CALIFICACIÓN DE IMDb
4.6/10
59 k
TU CALIFICACIÓN
El trío de ardillas cantantes de fama mundial vuelven para lidiar con las presiones de la escuela, la fama y un grupo de música femenina rival conocido como The Chipettes.El trío de ardillas cantantes de fama mundial vuelven para lidiar con las presiones de la escuela, la fama y un grupo de música femenina rival conocido como The Chipettes.El trío de ardillas cantantes de fama mundial vuelven para lidiar con las presiones de la escuela, la fama y un grupo de música femenina rival conocido como The Chipettes.
- Dirección
- Guionistas
- Elenco
- Premios
- 3 premios ganados en total
Justin Long
- Alvin
- (voz)
Amy Poehler
- Eleanor
- (voz)
Anna Faris
- Jeanette
- (voz)
Anjelah Johnson-Reyes
- Julie
- (as Anjelah Johnson)
Chris Warren
- Xander
- (as Chris Warren Jr.)
Opiniones destacadas
This film is about three chipmunks who has to put their singing career on hold to attend high school.
Even when I was typing the plot summary, I was already laughing out loud. What a ridiculous story! Can a sane person imagine chipmunks going to high school, and have all the schoolmates treat them like actual people? The plot is full of stupid and crazy clichés, in every imaginably contrived manner. And the voices of the chipmunks are so high pitched that they hurt my ears and annoy me so much. Even putting my enraged emotions aside, I often could not hear what the chipmunks say, which made me like the film even less. The quality of the animation is bad, production is bad, and acting is bad. Everything is uniformly bad. I can't believe how awful this film is, even taken into account that this is a children's film!
Even when I was typing the plot summary, I was already laughing out loud. What a ridiculous story! Can a sane person imagine chipmunks going to high school, and have all the schoolmates treat them like actual people? The plot is full of stupid and crazy clichés, in every imaginably contrived manner. And the voices of the chipmunks are so high pitched that they hurt my ears and annoy me so much. Even putting my enraged emotions aside, I often could not hear what the chipmunks say, which made me like the film even less. The quality of the animation is bad, production is bad, and acting is bad. Everything is uniformly bad. I can't believe how awful this film is, even taken into account that this is a children's film!
After all the negative reviews I read, I went in with pretty low expectations. Perhaps that's why I ended up giving up a 7.
Look, this is not Hamlet, Citizen Kane or Duck Soup. This is a PG film that as close to being family friendly than I have seen. I can only imagine the PG rating was due to the fact that the chipettes were darn right sexy - I didn't hear any vulgarity, see any nudity, violence or adult situations.
It is really getting hard to find a film where I can take my 9 year old daughter to. With battling giant robots, vampires, and giant smurfs lurking in 3D, this movie was a relief to see.
The plot is paper thin - though in its defense it did have an ethical base of family, friendship, and responsibility.
The effects were top notch, and there were a few times I even laughed (which was a few more times than I expected).
In one word it was - 'Cute' - which is exactly what I think it sought out to be. Nothing more.. Nothing less. Harmless fluff.
My 9 year old enjoyed it. And at the end of the day, that's all that mattered to me.
This is a film for children. Taken on it's level, I give it a 7. if you want to rate it as art or entertainment for adults? Yeah, mebbe a 2 or 3. But you know what? Some kids were clapping at parts in the theater. To me, that was pretty cool knowing that a film can get kids in a theater clapping for the characters on the screen.
So relax. chill.. bring your little ones... and enjoy...
Look, this is not Hamlet, Citizen Kane or Duck Soup. This is a PG film that as close to being family friendly than I have seen. I can only imagine the PG rating was due to the fact that the chipettes were darn right sexy - I didn't hear any vulgarity, see any nudity, violence or adult situations.
It is really getting hard to find a film where I can take my 9 year old daughter to. With battling giant robots, vampires, and giant smurfs lurking in 3D, this movie was a relief to see.
The plot is paper thin - though in its defense it did have an ethical base of family, friendship, and responsibility.
The effects were top notch, and there were a few times I even laughed (which was a few more times than I expected).
In one word it was - 'Cute' - which is exactly what I think it sought out to be. Nothing more.. Nothing less. Harmless fluff.
My 9 year old enjoyed it. And at the end of the day, that's all that mattered to me.
This is a film for children. Taken on it's level, I give it a 7. if you want to rate it as art or entertainment for adults? Yeah, mebbe a 2 or 3. But you know what? Some kids were clapping at parts in the theater. To me, that was pretty cool knowing that a film can get kids in a theater clapping for the characters on the screen.
So relax. chill.. bring your little ones... and enjoy...
I asked my 11 year old and 7 year old daughters what they thought of this film. They both loved it.
The 3 on IMDb is a bit misleading. This is a film for children, not a campaign to win an Academy Award! Obviously there are people out there who take things a little toooooo seriously when rating kid's movies.
My 11 year old daughter writes the following: the movie was great. i love the sounds of those little voices. why are kids films usually getting a 2,3,4? the film the music, adventure,scenes were all entertaining for me.
