Cars 2: Pixar's first critical flop?

Haven't seen Cars 2 yet but didn't hate Cars - not brilliant but simple fun. I'm guessing we'll get around to seeing this when it's out on Bluray - there doesn't seem to be any urgency in my house for this one.

My feeling is that Disney pushed Cars 2 because they knew they could get a nice strong 1 year cycle of Cars-related stuff out of this - Cars 2 in theaters now, then on video in time for Christmas, and then Carsland opens in California Adventure next year. I think much of the drive for this is to prop up an excuse for that Carsland, actually - otherwise, the addition of a park-sized area for one of their "lesser" titles would look ridiculous, even in the iffy California Adventure. Carsland is HUGE - about half the size of CA itself! But, hey, if it adds something fun to CA, especially for kids, I'm all for it.

 

What do you guys think of the Weezer cover of "You Might Think" used in the movie? I like Weezer, but this doesn't seem to add anything to the song. It's a straight cover with no real change to the arrangement. They should have just used the original, imo.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KyT1_jEx6eY

 

Disney probably didn't want to pay performance use royalties to Time-Warner-AOL, so they created a faithful cover version that they could market with the soundtrack CD and mp3 downloads...simple marketing strategy!!!
At least Ric Ocasek still gets his songwriting slice of the pie!!!

 

Ehh.

 

I don't think this is exactly true. The movie made $450 million theatrically (worldwide), and made another $100 million on home video. I think this is enough to more than break even based on a $120M budget (plus $50 marketing). I think NY Magazine is wrong in declaring it a "money-loser," but I would agree that it was far from a hit. And judging by the reviews, I don't think it's a very good movie.

You can look at this list of Pixar films and pretty much figure out which made huge money and which didn't. Technically, the original Toy Story was the lowest-grossing Pixar film ($362 million), but since it only cost $30 million to make, it wound up with a large profit. And the merchandising went through the roof.

 

That part I got, but...

Spoiler

What was the deal over having a lemon engine? I saw no point in that.

 

Neither AOL nor Warner Music Group are subsidiaries of Time Warner anymore. just sayin.

 

That is true. When you check the numbers, Cars didn't hit the heights that other PIXAR movies did. Yet its considered a hit because of the insane marketing.

 

Well, the original didn't have those auto-tuned vocals.

I too don't understand covers like this...almost the same keyboard sound, same guitars, same bass lines.

 

Is anybody but me just scrunching-up their nose when they go into Target, and see a fuzzy, stuffed Mater staring back at you on the aisle caps?

I'm not feelin' this one.

 

This one seems to be following a similar pattern. I'm seeing Target commercials with Cars characters, State Farm commercials with Cars characters. I imagine there are some fast food joint marketing tie-ins, but I haven't noticed them yet.

 

I don't think the first Cars was a critical success - every review I read said it was easily the worst Pixar film. However, a movie like this is pretty much critic-proof. My cousin's son has watched the first movie 25+ times and has all the merch - no doubt he will be obsessed with this one too.

Tom

 

Hard to beat Disney when it comes to merchandising...

 

I call 'NOT AWFUL' on this movie!
Now, was it because I was 'set-up' to see a horrible piece of crap??
I've always been one to say, 'Let ME be the judge.' when it's comes to hearing something from someone that I like is awful. So, perhaps, I gave it a little bit of a handicap? Anybody else ever do this?

 

Interesting industry news:

Cars 2 plunged a steep 62 percent for $25.1 million over the three-day weekend — the largest second-weekend drop in Pixar history.

This would be a bad thing. Hit movies traditionally fall off no more than about 50% the second weekend. 62% is pretty catastrophic for a film of this size.

http://insidemovies.ew.com/2011/07/03/box-office-update-transformers-dark-moon/?hpt=hp_t2

 

I would guess the holiday weekend combined with the domination of a Transformer movie opening killed its chances.

 

Cars 2 was still the #2 movie for the weekend, so it's not like it totally bombed. But that new Tom Hanks movie... hoofa!

 

Saw Cars 2 yesterday. There is NO WAY this is a 35% Rotten flick. While it isn't the best offering from Pixar, it's still a very fun, enjoyable movie. It doesn't have as much heart as Cars, I find a little Mater goes a long way, and some of the jokes aren't nearly as clever as they should be, but other than those niggling complaints, I enjoyed Cars 2 very much.

I can't think of a movie I've seen in the last few years where my feelings are as far out of whack with Rotten Tomatoes as this one. My suggestion is to go see it and judge for yourself - don't let the negative spin deter you.

You might just enjoy it like I did!

 

I agree. It wasn't great or anything, but it was much better than all the negative reviews lead me to expect. Perfectly fine for mindless summer entertainment with the kids.

 

Actually it is. That's not really something that is arguable.

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/cars_2/

That's the score there. You might not think it deserves it, which is fine.

 

Really enjoyed the james bond type soundtrack..

 

Saw it with my 4 year old (his first theater movie) and I sure could have done without so much gun play and lines about "killing" Lightning McQueen. The "State Farm" jingle that Tow Mater sang at one point was one of the most contrived product placement moments I have ever seen. Seemed more like a direct-to-video sequel than a big summer blockbuster.

 

Um, yes, I'm well aware it's at 35% at Rotten Tomatoes. My whole point is that, in my opinion, it does not deserve it - not even close. I'm saying, "In no way is that a 35% rotten flick."

 

And I'm with jriems. Was it Pixar's best? No, but it was enjoyable and clever.

It got 35% at RT because too many critics rated it against other Pixar flicks, not on its own. "Bad Teacher" and "Transformers 3" have higher ratings?

 

Larry Crowne looked goofy in the trailer.