PSF

The Lounge => Television & Film Discussion => Topic started by: Death Blossom on 2016-11-21 12:09:53

Title: Cars 3
Post by: Death Blossom on 2016-11-21 12:09:53
So, apparently this is a thing. Despite Cars 2 being a critical flop.

There's also this that came out recently-ish; a Teaser Trailer.

My friend keeps saying McQueen dies haha, but uh, yeah. Apparently Pixar is trying to make the new movie dark or something. I don't know. We have until summer to build our bunkers. What do you all think of the trailer and series in general?
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: MasterXtreme on 2016-11-21 12:35:04
I liked the first film... but Disney, we don't need another.  Stop forcing Pixar.
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Death Blossom on 2016-11-21 12:56:47
I don't think Disney is forcing. Lasseter seems to actually like making them.
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Anyponedrawn on 2016-11-21 14:14:48
I hope it is good is all I can say. 
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Rainberry on 2016-11-21 14:20:48
Consider my engine revved. 
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Death Blossom on 2016-11-21 14:37:12
I mean, I guess we can hope it's good. But I'm not exactly happy to see this coming out instead of something new.
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Rainberry on 2016-11-21 14:41:43
I would prefer something different, but I would like Pixar to surprise us and do their magic again.  That would be a nice surprise. 
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Death Blossom on 2016-11-21 14:46:20
I guess. I don't want all these unnesary sequels. Pixar needs to get their game face on, and get out of their dork age. I'm sure they can work some magic, but I mean... Look at Cars 2. It was kind of a bomb.
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Anyponedrawn on 2016-11-21 14:52:04
Cars 2 was a disgrace to the Pixar name.  They haven't had anything super great in awhile. 
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Death Blossom on 2016-11-21 14:53:34
Well... Wasn't Inside Out Pixar?
A lot of people loved it. I stand by its an alright movie. There are some big issues with it that I have. But many people loved it. And then there's Finding Dory. That was a beautiful movie. The ending was bizzare and crazy though. Too out there.
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Rainberry on 2016-11-21 14:55:48
I liked Inside Out, but.... it was so much with the feels only. 
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Anyponedrawn on 2016-11-21 14:56:38
Inside Out was great, but for different reasons.  Great unique idea, and a good story about memories and feelings.

But it wasn't exactly funny or exciting. Which is fine, it was a different kind of movie. 
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Death Blossom on 2016-11-21 15:05:17
There were some funny moments. And hey, it managed to make me cry. But then again, so did The Croods. But I guess becaus it was a mostly a father daughter type movie, and I really love my dad so, yeah haha. But yeah, as for completely unique, I wouldn't say so. The idea has been done before, but I did like how they added so many more flourishes to it.

Anyway, back to Cars lol.
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Anyponedrawn on 2016-11-21 15:58:10
The Croods made you cry?  I didn't see that movie, it looked pretty bad.  Should I watch it? 

Cars.  I am guessing Lightning gets all wrecked up, and they change his whole body, PLASTIC SURGERY!!!  And he becomes like an exotic looking sports super car....

Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Death Blossom on 2016-11-21 16:07:26
There's a moment near the end. I wouldn't say the movie is bad per say, but it is a sweet movie. The humor may be hit or miss for you, depends on what you like. But I think it's a nice fun movie.

Oh... God. Nooooo. Or maybe he dies for real. Or maybe he ends up like Doc from the first movie.
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Anyponedrawn on 2016-11-21 16:10:29
Well based on the short snippets there, the cars all seemed more more, like more modern versions of stock cars, then there was one really futuristic one there too.  My guess is you may be right to some degree too.  Lightning is getting on in years and his career is coming to a close, he is getting old and outdated to all the new cars out there. 
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Death Blossom on 2016-11-21 16:13:20
That one car they focused on in the center in that one shot, zooming up the race track. I feel he may be the antagonist or something. Maybe he's the reason McQueen wrecks? Maybe it is time he should retire, but he still feels he's got game?
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Anyponedrawn on 2016-11-21 16:16:14
That is my guess.  It will be a tale of coming to age and either knowing when to quite gracefully, or maybe showing that old folks still have it in them.

All the other cars on the race track had all the modern stock car stuff on them, Lightning didn't, he was still designed the same.
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Death Blossom on 2016-11-21 16:37:47
Modern stock car stuff? What's that?

