Having kicked off this season of Christmas film reviews with the newest in the ‘Home Alone’ franchise of films, it felt only right that I complete the collection and watch all the films I hadn’t yet seen and reviewed. What a shame it is that these happened to be the shit ones. Now, I shouldn’t go into these films with any preconceived notions about what they are going to be like in terms of quality, but I have only heard bad things about all the ‘Home Alone’ films past the first two. But who knows, maybe Home Alone 3 (1997) could be a gem. The film follows Alex Pruitt (Alex D. Linz), a young boy off school with chickenpox, who through a series of events comes into possession of a top-secret US Air force computer chip. This chip is being pursued by a group of criminals working for a North Korean terrorist syndicate, who track the chip down to Alex’s Street. This leads to Alex having to defend his house against these criminals while also keeping the chip out of their hands.
As you can tell from that synopsis, the stakes are a little bit more extreme in this film than in the previous two films. We have gone from two somewhat hapless criminals just trying to rob houses, to terrorist organisations trying to steal top-secret intelligence to use against the United States. Can you see the issue with this? More so than the original two films, this one is aimed at younger children, or at the very least feels that way. So, to have such high stakes, even if they don’t treat it as such, makes all the more slapstick stuff going on later in the film seem completely ridiculous. This also makes the whole break scene more insane, as the group attempting to break into this house have high tech and are clearly trained, but when the plot needs them to be they become these useless idiots who are being outfought and thought by an 8-year-old. Just because you’re making a film for kids doesn’t mean that you don’t have to think these things out a little bit more. I mean, I guess it doesn’t really make a whole world of difference to the overall enjoyment you’re going to get out of the film, after all, it is a silly film for kids. But it does feel all a bit extreme for a ‘Home Alone’ film.
If I am being totally honest. This film is not anywhere near as bad as I was expecting it to be. Similarly, to Home Sweet Home Alone (2021), it isn’t good. It is in fact far from being good. The narrative, as I have already mentioned, is ridiculous but it doesn’t even do the justice of being interesting, with the film dragging for the most part. It also has a rubbish script with some dodgy dialogue and really rushed moments of sentimentality or character development that doesn’t feel earned in the slightest, especially when it comes to Alex’s relationship with his older siblings. But with all that being said, I think it does what it needs to do in terms of being a ‘Home Alone’ film for younger kids. It is very silly and childish, and I can absolutely see kids enjoying it. All the actors do a decent enough job, and I thought Alex D. Linz, while not being as charismatic or carrying the film as effectively as Macauley Culkin, does a good job. Also, Scarlett Johansson is in this film, so yeah there’s that. But what you are all wanting to know is what are the booby traps like. After all, this is one of the main selling points of the franchise. And it is pretty hit and miss. One moment that really made me laugh was when two of the crooks get a dumbbell dropped on their head from about 15 feet, which made me laugh because of how stupid and over the top it is. This whole sequence could be described this way, but whereas the dumbbell is funny, some of the rest jumps the shark. A lot of the booby traps involve heavy DIY work and creating genuinely complex systems of pullies and trap doors and the like. All this made by an 8-year-old in an afternoon. It is just a bit much, even for a film that sells itself on these break-in scenes.
While Home Alone 3 isn’t anywhere close to being as bad as I had heard or expected, I still can’t possibly recommend it. Even though I think small kids would enjoy it for how silly and childish it can be, kids are also going to enjoy the first two films so why bother to show them an inferior film? My mine takeaway from this film is that it was completely unneeded, and the fact that there are two more sequels before Home Sweet Home Alone is a worrying sign. If this film is this bad, how bad are those two going to be?
Comments