Dave (Jason Lee) plays piano as the chipmunks dance on bongos beside him
Film review

Alvin and the Chipmunks

2007 · Directed by Tim Hill · 1h 32m · NMHH 18

In a sentenceThe chipmunks get the songs; the humans get to look tired

Alvin (voiced by Justin Long), Simon (voiced by Matthew Gray Gubler) and Theodore (voiced by Jesse McCartney) are three chipmunks with high-pitched singing voices and a habit of causing mischief. Their human company includes Dave (Jason Lee), Ian (David Cross) and Claire (Cameron Richardson). Musical performances and physical comedy accompany a story about commercialism and personal relationships, with a romantic subplot running alongside the chipmunks’ antics. The three animals appear through computer animation, sharing the screen with the live-action cast as songs and comic disruption bring the two groups together.

Fi1m review

Tim Hill’s family comedy has agreeable physical mischief and persuasive computer animation, but its squeaky voices and thin story soon wear it out. A few laughs are a poor return for 92 minutes.

Alvin and the Chipmunks is a thin, tiring family comedy whose occasional charm does not justify 92 minutes. Tim Hill has three mischievous singing animals and a cast of human beings to put up with them, which ought to be enough for some decent knockabout. There are brief pleasures in the physical comedy. But the screenplay by Jon Vitti, Chris Viscardi and Will McRobb never gives the antics enough shape to sustain a feature.

The computer-generated animals sit convincingly beside the live-action cast, and their physical clowning supplies most of the amusement. Some of it is simply cute, which is a perfectly respectable achievement in a family film. The director also resists the urge to keep reassuring adults that he knows how silly this is. That lack of knowing irony is welcome, though it puts more pressure on the jokes to work without an accompanying wink.

The sound is harder to forgive. Justin Long voices Alvin, Matthew Gray Gubler voices Simon and Jesse McCartney voices Theodore, but the electronic processing makes their singing wearyingly shrill. We were worn out by the high-pitched harmonies; even when the voices blend neatly, the squeak remains the main thing we hear. Christopher Lennertz’s score struggles to make much of an impression around them. The musical numbers have some bounce, but the songs are forgettable, and their energy does not make up for the shortage of good dialogue.

Peter Lyons Collister’s static compositions give the actors little help, leaving them to share frames with animated performers who command attention by making more noise. Tim Hill rarely turns that awkward arrangement into a visual joke. Richard Holland’s production design is serviceable, but there is little pleasure in studying the surroundings while the chipmunks perform. The physical effects are persuasive enough that the lack of invention in the staging becomes more noticeable.

Jason Lee plays Dave, David Cross plays Ian and Cameron Richardson plays Claire, and none is given enough rewarding comic business. The human scenes feel dutiful, with performers required to keep the comedy going when the writing has offered them little to play. The romantic subplot is especially thin. It occupies time without giving us much reason to care about the relationship, and makes the already slight story feel more stretched.

Peter E. Berger’s editing cannot solve the basic problem that there is too little story between the comic business and the songs. The screenplay’s lesson about commercialism adds another familiar obligation without giving the characters much to discuss. It is all easy to follow, but that is a modest return for such mechanical plotting. The film keeps moving through its allotted 92 minutes, and still manages to feel long.

A family comedy need not be sophisticated, and there is nothing wrong with finding small, mischievous animals funny. We do expect it to find fresh ways for them to cause trouble, and to remember that adults are watching too. Younger viewers may be satisfied by the singing alone. For a shared evening, we would choose something with more jokes.

Critical consensus AI synthesised

42
Positive
0
Mixed
4
Negative
3

The reviews lean towards disappointment, with none offering a clearly positive verdict. Most critics find Alvin and the Chipmunks thin or bland, though several allow that its cuteness and physical comedy provide occasional amusement, particularly for children. Praise is scattered rather than concentrated on any performance: the effects earn some approval, as does the absence of knowing irony. The more forgiving assessments treat it as inoffensive entertainment whose small pleasures cannot sustain a feature.

