Cars 3 (2017) Poster


User Reviews

Review this title
397 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Very underrated
briancham19941 July 2020
I'm actually shocked by how low the ratings are for this movie. I thought it was the best Cars film and a pretty solid film in general. It follows Lightning McQueen in a completely different role, that of the aging star who is out of touch with the times. It is heartbreaking, it is dramatic and it is compelling. I never knew I could feel so sorry and yet so hopeful for such a has-been.
28 out of 34 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Solid conclusion to Cars Trilogy!
pickle-9264226 September 2021
Way better than I expected. After being slightly disappointed by Cars 2, this was a pretty good return to form for the Cars franchise. I thought it definitely could've been much better, though. A lot of the scenes were unneeded and once again, did not have the magic the first one has. But somehow, it still finds its way and manages to be a formidable sequel and satisfying conclusion to the trilogy. Although, was it really the conclusion? It seems like they could do another, but they just don't make enough money. Hopefully we'll see a fourth that just completely blows people away. Other than that, I don't have much else to say, pretty forgettable but still pretty funny and entertaining.
15 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
An improvement over Cars 2
cardsrock25 December 2019
While another sequel to Cars was still not needed, Cars 3 is at least closer to the quality of the original. With more of a focus on Lightning McQueen and his internal struggle, the story has a lot more depth than Cars 2. The story isn't original by any means, but it's told in an interesting way and is a pretty fun watch.
16 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Thats a ending!
nadinethart14 October 2019
Yes! Love this ending of cars! 1 and 3 are the best, 2 more for fun. I enjoyed this movie a lot! Just for a fun night
27 out of 36 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
It's a Way, Way, Way Better than Cars 2
WasiReviews6 September 2020
If you came out of Cars 2 disappointed you're not alone, the bad spy stuff, the melodramatic plot and the awful characterization. This film is visually fantastic having Lightning McQueen take part in a customary mid life crisis in a racing, mafia and sports movie. This part is a little bit boring but you can ignore it because it becomes an awesome race towards the end. I hope they don't make a fourth it will be a bad reboot featuring a ugly yellow car.
10 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
A good closure of the series
dontakeitpersonal24 December 2020
I thought it was surprisingly good and a well thought of ending four the series. It was funny and realistic, easy to relate to and get involved with the story.
6 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Ignore all the bad reviews! This was a good movie.
mcain-260577 September 2017
Warning: Spoilers
** Possible Spoilers **

First off, I have no idea what these other reviewers are talking about with this "alternate universe" theory. The fact is this movies ties perfectly with the first one. All the same characters are in the movie from the first one and many references are made to Doc, so not sure how this thought came about.

This movie is essentially a version of cars where Lightning McQueen actually aged, meaning he is not the same age as in the first one. With age, especially in sports, comes new, and younger, talent. In this movie lighning McQueen is faced with this same challenge, new, younger, talent who are training in new, more advanced, ways. With this younger talent and better training methods (Lightning McQueen still trains like he did under Doc) Lightning is having a tough time competing against the new guys. He essentially has to make a choice, adapt with new training or retire. I won't go into the details of his choice as I don't want to spoil it for anyone.

However, this movie was very good and, I thought, a fitting end to the franchise. Can you imagine a Rocky movie where Rocky never ages and just keeps fighting and beating everyone? No, and that is not how the Rocky series ended. Rocky retired and helped the new up and coming fighter. That is somewhat what happened here.

I can only assume the others making the reviews wanted Lightning to be perpetually young and just keep racing and racing and beating everyone, movie after movie. The writers wisely chose not to follow that formula. Yes, I will agree, there is a bit more of a story here than just pure racing, and perhaps that is what people didn't like. However, that didn't make it a bad movie.

I hated Cars 2 but I did really like Cars 3. It's not a perfect movie but also isn't what people are making it out to be. Give it a chance and I think you will like it.
152 out of 207 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Loved this!
meydiana-652424 April 2021
I absolutely loved this film from start to finish. Actually I loved the movie first part when Lightning is blindsided by new generation of race cars and the music during that part is nice too. I loved Lightning crashing scene as finally he learns his lesson of being too proud of himself. But the middle part is like the first film very boring and I actually almost fell asleep. So if there is a Cars 4 please make the middle part more exciting. But overall way better than Cars and Cars 2.
11 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Shocking Ending...and not in a good way.
rws_203 July 2017
Warning: Spoilers
In this one, Lighting struggles to keep up with the new young techno cars on the circuit and has to go find his racing mojo. Along the way he meets a young racing car who is ironically his trainer, as it turns out she is the one who needs the training from Lighting. Lighting teaches her his techniques whilst trying to improve himself.