But hm, maybe. Learning to quit gracefully would be good. But it wouldn't really be gracefully if he went out with a wreck.
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Anyponedrawn on 2016-11-21 16:40:29
The new cars are more boxy and safe then the old ones... Uh... let me a get a picture comparison.  When the first movie came out, the cars were like the older style, and not as regulated by NASCAR as much for safety and trying to make the cars all the same.
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Anyponedrawn on 2016-11-21 16:45:02
So when the first cars movie came out in 2006, stock cars looked like this, small variances depending on the manufacturer.

(http://images46.fotki.com/v1611/photos/9/61479/12580392/19Dodge2005ref-vi.jpg)

Then NASCAR changed to the "Car of Tomorrow" which made all the cars more similar so no one driver would have advantages over another.  Also made them far safer.  The cars become boxier and more square.

(https://racingnews-walterswebdesign.netdna-ssl.com/files/2015/06/NASCAR-Low-Downforce-Rules-Change-Being-Tested-and-Discussed-.jpeg)

Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Death Blossom on 2016-11-21 16:49:35
Huh. Interesting... But does it make it slower?
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Anyponedrawn on 2016-11-21 16:50:42
No.  Still just as fast.  Slower to start, but they still hit their 200mph or whatever they do. 
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Death Blossom on 2016-11-21 16:52:37
Huh, cool. But that is interesting, I never would have noticed the difference. Good to have a guy who knows cars lol. So hm, it would be interesting to see what they do. Maybe they make him the new model and stuff and his friends say he's just not the same?
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Blurr on 2016-11-21 16:54:48
First impression upon seeing Lightning Mcqueen crash:

Roll credits. Thanks Pixar.
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Death Blossom on 2016-11-21 16:55:32
Glad the series could finally be over? lol
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Anyponedrawn on 2016-11-21 16:58:58
As a quick note, this might show the changes better from the 2006 car.  So in between the two pics I showed, there was the Car of Tomorrow which looked like this.  It was very different and wild.  That third pic is a 2016 car, and they have made them look less weird and new more areodynamic.

(http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2007/10/16/067440.1-lg.jpg)

Here is a weird one. 
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Death Blossom on 2016-11-21 17:09:55
I feel so dumb.... But I don't think I followed that haha. Or see much difference between this recent picture and the other one O_o
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Anyponedrawn on 2016-11-21 17:19:04
Lol!  Okay.  The biggest differences in that LATEST pic and the 2nd pick is this.  Note the front bumper has these goofy wires.  Note the rare spoiler is very big and L shaped.  There.  Enough car talk. 
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Death Blossom on 2016-11-21 17:30:25
Ahhh, okay I see. Strange. What are those wires for?
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Anyponedrawn on 2016-11-21 17:38:21
I don't know what the wires are for...  It looks like all one piece, so I am not sure why they are there at all. 
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Smiles2us on 2016-11-21 17:38:51
Siiigggghhhhhhh...... And even more sad, Toy Story 4.......
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Death Blossom on 2016-11-21 17:45:07
Ugh I know.
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: RainySunshine on 2016-11-21 17:46:10
The visuals look great.  If they could make a realistic action movie with chase scenes, that would be really cool.

INCREDIBLES 2?  Isn't that the only sequel anyone ever wanted other then Toy Story 2? 
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Anyponedrawn on 2016-11-21 17:47:16
No.... not Toy Story 4.  3 ended the series so welllllll.......  *Flops down all limp.* 
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Death Blossom on 2016-11-21 17:50:11
I can't wait for Incredibles 2!!
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: RainySunshine on 2016-11-21 17:50:40
I know.  I can't wait for Incredibles 2 either. :) 
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Death Blossom on 2016-11-21 17:53:10
Oh! Reminded me of something.
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Anyponedrawn on 2016-11-21 17:56:48
What is it?
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Death Blossom on 2016-11-21 18:05:19
Posted.
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: MasterXtreme on 2016-11-21 19:06:58
What we are seeing with this teaser is pretty dark. 

So at 16 seconds, you talk about the futuristic cars, and you are right.  Their engines are the distinct sound of an electric engine, and there is more then one of them in this trailer.  There is a handful of them, for sure two shown in the video, and they are passing all the regular gas engined stock cars.  I think at the end, we see Lightning trying his best to keep up with the futuristic electric cars, and does all he can, and wrecks himself in the process. 

