- Share this article on Facebook
- Share this article on Twitter
- Share this article on Email
- Show additional share options
- Share this article on Print
- Share this article on Comment
- Share this article on Whatsapp
- Share this article on Linkedin
- Share this article on Reddit
- Share this article on Pinit
- Share this article on Tumblr
Mike Mitchell‘s Alvin and the Chilpmonks: Chip-Wrecked hit theaters Dec. 16, making just $6.8 million on Friday from 3,723 theaters (comparitively, the original Alvin and the Chipmunks earned $13.3 million on the same Friday in 2007).
Here’s what critics are saying about the 3D GGI/live-action hybrid, which is expected to gross $24 million to $25 million for the weekend.
The Hollywood Reporter‘s Michael Rechtshaffen says, “If the true gauge of a worthy sequel is consistency, then it would be fair to say that “Alvin and the Chipmunks: Chipwrecked is every bit as frantic, frenetic, groan-inducing and all around grating as its two predecessors From the p.o.v. of its targeted young audiences (it’s G-rated, as opposed to those prior PG ratings) it should handily do the trick at the holiday box office, although it still would have been nice if they could have made a slight effort to instill the Ross Bagdasarian Sr. characters with a modicum of charm and inventiveness.”
“Every parent sacrifices: hours logged at cold skating rinks, wet soccer fields, airless American Girl stores,” writes Time magazine’s reviewer. “And that’s the stuff that comes after toilet training. Then there are the movies targeted at children too young to drop off with someone yet too old to lie to about the existence of movie theaters. Those must also be endured. A shining example of one is Alvin and the Chipmunks: Chip-Wrecked, in which the ever-chipper rodent musical act is carried off a cruise ship by a kite and end up marooned on a tropical island.
Cinema Blend gets right to the point, saying, “Alvin And The Chipmunks: Chip-Wrecked isn’t a very good movie. It’s disposable, overly-reliant on stupid cover songs and extremely formulaic. There’s no real emotion, real punch or real purpose for existing. It’s just kind of there, which in a way, is both the whole point and the reason why Chip-Wrecked is ultimately successful. Ten years from now, we’ll remember this as the one where the chipmunks got stranded on an island, and we’ll mistakenly think it was okay even though it kind of sucks. That’s how our brains work, and that’s why this movie will later get more credit retrospectively than it deserves.”
“I’m sorry, is this really necessary? Let’s be honest. Either you’re eagerly anticipating Chipwrecked, the third installment in the lucrative Alvin and the Chipmunks series, or you’ve opted to avoid these films like the plague,” says The Washington Post‘s Sean O’Connell. Nothing in this review will persuade a non-fan to unleash his or her inner ‘munk, and no opinion put forth could possibly dissuade the substantial “Alvin” audience – and I do mean substantial – from handing over hard-earned cash to learn which dated Lady Gaga hits the singing rodents cover next.
The New York Times‘ reviewer calls the film “harmless fun,” but also notes, “There is chipmunk gambling. There is seductive dancing by Chipettes wearing only towels. There is a musical gag involving the lyric “whip my tail back and forth.” How Alvin and the Chipmunks: Chipwrecked ended up with only a G rating is a mystery.”
Sign up for THR news straight to your inbox every day