Search the Site:
So I know this wasn't a very anticipated movie on these boards, but I thought I'd make a talkback for it anyway.
I saw it this morning and it was competently done in terms of visuals, but didn't really offer very many surprises in the story department. Heck, the mentor's secret was even quite similar to Doc's in Cars. The villain was also pretty stock- he's a guy who doesn't want some "nobody" sullying the plane racing sport. We've seen him before.
-Comedic: The villain stomps a lackey's iPad knock-off and when the lackey complains, the villain brushes him off: "There's a new one coming out in two weeks."
-Action: When Dusty flew through the tunnel and sees a train coming towards him. And the scene ended with a nice screw-you bit where you think Dusty's dead.
-Dramatic: "Would you have come to me for training had you known my past?" "........No."
-It's really convenient that there were helpers to rescue Dusty every time he had equipment damage/malfunctions. I think it happens twice and just feels like deus ex machina both times.
-The "romance" between Dusty and Ishani felt like an afterthought.
-I'm not a Dane Cook fan so his voice performance didn't do it for me. This is a perfect example of how certain modern cartoon voices aren't distinctive.
-In general, the movie is really predictable. A country bumpkin desires more in his life, encounters adversaries, but eventually triumphs.
John Ratzenberger cameo: A tiny assistant to a passenger plane who gives Dusty directions.
Related question: Was this the first Disney film to be outsourced to India?
Haven't seen it, and don't plan to until it's on Netflix or TV. But I saw this online, and thought it was worth mentioning:
If Dusty's a crop duster, who is he dusting crops for?
Interestingly, this was done under a $50 million budget, thus making this film a tad cheap.
Ethanol is partially made from corn. So clearly, the crops were for cars.Originally Posted by Dudley
I saw the movie last week. And I have to say that it did not live up to the "hype". I had the same problem with this movie as with "Cars". The characters being machines do not have the full articulation of a standard human or animal type animated character as to bring out a fuller personality. They just had limited personalities. Being an avid aviation "buff" all of my life, I guess I was expecting more. Most of the technical gargon was correct. As in "Cars", the hometown backrounds proved to be the most interesting. As Dusty was crop dusting at the beginning of the movie, you may notice the B-17 bombers that are part of the hillside landscapes. As an animated film - great quality. As an an entertaining film - not so hot.
Maybe I'm getting soft in my old age or my critical faculties have been dulled by watching too much kidvid with my 4-year old son, but we went to see this yesterday and I have to say I thought it was pretty good. It's definitely not the most original film: it's predictable as all hell and cheerfully recycles the same stuff from a dozen other films. That said, I think the execution wasn't bad and, if nothing else, the movie doesn't have a cynical bone in its body. If I have to watch stuff like this, I'd rather get something like Planes than nearly anything else DreamWorks or Fox has to offer.
I also got a kick out of how the movie used its international cast, especially in how they opted to make Ishani Indian and cast an up-and-coming Bollywood actor to do the part. They really didn't have to do that, but that and the bit in China that felt a lot longer than the other international stopovers gave subtle hints that they are concerned about how the movie plays internationally. I was also amused that they cast veteran voice actors for Ripslinger (Roger Craig Smith) and El Chupacabra (Carlos Alazraqui) rather than the bigger stars in the other major roles. Even so, it's not like Dane Cook or Priyanka Chopra or John Cleese are big enough name draws to pull people in theaters (as opposed to, say, making any kind of deal out of casting Brad Pitt in Megamind even though he gets maybe 2 speaking scenes in the entire film).
And speaking of voice casting: the John Ratzenberger scene (which, with his lengthy directions and "you've gone too far" bit, is supposed to be a Boston riff and probably a nod to his role as Cliff in Cheers) is essentially product placement for American Airlines -- Dusty comments on the jet's new paint job, which struck me as weird until I found this bit posted by Disney's Movie Trailers channel while searching YouTube for clips and other stuff with my son after the film.
Like both Cars movies, I think the best parts of the film are the flying race sequences, which are all terrific. I think you'd have to go to a Miyazaki film to get a more exhilarating animated take on flight, but he almost never works at the speeds these racing planes reach.
I'm sure if you dig too hard you're going to find lots of other ways this breaks, but I kind of feel like applying that much thought kind of misses the point of the movie. It's a movie about talking cars and planes. I don't find much more utility in asking, "What are the doors on the vehicles for?" as I do in asking, "What are the Hulk's pants made of that they never disintegrate along with his shirt, shoes, and socks?" No, it doesn't make sense if you think about it, but it's the price of admission and there's just no value added in answering the question. You can choose to accept it or not, but if that's the worst criticism you can level against the movie, it's not really doing all that badly.
Anyway, not great but not bad and a lot more watchable than a lot of the reviews would have you believe. On my continuum of "where are we going?" movies vs. "how are we getting there?" movies, this falls conclusively in the latter category, and I think the "how we get there" part was entertaining enough. Then again, I'm also one of the few who liked Cars 2 and, I find, it's for a lot of the same reasons.
a certain company.
I just always figured the Cars universe took place in some post-apocalyptic Earth where sentient AI survived and lamenting for this past with humans, continued on living as they could emulate their tasks, but did not have the ability to actually make a synthetic human, so they bestowed their various transportation devices with humanity...or as close to it as possible.
Yup. It's a signature. Go away if you're expecting something interesting here.
|toonzone quick jump|