For me it was a bit of a poor excuse for a Pixar film, and the ending is probably one of the worst I've seen in an animated flick. It just feels so unfulfilling and so not like Lighting McQueen.

(If you do not want to know the ending do not read on!!!!)

In the end, lighting makes his return to racing after training in the off season. During his big comeback race, halfway through he decides that the car he has been training deserves to try and finish the race?

So instead of it being make or break for lightning, it turns into making a name for the young race car that he has been mentoring.

Everything up to the ending is quite slow paced and a tad boring.

Sadly Cars is another franchise that has suffered through the making of sequels. Shame.
57 out of 104 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Good Sequel! Better than the Cars 2
Mynameisroman30 September 2018
The first Cars movie was awesome and it jumpstarted a lot of rip-offs tv shows for children. talking cars or talking planes everywhere nowadays... cars was the origin and of course there have been two sequels to that movie. while the first sequel felt forced onto the franchise this one here fits perfectly. a great continuation about how his career would develop over the years. he's not a rookie any more... he's not as fast as he used to be... he needs to find out how to solve this... the hints about where the story goes are subtle and reach the right conclusion in the end. and its feels like this might also be the final movie for the franchise but who knows... it a solid 7. if you loved the first one you will love this one as well
13 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Never really got into gear, the 'Cars' franchise has run out of gas
TheLittleSongbird21 July 2017
Am a big Pixar fan, feature films and short films. As far as feature films go, the 'Toy Story' franchise, 'Inside Out', 'Up' and 'Wall-E' were particularly fantastic, while 'Presto', 'One Man Band', 'Geri's Game' and 'Piper' were particularly great short films.

The 'Cars' films are often considered lesser Pixar efforts, for reasons that are understandable. To me they are towards the bottom as well, though the first 'Cars' film was still very enjoyable if not perfect and while the second film had a lot of problems to me it wasn't that awful. Seeing 'Cars 3' during my four day hiatus from IMDb (but had not yet gotten round to reviewing), from personal opinion it was underwhelming and the short film that came with it, 'Lou', came over much better.

Some will disagree, others will agree, but 'Cars 3' (expecting pitchforks and stones to be thrown, because some will consider this a blasphemous statement to make) for me was the worst of the three and replaces 'The Good Dinosaur' (which still wasn't too bad a film) as Pixar's weakest.

'Cars 3' does have its strengths. The animation is fantastic, it's rich in colour, gorgeously designed and the attention to detail is incredible. The racing scenes are mini-masterpieces of editing as to be expected.

There is also an energetic and nostalgic music score, a few of the jokes are funny and the voice acting is uniformly great, Cristela Alonzo taking top honours. A few neat little touches, like the dashboard as well.

For all those good things, a lot didn't work. Too many of the jokes backfire, due to too much of a recycled feel and very tired timing. The more emotional parts to me lacked heart and soul (though there are a couple of parts that did), so it never came over as poignant (coming from someone who cried like a baby during the emotional moments of 'Toy Story 3', 'Inside Out', 'Up' and 'Wall-E').

While there is a story and it is not as cluttered or as confused as the second, it does plod along too much, with a very sedate middle act before coming to life at the end (the climax is good and has some excitement), and seemed too thin for the running time, which it tried to hide with padding, some of which added little.

Didn't get emotionally invested in the characters, and, even with the intentionally flawed ones, never learnt enough about them and found some difficult to like. Cruz had real potential but felt underdeveloped to me, although she did bring a little heart to a film that lacked it elsewhere. Meanwhile Lightning never really grew as a character and Mater, while with less screen time than before, is a bit annoying.

Overall, disappointing film that never really kicked into gear and a sign of the franchise running out of gas. 4/10 Bethany Cox
16 out of 30 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Speed with heart
Ramascreen12 June 2017
#Cars3 is speed with heart. It's fun, exciting and emotionally endearing. The first film was about a lost small town USA and the humbling of a cocky racer. The second movie didn't quite know what it wanted to be, part espionage, part mistaken identity, part global tournament, all wrapped up in a poor attempt to address friendship. But this third installment is about the racer becoming the mentor while at the same time honoring the legacy of a very important person in McQueen's life, Hudson Hornet, who's voiced by the the late great actor whom we cinema deeply miss seeing on screen, Paul Newman.

