Benutzerrezensionen

I don't think the film is as bad as the rating suggests, but it does pale in comparison to the first two films, which are holiday classics to me! There were some bits I liked, but some bits where improvements would have been appreciated.

The positives are that Alex D Linz makes a cute and charming lead, though Macaulay Culkin is definitely better. The film does look lovely, and there is evidence of some detailed direction. And the parrot was awesome. Believe me, this film is much better than the vomitous Home Alone 4.

The negatives are that some of the violence, that was classic in the first two films, seemed to have been reduced to cartoon slapstick. Another problem was that I didn't recognise any of the characters, and the uneven script didn't allow them to develop properly. Also, I do miss the antics of the Wet Bandits, the new villains weren't as effective.

All in all, a perfectly adequate, but uneven film, that is much better than its abysmal follow up. 5/10 Bethany Cox

Home Alone 3 tells a whole different story then the original two. Instead of the McCallisters, we meet the Pruitt family and in particular the main character Alex. A computer chip worth ten million dollars is placed into a toy car by our four villains in an attempt to get through airport security. There is a mix up at the airport, and the toy car ends up in the possession of an older woman who gives it to little Alex as a gift. The four bad guys track the car to a neighbourhood in Chicago and break into a series of houses looking for the chip. Alex (who is HOME ALONE with chicken pox) see's the crooks breaking into the houses an calls the cops, only to look like a prank caller each time. The villains looking for the chip eventually realize that little Alex has it and that's when the fun begins - Home Alone style.

I actually enjoyed Home Alone 3 as a kid and as an adult now. No, it isn't as good as the original films and no Alex Linz is not Macaulay Culkin. But this movie gets points for breaking off from the McCallister storyline. I mean how many times can that family forget the same kid? Young actor Alex Linz who plays Alex in Home Alone 3 does a great job taking on this big role, he manages to not put in an annoying performance like so many child actors can be do these kind of movies. The crooks include three men and one female, and I like that they added a woman into that villain role. They all are good actors and add plenty to this movie.

The best comedic moments come from the crooks, especially David Thornton as 'Unger'. There are some ho-hum funny moments which fall flat such as the talking parrot and a few scenes with Alex's older brother and sister who "torment" him. Another flaw was the actual "home alone" bit, and the fact that Alex isn't really home alone as we've seen in the first two films. His mother leaves him for a couple of hours as he recuperates from Chicken Pox, hardly the same as Kevin McCallister went through. And I don't like that it doesn't take place ON Christmas. But those drawbacks don't take away from the whole movie at all.

Home Alone 3 isn't great, but it takes some risks by moving from the original plot and adds some smarts it with the computer chip story. These aren't your simple criminals like the wet bandits were, they are after far more than some jewellery and expensive silverware. I recommend Home Alone 3 for sure!

6/10

I think this film was always on a hiding to nothing, as the public were never going to accept a 'Kevin clone', so beloved/associated was Macaulay Culkin with this franchise.

But, having said that, 'Home Alone 3' is great fun, and well deserving of a watch with an open mind.

It's got a great script from John Hughes, that actually ups the ante on the scrapes that Kevin got into, and the slapstick is on a par, if not better than what's gone before.

I enjoyed this film, I hope if you give it a chance you will too.

Everybody says this movie sucks...i don't think that at all. We can't have kevin forever...he's gotta grow up at some point. That's why it was good to go with a new family that would keep the spirit of home alone alive...remember it's for the kids. plus the bad guys were more advanced then marv & harry (not saying that i didn't like marv & harry) but these guys had high-tec equitment that was pretty cool. This movie was new,fresh,well acted & had good direction. (RAJA GOSNEL)

WAY-TO-GO JOHN HUGHES!!!!

Has the same title only this ain't the Home Alone you'd all be familiar with.

No one from the original is in it. And the plot to it isn't as amusing as the first 2 were.

This one has to do with some secret group of agents accidentally misplaced there product at the airport which has some important chip in it that's top secret. They track down where the product is which is in Chicago, and located in somewhere in a neighborhood. 4 agents now have to check every house and find that chip.

A kid who's supposed to be the new version of Kevin has the chip only he doesn't know it yet.

He likes to watch neighbors with his telescope and goof around. When he notices the agents breaking into the neighbor's homes, he calls the police. When they get there they didn't find any of the intruders in the neighbor's home. When the agents plan on breaking into our main hero's home, he has to prepare himself to set up traps and give them hell.

