Home » Disney Pixar, Disney Pixar CARS 3

Disney Pixar CARS 2: I’m Dying Here

One of the main points of contention in CARS 2 is that CARS die …

Falling, falling, falling …

Sure, you could say that it’s a little disturbing for kids … but of course, we humans often refer to cars as dying or dead … but just as Finn can go splash from the same height for dramatic effect in the storyline (is he really dead? Whew!) or that CARS can go BOOM as in this scene without dying – they get scorched and scratched up but they return to do more evil later …

But I don’t think they added “death” as a possible course of action for CARS just for the sake of ramping up the dramatic possibilities or making the story more PG-13 from G …. but rather because of …

Without coming out and saying it – they wanted to let everyone (kids and adults) know that the Doc Hudson/FHH was no more – that he was passed on … that he could not or nor simply be repaired or have a major overhaul – otherwise kids would ask – why can’t they just fix Doc? Why can’t he just get a new engine, refurbished parts, etc … if a Gremlin can broken up and repaired – why not Doc? So, this was simply a device that let everyone know that CARS cannot always be repaired and some simply die.

Of course, this was presumed to be true for Stanley from CARS but since we never saw him ‘alive,”younger kids might not make that connection … and of course, most Disney movies from the 1930’s to the 1970’s usually involved some traumatic parent scene (a tradition carried on with FINDING NEMO but more off-screen than DUMBO or BAMBI).

So, while it may have been a bit jarring for young kids, I believe they did it to better explain and present the Doc scenario and I think most adults would prefer that Paul Newman’s character be retired in our memories and not voiced by a sound-alike …

«  »
19 December 2011 Disney Pixar, Disney Pixar CARS 3 15 Comments


  • Bumper Save says:

    RTR lives, I don’t care what you say. 🙂

  • Steve AKA: Poppa says:

    I’m late in chiming in on this issue. That’s because Cars 2 totally destroyed my interest in the Cars line. Cars, The Original had a sweet story line kids could follow. There has always been a little romance in cartoons: Donald & Daisy Duck, Mickey & Minnie, all the Prince and Princesses, et al. Cars, The Original had a simple goal of McQ getting to and winning the big race. The small town atmosphere with sweet characters.

    The creators of Cars 2 may have been given free reign but the result is not a child’s cartoon. The comment has been made parents need to teach kids about death. Well, the intended audience of Cars 2 is not old enough to understand the true meaning of death. The intended audience is also not old enough to truly understand the underlining plot of the movie. Yes, the little kids easily get the idea of Mater going into the wrong bathroom. But, do they truly understand the green fuel concepts?

    I really think Pixar has to reassess some of the concepts in the latest movies. I wasn’t too thrilled with Toy Story 3 and the potential incineration of the toys. That was a little over the top for young ones, too.

    I really do not think the toys from Cars 2 will have the attraction of Cars, The Original. I’m kind of hoping Mattel brings back the toys from Cars, The Original when the theme ride opens in Disneyland.

  • jamarmiller says:

    It was dumb to kill off Doc, just because of the actor died, if we did that for all characters we wouldn’t have Mickey Mouse and countless others too.

    It disrespected the character and actor IMVHO , NOT honoured him.

    I like Paul, always had, and still do, but hate the idea that DOC is dead now

  • Mike Manifold says:

    John Lasseter does talk about this a little bit during the DVD bonus dialogue. He says it was important to make an actual spy-thriller, rather than a spoof of a spy-thriller, so they intentionally made the bad guys truly dangerous, as well as comical. My view echoes many of you – they could have achieved this real danger without going overboard on the killing and threats of killing. For example, Leland Turbo’s demise already convinces the viewer that Finn, and later Mater, are facing real danger, so it wasn’t necessary to kill Rod Torque Redline. They could just as easily have Rod captured, detained, and then rescued as part of the fast-paced end. I also think they could have made the bad guys a little more comical, perhaps by having a few more slaptick physical comedy things happen to them, like when Acer flies off into the oil tanker, or experience lemon-style car trouble while they are trying to do evil. They seem to run a little too well, and be a little too fast. I did love it overall, but it will be quite a few years before Baby Manifold will be able to watch it with his older brother.