It will probably be a film of knowing your limits and boundaries, but also a film of age and when you can't do what you used to do.  It actually has me interested if they can do it right.... well, my speculation has me interested. 
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Death Blossom on 2016-11-21 19:18:17
Hm, yeah. If they go that route I'll be interested.

I'm just afraid they're go the route of Turbo and Planes 2. Where they seem to encourage doing stuff even if you aren't built or able to do them. It's actually a pretty harmful message in some regards. I feel like movies are too afraid of being sad or not having the main character "win" or succeed. Sometimes the most growth in character comes from accepting you can't do something, and that's okay.
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Anyponedrawn on 2016-11-21 19:22:07
Hmmmm, good input, MasterX. 

Maybe it will say something along the lines of you can't beat the next generation because they are better then you. 
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Death Blossom on 2016-11-21 19:24:54
Uh, huh, no wait that doesn't sound right...
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Anyponedrawn on 2016-11-21 19:27:38
I never saw the Planes movie, but those weren't Pixar films.  They were Disney films using Pixar characters... it was a real dirty movie Disney did there. 
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Death Blossom on 2016-11-21 19:32:34
They weren't using Pixar characters. No characters cross overed. It was just the same universe.
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Anyponedrawn on 2016-11-21 19:47:58
Yeah, but the Airplanes were Pixar inspired.  It was a dirty money grab to trick the average person.  I wanted to see it when it first was teased, but I never got to see it. :-\ 
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Death Blossom on 2016-11-21 19:55:27
I mean eh? I don't think it's a big deal. Disney owns Pixar.
Most people who don't like the movie unjustly blame Pixar though.
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Anyponedrawn on 2016-11-21 20:01:02
Exactly, thats the problem.  It blemishes Pixar, not Disney. Most people are too dumb to know any difference.  You still have people who think Pixar and Dreamworks are the same thing... it drives me off the wall. 
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Death Blossom on 2016-11-21 20:03:10
Most people know now though. After tons of people correcting them.

Wanna know what absolutely pisses me off the most?? When people say freaking Land Before Time is Disney. I want to strangle them until their neck snaps in half when people say that.
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: 1234 on 2016-11-21 20:04:06
•_•;

*slowly steps away*
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Anyponedrawn on 2016-11-21 21:02:45
Step behind me Numbers.  You will be safe until I am shred to pieces.  It should give you enough time to stumble to the door, just so you can be beaten, and thrown down the stairs.

But yes, I agree LP.  Land Before Time is not Disney.  It was Universal Pictures, who also did the Despicable Me series more recently. 
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: FoxTail on 2016-11-21 21:13:08
Oooh, this was a pretty cool teaser.  It is going to be a life changing moment for him it seems.  I stopped the film many times, and it varied between the old round cars racing, to those new modern looking ones that MasterX called electric cars.  I think a new era of cars will come in and start dominating the field, and it will make Lightning question his future and abilities.
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Death Blossom on 2016-11-21 21:21:57
I think the whole new car old car thing is cool. I'm sure in the movie they will explain it as not everyone is cat savy.
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Anyponedrawn on 2016-11-21 21:42:40
I think that is a cool idea to explore too.  New vs. old.  He may still feel young, he may still be young, but he just can't compete on the same level.  Might be very hard subject matter, but could be a great story to tell.

I like how we are assuming all this, and have turned this topic into a very cool idea for the movie, lol!  I would actually go see this if this were the story.
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Death Blossom on 2016-11-21 22:00:35
Man, if the movie doesn't even come close to our ideas, I shall be dissappoint lol.
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Anyponedrawn on 2016-11-21 22:04:53
Maybe we should go work for an animation studio and write stories. 
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Death Blossom on 2016-11-21 22:05:27
Haha, right.
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Wolfwood on 2016-11-21 22:06:43
Weeeelllllll frackus....... a third movie?  Did anyone want a third movie after that joke of a second movie?  That movie should be thrown in an incinerator and be forgotten from Pixar's fairly stable STABLE of movies.   
Title: Good things come in threes?
Post by: NostradamusTheSeer on 2016-11-21 22:07:46
But yes.... Land Before Time is not Disney.  It was Universal Pictures, who also did the Despicable Me series more recently.
Which reminds me, they're getting a second sequel as well.  Gru meets his long-lost twin brother Drew.   I wonder if he will be an evil genius... with a full and enviable head of hair?
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Anyponedrawn on 2016-11-21 22:09:04
Oh no.... not a long lost brother story, SERIOUSLY?  Maybe his long lost brother will be a super nice guy who makes super nice things for people.