This movie was good at first but it's not the same. Those who like the first 2 Home Alone movies, you might not like this one. Rent it first, and see for yourself.

Four high-tech industrial spies are trying to smuggle out a top secret military microchip to North Korea. A mixup at airport security leaves Mrs. Hess with the microchip hidden in a remote control car. After Alex shovels Mrs. Hesses' driveway, she gives him the car as payment. The spies have tracked the chip to Alex's neighborhood, and faces off against Alex who is home sick with the chicken pox.

I like the cat and mouse game, but the premise is way too serious. It's not so kid friendly to start. But this is not a horrible sequel. The fact is the kid isn't Macaulay. And the movie doesn't have as much whimsy as the previous two. The bad guys are real bad guys, not the silly Wet Bandits.

For those of us who want to see Scarlett Johansson, she has a minor role as the sister. It's nothing special to write home about. She does have a few scenes.

Home Alone 3 is an OK movie, but not as good as the original.

The humor isn't as funny, the plot is the same as before, and worst of all... they replaced the main character of the originals: Kevin! Sadly, his substitute is pretty odd, and WAY too smart for his age. Kevin was one of the things that made the original so fun. But, some of the stunts are clever, (like the one with the gun) just not clever enough.

Skip this unnecessary installment.

Do yourself a favor and watch the originals, which are much better than this movie.

5/10

Feel free to send me a Private Message regarding this comment.

Home Alone 3 has a lot of unfair criticism. I mean, how many of you would really have wanted a 16-year-old Mac Culkin doing the same-old same-old to Harry and Marv. Of course it was a better idea to do in a different direction and with John Hughes still producing and writing you know there's going to be a good amount of imagination and creativity.

This time around we have 8-year-old Alex Pruitt defend his house against international criminals. Stuck at home with Chicken Pox with both his parents tied-up in work matters, Alex suspects foul play on his snowy street when he witnesses strangers poking around in his neighbor's house. Of course, no one believes an imaginative 8-year-old so he has to deal with them himself.

It turns out that a toy car Alex got from the old-lady across the street is actually a Trojan horse to smuggle a priceless defence microchip to the North Korean mob. They really ought to hire better criminals as they fall for every one of Alex's sadistic booby-traps.

Yes, that is basically the whole plot but it gets enough mileage out of it and it's still very funny. Set in January, it lacks the Xmas feel of the first two, but I guess that would have just been a distraction. John Williams' theme only gets a brief recital at the start, but from then on it's an adequate (if not exceptional) score from Hans Zimmer pal Nick Glennie-Smith. Despite these key differences of characters and theme, it still feels like it has enough continuity with the others.

It's a totally worthwhile and enjoyable sequel that has a bad rep for no reason. Home Alone 4 on the other hand...now THAT is BAD!

Home Alone 3 is one of those movies that sits perfectly in the middle: not bad, but not particularly good either. It moves the series away from the classic Winnetka setting to Evanston, Illinois, and interestingly, the film isn't even set during Christmas. Instead, the story unfolds in January, which strips away some of the festive charm that defined the first two films.

The highlight-and really the heart-of the movie is Alex D. Linz. Even Roger Ebert pointed him out as the standout, and he absolutely is. Linz brings an honest, charismatic energy that holds the film together. The rest of the cast is fine, but nothing that leaves a lasting impression.

One pleasant surprise is the musical score by Nick Glennie-Smith. While it's nowhere near the iconic level of John Williams' timeless themes, this soundtrack manages to stand on its own. The track that plays when the international criminals pass through the San Francisco airport is especially cool and gives the movie a brief spy-thriller vibe.

As for the villains, they start out surprisingly smart-elite operatives on a covert mission. But once they arrive in the neighborhood and get caught in the classic Home Alone trap setups, their intelligence drops dramatically. They're clearly nerfed for the sake of slapstick comedy, which creates an uneven tone between the film's high-tech opening and the cartoonish finale.

Overall, Home Alone 3 is an average, watchable sequel. It lacks the magic of the original films but offers enough entertainment thanks to Alex D. Linz's performance and a respectable score.

The movie only works if you are four years old. Doesn't feel like a Christmas Movie at all. The gags are forced, the humor doesn't land. Nothing like Home Alone 1 and 2.

