. And since that film was released in 2006, it’s become one of the most popular brands for Disney, generating millions of dollars in merchandise sales and inspiring a line of short films, spin-offs, and a sprawling, technologically mind-bending land at the Disney California Adventure park in Anaheim. At this point it’s hard to remember when “Cars” was a movie and not a franchise (lord knows the disconnected 2011 sequel, with a plot that remains totally baffling, didn’t help anything), which is what makes “Cars 3” such an exciting proposition.

    A few weeks ago, I went up to Pixar and watched about half of the movie, all told, and was utterly charmed with what I saw. Based on what I saw, “Cars 3” is a true return-to-form for the series and does a lot to remind you just how special the original film was.At the beginning of “Cars 3,” Lightning McQueen (Owen Wilson) is still top dog, but his age is starting to show. He is involved in a catastrophic crash (one that is teased in the first trailer) and is constantly being bested by Jackson Storm (Armie Hammer), a high-tech racecar with all the bells and whistles. When his sponsorship is taken over by a sick businessman named Sterling (Nathan Fillion), McQueen thinks that they’re going to put him back on the track. But instead, Sterling wants to position McQueen as a legacy sponsor of a host of products. Lightning strikes a deal with his new boss: Let him race one more time, and if he loses, he’ll retire and spend his golden years shilling products. (The fact that Lightning is essentially being reduced to a logo is pretty interesting and way more meta than you’d expect.) Sterling assigns a young trainer, Cruz (Cristela Alonzo), to help Lighting get ready for the race, and, together, they travel across the country seeking inspiration and advice.

    It’s pretty cute.

    And the connection to the first film is pretty awesome. If you saw “Cars 2,” you know that it refashioned the original’s slow-down-and-enjoy-the-simplicities-of-life narrative as a high-octane spy adventure. It was audacious, for sure, and remains one of the most beautiful-looking Pixar movies ever, but it lost the sweetness of the original and traded that film’s laid back, Miyazaki-indebted charm for something frenzied and frantic and somewhat overwhelming. Also, it made goofball tow truck Mater (Larry the Cable Guy) the central focus instead of Lightning. It was … bizarre.

    And if the footage I saw up at Pixar is any indication, the third film almost completely ignores the events of the second film. There’s no mention of the European and Asian races depicted in that film, none of the characters have returned, and Mater is barely in it. Seriously, the hillbilly tow truck probably said 10 words in the almost hour’s worth of footage I saw. And this film is primarily set in Radiator Springs, the Route 66 oasis introduced in the first film. (Sadly, the sunny epilogue of the first film, which saw tourists and visitors return to the sleepy hamlet, isn’t a part of “Cars 3.”) So, if you never saw “Cars 2,” don’t worry. It’s probably better (and less confusing) if you didn’t.As Lightning McQueen ambles through the American southwest, a part of the country that historically birthed NASCAR races (it started with bootleggers racing their souped-up getaway cars), he clashes with Cruz, who just wants to help, and ends up searching for the trainers that made his mentor, Doc Hudson (Paul Newman, via the help of audio outtakes from the first film), the dynamo he was. It’s all about going back to reclaim the fundamentals. And like the film’s jab at the abundance of merchandise spun off from these films, it’s a very knowing, winking look at the franchise. Instead of going above and beyond and introducing all sorts of spy movies shenanigans, it’s about peeling all of that stuff away and focusing on what made the original film so charming and engaging.

    Technologically and visually though, this is hardly a step back. The footage we saw was amazing-looking; there was a tactile quality to the images that made everything feel lived-in and real. It’s like they took the photo-realistic breakthroughs of “The Good Dinosaur” and applied it to something more outwardly cartoony. The result is the “Cars” world we know and love but given a heightened sense of detail and depth. Instead of the glistening metropolises of the previous film, “Cars 3” is all about naturalism. There’s also a sequence where Lightning and Cruz are racing along the beach that is just breathtaking. Another sequence has Lighting entering a demolition derby incognito, his trademark logo covered up with globs of mud. You never think about the technology while watching these scenes, about the physics engines whirring away to make sure everything looks just right, but you do know that it looks beautiful and the added layers of detail, atmosphere, and texture go a long way in firmly placing you in that world.

    And maybe that’s the biggest takeaway from the footage we saw — how good it feels to be back in the “Cars” world. That’s huge. The first film, as sweet as it is, isn’t seen as a high mark in the Pixar canon — and the sequel didn’t do it any favors. But “Cars 3” seems like a fine return to form and possibly even better than the original. The story seems like the perfect blend of the old and the new — both nostalgic and forward-thinking — and the animation style is the same, with returning characters updated with a fresh coat of computer-generated paint.

    Quite frankly, I can’t wait to see the rest of the movie and watch McQueen reclaim his former glory. It’s a great metaphor for the “Cars” franchise, really. See you in Radiator Springs.

    “Cars 3” opens on June 16th.