IMDb > Home Alone 3 (1997) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Home Alone 3
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
Overview
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guidemessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
Promotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Home Alone 3 More at IMDbPro »

Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 6 of 15: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [Next]
Index 141 reviews in total 

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

It Needs a New Title

5/10
Author: fuzzyfacefreak from High In the Rockies
17 April 2006

If the movie had a different title it would help. Home Alone 3 is not a sequel to the first two Home Alone movies.

Unlike the first two movies, in this Home Alone, Alex is alone at times but his mother, brother and sister are in and out of the house.....the father is there as well.

It is funny and amusing at times.

The animals in it, a mouse and a talking Parrot are funny also.

With four villains to stop there are lot of good scenes to watch and laugh at.

The camera angles from the toy cars view are really good.

The one odd thing was that the boy playing Alex reminded me of a creepy looking Adam Rich! (of Eight is Enough fame)

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

a great movie

7/10
Author: husnain ali from London, England
17 October 2005

I think Home Alone 3 is an alright comedy but it can never beat Home Alone or Home Alone 2,but it is better than Home Alone 4.Alex was great and so was the rest of the cast and the boy and girl who were Alex's brother and sister were average. Peter Beaupre: We are going to Chicago. Earl Unger: In the winter? I packed tropical. This second sequel to Home Alone has Alex D. Linz replacing Macualay Culkin as the kid who is left Home Alone and also has a completely different cast.After having the chicken Pox Alex is left home alone and 4 burglars are looking for a chip that that they have hidden in a toy car which ends up to be with Alex for shuffling snow.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Different feel from first two prequels

Author: taipansmith from Singapore
21 December 2002

Home Alone 3 has a totally new cast, and a totally new storyboard that deviates from the first two prequels in minor details even as it retains the skeletal plot structure. I found this movie rather enjoyable on its own; the kid was witty, funny against international spies that somehow manage to bungle up their 'mission' as unprofessionally as they can manage. Yes, major suspension of disbelief is required to enjoy this movie, but it wasn't any different with the first two prequels with regards to this aspect of the film anyway.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

It didn't stink

Author: len-26 from Haverhill, MA
8 July 2002

This movie is not a great cinematic work, nor does it pretend to be. If anybody viewed this film expecting otherwise, the movie should not be blamed. Right from the start, major suspension of disbelief is required. Having said that, it was adequately entertaining.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

good, but doesn't belong in the home alone franchise.

Author: TheLastStop41 from United States
15 February 2002

Yes, this certainly wasn't a bad movie as people have made it out to be. It's actually pretty good, but it doesn't qualify as a Home Alone. The movie still should of been made, but it should go as a Dennis the Menace. The old lady next door wouldn't be in it. They change her character to Mr. Wilson, and yes Waler Mathau would be playing him. He would still be alive in 97. My sympathy goes out to his family. He was truly a great comedian, especially in both Grumpy Old Men movies. But back to Home Alone 3. It was good, but from now on I'll call it Dennis the Menace 2. Rating 6/10. Why 6/10? Because of it being named as a home alone.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Surprisingly good

Author: DrEvil30 from Illinois
27 August 1999

The movie was fun from start to finish. The plot WAS different this time. It was WAY better than the first two by far. This one contained originality that the others lacked. (Who has a huge family, outrageous pizza bills, going on a huge vacation and a mansion?) Not many do. I reccomend this for a nice laugh and great thrills.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

**:2 out of 5 stars,a grand example of badly-timed sequels.

Author: PJS-5 from New hampshire
28 April 1999

True we have the same funny hijinx & crazy nearby tool fun,but they took what the 1st two had & litterally threw it away,true macualy culkin really did outgrew the Crook-invading little kid but,but did they really have to replace the wet bandits(Joe pesci,Daniel stern) sure the new crooks were okay for beginners at trying to invade the kids traps but they couldn't compare to the Wet bandits,& the mild sensuality was just low humor-to pathetic attempts to try to get hormone-surged teens to some adults to get interested,1st one when the new kid(Alex D. Linz) fires a li'l toy plunger gun on the Tv screen & it landed right on a female aerobiizer's butt,the 2nd one(the truly pathetic one) is when 1 of the crooks finds & tries to sneak up to a girl in the shower which is actually a (presumably) porno cutout,but remember at least they keep the wacky hijinx alive & well,but that's the only thing they kept alive,everything is basically proof that this is a badly-timed sequel.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

No more house calls . . . please!

Author: adam b
3 January 1999

This movie is downright painful to watch. Any movie that makes you long for Home Alone or the awful sequel has reached new lows. Take the worst part of the first two (cardboard characters, didactic dialogue, pointless plot) and make it even worse with new villains. Gone are the bumbling burglars who only committed property crimes. Now we have four malicious characters who terrorize an old woman, attempt to murder who they believe is a potential witness, and GUESS WHAT ELSE KIDS! There's GUNS in this one! No one ever shoots any of them, but they are drawn and pointed all over the place. How's that for wacky hijinks? Do yourself a favor and leave this home alone.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Good for some...

Author: whitekat from Richarson, Texas
3 January 1999

Sure it was a mass of stupidity, but I don't think we really are SUPPOSED to like it. I mean, it really is more of a kid's movie.

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

Really awesome people should give this more credit.

10/10
Author: hazeem-ul-hussain from Sri Lanka
13 October 2012

I recently started to have a home alone marathon from the original to this, so while i reached Home Alone 3 i started to find out more about the supporting actors what they are doing now and all and i could not believe this movie is rated so poorly, as a kid i loved it, the pranks on the crooks are hilarious, but most people wanted Kevin back but the truth is he too grown up by 1997, look at me i am 20 and still watching this movie there has to be a reason why i still enjoy this, this movie is awesome. People should give more credit to this movie, i think Raja Gosnell did a very good job. Too bad John Williams do the music for this music but i think Nick Glennie-Smith did okay. The crooks in this movies are awesome in this movie too. Alex D. Linz acting was great as well as the supporting actors. The fact is people shouldn't compare any sequels to the previous movies unless they have the same characters, if its a new story with new characters and all they should never compare the movie to the originals. This movie falls into my all time favorite list.

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 6 of 15: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [Next]

Add another review


Related Links

Plot summary Plot synopsis Ratings
Awards Newsgroup reviews External reviews
Parents Guide Official site Plot keywords
Main details Your user reviews Your vote history