Reservations centre on the slight, familiar story, with complaints about static compositions and an underwritten romantic subplot. The music divides opinion: Empire enjoys the musical numbers, while Eye for Film finds the songs forgettable. The squeaky voices are a sharper obstacle for some, especially The Guardian, which also condemns the dialogue. The spread runs from qualified tolerance to outright hostility, with little evidence of enthusiasm even among the less severe reviews.

Screen Daily
13 December 2007 · Brent Simon
64*

The visible excerpt emphasizes the chipmunks’ long-standing appeal but does not reveal the critic’s overall verdict. It singles out their high-pitched harmonies and mischievous antics as defining features.

Read the full review →
Slant Magazine
9 December 2007 · ★★/4 · Ed Gonzalez
50

Gonzalez finds the film humdrum but intermittently cute, and says it feels surprisingly sophisticated after The Golden Compass. He praises its occasional cuteness but criticizes the static compositions and the strain they place on the human actors.

Read the full review →
The AV Club
13 December 2007 · C- · Keith Phipps
50

Phipps finds the film inoffensive but too thin to sustain a feature. He praises its freedom from the post-Shrek irony common in children’s films, while faulting the manic Chipmunks for wearing out their welcome.

Read the full review →
Time Out
17 December 2007 · ★★ · Anna Smith
40

The two-star rating indicates a negative verdict. The page description singles out the familiar, irritating squeaky voices.

Read the full review →
Empire
4 July 2007 · Anna Smith
35*

Smith finds the film intermittently amusing for children but ultimately overlong and underplotted. She praises the chipmunks’ musical numbers and cute physical comedy, while criticizing the familiar story and its bland sermon about commercialism.

Read the full review →
The Guardian
21 December 2007 · Peter Bradshaw
10*

Bradshaw gives the film a scathing verdict, calling it thoroughly brain-dead. He especially condemns the chipmunks’ electronic voices and dismal lines.

Read the full review →

Straight answers AI written, from our review

Is Alvin and the Chipmunks worth watching?
Alvin and the Chipmunks offers a little physical comedy for younger viewers, but we find it too thin and tiring to recommend for a shared family evening; we score it 43/100. The computer animation is persuasive and the mischief occasionally charming, but the shrill singing, forgettable songs and underwritten human scenes make 92 minutes feel long.
How long is Alvin and the Chipmunks, and what is it rated?
Alvin and the Chipmunks runs 1h 32m and is rated 18 by the NMHH in Hungary. It is a comedy and family film.
Where can I watch Alvin and the Chipmunks in Hungary?
Alvin and the Chipmunks is available to rent from Apple TV from Ft 799. Availability is checked daily; the links above go straight to each service.
How does Alvin and the Chipmunks compare to Stuart Little?
Alvin and the Chipmunks is the weaker family choice beside Stuart Little, which gives its small creature and human company more care. We prefer the appealing mouse and funny cat to the chipmunks’ wearying musical antics, though Stuart Little also has bland human scenes and too much reassurance. It is the better option for a shared evening.
What should I watch after Alvin and the Chipmunks?
After Alvin and the Chipmunks, try Stuart Little (1999, Fi1m 66): Another small creature among humans, with more care for both. Then Babe (1995, Fi1m 88): Animal comedy that gives its human characters something worth doing; and Ernest & Celestine (2012, Fi1m 84): Gentler animation, warmer company and rather less strain on the ears.

Cast

Awards

Kids' Choice Award for Favorite Movie, 2008

Won
Kids' Choice Award for Favorite Movie

If you liked this, try…

  1. Stuart Little (1999, Fi1m 66)Another small creature among humans, with more care for both.

  2. Babe (1995, Fi1m 88)Animal comedy that gives its human characters something worth doing.

  3. Ernest & Celestine (2012, Fi1m 84)Gentler animation, warmer company and rather less strain on the ears.

  4. A Town Called Panic (2009) · not reviewed yetFor the appetite for chaos, with far better comic timing.

  5. The Muppet Movie (1979, Fi1m 82)Songs and silliness with jokes that need no age allowance.

Free account

Know what to watch tonight

Two lists that know where things are streaming, collections you can share, your own score beside ours, and Discover that remembers what you have seen.

  • Want to see, sorted by what is streaming now
  • Seen, with your score out of ten
  • No adverts, ever