Welcome to the Rofling Officer Productions blog, where you will mainly find extremely cynical reviews by a British Stereotype (usually with my good friend, John Smith). These reviews will most often be of games and films, but also have a few little projects.



Saturday, 23 April 2011

Alvin and the Chipmunks: The Squeakquel

The first time I watched this film a strange thought came into my head. I thought that the writers of this pile of shit had put more effort into explaining the word "squeakquel" than they did trying to write a good film.

The first Alvin and the Chipmunks was bad, very bad, so bad it made me want to emigrate to North Korea to get away from it, but it was still bearable, in a strange, "so bad it's interesting" kind of way. What I hated the most was the ending, which pissed me the fuck off. So Ian (the Chipmunks' manager) turns so generically evil that he probably schedueled drinks with the Joker and Lex Luther the next night, locks away the chipmunks in a cat carrier, and starts to drive them away.

Then it turns out the chipmunks escaped and go back with their owner Dave, away from the life of show business.

First question: HOW THE FUCK DID THEY ESCAPE!? Simon says later on: "We're talking chipmunks Dave, we know how to get out of a cat carrier..." in such a smug, arrogant voice I want to rip out his vocal chords so he can't beg for mercy while step on him. So how does being able to talk mean you can get out of a cage?! That's like saying: "Ha ha! You fool! You cannot fire me into the sun, for I can turn invisible!" HOW IS IT ANY HELP?! And some people might say they gnawed through the bars, but when Ian "Adolf" Idiot checks on them, the bars are intact and they've replaced themselves with toy chipmunks. HOW THE FUCK DID THEY ESCAPE!?

Second question: The Chipmunks must have signed a contract right? Well, after their escape so miraculous it would have put Jesus out of his day job, why didn't Ian McStalin just go to the Chipmunks, show the contract and say "Right then, get in the car."

To summarise how I felt about the first film, I started off liking it. I'm not ashamed to admit I laughed quite a few times and enjoyed the film for about 20 minutes. And then we came to when they first started to become popular. The film lost all charm and became so unfunny so quickly it could rival an old man continuously shooting "poo" in a waiting room. The Chipmunks annoyingly went from Pop singers, to Rock singers, and then to chavvy rap singers all within the space of half an hour. By the end, I was glad I was landing in Dubai (I saw the film on a plane).

And now we come to the second one. To say I liked this film would be able to rival the Bible in the "Great Lies Awards". Watching the film was like gargling nails, both the metal kind and the finger kind. They went from one over-used, useless plot point to another, with the fluency of a malfunctioning rollercoaster. Ian Hawke is the bad guy AGAIN? Sure, whatever, I'm sure our idiot audience don't want anything original. We need an actual plot for this film? Hmmm, how about we just re-use the plot from the previous film but with girl chipmunks instead?

The film opens with the Chipmunks... at a concert, even though in the last film they said they didn't want to be in show business and wanted a normal childhood, you know, because they abandoned Ian. After a gratuitous slapstick scene that's taken straight out of Horton Hears a Who, Dave is injured, and the Chipmunks live with a guy who is constantly trying to be made out to be a bad guy taking care of the Chipmunks. From what I saw, he was doing a good enough job, taking them to school when they didn't want to, letting them in his bed when they have nightmares, but that all changes... BECAUSE HE FARTS WHEN THEODORE'S IN BED WITH HIM.

1 comment:

  1. I love the movie character here. So naive picture editing it seems for me lovely post.