Sign In Now ►
or Create A New Account ►
Rank This Matchup or Comment/Reply Below
some people might say Cars 2 wins this, but I'm going to go with the first one, it had more heart. But I still think the second one isn't as bad as some people say it is.
Cars had more heart. I will not try and deny that. What I will try and deny is that Cars 2 was devoid of any sort of heart. Admittedly, the relationship dynamic between Mater and McQueen felt like a bit of a retread (pun unintended) from the first movie, but that being said, I enjoyed it as much this time around as the first time. In addition, I am one of those strange people you probably thought didn't exist. A Mater fan. I was actually excited when I heard he was going to be the main focus of the sequel, believe it or not. And, in my opinion, he did not disappoint. Sure, the humor in Cars 2 is not high brow in the slightest, and contains a lot of (literal) potty humor, but I like humor of all kinds. Also, I really enjoyed all the throwbacks to and parodies of the spy genre. All in all, the movie was hectic and lacking the heart of the first one, as Nathan said. Put simply, it was clearly made with children, and simple fun, in mind. Some might consider that a problem, but I am not one of them. Cars 2 was an exciting ride that I loved in spite of its flaws. Yes, that's right, I said loved.
cars was pixars worst movie, and it's still enjoyable. still, i don't know what pixar had in mind when they made a sequel to their worst film. the original wins
Meh. Cars isn't something I reach for when I need something to watch, but it was better than the sequel, which I thought was *by far* the worst thing PIXAR's come out with (except maybe for Boundin'!, but that's a short film). It makes me sad to think that I could have had an Incredibles sequel instead of that junk ... or an original film, for that matter.
I definitely pick Cars 2. Though both Cars and Cars 2 were bad movies, I kind of liked Finn McMissile and how the movie didn't take itself too seriously.
Cars took itself too seriously, and tried to be as profound as other Pixar movies, and it didn't work.
Obviously Cars. I didn't see a big lack of quality in the first Cars, unlike many critics. And even though I liked Cars 2 (not loved, just liked), Cars tops Cars 2 in almost every respect (with the exception of animation).
Both of these are my least favorite Pixar films, but I enjoyed Cars 2. It is (mostly) devoid of the heart that Cars had, but they filled the space with plenty of humor. I'll take a throw-back to old spy movies over a Doc Hollywood look-alike (plotwise, definitely not visually) every day of the week.
Like everyone else, I think these are Pixar's worst. Still, it bad. But not nearly as good as their others. I read somewhere that out of all their movies, the Cars franchise was sold the most toy, and that's why they made a sequel. I think Cars tried to be a good movie. Cars 2 didn't. But it was more entertaining.
Agree with part of the above. These are Pixar's worst. And who the hell asked for a Mater movie? Cars 2 was awful. Original for me...
Cars 2 features cars getting blown up which is equivelnt to people being killed. thats badass. pixar always has a way of there movies being violent without it being bloody
"Cars" was the first Pixar movie I saw that I thought wasn't great, just good - though time has softened my view of the movie and I like it more now than when I saw it in the theater. But "Cars 2" is a true failure - it forces the storyline along to the point where the viewer asks themselves, "Are they making this up as they go?!?" Yes, "Cars 2" has a touching tribute to the late Paul Newman through comments about Doc Hudson, but "Cars" is easily the winner of this matchup.
Both are underrated, but as of now with 13 feature films released Cars 2 is the only Pixar film that I don't love. That being said I still like it, but the first is definitely better.
Cars is a definition of mediocre, but Cars 2 is THE definition of bad. Cars 2 seems to be built from the ground up about THINGS happening, and all of the characters are not even one-dimensional, they're practically non-existent, zero-dimensional. It's about as complex as those god-awful Mater Tall Tales shorts, but with a LOT of padding. Remember when something that was just pretty mediocre was the biggest stinkpile Pixar ever made? Oh, the glory days! Let's just hope Monster's University can bring the studio back to it's roots, and judging by early reviews, it very well may.
They are both disappointments. However, while Cars may have been a disappointment, Cars 2 was just tedious and dull. The first had more laughs and heart, which the second lacked in both categories. That being said, they are the bottom of PIXAR'S library, Cars 2 just sent them down a spiral.
Think as the better way that which if is just like as one learn second looking choice easly
Cars 2 was...useless. No purpose at all. The original will always win here.
Cars 2 is Pixar's 2nd Best. It's only surpassed by Toy Story 3.
Both aren't very good and just really stupid concepts. I'll go Cars 1 because the sequel shouldn't exist and they didn't justify it existing.
Cars 1 is better, no competition
Cars 1 is decent, thanks to the cinematic icon that is Chick Hicks. Cars 2 is actually terrible. I genuinely can't think of a single good thing about this movie other than the your mom joke. Other than that, it's a stupid, worthless experience. Cars 1, easily.
Cars 1 is easily the best of it's trilogy