Hi,

Home Alone 3 would be a really great film if they ( the writer/director/producer) didn't name it "Home Alone 3". I saw the 4.4 rating and immediately understood why. Home 1 & 2 were classic Christmas films. Why wait 5 years to complete the potential trilogy? I understand that this film is nothing like the original and that's what people are expecting. If this was a stand alone film, it probably would've been better received. Either way, I think its a great film. The plot, the actors, the acting, the comedy, the scenes, all were good.

(P.S. Home Alone 4 was trash and they were asking for trouble!)

At the airport in Chicago, four international thieves lose an important package and make plans to search a neighborhood where they believe it was delivered. Meanwhile, Alex (Alex D. Linz) is a darling youngest child who, after working for an older neighbor lady, doesn't get paid in money. Instead, she got a remote controlled car delivered to her by mistake and she gives this as payment. Bummer. At home, Alex feels itchy and goes to the bathroom, where, after seeing his reflection, starts screaming. His older brother and sister (Scarlett Johanssen) immediately begin razzing him for what they believe he is screaming about. But, no, its chicken pox. Since mother and father work, Alex will be alone at times, with the neighbor lady keeping an eye on him. This is just the moment the four thieves come into the area, pretending to dogwalk and jog in order to find the package. Inside, you see, is a valuable microchip they could sell for mucho bucks. All too soon, when Alex starts playing with the car, they know what house they want. Will Alex be able to do what Kevin McAlister did and foil the evil adult criminals? This cute third installment of the Home Alone movies has a darling child in Linz and some funny thieves. Watch out for Johanssen, future superstar, as a teen actress. The sets and costumes are great, too. The script, which is indeed from John Hughes, has some funny lines and ideas. But, in truth, how many times can we see the bumbling adults fall into a child's booby traps? Imaginative are the ideas, yes, but they go on and on to almost excess. Nevertheless, for a film with few known actors, this film is a good time for families who want an entertaining choice on movie night.

The first Home Alone was a decent enough film... the sequel was pretty much the same, at a new setting. This one tries to be original, and succeeds to some degree... of course, the formula is basically the same, so it's like watching the same movie for a third time with slightly altered plot. The new score is quite bad(though the new "setting traps" piece was, if nothing else, interesting and different), especially compared to the grand score of the first, and the almost-but-not-quite-as-good score of the second. It (almost) makes up for it by using some pretty good non-original music, but it's just not the same. The plot is fair, and somewhat original to the franchise, but it's still basically the same movie as the first two, with worse acting and a less impressive example of the 'scary character turning out to be good'. The acting is mostly unimpressive. The characters are mostly caricatures. The new thieves are less entertaining than the old ones(and they make fun of spy-stuff, which is almost criminal, given the limited amount of good spy flicks there are, and how precious few of them are cool). The fact that there are more of them(and thereby more traps) is just a weak attempt at trying to go one higher than the first two films... and it doesn't work. The idea behind the thieves and their mission is a tad too... adult and serious for a children's film(and there was a sexual joke or two, though that isn't the first time in the series). It's also unnecessarily complex, as is the plot in general. I could follow it, but I doubt a kid could. Some of the exposition are delivered so obviously that even children may find it stupid. The animal stuff is generally not amusing. There are fewer siblings, which should mean that those there are get developed more, but they have less personality than the least featured of those of the first two films. All in all, just not particularly good, or worth watching, unless you *really* love watching criminals getting hurt in cartoon-y violence. I recommend this to huge fans of the series only. 3/10

This is NOT part 3 of "Kevin's Adventures", but rather a brand new "home Alone" situation. The setting is still suburban Chicago during the Christmas season, the family is still "upper middle class", and even the theme music is very similar to the predecessors. This time, however, the "kid" is NOT abandoned by his entire family who took off for their Christmas Vacation. This time our pint sized hero is left unattended only for hours at a time, while he is at home and sick with the measles. A gang of foreign spys is after a top secret multi-million dollar computer chip stolen from the US Air Force. Of course, they hide it in a battery-operated toy that ends up with "the kid".

