studioAT
Having used a 'Kevin clone' in Home Alone 3, this belated fourth instalment returns to having Kevin as the central focus, this time played by another actor. They also bring back the vast majority of his family, and Marv too, again all played by different actors.It sets the tone for the whole film really. It's Home Alone by numbers, with all the ingredients being there, but it not quite having the magic of the original, probably because we've seen it all done so much better before.The replacements aren't bad, they're game for all the slapstick antics that they're given, but tis is a pale imitation for the original.At least it's got its tongue firmly in cheek though, with a few little jokes about the ridiculousness of the situation, Kevin's age changing, and the best one from the Mum "how many times can I lose this kid".Decent enough, but watch the original.
stormhawk2018
There are people who say that in ignorance there is happiness. Well, I'm not at all in agreement with this statement but this time, without serving as a precedent, it's applicable. And I was happier before I knew that there was a fourth "Home Alone", a saga to which I have a special affection for being linked to my childhood. I was happy in my ignorance thinking that the saga reached a third part that I wasn't in a hurry to see because what I had heard about it wasn't very encouraging. Until one day, without being aware of the visual and neuronal torture I was going to suffer, I passed innocently on the TV channel until I saw the movie they shot: "Home Alone 4". At first I was surprised "is there a 4?" I was wondering. He had just started and his appearance as a shabby television product was already bad luck but out of curiosity (the same one that killed the cat) I decided to see it. The rest is history.Where to start? This mo...er, "thing" is supposed to be a direct sequel to the second part, resuming Kevin's adventures. But of course many years have passed and Macaulay Culkin has grown so the actors are all new and their similarities with the old ones isn't that they are minimal, it's that they are nil. And no, I'm not only talking about the physical aspect, but in the character all the characters have changed for what it costs...I say, it's impossible to see that these characters are the same as those that came out in the first two.First big flaw and that happens for the first time in this saga: the boy is disgusted, a lot of disgust. The original Kevin was adorable, Alex (the one by many hated HA3) was funny, this new "Kevin" is 100% repellent. In HA1 Kevin has 8-years-old, in HA2 has 10, but in HA4, has only 9. What is this, a prequel? To top it off, Kevin has brown hair, unlike the first 2, where he was blond (sure they are mistaking with Junior Healy from HA's competitor, "Problem Child"). But he isn't the only one, his parents (who have been divorced, already take, not very respectful with the original films) are idiots. Peter, his dad, has separated from his nice wife, Kate, for live with Natalie, a sybaritic, selfish and fluffy bunny of woman. The same brothers (only Buzz and Meghan survived, but, what the hell happened to Linnie and Jeff?), so caricatured, so many, that they are nothing more than a sad parody of the originals (even Buzz, in the first two was a teenager with a bodybuilder body, in this one, he is a wimpy little kid almost the same age as Kevin). Instead of Linnie and Jeff, we have Prescott, a butler (Erick Avari, from "The Mummy") and Molly, a maid (Barbara Babcock). And the villains? Oh, I was leaving the worst for last. Marv is back...but unified in Harry's body (Joe Pesci? No, is French Stewart, from the abysmal "Inspector Gadget 2"), and he walks around making funny faces of bad guy and overacting as if it were a movie for 3-year-old kids, nothing to do with Daniel Stern; and with a chick named Vera (Missi Pyle), apparently his girlfriend, wife, concubine or whatever, who goes around with a constipated face that can't be with her (it's supposed to be a bad face...it's supposed).The rest is already a non-stop: boring plot, stupid traps, overacting, zero grace, boredom...who has given the nod to this movie? Why have they infantilized her so much that it's stupid? What the hell were smoking who wrote the script? This fourth part is the clear example of not only knock off a saga, but to shatter it irremediably.But well, as I was happy in my ignorance (I remember those days with nostalgia) I will try to forget how this film exists, and stay with the first three (yes, plus HA3 too, although lazy, it's worthy to be part of the saga) and erase from my memory that this grotesque exists. I don't recommend it even if it's out of curiosity to see how bad it is, it sure has better movies to watch than "this".P.D. Answering to adonis98-743-186503, yeah sure, this movie was your guilty pleasure because maybe you had a crush with Missi Pyle...if you want watch good movies with her, I recommend you "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory" instead of this hell. And for jeffreybai8, go to watch "Care Bears: Nutcracker Suite", this animated TV special is great and beats this abomination.
benjaminweber
Let's start with one of the key problems here: Kevin McAllister (even though he looks nothing like the kid from the first two films) is not at home for the vast majority of the film, and he is never actually alone as the butler is around at all times. The film tries so hard to get around this by trying to convince the audience that the butler is actually an accomplice, that when he is revealed not to be an accomplice the entire plot self-destructs, with characters supposedly having done something they clearly didn't do, because they were on-screen at the time! Continuing on plot, there are several moments that just do not make sense. For instance, Kevin is routinely disciplined for doing something he didn't, in a house with a surveillance system. No one ever seems to consider this, they just tell him off or threaten him. Even when Kevin has actual evidence in his possession, he does nothing with it, simply accepting no one will believe him. In fact, in one case the absence of security footage would have revealed something was wrong almost immediately, not only clear Kevin of wrongdoing, but no one does anything. After all, a rational response would stop the plot from progressing! Aside from this, there is also the problem of the villains. Aside from the usual issue in a Home Alone film of, "Why aren't they in the hospital yet?", something this film doubles down on by having the two main antagonists show up at the house three days in a row, only to be booby-trapped three days in a row, this film decides there is a need for a secondary antagonist: the wicked would-be stepmother. This character is so poorly developed, and her malice appears so suddenly, that she seems to be more like a robot than a human by the end. A robot, pre-programmed to just move anything inconvenient to one side. This means that when the inevitable end of her getting her come-uppance arrives, it feels forced and somewhat cruel.In conclusion, this is a bad film. However, it is so nonsensical and the characters are so bizarrely written that it is still fun to watch, even if just to mock.