In "Cars 3," Lightning McQueen suddenly finds himself blindsided by a new generation of blazing fast racers. He's seeing himself and his fellow race mates forced to retirement. Refusing to be told when he should call it quit, McQueen is determined to get back in the game, acquiring the help of a new sponsor and a young trainer who's secretly wanting to be a racer. But all that only brings McQueen to the doorstep of his own inspiration, the late fabulous Hudson Hornet. This enlightenment will prove once again whether or not Lightning McQueen still has what it takes to be a champion.

It's obvious from "Cars 3" that Pixar had learned the lessons of their mistake or blunder that was "Cars 2." The story in "Cars 3" is more coherent, clear and straightforward and it goes back to Pixar's strongest strategy which is to appeal to our deepest emotions. It doesn't necessarily rehash the first film, but more of presenting our hero deciding for himself to take on the next chapter of life that is just as fully rewarding as beating his opponents on the race track, which I think is a well put progression in McQueen's evolution as a character.

I think you'll be wowed at the film's excellent effort in pulling parallels between Hudson Hornet's experience and what McQueen is going through. It's like every piece fits into its place naturally, like it's meant to be. The new rival, Jackson Storm makes the cocky McQueen in the first film look tame. You don't see much of Mater this time around, but that's actually not a bad thing. You'll love some of the new racing tricks that "Cars 3" has up its sleeves, I'm entertained by them and I'm not even a Nascar fan. And the rookie/trainer who secretly wants to race, Cruz Ramirez will surprise you at every corner, that one is like a an eager young prodigy whose skills are just waiting to be discovered given the right opportunity. The themes basically ask the inevitable questions of what we all should do when we get older and are no longer able to do some of the things we love, what would be the the options then. And so I think "Cars 3" does an excellent job of letting you know that if you've reached the point of success, we should then do our part to now guide, train, teach others to reach their point of success too. Don't burn the bridge behind you.

-- Rama's Screen --
62 out of 123 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
entertaining, moving, has a good moral for children, and a quantum leap up from Cars 2
Quinoa198415 June 2017
Aside from what should be obvious to most of those who are over the age of 5 - merchandising, merchandising! I can hear Yogurt from Spaceballs say (which this movie does try to sort of, kind of, almost satirize but doesn't quite get there, and I'll get to that later) - I wondered going in why Pixar would make Cars 3. The first Cars, one of those unlikely passion projects for John Lasseter, was fine though not remarkable unless one didn't mind getting their Paul Newman fix (last movie too!) if it meant wading through the "comedy" of Larry the Cable Guy, and the sequel was one of the most mediocre films of the past decade, from anywhere (again, Larry the Cable Guy as the protagonist). But then I thought that this was exactly why it would be interesting to see the movie - what would the Pixar creative team come up on this one. What they came up with was a good movie, no more but no less either.

Aside from a far smaller quotent of scenes with that grating Mater character (I'll get off it now but, really, who really was hungering for more of Mater in their movie theater in 2017?), this is another example like Monsters University where the filmmakers are favoring a strong message over having a simple villain. And, curiously enough, while both movies do feature Nathan Fillion as an almost/would-be antagonist, it's not about that (it can't be coincidence that in both movies he voices the show-off, cocksure figure, right? - actually Armie Hammer is more-so that character here, but nevermind), I suspect that the message was what was key for those in the story room. What could make Lightning McQueen interesting again after all these years? Was he even interesting to begin with? It's not even him so much as it is what a character's arc is, and what Pixar taps in pretty well here is the idea of moving on and what education means.

In the story of Cars 3, McQueen gets into a terrible accident as the first turning point - one remembers that from the surreal teaser trailer where it made it look as though this might be the Saving Private Ryan of Cars movies or something - and though he wants to get back into racing there's constant trepidation, about his age, about his ability, about everyone else out on the track... and then comes, ironically enough, his trainer (thanks sponsor Fillion!), with a good voice job by Cristela Alonzo by the way, who of course didn't grow up as a, uh, small car wanting to become a trainer of other cars, she wanted to be race car herself! But she lacked the confidence and the wherewithal to keep at it (those who can't do teach sort of thing). Matter of fact, that may be the whole point of the movie, but it's also saying that isn't necessarily a bad thing - if you want it, it can be great.

