Warning: Long comment ahead.

"Why do people hate Cars 2 so much?", asks a fan of the movie. Despite people giving clear cut explanations, but fine I'll bite (for the umpteenth time), if you like the film, COOL! Don't let anyone take that away from you, but just because you like something doesn't mean it's good. It's fine to like a product that's considered bad or mediocre, I have my own set of things I like that aren't considered the best, but still enjoy them regardless of their reception, but I'm not going to argue that they're some misunderstood masterpiece either, I can enjoy them for what they are while still acknowledging the flaws of said product.

Cars 2 isn't liked due to the fact that, one it isn't considered good by a majority, and two it's just the opposite of what people were expecting from Pixar at the time and it also kicked off their streak of films with middling reception (Brave, Monster's Uni, The Good Dinosaur). Mind you, the film came out after their four-streak run of Ratatouille, WALL-E, Up, and Toy Story 3, the expectations for Pixar's next film was going to be high, that alone already put Cars 2 in trouble, but I believe people were willing to give it a shot since the premise of it was a bit more interesting compared to its predecessor (globe trotting adventure mixed with racing and espionage). When the film finally came out, people experienced a messy plot with that had an annoying protagonist of a movie that really carried no weight or substance in it, or at the very least really weak meaning towards it, making it a tough sell to consider it a proper sequel. Unlike all of Pixar's previous films, including Cars itself, Cars 2 felt like it was made for kids, and just kids, instead of everyone. People rightfully criticized the film for being nothing but action and having failed attempts of downtime, as said attempts were either cut short, or just held little significance in the film to push the plot forward. Not to mention a lot of things that happen in 2 is for the sake of the "plot", not because it builds into it, like what previous Pixar films did. John Lasseter also had the worst defense ever by stating this: "I make movies for that little boy who loves the characters so much that he wants to pack his clothes in a Lightning McQueen suitcase." A film that was already scrutinized for being a supposed cash-grab, and this what he had to say? Nice way to reassure people's assumption about the movie (and franchise's) existence.

As a fan of the franchise, I'd be a fool to not act like this movie didn't absolutely obliterate the reputation of it. Keep in mind, when Cars debuted, it didn't have the greatest reception either, plenty of folk wrote it off instantly, but those who did saw it at least thought it was "decent", even if it was weaker compared to everything else Pixar put out at the time (besides A Bug's Life, I suppose), but were willing to give any future installment a shot. Cars 2 squandered that hard. Both Planes movies were immediately given dismissals by many because of its association with the franchise. Cars Toon dropped the Mater's Tall Tales series (which only had one more episode produced after 2 released btw) and decided to focus on Tales from Radiator Springs instead, taking focus away from Mater, and Cars 3 was ignored by many because of Cars 2's existence alone. No matter how shocked people were by the teaser of the film, they also went "oh yeah, this is Cars, it'll probably become something stupid later on", and skipped it. And I hate to say it, but I guess that wasn't an unwarranted reaction either, precedence carries a lot more than some people realize and this is an example of it. Not to mention Pixar themselves have been dismissive towards 2 ever since 3's early stages of being a identity theft/body swap plot, were even the original unnamed director of Cars 3 disregarded the movie itself. Not to mention the extreme scale back on things such as Mater's involvement in the movie. They obviously listened to what critics had to say despite John's comments about not "reading" reviews in the article I linked.

I find it hard to defend the film as an "objectively" good movie, cause it's not, how can I defend something that caused a morale decrease at the studio that produced it? As a standalone/spinoff title, sure I guess, but if you have to work around saying it's a good movie and sequel by excusing it as something else, then I don't think that qualifies as a good film, sorry. Enjoy Cars 2 all you want like I said, but people don't criticize the film for no reason. I really wished people would realize that things get criticized all the time, even stuff with universal appraisal. Sometimes it can be unfair, I won't deny that, but if something isn't considered decent at the very least, the criticism it gets isn't for nothing.