Although the "boobie trap" routine could be viewed as just another rip-off from the first two films, the "gags" seem a bit more sophisticated and less forced in "3". The mere fact that our hero is not dealing with "wet bandit idiots" this time around makes the whole show less of a "kiddie circus". The third running is also leaving out the mushy side plots which would've gotten tiresome by now. All in all this is a fun show for the whole family. I showed this film to my 4th grade class and they gave it 20 thumbs up. Not for the "grown-up" comedy critic, but definitely a winner with kids.

The first "Home Alone" was one of the funniest movies of the 90's. The second was just as funny with the same cast and jokes! Now comes "Home Alone 3". I was curious how they could continue with the same story considering Kevin would've been 17 by 1997. He could take care of himself, right? So, what does the director decide to do? He takes a child just as annoying and makes him sick. The kid is like 6 years old and the mother leaves him alone in the house? What kind of team of burgerlers are these idiots? I don't really want to get too into detail if you want to sadly see this movie. But please, I'd recommend that you'd stay away from it. It's not worth your precious time. Go fold a piece of paper, do chores, balance a pencil on your nose, or take a nap! It's better to do then to watch "Home Alone 3"!

1/10

'Home Alone 3' is the first of the Home Alone movies not to feature Culkin in the main role and the same villains. However, the plot is very similar to the original 'Home Alone' film. Instead of two comical villains, we get three or four of them. This film involves some traps, but it also has a long scene with a remote-control car. The slapstick humour is consistent as well, but the young boy and the villains really fail to make an impact in this film. (No pun intended.) This film offers nothing new or different than the previous films did, and there really is not the warm, holiday feeling or subplots that the other two films had. It's more of a pure comedy, but it did not succeed in making me laugh as the characters really did not do it for me. I would not recommend this film; it's pretty boring. If you are seeking a good holiday family film with comedy, then watch the original 'Home Alone' movie.

¨Home Alone 3¨ (1997) by Raja Gosnell (editor of the two previous films) boasts a nice cast with Alex D. Linz taking over for the teenaged Culkin, Kevin Kilner, Olek Krupa, Lenny Van Dohlen, Haviland Morris, Scarlett Johansson. Here some international criminals trying to recover a microchip stashed in a toy car that has the mistakenly left home alone Alex Linz, while attempting to foil their plans, this sequel fails to carry the charm of its predecessors. A gang of international criminals has hidden a top-secret prodigious chip inside a toy car. They are: Beaupre (Olek Krupa), Alice Ribbons (Rya Kihlstedt), Burton Jernigan (Lenny von Dohlen) and Earl Unger (David Thornton). A confusion in the baggage causes elderly Mrs. Hess to collect the toy and give it to her neighbor Alex (Alex D. Linz) , who is home alone because of chickenpox. Alex must stay out of school along with Karen Pruitt (Haviland Morris), the mother of Alex, Jack Pruitt (Kevin Kilner), the father of Alex and Molly Pruitt (Scarlett Johansson), the older sister of Alex, and Stan Pruitt (Seth Smith), the older brother of Alex. Meantime, the criminals who want to recover the valuable chip at all costs undertake their search without suspecting that Alex is prepared to give them a warm welcome. There's a new kid on the block !. This Christmas, staying at home will be an adventure !. It's bad news for bad guys... Again !. Ready for more, much more !.

A routine and nothing new follow-up with fun incidents, genuine laughs, violence in cartoon style, entertainment and amusement. Little Alex's sharp ingenuity includes a complete arsenal of weapons, traps and ambushes complicating the evil plans of the nasty thieves. An average continuation in which spies want to get the toy back before their clients get angry and decide to burglarize every house at Alex's street to find a chip. Home Alone 3 (1997) is made without any originality, it is practically a copy of the original: Chris Colombus' Home Alone¨ (2000) . Practically repeating the same schemes, set pieces and similar gags. Although it is fun, the situations are already very familiar and frankly repetitive, we already know the beginning and the end. However, it is still entertaining and funny despite knowing what is going to happen and the already overexploited plot.