It reminds me too of what happens in other professions like in the movies where actors find they aren't getting the good roles or aren't being challenged enough so they decide to direct, and it takes on a whole new feeling and passion. All of this noted, Cars 3 doesn't exactly make this some big surprise, it's actually a predictable story that, at least for me and I'm sure many others, one will see coming a mile away as far as whether or not Lightning McQueen is going to do that first race (really the only question is how much or how little will he really race before passing on the baton). But Pixar was sneakily impressive here with how it brought real emotion, or as much as can happen with these cars, and Owen Wilson and Alonzo have a good pairing in the film that has an arc and develops over the course of the story.

There's a little shakier ground that Pixar tip-toes up to as far as what it means to have, say, branding and merchandising - the Fillion "Billionaire" car Sterling (I wondered if he had ever wanted to race or as a tiny car wanted to be a, uh, Billionaire car, however they can spend it) looks at Lightning as a vehicle, no pun intended, for money-making, that his admiration for McQueen is for what he is *valued* as a commodity, as a presence or a thing, as opposed to his ability (which goes a way to explain why he's not impressed when he begs Sterling that he can do one more race). But I'm not sure Pixar developed that side of it enough, or perhaps they could only do so much satire in a G-rated movie for all audiences. It may be enough, though a little more could've gone a longer way to make a decent movie into one of their REALLY good sequels like Monsters U or Toy Story 3.

At the end of it all though, Cars 3 is entertaining, occasionally quite funny (some puns and jokes hit better than others), and eschews typical villainy or the usual antagonists and embraces more like existential questions, which is probably more than a kid-friendly blockbuster like Cars 3 of all things had to concern itself with. I give Pixar points for that, and if seems like something that had... effort put into it, at least up to a point. Not to mention, last but not least, what seems to be a fitting coincidence (or it may be just what Lasseter intended) that a first-time director was promoted up to do this movie within Pixar, Brian Fee. It was time to get in the race, I suppose, and he showed up to do well.
29 out of 61 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
One of Pixars worst films and lacked in story and humor.
cruise018 December 2017
Warning: Spoilers
Cars 3 was not my highly anticipated Pixar film since the second movie was just pure boredom. And this series has been running downhill and can never match the first movie which was cute and fun. This third film fails and bites the dust on the track with its sequel problems in lacking a creative plot, fun humor, the characters are no longer fun, and it was quite boring as well.

The plot did not stick out or did it made an improvement over the last movie. Which most of it was about the Nader the tow truck. The focus is on Lightning McQueen after losing a race with Jackson Storm. Who is a fast high tech car that reaches in 200 mph in seconds. McQueen spends most of the film trying to practice racing to face his opponent. Even with the help from Cruz, who is his trainer. They spend most of the movie racing through a desert track and beaches. Just so he can win the race.

The film was no longer fun and had fun humor like the first movie. I am sure kids will still enjoy it. But for adults it was a completely boring movie.

Overall, Cars 3 is terrible and a let down. Probably one of Pixars worst films to date.
18 out of 34 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Good enough
pennyelenabooks26 June 2017
Warning: Spoilers
Cars 3 is not like the rest of the Cars movies, though it tries recapture some glory from the first movie. Didn't mind the new characters, they were interesting in their own way. However, it would have been good to also have some of the old characters in there as well, and not just at the beginning and at the end. Other than that, the story is okay, with some action (though, they could have added some more) and a great twist in the end, that, at least, helped pull the movie out of the cliché pit. Finally, the special effects were nice, with the cars almost looking like real ones, especially at certain scenes, where even the scenery looked real. So, overall, 4 out of 10.
13 out of 23 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
An uninspired borefest
Nobody-2722 June 2017
I am one of those guys who actually liked the first Cars film. That one had a soul. Then came the second installment, which was even better - one of those rare sequels that did not feel forced or redundant.

And then Cars 3 came along to spoil it all.

How bad is it? Well, bad enough that a kid next to me could not wait for the film to be over. And bad enough that I was struggling not to fall asleep due to pure boredom. The middle part of the film (like from 15min in to about 15 min before the end) is mostly a blur for me - it was that bad. They say that with any story, you want to leave audiences questioning "And then - what happened?" so that the story shows "and then - this happened, and then - this..." but this film has nothing happening. There was tons of talk, reminiscing, fear of old age, but nothing worth watching.

