Page 2 of 2
Posted: Fri Jul 29, 2011 7:09 pm
by David S.
To really go back to the "classic" Chipmunks, you have to go back to their original SIXTIES albums and cartoons:
<iframe width="480" height="390" src="
http://www.youtube.com/embed/cG_JLQPHBu0" frameborder="0"></iframe>
I agree that I prefer both the original 60's cartoons, and the 80's cartoons over the live action/CGI reboots.
However, I actually enjoyed the new movies to an extent, being a Chipmunks fan. I certainly didn't hate them.
I wonder if the reason they are hated so much by *some* here is because one of them did really good business against a DAC? (I think Princess and the Frog). Personally, I prefer Princess (and pretty much all DACs) over the Chipmunk reboots, but I prefer the Chipmunks over, say, WALL-E, because at least they didn't make me think of depressing ideas like a "post-apocolyptic", run-down, Earth.
They are just cute, fun, escapist movies about talking and singing Chipmunks. They aren't intended to be "Citizen Kane"!
Posted: Fri Jul 29, 2011 8:56 pm
by Disney's Divinity
The reason I didn't like the first film was because it wasn't fun or entertaining to me--it was awful. It was nothing like the show I grew up with, and it wasn't even good in its own right. I can only assume the sequels are even worse.
Posted: Fri Jul 29, 2011 8:59 pm
by ajmrowland
^You cant expect it really to be identical to the show you grew up with. Nothing wrong with doing new renditions of old songs, it's just that you got no nostalgia.
I mildy enjoyed the new movies, but I'm in no rush to buy them and the newest trailer was just insulting.
Posted: Fri Jul 29, 2011 9:25 pm
by Mason_Ireton
Well today I my fiancee informed me bout this new trailer I was like "ok I'll check it out" after watchin this preview, seems like The Munks are bein turned from curious, semi educated 'Munks to money makers, I heard that Ross B. Jr and Janice K. tried suein 20th Fox for not reconzigin Alvin/Chipmunks as an actual singing group.
Course there could some potenial for this sequel, idk, but Simon did say it best for those who aren't total munk fans "I"m goin to puke" also they're stranded on a deserted island yet the boys are wearin sweatshirts instead of T. shirts, hopefuly it was just for publicity.
What's the song that Alvin sing to the crowd and the song the girls sing on the island??
Posted: Fri Jul 29, 2011 11:32 pm
by Disney's Divinity
ajmrowland wrote:^You cant expect it really to be identical to the show you grew up with. Nothing wrong with doing new renditions of old songs, it's just that you got no nostalgia.
Which is why I said:
it wasn't even good in its own right
Even when not in comparison to the nostalgia-inducing original series, I found it awful and the only thing they manage to sell themselves on is the franchise their borrowing their name from. Just like The Smurfs, Garfield, and every other horrendously lazy cash-in.
Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2011 12:24 am
by Rose Dome
OH NO THEY'RE NOT!
Why make a third when the first one was rubbish?
OF COURSE!!!
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
How much lower can Cinema stoop?
Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2011 1:50 am
by ajmrowland
^Dunno. Let me ask Son of Kong.
Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2011 3:11 am
by David S.
^Or the typical raunchy gross-out sex "comedy".
Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2011 4:28 am
by Rose Dome
Disney's Divinity wrote:Even when not in comparison to the nostalgia-inducing original series, I found it awful and the only thing they manage to sell themselves on is the franchise their borrowing their name from. Just like The Smurfs, Garfield, and every other horrendously lazy cash-in.
By the way, I see what you mean about
Son of Kong, and the sex comedies,
ajmrowland and
David S. They are cinematic lows as well.
Posted: Fri Oct 14, 2011 9:36 pm
by Sotiris
Posted: Sat Oct 15, 2011 6:51 am
by TheValentineBros
God, I wish I was dead.
It's all about money, huh, Fox.
Posted: Sat Oct 15, 2011 7:41 am
by Dr Frankenollie
-
Posted: Mon Oct 17, 2011 3:49 pm
by PixarFan2006
Faceslam overload.