Talk:Cars 2

Cast Problem

Does anyone else think that, due to his overall prominence in the film that in the cast list, Larry the Cable Guy should be ahead of Owen Wilson. He certainly has much more screen time and is the focus of the film. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.30.236.15 (talk) 12:24, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

POV pushing?

One thing that really concerns me is the last line of the introduction section which reads "This is Pixar's lowest reveiwed movie to date" While this is technically true, there is no reason for it to be in the introduction section of the article. Most other movies do not have this in there opening section and it seems like a thinly veiled way of saying "Cars 2 sucks". Deathawk (talk) 23:06, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Usually, items of notability go into the lead paragraph. Up until Cars, Pixar films have always been able to count on very positive reviews. But apparently the critics, who already didn't really like Cars that much (but enough liked it somewhat and kept things generally positive), hated more of the same, so they drubbed Cars 2. Since it's the first "critical failure" for the studio, it does have some notability. --McDoobAU93 03:11, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

To add onto McDoob, there have been many articles and editorials noting that very fact and reviews take note of it as well. BOVINEBOY2008 03:45, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Release section

Hey everyone, I noticed the release section is a little light. In an effort to bring the article up to Film MOS standards, I drafted a new version of the release section which can be found here. Much of the focus is on the home media release, but I also added in information about the El Capitan world premiere. Any feedback is welcome. Thanks. --TravisBernard (talk) 13:15, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Honestly, it seems to me like there's a bit too much detail. I get lost in the long lists of "2-disc Blu-ray", "1-disc Digital Copy", etc. Maybe it could be written in such a way that the flow isn't broken up by all those long parentheticals. I would also just link "digital copy" instead of explaining it there. Actually, maybe it would be as simple as just not listing how many of each disc there are. For example:

a 5-disc combo pack (Blu-ray, Blu-ray 3D, DVD, and Digital Copy);

reads much easier to me than:

a 5-disc combo pack (2-disc Blu-ray, 1-disc Blu-ray 3D, 1-disc DVD, and 1-disc Digital Copy);

I would also probably reword some of the bonus features a bit, rather than just name how they appear on the box (which is marketing-ese, not necessary appropriate for an encyclopedia). For example: The Toy Story short is usually referred to as just "Hawaiian Vacation" (and it should be italicized), so I would probably write "the short Hawaiian Vacation" or "the Toy Story short Hawaiian Vacation".

That's my $0.02 for now, anyway. --Fru1tbat (talk) 16:43, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback. I updated some parts of the draft, so if you have a chance, could you give it another look? I removed some of the excessive information from the intro home media paragraph. I decided to leave the long lists, because I think it's more clear. I worked heavily on the Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides article, and most editors agreed that this format was better. With regards to the bonus features, I think I might need to remove some of the bonus features so that only the most important features are included. The tricky part is deciding which ones are the most significant. Maybe I'll take your suggestion here and shorten the bonus features to, let's say "the Toy Story short Hawaiian Vacation" and a few others. I'm still trying to make a decision on this part, so any input would be greatly appreciated. Thanks again for the help. --TravisBernard (talk) 16:10, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

I did some additional rewording to the draft, and i think it's good to go now. I'll implement the update within the next hour. Thanks. --TravisBernard (talk) 15:58, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

I think we could maybe trim down some of the release section, but I still think most of the information is important to include. What parts specifically do users think we should cut? --TravisBernard (talk) 20:43, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

I re-read the section and I think it can do without the disc numbers in parenthesis. I think it greatly enhances the flow, so I made the edit. --TravisBernard (talk) 20:47, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

I think almost everything should go :) Listing all disc combinations reads as a shopping guide. There are too many of them, and more will still come, with new film packs, anniversaries.. And having so detailed disc information is not common on films' pages. Beside that it is really hard to read, and only one reference with the press release would suffice. I would just write that the film was released on this and that media, and with what shorts it was accompanied. --Carniolus (talk) 08:46, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

What if we left the first paragraph in the home media section, and shortened the second paragraph to include just a list of the extras, but not which extras are included with each individual package? --TravisBernard (talk) 12:53, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, that would be a progress :) And only one ref at the end of the paragraph would be more than enough. The best would be the one which cites the original press release in its entirety. Like this one: http://www.toonzone.net/news/articles/38561/pr-cars-2-to-blu-ray-combo-pack-blu-ray-3d-dvd-amp-download-on-november-1-2011 --Carniolus (talk) 14:00, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

I shortened the reference list. I kept the Cinema Blend reference because it includes the press release. I think it looks much better now. Thanks. --TravisBernard (talk) 20:21, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Should we include this?

Just recently, John Lasseter made a response to the negative reviews of the films. Not sure if it would be worth mentioning in the article, but...

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/18/movies/john-lasseter-of-pixar-defends-cars-2.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1

He also made this response shortly after the initial release while he was at the film's premiere in Paris: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xl7Y9bC4rnY

--I'm a Graduate! (talk) 22:14, 17 November 2011 (UTC)Chris

I believe specific quotes from Mr. Lasseter would be usable in the article, in the "Reception" section. There are some good ones, including one where he denies that Disney forced Pixar into doing Cars 2 in order to sell more toys. --McDoobAU93 22:52, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

I also support the use of Lasseter's quotes throughout the article, especially with regards to the "Reception" section. Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 21:59, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

I've added this information to the Reception section. Cutecutecuteface2000 (talk) 23:01, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Good article

Does anyone have suggestions for how to get this page up to good article status. I think it's in pretty good shape right now, but I'm looking for ideas to improve it. Any suggestions would be helpful. --TravisBernard (talk) 22:29, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

John Lassetire is not in the movie.

I watched the movie and he's not in the movie. Can you please tell me where he is in the movie? 66.82.9.74 (talk) 06:54, 26 December 2011 (UTC)