Cagefighterkip
Mr. Golightly
- Joined
- Dec 6, 2007
- Messages
- 4,741
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 33
Garfield was awful. does any1 care about a fat cat who loves lasagna anymore?
Garfield was awful. does any1 care about a fat cat who loves lasagna anymore?
You mean him?
![]()
http://themovieboy.com/directlinks/07alvinandthechipmunks.htm
This review says the movie actually gets pretty dark towards the middle.
Then why make a movieI'm not sure why people expect it to be good when the damn subject matter was never that good. It was funny and clever at times, but it was just spun-off of a 1950's music gimmick.
Then why make a movieEven more importantly, why waste your money and time watching it
![]()
Jeez, was it really that good? The way you guys are describing it makes it sound like an Oscar-caliber movie.
Jeez, was it really that good? The way you guys are describing it makes it sound like an Oscar-caliber movie.
If you're a child of the 80's or earlier, you know the Chipmunks. If you were born past their peak, you more than likely don't care. They were a cutesy gimmick, but every guy knows he watched the show on Saturday. You either related to Alvin, Simon or Theodore in some way.
why did theodore get more screentime than alvin
just curious though
why did theodore get more screentime than alvin
He is the heart of the group. Simon is the brains, Alvin is the leader, but Theodore is the heart. And being as this movie was sort of their origin, he had to be the one who really reached out and got to Dave. The one who made them the family. Alvin just doesn't fit in that role.
But over all, the only two prominent, Theodore only scenes I can think of are the ones with him having nightmares. I think the director and writer did a REALLY good job of juggling all three