Or then Gru figures out his long lost brother worked for Hitler.....
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Wolfwood on 2016-11-21 22:09:53
They are making a new Despicable Me movie?  I guess I should have seen that coming.
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Death Blossom on 2016-11-21 22:35:04
Wait. Are you pulling my leg?
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Anyponedrawn on 2016-11-21 22:50:10
Nope... it's real....

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt3469046/
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Death Blossom on 2016-11-21 22:54:29
*curls up and cries*
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Wolfwood on 2016-11-21 23:02:20
*Places a table in front of me, pauses a moment.*

AAARRHHHGGGGG!!

*Flips table.*
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Death Blossom on 2016-11-21 23:13:16
Crin.
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Silverwing on 2016-11-21 23:16:19
Well, I am clearly in the minority here, but I think this can be a very interesting movie if done right.  I didn't read anything anyone said here because I don't have time too.  But it appears to me this accident will be a life changing moment for Lightning, and one he will have to reflect on and decide about his future.  It seems that a new generation of rival drivers are more advanced and more powerful then him, and no matter how hard he may try, he just can't match up to their speed, technology and precision.  He will have to find news ways to win, and maybe learn that being the best, doesn't always mean you have to actually be the best.  He will have to be more creative, work even harder, and suffer hardship. 

Those new car noises were electric by the way. 
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Death Blossom on 2016-11-21 23:20:30
That's exactly what everyone said, Silver lol
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Silverwing on 2016-11-21 23:21:30
Well good.  *Nods.*

I was really hoping I had something different and ground breaking here.
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Soda on 2016-12-05 23:04:17
I know expectations are low, but we shouldn't be doing that.  This is Pixar we are talking about.  Masters of surprising and delighting.  They are not a company known for messing up, and if they do, they fix it by making something grand. 
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Death Blossom on 2016-12-05 23:14:39
"Not a company know for messing up"
*points to Cars 2* That's a pretty big mess up.
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Soda on 2016-12-05 23:41:17
"Not a company know for messing up"
*points to Cars 2* That's a pretty big mess up.

They are not a company known for messing up, and if they do, they fix it by making something grand.

As I said, when there is a mistake, they fix it.  They fixed that quickly with their next film, Brave
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Death Blossom on 2016-12-06 02:46:43
*Snrk* heh, right. I'm not sure I'd call Brave the movie that made up for Cars 2.
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: RainySunshine on 2016-12-06 13:42:00
I've never seen it. 

But I know it was an improvement based on the reviews.  But based on money earned from the movies, Brave actually made less money then Cars 2.  Shocker!  The worst performing Pixar film of all time was, "The Good Dinosaur."  It only drew in $332 million.  That is lower then their first film in 1995.  The Good Dinosaur got good reviews overall though.  Even crazier, Cars 2 made more money then Cars 1.  Cars 1 got overall good reviews, Cars 2 did not.  Cars 2 also made more money then WALL-E and toy Story 2. 

Pixar is having a harder time making big money on films possibly because other film studios like Dreamworks and Blue Sky have copied their style a lot, and the average consumer doesn't notice the difference. 
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Death Blossom on 2016-12-06 13:44:35
Eh. It didn't deserve the award. It was pretty boring. And kinda dumb. And Merida was unlikable.
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: RainySunshine on 2016-12-06 13:47:29
I've never seen it. 

But I know it was an improvement based on the reviews.  But based on money earned from the movies, Brave actually made less money then Cars 2.  Shocker!  The worst performing Pixar film of all time was, "The Good Dinosaur."  It only drew in $332 million.  That is lower then their first film in 1995.  The Good Dinosaur got good reviews overall though.  Even crazier, Cars 2 made more money then Cars 1.  Cars 1 got overall good reviews, Cars 2 did not.  Cars 2 also made more money then WALL-E and toy Story 2. 

Pixar is having a harder time making big money on films possibly because other film studios like Dreamworks and Blue Sky have copied their style a lot, and the average consumer doesn't notice the difference.

Sorry, I edited more. 

