Niño rico

In 1994, Macaulay Culkin stared in 3 films: 'Richie Rich', 'The Pagemaster' and 'Getting even with dad', none of them particularly interesting. The movies themselves did poorly at cinemas and in critical terms.

In 1994, Macaulay Culkin was 13/14 years old. He was in his early adolescence, so he was growing. A difficult phase for him. Ridiculously, people began to ignore him because of that - either that or they simply thought his cuteness was disappearing and gave him little value for that. But he always proved to be a terrific actor. True, there were many, many great child actors but he was one of them for sure. Sure, his cuteness took him far, but it was his talent that made him a legend.

After playing a completely different role in the 1993 film 'The Good Son' (where he played a psychopath that could very well disguise that nature thanks to his angelical looks, a wolf in sheep's clothe), he returned to the roles of 'good guys' in all of his 1994 films.

'Richie Rich' is not much of a film, but perhaps it's a little more interesting than 'The Pagemaster'. It's not a bad movie, but it's a somewhat complex film for me to give a fair rating. It has good moments but also very stupid moments, particularly from the 2nd half on (in my opinion, where the movie is at its weakest).

Macaulay Culkin plays the title character. Richie Rich is rich (like his name suggests), lives in a fancy mansion surrounded by comfort and luxury and can even count with a chauffeur that takes him in his majestic and elegant Rolls-Royce Silver Cloud whenever it's necessary. But Richie realizes that there is one thing that money can't buy: happiness. He feels the lack of friends and possibly bored with his tedious life. He just wants to be like the other kids.

About the things I found funny in this film, a good example of that is the line «Oh my God, I look like Michael Jackson!» by Richie's mother. Come to think of it... that's not untrue - lol. I'm surprised they put this line in the film because Macaulay Culkin stars in it and considering the friendship he had with the eccentric singer... Other funny details are, for example, the cute dog that has dollar signs instead of spots and appropriately named Dollar, and the scene when Richie doesn't wanna wake up but stares at his personal trainer when he realizes what a beauty she is (she is portrayed by the supermodel Claudia Schiffer).

Macaulay Culkin had everything to be a great name of the cinema. And he was, for a few years, mostly thanks to the success of the first two 'Home Alone' films. He was talented, charismatic and good-looking. Too bad he trashed his life later, but I believe he turned out to be like this because of his personal problems.

I gave this movie a 7 on a scale of 1-10 because I took into consideration it is a kids movie and should be judged as such. When this movie came out I was 13 and of course I enjoyed it much more then as opposed to now but having watched it as a child and as an adult I do remember how much I enjoyed the film as a kid. From the harsh grade of a 4.4 average I assume people where comparing this to complex movies with great plots. Kids should not be subjected to nothing but adult theme. So when you grade the movie remember what audience it was desighned for.As a child I would have gave this movie a 7. Would you drive a metro and act as if it should perform like a porsche?

I don't know why it has such a low rating. The movie does not want to be taken serious. So it is not serious. The movie is aimed at kids and that makes it great. I watched it in my early twenties and had a good evening watching the movie. Great for family's and kids.

Based on the comic strip of Richie Rich, this is an underrated film starring McCauley Culkin in a non Home Alone film. The co-star cast is not so bad either with John Larroquette (Dan from Night Court), Edward Hermann (voice of the History Channel) and Jonathan Hyde (Van Pelt from Jumanji). Christine Ebersole as Mrs. Rich though, was a letdown.

For an early 90s family film, it can seem flunky by standards of 2018, but it was all in fun. What kid wouldn't want to live the life of Richie Rich, or have their very own McDonald's restaurant right inside their home?

Definitely a fun film to show kids, especially if you were a fan of the film growing up. Of course, the story wasn't the best, but what do you expect. However, it's still entertaining in its own right. The sequel, a Christmas foray, is another story!

I didn't absolutely hate Richie Rich, but for me it wasn't that great either. As usual, there were some good things, but some not so good things as well.

THE GOOD THINGS:

1) Macaulay Culkin, personally I think he is better an actor than people give him credit for. He is one of the main reasons why I love the first two Home Alone movies so much. Here, he gives a very spirited lead performance, admittedly not as cute as he was when he was starring in underrated gems like Uncle Buck, but he shows once again what a talented actor he was.

2) Jonathan Hyde as the butler comes very close to stealing the show, a very funny and sly performance. Also Edward Hermann and Christine Ebersole give humorous performances, while John Larroquette plays the villain of the piece more than adequately.

3) The scenery is quite impressive, captured well by the breezy cinematography. The Biltmore estate was gorgeous.

4) The soundtrack was decent, nice background music especially.

5) I liked the moral the film taught; All the money in the world can't make you happy, thinking about it that is true.

THE NOT SO GOOD THINGS:

1) While I liked the moral of the film, the story itself is predictable and somewhat contrived. it probably doesn't help you have seen it all before.

2) The script is quite weak in general. Don't get me wrong there were some good spots like "Oh my god I look like Michael Jackson!" but the jokes are admittedly very silly and juvenile, and the scripting does fall in the danger of becoming clichéd.

3) The pacing. Now I don't mind films that move fast. I do have more of a problem if the pacing is TOO fast, despite the feel good nature of the film, and its valiant attempt to rise above superficial material, the film feels a little too rushed, the ending particularly felt skimmed over.

4) The characters feel rather stereotypical. Maybe that is an unfair complaint as it probably couldn't be avoided, but I couldn't help thinking yeah I recognise that type of character.

Overall, definitely not a bad film, worth watching at least once, but I personally didn't find it that great. 5/10 Bethany Cox