I agree <em>'Cars 3'</em> improves upon <em>'Cars 2'</em>, not by much though.
The story for this does feel more rounded than the preceding film, even if it ends rather lamely. The whole production builds up around Lightning McQueen, rightly, before strangely having a conclusion that focuses on newbie Cruz Ramirez. I like the idea of what they were going for, but the way the do it is actually quite poor - it feels too forced, as well as chucking most of the development for McQueen across acts one and two out the window.
With that said, it isn't a massive hindrance. I still had a fun time with this. Owen Wilson remains good as McQueen, while Cristela Alonzo gives an accomplished performance as Ramirez. One thing I do rate about Alonzo is that Disney didn't go down the obvious, lovey-dovey route with her.
None of the rest of the cast standout all that much, though it's cool to hear Kerry Washington as Natalie Certain. Mater (Larry the Cable Guy) is arguably underused, which is weird as he is overused in the 2011 sequel - they don't seem to know how to fit him in ideally.
The overall premise itself is interesting, while the animation remains in top gear. The ending doesn't fit perfectly for me, but I can still recommend that you give this a viewing.
**The end of a franchise that was never really worth our interest.**
I never really wanted to see the “Cars” movies. As I said before, I was already an adult when they appeared, and I particularly felt the almost invasive force of the propaganda machine that, by all means, tried to foist the film on us, almost in the same way that Jehovah's Witnesses go to people's homes to sell their perspective of religion. “Cars” was everywhere, and the merchandising involved was a billion-dollar business in itself. Therefore, I preferred not to see them. I don't like to feel that things are being forced on me. I saw this film, the last of the trilogy, right now.
Comparing this film to the first in the franchise could be considered an honest effort. The two films are quite similar, although the first has an ascendant, due to its novelty. As for the script and the story itself, both are complete clichés: if one talks about the success of a novice “outsider”, full of nobility and desire to win, the third film already shows us that everything has an end, and that there is to know how to leave the scene and give way to others in an honorable and dignified way. It is the eternal question of the passage of generations and their conflicts. In the middle of these two films, “Cars 2” is completely out of place, just having a character as the protagonist who only appeared a few minutes in the first film. “Cars 3”, as cliché as it may be, rediscovered some of the merits and values of the first film.
Even so, and despite the commercial and critical success, I don't think it's honest to compare any film in the “Cars” franchise with the films “Toy Story”, “Up” or “Inside Out”. In these films, Pixar bet on creativity, that is, on the creation of an original story and very original characters. That never happened in "Cars". Just think of the huge amount of cartoons that include, albeit in an accessory way, talking cars. It's an old idea, one that Pixar has merely retreaded and brightened up, with CGI animation techniques it masters like few others. Quite simply, it was a way to earn lots of money with little effort.
In this film, we once again have the technical brilliance, attention to visual detail and the sharpness and quality of digital animation that Pixar has accustomed us to. It would be too bad for the studio not to be able to honor its credits and fail even at this! In addition to the magnificent animations, the mixing, sound and editing work was really taken very seriously and done by good professionals. The work of the voice actors also deserves no notice, with the return of Owen Wilson and other outstanding voices, joined by Cristela Alonso. All were well, in an impeccable work.
If we have already spoken about the script, we can only talk about the comic: the film makes several attempts at humor, and if the jokes seem to be well-placed in the plot, the truth is that they have almost no strength or impact, and simply do not make people laugh. They're not funny. Attempts to thrill or move the audience also failed utterly, largely due to the Franciscan poverty of the characters, merely sketchy and barely able to capture our sympathy.