Yeah, Brave, as a consumer, didn't interest me, hence why I think many people didn't go see it.  Especially because Disney Animation Studios started producing films that mirrored Pixar films, or tried too, and they were more colorful, like Tangled and Frozen a few years later. 
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Death Blossom on 2016-12-06 13:53:44
Yet Brave still got the award over 2(3?) other more deserving films. So my dislike of it is intensified there.

And honestly, it's not that hard to have something better than an excuse of a movie as Cars 2.
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: RainySunshine on 2016-12-06 14:01:21
A lot of critics and awards people give awards to films no one actually goes to see or likes.  A great example was the show, "30 Rock," a few years ago on NBC.  The critics praised the show, gave it all the awards they can, but the show never mustered a following.  NBC kept it renewed just to please critics and have a "fake hit" show on their network for several years.  The show rarely got millions and millions of viewers they hoped for. Based on all the awards it got, you would think it was the second coming of Christ.
Title: Car hop
Post by: NostradamusTheSeer on 2016-12-06 20:47:24
I kept getting the title confused with Third Rock from the Sun.
Title: Re: Car hop
Post by: RainySunshine on 2016-12-06 21:07:49
I kept getting the title confused with Third Rock from the Sun.

I am not sure if you are joking, but I kept making that mistake early on.
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Darrin on 2017-01-05 14:25:42
New trailer-isa thing by Pixar on Cars 3.  Shows two new characters.

Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Soda on 2017-01-05 15:45:58
Not much to say.  Two new character, cool.  Great.

As usual with Pixar though, the graphics and design are beautiful. :) 
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Death Blossom on 2017-01-05 18:41:37
I forgot to say this. My sisters actually thought that they were making Cars 3 in real life. I had to convince them that no, it was still animation lol. They said the clouds just looked so real haha
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Anyponedrawn on 2017-01-05 21:01:33
My goodness. :)  Children.  ;)

Nice new visuals. 
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: ✨proponypal✨ on 2017-01-07 12:00:10
This is more of visuals then a trailer wtf Pixar
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: FoxTail on 2017-01-07 12:03:16
It's mainly a trailer showcasing their mastery in visuals like P3 said.  Trailers usual... well, they usually show some of the film. 
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Death Blossom on 2017-01-07 12:04:22
I think... The reason they're doing this. Is so people have no idea what the hell the movie is about. Forcing them to go see, or have a friend go see it to know what it's about. Thus giving them the munes.
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: RainySunshine on 2017-01-07 12:06:18
They did give us that first teaser with the car accident, so they might be trying to do that. 
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Death Blossom on 2017-01-07 12:07:26
Yeah. Like here's this one thing that happens. Now we're gonna reveal NOTHING else.
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: FoxTail on 2017-01-07 12:20:55
Which can be a smart marketing plan, but it can be disastrous if no one cares. 
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Darrin on 2017-01-10 12:23:32
Here we go.  An official new trailer that extends the first trailer.  This will probably be an interesting story they plan to tell, and it fits in line with what many of you were expecting.

This story comes just as some of NASCAR's legends like Jeff Gordon retire, Tony Stewart, and soon Dale Earnhardt Jr.  Interesting timing.

Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Silverwing on 2017-01-10 13:05:33
The story, and a compelling story that everyone must ask at some stage in their life.  It may be a great story idea, but it will only be good if they can answer it in a good way. And to everyone that answer will be different... but we will see what McQueen's answer will be.
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Anyponedrawn on 2017-01-10 13:09:10
Interesssttttiiiinnnk.  *Pretends to be stroking a neck beard.*
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Death Blossom on 2017-01-10 14:18:48
Cars being deep? Please.
I'll eat my dog if they even get it close to well done.
It just seems dumb. So many other ways they could have told the story honestly.
But freaking cars? No one cares about the characters enough for us to actually care about the dilemma they're going through.
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Silverwing on 2017-01-10 16:40:35
I care... I CARE.  I am interested and want to see how they will handle this situation.  Maybe it will be humbling for Lightning McQueen, who in the first movie, was somewhat of a jackass. So I would like to see him humbled and further learn what Doc Hudson had started teaching him.  You don't need to be the fastest and newest, but smarts is key too. 
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: MasterXtreme on 2017-01-10 16:47:04
I'm not writing this off.  I feel Pixar realizes Cars 2 was a joke, and they are going to make things right.  Take more the in their approach from Cars 1 and the world building and storyline. 

