Christmas Movie #16: Home Alone 3

Or the film I'll get most shit for.

Let me give you some back story. Back in 1997, I went on a trip with some other children (I was a child as well I should add), to see Home Alone 3 in a now abandoned cinema in Basildon (the glamour). Afterwards we went to the projectors booth to mess around. Twas the best of times. 

Maybe it's this experience that means I have a sentimental attachment to the third Home Alone. I do appear to be the only person in the British Isles who's seen it. (Though the late, great film critic Roger Ebert liked the third one more than the first two.)

When I saw this, age 10 remember, I quickly became one of my favourites, and I foolishly thought it was better than first two. I admit, 10 year old me was a bit of a prick.

But, it's been a good ten years since I've seen it last. Now that I've fought off puberty and entered adulthood and learnt how to run an unsuccesful blog, how will Home Alone 3 look to me now?

You'll be surprised to learn that it's NOT terrible.

Firstly, yes, it's not as good as 1 and 2. Especially if, like me, you've watched 1 and 2 in the last week. But it's certainly got some charm.

The plot is all change. This time it's some shadowy kabal of... CIA agents? Thieves? Hitmen? Nope, not sure. Anyway, four villains need a computer chip hidden inside a remote control car that has ended up in the hands of a chicken-pox ridden young boy, who, much like Kevin McCallister before him, likes to drop heavy things on adults. He just falls short at waterboarding them.

First the good stuff. There’s some musings in the first hour. Especially all the things involving the crooks chasing the remote control car and a talking parrot. Yes, I’m that easily amused. Ooooh, something shiny.

Alex D Linz, the unfortunate one chosen to replace the Culkin, as I shall forever (or for the duration of this blog entry) refer to him, is remarkably cute. He doesn’t have the mischievous, satanic streak that made the Culkin an international star, but he’s an adequate replacement.

But there’s also reasons why it hasn’t become a mainstay, like its predecessors.

It has none of that wish fulfilment that made the first two a lovely fantasy for kids. Also, and was I looking forward to the traps as much as I do in 1 and 2, but here they really do disappoint. I don’t know if it’s because I’ve seen people being hit with things for the last week and therefore have exhausted by ability to laugh at people being brutality hurt for the sake of comedy (unlikely), but the traps here felt old hat and no where near as imaginative.

And, to add insult to injury, it’s just not a Christmas movie. It’s set just before Christmas (there are references to Christmas trees and the setting is snowy suburbia) but the originals feel like Christmas is an extra character and a necessary time of year for the films to be set. Here it could be set at any time of year.

So, why not give Home Alone 3 a go. Come on, what have you got to do that’s better? Anything but that, you say?