One saving grace is the film's visuals. And there was one camera move I loved. That was it.

Oh, in case you have heard of the ending, which I will not disclose here - it feels terribly forced. Lightning McQueen makes a random decision that is supposed to make us feel all warm and fuzzy, but it doesn't. It just leaves everyone with the big WTF on their face, and rightfully so, because it is so out of character and so stupid. So, the ending does not work, as much as it was cute as an idea. Good ideas need to be well executed to work, otherwise they fail.

All in all, the story feels like a typical Hollywood "paint by numbers" screenplay which was developed by going over McKee's or some such author's check list, and then going like this:

  • Start with action on page 1? Check. - Unexpected ending? Check. - Lots of dialogue in the middle part? Check. - Take care of the minorities? Check.

And so on. Painting by numbers never produced anything worthwhile.

Story must come from the heart if it is to work, otherwise you get Cars 3 - an uninspired borefest.

Essentially, Cars 3 is a 10 minute story stretched to painfully long 110 minutes. I was shocked when I discovered that it was that long - for a CG feature with no story, those extra 10 minutes are both expensive and meaningless.
51 out of 97 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Seems to upset idiots
rob-rainthorpe24 December 2020
Warning: Spoilers
When someone does something you don't like, some people's first instinct is to call them a "snowflake" or if they're slightly more honest "liberal".

Well this movie, bizarrely, seems to have got a few of that breed of morons upset because the "winner" doesn't look like them or wear the same underwear.

Get over yourselves, knuckledraggers, the world's moved on. Heroes can be boys, girls, whatever, and they can win in many different ways. The characters in this humble movie are better than any of you will ever be.
4 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
rsj_13129 June 2017
Warning: Spoilers
Even my son was asking throughout then entire 1 hour middle portion of the movie , "why aren't they racing, is he gonna race Jackson storm ...". I just kept saying yeah son eventually. Then it's the female that ends up racing in the end and my 5 year old son experience his first episode of disappointment and fraud. How do you explain to a 5 year old that it's politics and the moral of the story is no longer innocent heroic comebacks but now it's about equal opportunity and forcing ideas on young minds. Kids just want to see a good , animated race movie AS ADVERTISED!!! Instead it's 10 minutes of racing, and an hour and a half of training and build up that leaves you asking yourself... did this have to be nearly two hours long?! Garbage
85 out of 159 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
One of the most dissapointing movie experiences I've ever sat through
vciccarello19 May 2018
Warning: Spoilers
First off, I want to say that when Cars 1 first came out, I loved that movie and I sill love it today. I was about 6 when Cars 2 came out, I liked it when I was younger, but now I don't. Now, I'm 13 and this came out on Netflix a little while ago. Boy, was I dissapointed.

In this movie, McQueen retires after a new racer who turns out to be faster than McQueen. This means that he is done racing for life because he is too old. But McQueen doesn't want to stop racing, so one day he gets invited to a place that he'll spend the rest of his life at. A girl car named Cruz who turns out to be a fan of McQueen is his instructor. Since McQueen is too old to finish his race, he let Cruz finish it for him.

If you're a fan of the first Cars, don't watch it. I have to give some credit of this movie being better than the second Cars though.

8 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Old Cars, New Cars, I Say, Two Stars
trevor-8294416 June 2017
Three movies and countless Mater-shorts later, I still want to know how a world inhabited by live automobiles could exist with our own landmarks. Following from the previous installments, Cars 3 wants me to believe older cars are made of older models, and newer cars are made of newer models, never mind their biology of reproduction. But now it wants me to believe crabs live on their beaches. It even continues to parody itself by putting up "re-tire-ment" ads on the freeway. ​ Even by the standards of Pixar's nonsensical world, it still makes no sense. Each act felt increasingly made up on the spot throughout production, with a phoned-in self-contradicting message thrown in last minute. This stated logic just raises more questions than answers, like, why does such a franchise exist from a studio made famous for telling emotive stories for a new generation of storytellers? Yet, as long as parents know about the "good messages" of their kids' programs, we can rest easy at night, right?

Well, the third installment could rightfully replace that bad James Bond parody's mere existence, for it returns to the contrast between old and new ways of living driven by the first movie.