  • slicepie says:

    Oh boy, here we go… It’s not the responsibility of movie studios and production crews to teach children about life and death. It’s the responsibility of the children’s parents to do that. Wanting to try to explain that cars can actually die is not the problem; the problem is actually screenwriting purposeful and violent death into the dialogue of the film itself. Professor Z proclaiming that “Lightning McQueen must be killed!”, is way overboard in my book, especially for a movie that is Rated G. Anyone notice how that part was not included in any previews? I believe it was purposely excluded because they knew that parents would have second thoughts about taking their children to see it.

  • Tom says:

    I must respectfully disagree. The Captain makes an excellent counter-point. They simply replaced Carlin with a sound-alike, could’ve easily done the same with Newman. I think my son still doesn’t understand the Hudson Hornet Museum scene and that Doc has passed on. I do not agree with the supposition that they introduced the death and mortality themes just to “explain” the real-life passing of Paul Newman, it just doesn’t make sense. If that was the goal, why tie a death caused by old-age in with violence rather than an analogy to death from age? I think the Cars being killed and threatened with violence is a display of the lack of creativity on behalf of the writers, as well as a desire by the producers to spice things up a bit for maximum curb appeal. Obviously a sequel that just dealt with Piston Cup Car rivalries and the renaissance of Radiator Springs would have been too weak, hence the spy story line. I did enjoy the premise, but it could have been done without the gratuitous violence. Giant explosions at airports and Cars fighting in streets are not things I relate to espionage. Disguises, deceptions, intelligence and counter-intelligence and skullduggery are what make espionage interesting, not action movie stuff. I also bet that most of the script dealing with shootings, explosions, etc. was written before Paul Newman expired, so the premise that this was all a construct to help kids understand the circle of life is one I cannot abide.

    • momluvjnj says:

      The voices behind Red, Fillmore and Doc all sadly passed away, however, only Doc was absent from Cars 2. The kids don’t care who the voices are behind the characters just that the characters are present in the movie. The decision to leave Doc out and somehow make Mater LMQ’s crew chief didn’t make any sense to me. Doc was the one with the racing expertise not Mater. They should’ve had it where LMQ was invited to go around the world to different racetracks with the Radiator Springs folks as his pit crew and Doc as his crew chief. Mater’s antics could have made the trip around the world hilarious…Instead Doc is dead, Rod was tortured and killed, Mater and LMQ had a big fight, and bullets were flying….sounds like Disney Pixar was catering more to the adults than to the children. Both my boys 1 1/2 and 2 1/2 were upset when they first saw Cars 2.

  • James Daniel says:

    Cars was on BBC3 two nights ago, i watched it even though ive seen it loads and have the dvd sitting there, its so different to Cars2 and in my opinion is far better for younger kids, cars2 is good in a different way and suits older children.

  • TheCaptain says:

    So did george carlin die during production? Obviously they couldnt retire his character since he was such a huge part of the plot (oops, spoiler alert?) But the replacement voice is kind of annoying.
    On another note, the amount of action did disturb my 5yr old daughter in the theater. She was honestly scared for mater and even wanted to leave at one point. This broke my heart since we had waited so long for the new movie and at that point i knew i couldnt take my twin 2yr olds to see it, which killed me. I let my daughter know that all would be ok so we stayed. By the time the movie came out on dvd the twins were ready to see it and dont seem to be affected too much by the action.
    Long story short, i still think they went a little too far with all the shooting/killing/violence, especially when compared to the movie we all know and love (cars 1).

    • sodabear says:

      I thought George Carlin died before production started on C2. But I totally agree that Fillmore’s voice was annoying to the point of distraction. I’m with you on the violence thing too- we had to leave the theater during the you da bomb, Mater scene. I don’t begrudge Pixar making the film they want to make. I guess I should have waited til the kids were a little older to let them watch it.

  • John in Missouri says:

    Kind of like the old CBS show “Dallas”, I still say “Cars 2” will wind up being Mater’s bad dream, and “Cars 3” will revert back to the simple days of the original movie.

  • Stig McQueen says:

    Plausible hypothesis…

  • oliversmom says:

    My children did not even notice that… they loved “the action”!

    good point!

  • PirateDad says:

    Great point….my kids had NO problem with the death of the car what so ever…. it is a part of life/

  • Mr. T says:

    Interesting….. Never really thought about that……..

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.