The motion picture in low budget was professionally directed by Raja Gosnell, but nothing original because it is a simple copy of the previous stories. Raja Gosnell is a prestigious editor and has made a few films, preferably comedies, such as: ¨Scooby-Doo¨, ¨Scooby-Doo, 2: Monsters Unleashed¨, ¨The Smurfs¨, ¨The Smurfs 2¨, ¨Big Momma's House¨, ¨Never Been Kissed¨, ¨Yours, Show Dogs¨, ¨ Chiahuagua in Beberly Hills¨, ¨Mine & Ours¨, ¨Gun and Hotel Bible¨. The saga ¨Home alone¨ is formed by: ¨Home alone¨(1990) by Chris Colombus with Macaulay Culkin, Daniel Stern, Joe Pesci, John Heard, Robert Blosson, Billie Bird, Kieran Culkin, Devin Ratray, Kristin Minter. ¨Home alone: Lost in New York¨ (1992) by Chris Colombis with Macaulay Culkin, Tim Curry, Brenda Fricker, Eddie Bracken, Rob Schneider, Dana Ivey, Catherine O'Hara, John Heard. ¨Home Alone 3¨ (1997) by Raja Gosnell with Alex D. Linz taking over for the teenaged Macaulay Culkin, Kevin Kilner, Olek Krupa, Lenny Van Dohlen, Haviland Morris, Scarlett Johansson. Rating: 5/10. Passable second sequel but neither notable, nor original.

7 for being underrated and better than home alone 2. It has more life than home alone 1.

When i first knew about this movie it was over 10 years after home alone 2 was released. I found out about this movie from a video game review youtuber over 12 years ago.

When I searched the movie on google it looked very bad and I laughed at the attempt of ruining a classic.

Fast forward many years later I watched Home Alone 3 and seriously, it's a pretty good movie. I'd rate it above Home Alone 2.

The acting and story are done very well. Lead actor kid does a good job. The movie is not sentimental and mushy like Home Alone 1 and 2 which is a great thing. Too much sentimental can make me sick.

I recommend this movie to the original Home Alone fans if there are any left . However, knowing how fanboys can be, they will hate this.

What is wrong with all of you? This has to be one of the worst movies I have ever seen in my life. I'm sick from the amount of comments that say that this is a good story. Four spies can't handle a little kid. I think its pretty amusing that most of the kid's traps work and that he has the ability to make all of that stuff, and without his mom noticing. Come on, the first one was funny and a good idea, the second was the obligatory sequel that seems to happen to often these days (Scream 3, I still know blah blah blah). But this one, I watch it and am speechless. Not to be nit-picky, but wouldn't a plastic arrow gun weigh a little less than a real glock, and I think its interesting how the kid knows what kind of guns they will have. If I could I would give it a -6, but on a scale of 0-10, I'd have to give it a 0.

The problem most people have with this movie is because it doesn't have Macaulay Culkin.

But Home Alone 3 is not really a 'Home Alone' movie at all. Yes, the kid is home alone, but it's a different kid in a different house with a very different plotline. And, of course, different actors.

Once you divorce it from the two Macaulay Culkin movies and view it as a stand-alone movie, with no links to the first two, it's actually a rather good movie. It certainly deserves more than a 4.5 on IMDB!

My wife and I watch all three movies every Christmas. And over the years, we've actually come to like this one at least as much as the first two. And in some ways perhaps more.

Home Alone, Home Alone 2 and Home Alone 3 all age remarkably well. Home Alone 4 and 5, however, are pretty much unwatchable.

I caught this movie on cable. I'm soooo glad I didn't pay to see this. The first movie was cute, the second, was a take off of the first one, and after seeing the second one I thought enough already. This one was a joke. How long can you sit there and watch this kid boobie trap the house.....I think 5 minutes, no more.

I honestly don't understand the unfair and low ratings on this movie. Yes it's not the same and the story is very different. But I honestly still enjoyed this movie quite a bit and the traps during the final battle and hilarious moments are still pretty good. The story is absolutely bonkers in a good way to be honest. The only thing I less liked about this sequel in the home alone franchise is the lack of Christmas vibes it's just happening in winter but not Christmassy enough. Overall great sequel and different story.

Beating the bad guys... Again is the tag line for this movie, it exposes so much truth about it.

Home Alone one and two, film classics. Home Alone three and four, a good film if you're three! Like Sharkboy and Lavagirl, as hard as it tries to be funny, it's not. Culkin is replaced by Alex D'Linz or something else. He's a very bland actor with bland performances, but it's not entirely his fault, the writing called for bland vocabulary and bland expressions. The pranks are just copied from the first two with different crooks, and you'd have to be blind to think those chicken pox are real. A good choice if you are a preschool teacher in which is showing this film on a rainy day. And to make things worst, a totally different cast, go see if you don't believe me, but you'll regret it.