Lightning McQueen starts a new rivalry against a younger, newer racer who aspires to be better than him. Now Lightning has become the veteran about to finish his last race alongside a popular rookie, a direct role reversal from where he started. It parallels how the sports industry always worked: it brings in newer, younger racers who trained via virtual reality simulators. It does get a bit funny to see the contrast between old and new sport traditions, such as when Lightning meets his new trainer, Cruise, in preparation for his race against these high- tech cars. She makes him feel out of touch against the changing times, and he makes her feel inept for driving on a beach. Lightning's old mentor Doc Hudson also gets a more proper tribute than the previous movie. The addition of this mentorship legacy adds a strong common ground to meet between all viewers.

Pixar's team has always mastered intergenerational stories the whole family can enjoy, and now they mastered making movies no generation can enjoy. I mean it: a little girl next to me in the theater kept impatiently getting off her seat. Another 9-ish year old boy, who falls under the target demographic, made a bit of noise too.

As for the older viewers, some of the remnants of Pixar's glory days of innovating animation could still please. But compared to Disney's latest achievements, the animation quality here looks so lackluster, you could mistake any frame here with a frame captured from either of the two previous installments. Look at Pixar's other visual splendors: Finding Nemo, WALL-E, and Up, there is currently a real lack of care about keeping up to date on the animation trends.

Cars 3 attempts to entertain the older folks and younger folks at once, which in turn leaves each of them equally bored. Kids have no care about what racing was like in the 1950's, nor would parents pay to see a display of high-tech cars. Good quality humor cannot be found here, including silly childish humor fit for eight-year-olds, particularly by the now nearly absent Mater. Maybe a brief, "I've fallen and I can't get up" joke could land, except we already moved on from Life Alert's contagious catch phrase.

To top it off, the Cars franchise continues its reputation of offending minority groups outside of US sports by tossing in a demolition derby for no real reason other than to make that culture look unappealing. Oh, believe me, it gets worse. For no reason whatsoever, Luigi and Guido, the two Italian cars from Lightning's little small-town home, the most culturally insensitive characters from the first movie, join Lightning in his high-tech training. Again, these two amicos offer no comic relief, moral support or anything else. The only reason I can think of for their prevalence is to make the American cars look better in comparison.

Despite what the half-hearted messages want parents to think, the merchandising proves that Cars 3 carries no hard opinions about the old way of doing things. Think: how many of these sold spin off toys look like older car models? Although it proves the craftiness of Disney: their marketing utilizes nostalgic throwbacks for the parents, guaranteeing a higher emotional response from the buyers. The kids who are sold into Pixar's franchise deserve better than a confused, phoned in commercial.
29 out of 55 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
In 2017, this film series has finally run out of gas. And the bad news is.. that's a good thing.
theVade11 July 2017
Cars 3 is a predictable, anticlimactic, decently acted, and full of small continuity errors film, yet it still features some of the best visuals in animation to date. Although this film was still enjoyable at times, I never really connected to the characters like I did in the original film over ten years ago. Sure this film was good enough for young kids, but to me it wasn't, and I decided to give Cars 3 an "Alright" on theVade Review Bar or a 5 out of 10. Sadly the Cars franchise had such great promise when it originally took to the road back in 2006. Now in 2017, this film series has finally run out of gas. And the bad news is.. that's a good thing.

Read more at theVade.
12 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Bad plot ruins movie.
hansefde3 January 2018
Warning: Spoilers
Cars 3 begins great, the whole atmosphere of Cars 1 is back. The races, the scenery when the truck rides through the country, even the music of Cars 1 reappears. Lots of fascinating details everywhere (anyone notice the Mclaren headquarters?). The story starts intrigueing, but soon takes a turn for the worst.

Spoilers from here. First question is where's Doc? Apparently he died, but how and when? It's a missed opportunity to give the movie more depth. Then there's the storyline. Racing car gets old, can't cope with the young eager racing cars, becomes a trainer and his trainee wins. Nothing wrong with that, but the insight and transition comes DURING the final race in which they swap during a red flag period. Incredibly stupid and unlogical. Even worse is the mid part of the film where Lightning spends at least half an hour trying to find Doc's roots and his fizz. It goes on and on, the whole momentum is gone. The plot could have been brilliant if the main race had been half way in which Lightning would lose and consequently become a trainer with his trainee winning at the end of the movie. Last bit is the necessity to highlight feminism. Talented female trainer becomes instantly an ace racing car after shaking off her past. It's a forced plot that tastes bitter.
11 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
One of the worst endings for a movie ever
colin_hewson4 April 2018
Warning: Spoilers
Who thought it would be a good idea to retire Lightning McQueen after receiving a barrage of age-related abuse from the new 'rookies'? Great message! In the previous film we saw Mator get all kinds of power-ups to make him go faster but in this film they can't make McQueen go 10mph+ faster with a hi-tech training facility.

