Looks like a Lexus...

Rating: 7/10 (7 February 2007)

...rides like a Corolla.
Which is not to say that "Cars" is a bad movie; it isn't. On the surface, it's exceedingly slick. The CGI animation is superb, a genuine feast for the eyes. The rendering and detail are immaculate. The voice work by notables such as Owen Wilson, Paul Newman, George Carlin, Bonnie Hunt, Larry the Cable Guy, and John Ratzenberger is excellent. The computer camera-work is, well, thoroughly cinematic, if at times utterly impossible. The storytelling is pure Syd Fields, ably crafted, moving inexorably toward a crowd-pleasing, thematically satisfying finish.
But there's something clunking under the hood, and all of John Lasseter and the late Joe Ranft's love of automobiles and the joys of nostalgic motoring can't hide the noise. Simply put, "Cars" is the weakest product to roll off Pixar's assembly line so far.
Why? It's hard to put one's finger on the problem, even once you get beyond the glossy surfaces. Part of the trouble is the storyline and themes. Egotistical overachiever learns the value of friendship and teamwork, along with some nostalgia for better days gone by. Nothing out of the ordinary there, I'd have to say, and other than the twist of having sentient vehicles doing the honors, eminently forgettable. In addition, "Cars" seems perplexedly aimed at a somewhat older demographic than other Pixar films. There really aren't any characters a young child can identify with; "Cars" is decidedly teen/adult fare, with the occasional bodily fluid or excrescence to palliate the juvenile need for fart jokes.
Beyond that, the dramatic stakes are low. Lightning McQueen, Pixar's modern Speed Racer, is delayed from getting to his big race. When he makes it, will he win? Who cares? The audience has so little invested in McQueen that it really doesn't matter if the hotshot race car succeeds or not. In fact, his remarkable refusal to win the Piston Cup is so out of character as to be quite difficult to believe. Certainly no human driver in the world would have done what McQueen did, even in identical circumstances. The moral lesson of "Cars" seems downright quaint in this instance, if not outright forced.
Be that as it may, there's one further kink in the "Cars" chassis that interests me, and that is its lack of direct connection to the world of humans. Every other Pixar film has it; "Cars" doesn't. In fact, the only biological entities in the movie (not counting the flora) appear to be birds, and we see them so fleetingly that we really can't be sure they're not sentient flying machines like the tiny VW bugs. What I'm getting at is that "Cars" seemingly begs the question of its own rationale: where did this civilization of sentient vehicles originate and how does it maintain itself? Did humans create this world and then vacate the premises, after some clever terraforming for the aesthetic pleasure of their creations? If the cars don't have passengers, why do they exist in the first place? Mack, the big rig that hauls around McQueen's trailer, gives us a slim hint with his line about "thank the Manufacturer!" and Minny sighs, "Oh, for the love of Chrysler!" but that's about it. There's also a reference to Jimi Hendrix, along with a soundtrack full of human music, but other than that, humans are non-existent in the film. It's almost maddening if you think about it too much, and perhaps I'm just spinning wheels of pointless speculation. Regardless, for me, it's a noticeable ding in the smooth perfection of the "Cars" chassis.
All this may sound like I didn't enjoy "Cars," but nothing could be further from the truth. I saw it on the big screen and had a great time, and finally picked it up on DVD as soon as it became "last year's model." To be honest, though, I'll be going back to that DVD more often for the two short features included on it: "One Man Band," a wonderful cartoon with all the hallmarks of "classic" stamped all over its running time, and "Mater and the Ghostlight," a turnabout-is-fair-play romp starring the most memorable (and likable) "Cars" character.
"Cars" is definitely worth a watch unless you don't like animation, period, but I have doubts about its long-term mileage, despite the current high ratings here on the IMDb. "Ratatouille" looks much better.