Sequel can't match original

Rating: Null/10 (21 July 2011)

My son has seen "Cars" perhaps 50 times or more, so when "Cars 2" appeared in Seoul in 3D yesterday, we went.
A sequel is made to capitalize on a great success. Here, with five years to deliver and an estimated $200 million and the opportunity to use 3D, the film fell short.
The 3-D is poor. During the promotional material before the show, LG showed what 3-D should look like -- feathers floating so close you feel you can reach them, a jet flying out of the screen. The Disney-version is 2D tricked out with 3D glasses. We could have saved about half the ticket price by seeing it in 2D.
The story is extremely weak. It begins like a repackaging of the standard spy film with all the usual gimmicks, then pastes in "alternative energy" and car racing for extra action. Seeing this, and watching American TV (medical shows, crime shows, and medical-crime shows) it appears that corporate media bureaucrats can no longer find creative talent. If you want action without a sensible story, it does have action.
The real weakness, however, is that what made the original great is gone. It was the brilliant characterization, the variety and the depth, that made "Cars" a film you could watch again and again (as adults are sometimes forced to). Here, the wonderful characters are just cameos -- they appear, speak a few lines to remind you of the original film, and they are gone.
Even McQueen has a relatively minor role.
I'd give it a "6" -- it is still a watchable work of art, and the graphics are spectacular (despite the total failure as 3-D). Better management would have demanded a better story and something that stretched the 3-D technology to its limits.