None of it made any sense and just ruined what could have been a great film. The first half was all headed in the right direction and I was expecting a Rocky 4 style old-school vs new-school battle with McQueen coming out top.

But no. Much better to disappoint he kids.
10 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
An incredible comeback for the Cars franchise Warning: Spoilers
There will be spoilers...

Oh boy, where to begin.

I'll start with the elephant in the review section: The accusations of "sexism" and "political correctness". Yes, it's true, there is a female car in the film who happens to be a talented race car. The horror!! Look, I get it. I hate having a blatant agenda shoved down my throat. Ghostbusters, I'm looking at you. This wasn't that. Not even a little bit. If you think it was, well, what can I say. Maybe you should just go home to your bunker and watch Breitbart.

The bigger, and I think slightly more understandable, issue is that of the overall message of the film: our heroes getting older, and the end of McQueen's career as a race car. Hey folks, time marches on. People change, even our role models. If your kid can't handle McQueen passing the torch on to a younger, more adequate player, then maybe you should plop your brat in front of the TV with Cars 1 on a loop. News Flash: this is real life! It happens in all sports. Baseball, Football, Basketball, REAL RACING! Whether we like it or not, our heroes at some point become too old to do what they do. Progress happens. We improve. As a baseball fan, I see it every single year. Players we love go away, and new blood comes in. The message in this movie is exactly that. Kids need to learn from a young age that you can't have the same guy up there doing the same thing every day. Heck, if Cars 1 took place in the 1950s and was about the Fabulous Hudson Hornet, people would be complaining about a new car called Lightning McQueen. What an incredibly boring world it would be if Lightning McQueen always won every single race and no other cars came along to improve on the sport. He isn't becoming less of a hero, he's not being emasculated. His accomplishments aren't being diminished in any way. He's helping the next generation to become a hero too! And so what if that new hero is female? By taking this apparently contentious route, Pixar has opened up the Cars franchise to years and years of new material. New heroes will emerge and some will go away. I for one am delighted by this new direction. I was concerned with the let down that was Cars 2 that the third installment would be useless. It wasn't, not even remotely. Cars 3 is fantastic, and I thoroughly enjoyed it. My 3 year old son, who is obsessed with McQueen, loved it too.
108 out of 175 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Forgettable entry and, hopefully, the last.
martinmcdonough21 February 2018
Warning: Spoilers
The trailers for this movie would lead you to believe that the Pixar staff wanted to transpose a "Rocky III" type comeback onto their landscape with McQueen being the next Balboa. I get it. It's a formula that can work and usually does in the hands of skilled movie-makers.

Not in this case, however.

The first Cars was story driven, had a decent theme that played throughout, and had heart. The second was a mess. This one showed flashes of potential but ultimately was just uninspired. I get the "new generation" of racers pushing the old out of the spotlight. I get the whole "going back to your roots" angle that was used here and finding Doc Hudson's old trainer, track, and support crew. And I get the whole "rematch and redemption" thing as well. All of those elements ring of Rocky III. Incidentally, the Demolition Derby was kind of akin to Rocky fighting Thunderlips (a.k.a. Hulk Hogan) as well, and was the most entertaining part of the film, but I digress.

Don't get me wrong, as there were some good elements. For instance, there was alot less of Larry the Mater Guy in this one. And the artwork was spectacular. The smugness of the new cars was played up pretty good. But there was no need to bring back Chick Hicks, sans Michael Keaton, as a talk show antagonist. Nor was it necessary to "re-skin" McQueen with several new paint jobs - a clear merchandising move. And it would've helped the audience and the story if McQueen had told Smokey (or vice versa) how Doc Hudson died. Could have used whatever reason given as motivation for making it back to the winners' circle, but it never materialized.

The final race and ending was a total disappointment. McQueen basically admits defeat by letting his trainer (???) finish the race for him and, ultimately, win? Really? This isn't tag-team wrestling here, Pixar. It was a bad move to end the movie this way and, if it is the last entry in the franchise, a very disappointing way to end the series.
7 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews

Recently Viewed