[after his parents have left, thinking he is ill] "They bought it. Incredible! One of the worst performances of my…
Home Alone 2: Lost In New York
He's up past his bedtime in the city that never sleeps.
Instead of flying to Florida with his folks, Kevin ends up alone in New York, where he gets a hotel room with his dad's credit card—despite problems from a clerk and meddling bellboy. But when Kevin runs into his old nemeses, the Wet Bandits, he's determined to foil their plans to rob a toy store on Christmas eve.
Chris Columbus's "Home Alone 2: Lost in New York" could be easily written off as a sequel whose only purpose is to replicate the look, feel, story, and general cartoony shenanigans of its predecessor while filling the coffers of all those involved in its making. To be honest, that is what the film is. However, on its way to printing money by exploiting the success of the original film, the sequel winds up a raucous experience that revels in its own delicious absurdity. It may not be an organic continuation of the McCallister saga, but it is a ridiculous amount of fun.
A year after the events of 1990's "Home Alone," the sequel finds Chicago's McCallister clan, once again, separating…
Review In A Nutshell:
It is rare for nowadays for sequels to be more impressive than its original, but every once in a while something comes and manages to surprise us. Home Alone 2: Lost In New York may not be an ideal example to emphasise this statement, but I personally feel this to be so. If you have read my review for the original film, you can see that it is not very positive, feeling underwhelmed due to its unlikeable leading character and the mischievous adventures he gets himself into during the early parts of the film, only to be redeemed by its brilliant final 30 minutes, displaying the best of physical humour.
The greatest of sequels are regarded…
Pretty much everything I said about the first movie applies here, since Lost in New York is a beat-for-beat rehash of its predecessor. It’s the exact same motherfucking movie, only this one is larger, longer, and worse. Obviously the premise is the same, albeit transplanted from a big house to the big city, but so is the wish fulfillment, the trap-setting, the lesson-learning, and the bond with a soft-spoken loner. The recycled pranks (a mannequin’s silhouette, a gangster movie’s audio) start looking awfully rusty. The sequel dedicates even more time to bald sanctimony, affirming Kevin’s “good kid” status with scene after scene of putrid treacle. It was enough to sour me on the movie by the time it reached its…
The Wolf of Wall Street Jr.
Does this movie copy the same formula of the first film a bit too much? Oh god yes. But do I care? Honestly no I don't, because unlike so many other sequels that also copy the same formula, this still retains the charm, heart, Christmas spirit of the first film, and dare I say it perhaps delivers even bigger laughs. And Culkin, Stern, and of course Pesci still deliver great comedic performances in their roles. So while, I'll still say the first film is the overall better film, I still stand by that this is just as entertaining and about as much fun as Christmas films get.
But, yeah I'm now done with this series. Because there's only two Home Alone movies.
I assumed this film would merely nod its head at its prequel but lack all the essential qualities that made the first one great.
What Chris Columbus has actually done is take everything that was special about Home Alone, move it to New York and add extra helpings of laughter and fun. I couldn't possibly say which one I prefer - they'll both be in my Top 100 Favourite Films until I die.
I feel like I'm watching someone force a childhood friend tap dance so he can survive
It's OK mackully or however you spell it, you never have to do anything like this again
TRUMP 2016 BABY
Decent enough amount of Tim Curry.
I hate this entire family. They're completely made up of neglectful idiots who're dangerously stuck up their own asses. I have zero sympathy for the problem they keep putting themselves in. To make matters worse, this movie is a carbon copy of the first, but longer, bigger on scale, with way less of the Looney Tunes style violence that made the first one good and a Donald Trump cameo. Basically, it's part one, but worse. Is it a bad movie? Not really, just so long as you don't compare it too closely to the original, I guess. Or if you can actually stomach on screen idiot families that much. I guess.
Pigeon Lady still kicks ass though!
Basically a complete repeat of the original Home Alone, with slight variations on the plot and setting.
But Home Alone 2 is kind of like the first and second Terminator films when compared to its predecessor. Acknowledging the previous film, you could either see it in a negative way - an unoriginal and shameless rip-off of its previous success, or in a positive way - very well done with some stellar performances from the cast and some very clever plot design, couple with great references to the previous film. Take it whichever way you want, but I'm going with the latter.
I have always wanted to New York. This is not a review of the movie but I want to add that to this even though I'm not going to review the movie. I just had an epiphany: I wonder if the reason I've always wanted to see New York is due to this movie?
An exact copy of the first one set in New York. Still enjoyable.
Donald Trump is in this.
I do not recommend a vast majority of these films. In fact, a good 80-90% of these are anywhere from…