I think this is a topic, especially in kids films, that is rarely, if ever touched upon.  I think more parents will get this story then kids, and I for one, look forward to seeing what Pixar will do.

I care too. 
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Wolfwood on 2017-01-10 17:27:54
Eh. We'll see. 

I will say so far, this premise is better then the second movie. 
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Ari-Dynamic on 2017-01-21 12:10:57
I dunno about you guys but I loved the Cars 3 trailer, lol. XD

I saw Cars 2 at some point a year ago or two and I wasn't all that impressed. Cars 3 is my Cars 2... :D
Title: Re: Cars 3 Discussion
Post by: Rainberry on 2017-02-16 22:58:34
I hope Cars 3 is good.  I didn't see Cars 2, but just from the ads I remembering seeing, it looked like a horrible flop.  Too bad they cannot erase that film and pretend it never happened.

It comes out, June 16, 2017. 
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Anyponedrawn on 2017-02-27 17:18:49
New extended trailer was released.

Lightning McQueen seemingly has to work harder for his next racing competition. The new extended teaser of "Cars 3", titled "Next Generation", offers a look at an aging Lightning McQueen (voiced by Owen Wilson) who has to struggle to join future competition with much younger racing cars.

The first part of the teaser shows a pitch-black lavish car who has been introduced as Jackson Storm. Storm, who will also serve as the movie's bad guy, is featured competing in Daytona 500's festivities. "New generation is coming," reads the line in the teaser. "They're better, stronger, faster."

The scene later switches into a part in which McQueen suffers a serious accident. To get back in the game, McQueen will need the help of an eager young race technician with her own plan to win, inspiration from the late Fabulous Hudson Hornet and a few unexpected turns. "You will never be the racer you once were," a voiceover says. "You can't turn back the clock, kid. But you can wind it up again."

Besides featuring Jackson Storm, "Cars 3" will also feature another new character named Cruz Ramirez (voiced by Cristela Alonzo). An all yellow, 2017 CRS Sports Coupe, Ramirez is McQueen's fan as well as his trainer.

Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Death Blossom on 2017-02-27 17:27:01
Lol you give a detail detailing but also provide the video? So strange lol.

Sounds interesting. But why a bad guy? The new generation isn't "the bad guy". Like, I feel there shouldn't be a need for a "bad guy". So aggravating.
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: NostradamusTheSeer on 2017-03-01 08:13:04
Auto racing is known for its "heels".  I think Danica Patrick is trying to become the "diva" of the speedway, what with her "accidents" and her periodic bitch-fits. And you can't say anything bad about her, or else folks get up in arms.   I mean, damn, like the man said, I never missed  Jimmy Spencer so much in my life, you could say whatever you wanted to  'bout him.
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Silverwing on 2017-03-01 14:30:34
I don't think the new cars are going to be "bad guys" but a new threat to the older cars.  The new cars might not have the same respect level to the older "veterans" like how YOUNG PEOPLE are today. 
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Death Blossom on 2017-03-01 14:33:09
But again. The younger generation isn't a threat. Older people see them as a "threat" because they don't want to progress.

Why respect someone who can just drive in a circle? ;P
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Darrin on 2017-03-01 15:51:10
Don't....make....me....say it.....

It is a lot more then driving a car in a circle, or driving a car period. 
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Death Blossom on 2017-03-01 15:54:32
Sorry, an oval ;)
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Smiles2us on 2017-03-01 18:59:02
Good new trailer. :) 
Title: Cars talk
Post by: NostradamusTheSeer on 2017-03-01 22:14:05
Auto racing is basically wrestling with wheels, engines, and a gear shift.  It's all about showmanship, (usually) friendly rivals, and guys (and gals) you love to hate.  And among the fans the death of a racer is treated with the same pageantry as a President or Pope.

(http://i.ebayimg.com/images/i/151639578893-0-1/s-l1000.jpg)

Ask anyone.
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: RainySunshine on 2017-03-01 23:23:03
Well, lets be truthful here.  Dale Earnhardt was a legendary driver.  But now days, this era has many too.  Jeff Gordon and of course that champ, Jimmie Johnson. 
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Silverwing on 2017-03-14 19:27:39
Oh my gosh, lol.  Time for a Cars FILM THEORY!

Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Death Blossom on 2017-03-14 21:43:05
Oh boi.
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Darrin on 2017-03-15 15:44:21
Well.... no. 

Sorry, I am not buying it.  Not a believer.
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Soda on 2017-03-15 19:53:27
That whole Pixar world theory is true in the sense they are connected in some way... but not necessarily the same universe, if that makes sense?
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Soda on 2017-04-27 13:47:52
It's official, I want to see this movie now.  It looks really good and this trailer makes it seem like a great story.  They never should have made Cars 2, but if it was just Cars 1 and this, it probably could have been a great series.


This one is back to being more down to earth.
Title: Re: Cars 3 (why Pixar?)
Post by: Anyponedrawn on 2017-04-27 13:52:13
This one is back to being more down to earth.

Yes, exactly!  It looks like out will be a great film now.  I had high hopes the more I saw teasers and stuff.  Looks like it will have more racing action in it too, which will be great.  I'm excited for this.  OFFICIALLY. 
Title: Re: Cars 3
Post by: Darrin on 2017-04-27 13:53:50
It does look good.  It has a really good premise so far and one rarely done in films, can be done for an older audience.  I am legitimately excited to see what they will do.  I know many people early on here was predicting this would be the plot.  Good job to all of them.
Title: Re: Cars 3
Post by: Death Blossom on 2017-05-12 20:35:38
One rarely done in films? McQueen is basically the underdog story except he had glory in the past. It's kinda the same and a story seen done before.

Pixar should be putting more effort into other movies that aren't about cars. Just... Why Cars? Just give me the Incredibles 2 already damnit!
Title: Re: Cars 3
Post by: Anyponedrawn on 2017-05-12 21:07:19
Incredibles 2 is coming!  I can't wait, but they have to make it right.  So they can take as much time as they want on that to make it awesome. ;)
Title: Re: Cars 3
Post by: Anyponedrawn on 2017-06-12 16:57:51
Cars 3 reviews (http://www.autoblog.com/2017/06/12/film-review-cars-3-sweet-polished-fable/?hcid=hp-tile-small-1) are starting to come out, and it is getting high marks so far.

""Cars 3" is a friendly, rollicking movie made with warmth and dash, and to the extent that it taps our primal affection for this series, it more than gets the job done...the upshot is that this year's Pixar film is a finely executed product rather than an inspiring work of animated artistry." - Owen Gleiberman


The film is scheduled to be released on June 16, 2017.
Title: Re: Cars 3
Post by: Silverwing on 2017-06-12 21:10:17
Cars 3 reviews (http://www.autoblog.com/2017/06/12/film-review-cars-3-sweet-polished-fable/?hcid=hp-tile-small-1) are starting to come out, and it is getting high marks so far.

""Cars 3" is a friendly, rollicking movie made with warmth and dash, and to the extent that it taps our primal affection for this series, it more than gets the job done...the upshot is that this year's Pixar film is a finely executed product rather than an inspiring work of animated artistry." - Owen Gleiberman


The film is scheduled to be released on June 16, 2017.

We'll see what else they got going on with reviews, but you are right.  Majority are high marks so far.  Many saying they should just forget about Cars 2 and just jump straight from Cars 1 to Cars 3.  Pretend 2 never happened.
Title: Re: Cars 3
Post by: Ari-Dynamic on 2017-06-16 15:17:19
Cars 3 doin' well, eh?

MEANWHILE, AT VIDEO BRINQUEDO...

"Only Cars 3? Broski we're already on 8!"
Title: Re: Cars 3
Post by: Silverwing on 2017-06-16 15:27:38
For the people who don't know what he is talking about, lol.  Click this. 

Video Brinquedo (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V%C3%ADdeo_Brinquedo).
Title: Re: Cars 3
Post by: Silverwing on 2017-06-16 15:28:46
So far above average reviews. 

"Cars 3 has an unexpectedly poignant story to go with its dazzling animation, suggesting Pixar's most middle-of-the-road franchise may have a surprising amount of tread left."
Title: Re: Cars 3
Post by: Kiwi on 2017-06-16 16:24:33
I do want to see this movie.  I might try to go see it, or wait till it comes out on video.  I did enjoy the first movie.
Title: Re: Cars 3
Post by: Silverwing on 2017-07-17 19:59:44
Now at $223.1 million grossed total.  One of Pixar's lowest but not lowest rated film.  Still higher then most studios.