-Dave Seville
So I've been going through a nostalgia phase lately, and when it came to the Alvin and the Chipmunks part of my childhood I had a strange impulse to see the movie again, granted the animated movies were much better, but for some reason I wanted to give the live action ones another shot. Now, I haven't seen this movie in years. I thought it was okay when it came out, it felt like a good adaptation, much better than the other ones, so I was really surprised when I turned it on to find out how dated it felt. To put this into perspective, Alvin and the Chipmunks was released in 2007, that was nearly 10 years ago! Talk about a wake up call that made me feel old.
Well, what really surprised me was the CGI, and how wonky it looked compared to today's. I've been used to watching modern CGI that watching what it was like nearly a decade ago was kinda strange. It took a bit to get used to it, but I will admit that I'm really impressed in how well it held up. When you first see them you'll be like "wow" but you quickly get used to them. What amazed me even more was how much detail and effort was put into these chipmunks. I know that's what they were supposed to do, but I mean they have it down to individual fur hairs, to them actually behaving like animals, to the slight vibration of their cheeks and throats as they sing. Kudos to the animation team, because that's exactly what I like to see in a live action movie that has CGI characters.
As for the film itself, it wasn't as good as I remembered. Just noticing this poster (up above) I never realized that it's tag line was "The Original Entourage," that should have been a big warning. The biggest problem with this film was how much it tried to appeal to what was hot at the time. It's filled with pop songs, 2007 references, and things that did nothing to improve upon the film, except make it feel even older and out of place when you rewatch it. I also felt that it slowed down the pacing, that could be my imagination with all the product placement and updated songs that didn't need to be updated, but whatever.
By the middle of the film, it was starting to feel like a chore to get through. The story is something I've seen a bazillion times, Dave didn't need a love interest sub-plot, and for the love of God why does there need to be a villain in this movie?! First off, it's okay that this is a plot I've seen too many times to count, because at the end of the day this film was aimed at kids. You can clearly see that, and I thought it was well done enough that it wasn't patronizing kids. Secondly, I don't believe they nailed the Dave character. He's supposed to be the best all American dad, but instead they make him take back his ex-girlfriend while he's trying to learn to be a dad. I know where they were going with it, but the it was too much. Either make him be a great dad at the beginning who's boys are trying to search for a new love in their dad's life, or make him a single guy who needs to learn how to be a dad. With both of them mixed up, it just leaves the Dave character to be incoherent at times. Lastly, the chipmunks is one of the best properties that doesn't need a villain. All they need is a good old family conflict with mischievous antics.
Going through this whole movie again, I noticed something that isn't used a lot, and that's the fact that the chipmunks got so much more character development and attention than any of the live action roles, which is good. The one thing I hate about movies that take from a source, is changing those character, and to my delightful surprise, the chipmunks actually embodied what their characters were. The actual people on the other hand, seemed like they were either phoning it in, or looked bored. It looked like Jason Lee was trying, but he sounded so monotone, especially when yelling"ALVIIIIN!"
This is one of those films where I just have to wonder what the production of it was like. I feel like the studio intervened a lot, but at the same time they didn't. It's weird, because they nailed Alvin, Simon, and Theodore. Every time they were on screen I smiled because that's exactly what I grew up knowing. The voice actors did a superb job, and I wonder how they got those parts, because while they did sound different from the classic voices, they added their own flavor that is perfect. I mean, who would have thought that Jesse McCartney would be a great choice for Theodore, making his voice sound younger and cuter. The chipmunks were handled so well in the voice acting, animation, and dialogue, but I wish they just did the same for the rest of the film.
I am a little disappointed that it was only aimed toward kids, and probably younger kids more so, but at the heart I thought that this was an okay movie for kids. I didn't find anything bad about the film, and they kinda taught kids a lesson while making a fun adventure, but that's only half important for a kid's movie. The other half is engaging the adults, and I just don't think the adults would enjoy this a whole lot, especially if you have one of those kids that love to play the movie over and over. I can be technical and say that this film is bad, but I'm not the target audience, and I did find enjoyment whenever the chipmunks were on screen, so it's kinda hard to keep with my original thoughts on this being an okay movie, and then down grading it to bad. I'd say it's in the middle of those. If I had a kid, I'd say that this was an acceptable movie for them to watch. If I needed to entertain them for a few hours I'd definitely pop this in and let them take in the pretty colors. However, because there were animated shows and movies that are skies above in quality that came before this movie, I'd much rather people be watching those, because they give an overall enjoyable story that both kids and adults would find entertaining, especially the new show.
No comments:
Post a Comment