MovieChat Forums > Planes: Fire & Rescue (2014) Discussion > What did you fools expect? UP? The INCRE...

What did you fools expect? UP? The INCREDIBLES?


This wasnt trying to be a masterpiece in animation. This was going for a thrilling fun story for children. My son who is 2 1/2 loves the first CARS and PLANES. Took him to see this second one in the theater and it was leaps and bounds better than the first two put together. Animation-CG was crazy good. Voice acting and source music too. Critics and some reviewers act like this was going to be the next GODFATHER of kid toons. Did any of you watch the first PLANES?
Trust me, if your child likes the first one they will really dig this one. As well as you the parent. My child is too young to do the film in 3D but if you can you should. So many scenes I know would look outstanding in 3D.

reply

Exactly.

"Cars" was released EIGHT YEARS ago. It's well-known as Pixar's most dumbed-down, kid-oriented franchise. "Planes" was a quickie/cheapie, non-Pixar spinoff aimed at even younger kids, and "Planes: Fire and Rescue" is a quickie/cheapie sequel released just 11 months later. What were you expecting?

My kids are 3 1/2 and 5 and they love the Planes movies. This is a franchise for young kids. If you were expecting the artistry and narrative sophistication of "Brave" or "The Incredibles", that's on you.

Oh, it's not complex or thought-provoking enough for you, Mr. Adult? NOT EVERYTHING IS ABOUT YOU, YOU NARCISSISTIC TWIT! Imagine a dad who takes his four-year-old to to Disneyland, rides the Dumbo ride, and complains loudly that it's not as thrilling as Space Mountain. That's what you sound like.

reply

I watched both the planes films and fell asleep each time. I don't know why that keeps happening.

reply

You sure you're not typing about the ICE AGE flicks that some how keep getting shat out?

reply

Who are you guys yelling at?

reply

I am okay with the Cars franchise. I see it as harmless, mindless entertainment for little kids.

reply

There's nothing wrong in liking this. To each, his own. Tastes vary.....ya know that?

When the snows fall and the white winds blow, the lone wolf dies but the pack survives.

reply

True. There's nothing wrong with the movie, for that matter. It's a fine tribute to all fire and rescue workers and solidly entertaining, save perhaps for a couple weaker points here and there.

The grandeur of a Yellowstone-esque national park was captured majestically. I appreciated all the "mature" jokes that will fly--no pun intended--over children's heads (e.g., "I kicked Aston Martin," Boat Reynolds in "Best Little Boathouse in Texas," Harvey RV & Winnie Winnebago's adult joke, Dipper wanting a room for after Dusty's and her "second date," a plane on a dating site talking about how many "pounds of thrust" he has in a bonus animated short, etc.) Everything is a pun, parody, or allusion--Howard the Truck, CHoPS=CHiPS, the Grand Fusel Lodge, "Muir" written on the side of the train, etc.

Though it does seem illogical for vehicles to exist in a world seemingly devoid of humans, I was glad they addressed the matter of park wildlife (the "deer" are John Deere tractors, and little balsa-wood planes are birds! Ha.) You can tell they had a lot of fun making this. And one can only assume that the vehicles reproduce by building/manufacturing more of themselves.

Of the new characters, I most liked Windlifter the sullen Native American & Dipper, the lovably creepy overly-attached-girlfriend type.

Excellent voice talent in the form of Hal Holbrook, Fred Willard, Rene Auberjonois, Jerry Stiller, Patrick Warburton, Brad Garrett, John Ratzenberger, and others didn't go to waste. I found this to be a very cute film with the humor, cleverness, heart, and stupendous animation one expects from Disney. Good songs, too.

"Cars" itself may not be Pixar's best in most opinions, but I love it, and Pixar's "worst" is still danged great.

reply