Remember folks, this is a film for children, the chipmunks have been around for more than 30 years so they must be doing something right. If you want to over analyze a film then do a search on the French new age section and go your hardest, on the other hand if you are looking for pure entertainment for your under 12's then go no further.
The 3 on IMDb is a bit misleading. This is a film for children, not a campaign to win an Academy Award! Obviously there are people out there who take things a little toooooo seriously when rating kid's movies.
My 11 year old daughter writes the following: the movie was great. i love the sounds of those little voices. why are kids films usually getting a 2,3,4? the film the music, adventure,scenes were all entertaining for me.
Remember folks, this is a film for children, the chipmunks have been around for more than 30 years so they must be doing something right. If you want to over analyze a film then do a search on the French new age section and go your hardest, on the other hand if you are looking for pure entertainment for your under 12's then go no further.
Let's face it: "The Chipmunks" is a pretty thin premise. Once you get past the novelty of squeaky voiced animated rodents, there's really not much there. So this movie's straight-line, A to B to C story is a serious drawback.
Director Betty Thomas doesn't get a whole lot out of the cast (although, to be honest, I don't expect much in the way of high-caliber acting in movies like this), and the whole thing has a bit of a TV-movie feel, but the animation is rather good, and the film moves moves along at a pretty good clip, so even adults won't get too bored.
Certainly, for some reviewers, a film like this, in the final analysis, is perfectly acceptable, since it's "for kids," and thus the only thing that counts is whether it's "entertaining" on some basic level, regardless of its actual quality. That's a pretty common attitude toward kids' films, and one that really sells children short, as if they have no interest in character or story. They do, just like anyone else, albeit on a less sophisticated level than (most) adults. For example, I know that a lot of reviewers hated "Hotel for Dogs" but that film had an engaging story, well-drawn characters and a story that, while ultimately predictable, still held a few twists and turns. It wasn't particularly good, but it was better than this film.
Director Betty Thomas doesn't get a whole lot out of the cast (although, to be honest, I don't expect much in the way of high-caliber acting in movies like this), and the whole thing has a bit of a TV-movie feel, but the animation is rather good, and the film moves moves along at a pretty good clip, so even adults won't get too bored.
Certainly, for some reviewers, a film like this, in the final analysis, is perfectly acceptable, since it's "for kids," and thus the only thing that counts is whether it's "entertaining" on some basic level, regardless of its actual quality. That's a pretty common attitude toward kids' films, and one that really sells children short, as if they have no interest in character or story. They do, just like anyone else, albeit on a less sophisticated level than (most) adults. For example, I know that a lot of reviewers hated "Hotel for Dogs" but that film had an engaging story, well-drawn characters and a story that, while ultimately predictable, still held a few twists and turns. It wasn't particularly good, but it was better than this film.
You know this still works for the little ones, but will appall a lot older viewers, than say the first one did. It's basically more of the same, even with the addition of some Chipmunks "rivals" (another group of talking ...). The little ones won't mind (I watched it with my nephew and he enjoyed it), but what about the parents? There are other movies that can please both.
Still not really that bad, you can watch this in its own right or at least put the kids there and let them enjoy it. It's like the Chipmunks won't grow up (literally and physically that is), but again it's only us grown-ups that will think about things like that.
Still not really that bad, you can watch this in its own right or at least put the kids there and let them enjoy it. It's like the Chipmunks won't grow up (literally and physically that is), but again it's only us grown-ups that will think about things like that.
¿Sabías que…?
- TriviaJason Lee was meant to have a larger role in this film, but his screen time was rewritten shorter than planned due to scheduling conflicts with Mi nombre es Earl (2005). Most of his scenes were filled in with Zachary Levi's character, Toby Seville.
- Errores(at around 58 mins) At the sing-off, when the Chipettes are singing, Ian uses his phone to make a video. He says "If you like what you see, call Ian Hawke...." however, when the video is seen on a website by some record executives, Ian says "If you're interested..."
- Créditos curiososAfter the very last credit scrolls off the top of the screen, there is one more little scene.
- Versiones alternativasWhen the movie is aired on Freeform in, Ian Hawke's phone number is muted (which is odd, since the number doesn't exist in the first place) and references to "The Donald" (as in Trump) are removed entirely.
- ConexionesFeatured in Trailer Failure: Legion, Transylmania, Avatar & The Squeakquel (2009)
- Bandas sonorasYou Really Got Me
Written by Ray Davies
Featuring Honor Society
Honor Society performs courtesy of Jonas Records/Hollywood Records
Selecciones populares
Inicia sesión para calificar y agrega a la lista de videos para obtener recomendaciones personalizadas
Detalles
- Fecha de lanzamiento
- País de origen
- Sitios oficiales
- Idiomas
- También se conoce como
- Alvin y las ardillas 2
- Locaciones de filmación
- Productoras
- Ver más créditos de la compañía en IMDbPro
Taquilla
- Presupuesto
- USD 75,000,000 (estimado)
- Total en EE. UU. y Canadá
- USD 219,614,612
- Fin de semana de estreno en EE. UU. y Canadá
- USD 48,875,415
- 27 dic 2009
- Total a nivel mundial
- USD 443,140,005
Contribuir a esta página
Sugiere una edición o agrega el contenido que falta