What a bummer of a movie season....the trouble with "Cars"

I have slowly come to the realization that they just don’t make movies like they used to. Have I become a grumpy old man? No…it is just that when I go to the movies, I am invariably disappointed with what I paid for. This summer movie season is a prime example. I have already bored you all with my mini reviews of X-Men and the Da Vinci Code (both disappointing, especially the Da Vinci code [a book that I still refuse to read]). Last Friday, I went to see the new Disney/Pixar film “Cars.” Now those of you who know me know that I love Pixar films. From the original Toy Story on through The Incredibles, I have witnessed a body of work from a group of individuals who get “it.” What, exactly, is “it”? “It” is the fact that the story is the thing. You can throw all of the special effects, exotic locations, and expensive movie stars you want at a project, but if the story stinks, then forget about it. John Lasseter’s creative group at Pixar really gets “it.” I have never been disappointed in their storytelling. I reveled in the Lasseter-directed “Toy Story (1 & 2)” and “A Bug’s Life.” I enjoyed “Monster’s Inc” and “Finding Nemo,” but my favorite Pixar film is “The Incredibles,” directed by Brad Bird. The one thing that all of these films had going for them was the fact that the stories were ORIGINAL. Oh, of course, there were some recognizable archetypes and paradigms that were present in each case (the buddy picture, the little guy overcoming all obstacles, a father’s search for his child, superheros), but in each film, I could walk away and say that I had never seen anything like that before (both technically and storywise).

This brings me to “Cars.” The first problem that I had was that I HAD seen this story before. It was called “Doc Hollywood,” and it was released in the early 1990s and starred Michael J. Fox. Of course, Lasseter and the 7 OTHER CREDITED WRITERS just substituted cars in for people and changed the story to suit the situation, but it was a little too similar to the earlier film. Yes, I said 7 other writers. Too many cooks indeed…I never bought the story. I never bought into the characters. It seemed as if the storytellers (namely Lasseter) was going by the numbers on this one, a safe film as it were. Maybe it was the cars themselves. In all of the other Pixar films, we are dealing with living things, whether they be toys or monsters..they are all based on something that is ALIVE. Woody might have been a cowboy doll, but he was a COWBOY. Mike and Sully might have been monsters, but they walked and talked like living things (and were masterfully voiced by Billy Crystal and John Goodman). No, I never felt warm and fuzzy for the cars. Not one bit. I mean, it is not as if I lack imagination (just ask my folks, who, when I was younger, spent years worried that I lived in a fantasy world). I am able to give the benefit of the doubt to any work of fantasy or science fiction.

One theory is that the people at Pixar just didn’t try very hard. Why, you might ask, would they not try hard? Well, originally, this was to be the last film that Pixar released under their original agreement with Disney. The evil Michael Eisner (former President and CEO of Disney) and Steve Jobs (the CEO of Pixar and Apple) had a falling out, and Cars was to be the last film. In the meantime, however, Eisner was ousted by a shareholder revolt and Bob Iger, the new CEO of Disney, made nice with Jobs. Disney bought Pixar (which they could have done for a fraction of the cost 20 YEARS AGO!), and Jobs now sits on the Disney board of directors. Anyway, this might have been Pixar’s way of screwing Disney, but this is just speculation. I mean, according to the agreement, Pixar and Disney split the profits 50-50, so Pixar would have just been hurting itself by purposefully tanking the film. BTW, if you want to find out more about the Disney situation, I highly recommend James Stewart’s Disney War, a book that chronicles the rise and fall of Michael Eisner at Disney. This is a real page turner!
So what now for Pixar? Well, the good news is that they had a trailer for their next film in front of “Cars.” The film is “Ratatouille,” and it opens next summer. I must admit to laughing more during the preview of “Ratatouille” than I did during the whole of “Cars.” In addition, the Pixar short that preceded “Cars” is hysterical! What now for the rest of the summer? Well, I am still holding out hope for “Superman Returns” and “Pirates of the Caribbean.” I am also looking forward to “Talladega Nights: The Ballad of Ricky Bobby,” Will Farrell’s ode to NASCAR. Otherwise, though, I am content to watch my dvds of really good summer films and wonder what has happened to Hollywood.

Do you want my recommendations for good films if you are in the mood for some fun? Well, you cannot go wrong with “The Incredibles” (yes, I know it was released during the winter holiday), “Batman Begins” (the new standard for the superhero film), “Raiders of the Lost Ark” (number 1 on my list of all time favorites), and “Conan the Barbarian.” Yes, I said “Conan.” From the opening quotation from Frederick Nietzsche and the strains of Basil Poledouris’ musical theme “Anvil of Crom” over the opening credits where a sword is created on through the rest of the film, director John Milius really succeeded in doing justice to Robert E. Howard’s Cimmarean warrior. Milius gets the whole primal nature of man (I mean, his filmography includes writing “Apocalypse Now” with George Lucas and Coppola, writing and directing “Conan the Barbarian” (improving on Oliver Stone’s treatment of the script) and writing and directing “Red Dawn.” Taking those three films together, you would have a great testosterone film festival.