Critical response:
← Older revision
Revision as of 00:26, September 12, 2012
Line 168:
Line 168:
==Reception==
==Reception==
===Critical response===
===Critical response===
-
Cars 2 has received mixed reviews from the consensus of film critics. As of August 2011, review aggregator Rotten Tomatoes labeled the film "rotten", reporting that 37% of critics have given the film a positive review based on 156 reviews, with an average score of 5.5/10 with a "rotten" certification (the first Pixar film to do so), making it the lowest rated Pixar film. The consensus was: "Cars 2 is as visually appealing as any other Pixar production, but all that dazzle can't disguise the rusty storytelling under the hood. Another review aggregator, Metacritic, which assigns a weighted average score out of 100 to reviews from mainstream critics, calculated an average score of 57/100 based on 37 reviews, indicating "mixed or average reviews". Most critics felt the story lacked warmth and charm, and that the movie seemed like a ploy to sell merchandise. Other critics also found that the film had too much of a focus on Mater, rather than on McQueen. In addition, some critics thought that, due to the high amount of car chase scenes, gun violence, characters getting killed and other frightening moments, giving the film a G rating should have been put in question. It is the least critically acclaimed Pixar film. Considering the low reviews given to a Pixar production, critic Kyle Smith of the New York Post said, "They said it couldn't be done. But Pixar proved the yaysayers wrong when it made its first bad movie, Cars. Now it has worsted itself with the even more awful Cars 2."
+
Cars 2 has received mixed reviews from the consensus of film critics. As of August 2011, review aggregator Rotten Tomatoes labeled the film "rotten", reporting that 37% of critics have given the film a positive review based on 156 reviews, with an average score of 5.5/10 with a "rotten" certification (the first Pixar film to do so), making it the lowest rated Pixar film. The consensus was: "Cars 2 is as visually appealing as any other Pixar production, but all that dazzle can't disguise the rusty storytelling under the hood. Another review aggregator, Metacritic, which assigns a weighted average score out of 100 to reviews from mainstream critics, calculated an average score of 57/100 based on 37 reviews, indicating "mixed or average reviews". Most critics felt the story lacked warmth and charm, and that the movie seemed like a ploy to sell merchandise. Other critics also found that the film had too much of a focus on Mater, rather than on McQueen. In addition, some critics thought that, due to the high amount of car chase scenes, gun violence, characters getting killed and other frightening moments, giving the film a G rating should have been put in question. It is the least critically acclaimed Pixar film. Several critics called ''Cars 2'' "Pixar's first bad movie." Considering the low reviews given to a Pixar production, critic Kyle Smith of the New York Post said, "They said it couldn't be done. But Pixar proved the yaysayers wrong when it made its first bad movie, Cars. Now it has worsted itself with the even more awful Cars 2."
On the positive side, Peter Travers of Rolling Stone gave the movie 3 1/2 stars out of 4, and said that "the sequel is a tire-burning burst of action and fun with a beating heart under its hood." He also praised its "fluid script" and called it a "winner". Justin Chang of Variety praised the film, calling it "the rare sequel that improves on its predecessor, this lightning-paced caper-comedy shifts the franchise into high gear with international intrigue, spy-movie spoofery and more automotive puns than [a person] can shake a stickshift at." Roger Ebert of the Chicago Sun-Times gave the film 3 1/2 stars out of 4, saying; "At a time when some "grown-up" action films are relentlessly shallow and stupid, here is a movie with such complexity that even the cars sometimes have to pause and explain it to themselves."
On the positive side, Peter Travers of Rolling Stone gave the movie 3 1/2 stars out of 4, and said that "the sequel is a tire-burning burst of action and fun with a beating heart under its hood." He also praised its "fluid script" and called it a "winner". Justin Chang of Variety praised the film, calling it "the rare sequel that improves on its predecessor, this lightning-paced caper-comedy shifts the franchise into high gear with international intrigue, spy-movie spoofery and more automotive puns than [a person] can shake a stickshift at." Roger Ebert of the Chicago Sun-Times gave the film 3 1/2 stars out of 4, saying; "At a time when some "grown-up" action films are relentlessly shallow and stupid, here is a movie with such complexity that even the cars sometimes have to pause and explain it to themselves."