Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #5022 in DVD
• Released on: 2006-11-06
• Rating: Parental Guidance
• Aspect ratio: 1.78:1
• Number of discs: 1
• Formats: Anamorphic, PAL, Widescreen
• Original language: English, Polish
• Number of discs: 1
• Running time: 98 minutes

Special Features
1.85 Wide Screen
16:9 Anamorphic Wide Screen
English
English
Region 2
Dolby Digital 5.1 English
Dolby Digital 5.1
Interactive Menus
Scene Access
Original Theatrical Trailer
Cast Director Mini Bio Pages
Czech\Danish\Finnish\Hebrew\Hungarian\Icelandic\Norwegian\Polish\Portuguese\Swedish

Synopsis
Producer-screenwriter John Hughes scores the HOME ALONE hat trick with this second sequel to the slapstick blockbuster, which now finds savvy school-ager Alex under siege by spies while quarantined at home with the chickenpox. Due to an airport mix-up, the spies' super-secret computer chip finds its way to Alex's quiet, tree-lined street, and only he can prevent its rightful owners from ransacking his house.

Customer Reviews

Not overly dreadful
The first film of this franchise, although not without it's flaws - was an enjoyable family movie. And Home Alone 3? Well, there's some fun to be had but it's all been had before.

There's no Culkin of course ; the previous star of the movies has been replaced by Alex D Linz - not as bad as you may have been led to believe. He's a satisfactory if unremarkable child actor who's cruely forced to carry the film for much of it's runtime.

An element of originality is added in that, instead of fending off bargain basement crooks, our young hero must face-off against a gang of international terrorists. The formula sticks pretty much to the usual ; a gradual build-up of light comedy leading to a sadistic slapstick finale that redeems things somewhat.

If you ignore the numbering, and just compare these films without bias, it still leads to the conclusion that Part One is streets ahead of it's sequels. If you want a decent laugh ; you'd be best off sticking with that.

And just to correct the other reviewer ; Speilberg has NOTHING to do with any of these movies. Christopher Columbus directed the first two movies.

Why are a lot of people against this film?
After I saw this film at the cinema, I actually enjoyed it. OK, it's not AS good as the first two, but at least it's still enjoyable. However, this is a million times better than the fourth, which I didn't enjoy very much.

I've never laughed so little in my life.
I only saw it once and that was enough. I didn't laugh ONCE through whole thing. There was nothing really to laugh at. It had lost a major ingredient that made the first two so brilliant. Namely Macaulay Culkin and the other two guys. It just wasn't the same without them. That other kid was rubbish. He was just trying (dismally) to be like Macaulay and it just didn't work. Making a third movie is always a bad idea and in this case the worst idea they could have had.