|
 Home Alone 2 - Lost in New York
Description
| Product Description |
|
| This somewhat unpleasant 1992 sequel to the blockbuster Home Alone revisits the first film's gimmick by stranding Macaulay Culkin's character in New York City while his family ends up somewhere else. Again, the little guy meets up with colorful people on the margins of society (including a pigeon woman played by Brenda Fricker) and again he gets into a prop-heavy battle with Joe Pesci and Daniel Stern. The latter sequence is even worse than the first film in terms of violence inflicted on the two villains (director Chris Columbus, who also made the first film, can't seem to emphasize the slapstick over the graphic effects of the fight). The best running joke finds a concierge (Tim Curry) at the swank hotel where Culkin is staying trying and failing to prove that the boy is on his own. --Tom Keogh Editorial Descriptions are usually submitted by the manufacturers, publishers and authors. Contact us if you are one of them, and wish to change the above description. |
Reviews
Customer feedback
|
|
Voting |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Guest
I really enjoyed Home Alone 1. It was very creative and a fun, family holiday movie, with a lot of laughs. The second one had such potential, but they ruined it in so many ways. First of all, he isn't Home Alone, so the title alone is ridiculously incorrect. He is accidently in NY while his family is searching for him. Everything is so repetitive-from eating ice cream while watching movies, to the pranks he plays on the villains. What I noticed most was the furniture in his hotel room. It is from the house set of the first movie! Look at the 4 poster bed, the tv, the tables, even the lamp and the decorations around the fireplace. After all the money they made on the first movie, they couldn't even purchase new props? Stick with the first movie-this one is just a remake with a lot of bad choices. No charm, whatsover. I gave it 2 stars for keeping the same cast and the lovely scene of the toy store. But those 2 things are not worth the movie, itself.
|
Author: Guest
ok, home alone sucks. Why do they keep on making this crap?! the only movie that is actually good is Home Alone 4: Taking Back the House. But i dont watch it because everyone thinks it
HA4's stupid too. So dont buy this. Its so stupid with all of the stupid storylines, script, action, and crime. 20th Century Fox, please stop making Home Alone movies and make more PG13/R movies every second while you're at it!-- Actually, it's all a lie. This movie does not really suck.
|
Author: Guest
Macaulay Culkin is seperated from his family again but this time he's in the big apple New York. How it happen. The family wera plainning a christmas facation to Miami, Florida everybody else went on the right plane at the air port except for Macaulay character (Kevin) cause he was putting new batteries in his tape recorder after that he was flowing a man who had the same jacket as his dad that man was going catching the plane to New York and that's how Kevin got confused and got on the wrong plane. Luckly for him he had his dads bag filled with money and credit cards which can help him live and check into a hotel in NYC. Kevin is also smart enough to have his own plane ticket to Florida just in cast a mistake happen's again which it did. The same two bad guys from the first movie use to be called the "wet Bandets" now the "sticky bandets" nave escape from jail into NYC.
|
Author: Guest
I LOVE ALL OF THE HOME ALONE MOVIES, THEY ARE JUST PLAIN FUNNY. KEVIN IS AN AVERAGE KID WITH NO SUPER POWERS NO SPECIAL TELEKENETICS, HES JUST A WISE ASS AND THAT IS WHATS GOOD ABOUT THE HOME ALONE MOVIES, MY FAVORITE PART IS WHEN HE IS WATCHING THAT OLD MOVIE WHEN THE ROBBERS KNOCK ON THE DOOR "KEEP THE CHANGE YOU FILTHY ANIMAL" DOES ANYONE KNOW WHAT IS THE NAME OF THAT MOVIE? I WOULD LOVE TO KNOW.
|
Author: Guest
Home Alone is one of my favorite movies; the music was good, it was funny, the acting was great, and the booby traps were a hit. Now, I don't mean to sound harsh, but a sequel wasn't necessary. The plot is filled with so many fake plot twists and things that would never happen, but they do. Macaulay Culkin wasn't as good this time, but he could still act well. Joe Pesci and Daniel Stern were hilarious as the Sticky Bandits, their name changed this time. But when the expected booby trap sequence begins, it had stuff in it that could have made the movie PG-13 rated. I mean, shoud parents really let their kids see a sadistic kid throwing bricks at the burglar's heads from the 3-story rooftops? I was honestly a little sickened by this sequence, but there were some traps thatwere pretty funny (the cement bag was a kick). In the first film, the guys could have possibly lived, but in this one they survive things only a cartoon would. It's funny, yes, but sometimes upsetting (for example, the sink and the staples). I still think it's an easily watchable film for people wanting a mindless movie to unwind with after a hard day when you don't want to do any thinking. 'Nuff said.
|
Send to Friend
Send to friend
|
|
