Watch
Home Alone 3

Home Alone 3

1997
Comedy, Crime
1h 42m
Alex Pruitt, a young boy of nine living in Chicago, fend off thieves who seek a top-secret chip in his toy car to support a North Korean terrorist organization's next deed. (imdb)
Your probable score
?

Home Alone 3

1997
Comedy, Crime
1h 42m
Your probable score
Avg Percentile 12.06% from 3851 total ratings

Ratings & Reviews

(3850)
Compact view
Compact view
Rated 29 Jul 2016
65
11th
Proof that John Hughes' soul died years before he did.
Rated 30 Dec 2019
50
21st
The end result of John Hughes being told no twice. “I will burn this franchise to the god damn ground.” First few minutes are some bastardized home alone music riffs then nothing. Nothing. Home Alone without Home Alone Music is perverted.
Rated 16 Dec 2006
0
0th
It's the same, terrible premise, but somehow it's EVEN WORSE this time.
Rated 14 Aug 2007
12
8th
You're telling me none of the younger Culkins were hungry for work? I find that hard to believe.
Rated 14 Aug 2007
0
0th
Only rent this in conjunction with a free case of beer. Hit play ONLY after half a case remains. Return to the video store very early for a discounted rental of a real movie.
Rated 14 Aug 2007
31
6th
Totally necessary.
Rated 16 Nov 2007
1
0th
I don't want to talk about it.
Rated 05 May 2008
12
1st
The only film that makes you feel sympathy for the North Korean terrorists ! No plot, no humour, no hope.
Rated 28 Jun 2009
20
1st
It's Home Alone minus Macaulay Culkin, minus Joe Pesci, minus Daniel Stern, plus fart jokes, plus one viciously unlikable little boy with a haircut unpleasantly reminiscent of Anakin Skywalker. Oh, and terrorists. Really. No, really. The film's failure despite the presence of the signature extreme-slapstick M.O. seems to be proof that the appeal of Home Alone and its sequel lies mostly in, of all things, their characters, direction, and performances.
Rated 30 Mar 2012
5
0th
Remember how the previous two films had clever dialogue, a great relationship between Stern and Pesci, a protagonist you could (somewhat) identify with (and root for), memorable characters, entertaining traps, situations bordering absurd yet still realistic enough to keep you engaged, and underneath it all, an extremely endearing relationship between Kevin and his parents? (And, in a way, his whole family.) Scrap all that for an unnecessary piece of crap, where you WANT the kid to lose.
Rated 03 Sep 2014
1
1st
The highest compliment I can give this movie is that I liked it more than Home Alone 4.
Rated 24 Dec 2015
1
5th
The trap sequence at the end (which takes up damn near a third of the film's entire runtime) is so absurd that it makes the original film look like a serious and realistic docudrama by comparison. There's literally like a trap going off every 45 seconds for half an hour. And a lot of them are really elaborate, demanding engineering knowledge, power tools and time to construct. They all work perfectly. And he supposedly set them all up in one day. How did this fucking kid set up all these traps?
Rated 20 Sep 2016
5
0th
No thanks.
Rated 30 Dec 2017
6
43rd
Sure, there are a few glaring instances of lacking realism (see the super long range remotes) but on the whole this is a fun, tightly-scripted kid comedy that's a criminally underappreciated entry in the franchise. The disguise-wearing villains are funny (dry-witted Earl especially) and actually scary at times (see Alice and hostage in garage), and Alex's entertaining escapades go beyond just booby-traps (see the exciting toy car investigation). Bonus points for the hilarious crooning parrot.
Rated 21 Jan 2007
0
0th
I hate this goddamn movie
Rated 22 Mar 2007
3
2nd
As the film develops all you can do is stare blanky at the screen in total bewilderment at how the Home Alone concept could ever go so far astray from that original formula.
Rated 14 Aug 2007
5
2nd
Forget the chip, the toy's remote control technology alone would be considered light years beyond anything they have in the PRK.
Rated 09 Dec 2007
1
2nd
I don't know why I even bother rating films like these...
Rated 11 Feb 2008
0
0th
Apparently this movie was so bad McCauley Culkin wouldn't even star in it. That says a lot.
Rated 28 Apr 2008
10
0th
One of the worst films I've ever seen.
Rated 09 Jul 2009
0
3rd
:|
Rated 28 Jul 2009
25
27th
I'm sure that if you watched all 4 movies in one day, your head would explode. No doubt about that
Rated 08 Sep 2009
64
40th
A lot better then the previous flop, but still not as good as the original.
Rated 08 Nov 2014
52
18th
This is a decent advertisement for an RC car, otherwise it's garbage.
Rated 06 Mar 2007
10
2nd
Home Alone without Joe Pesci? I'll fucking pass, thanks though.
Rated 25 Jun 2007
20
0th
They never should have a made another one with a different kid. Very wrong.
Rated 16 Jul 2007
50
5th
The first two were passable, at least. This is terrible.
Rated 14 Aug 2007
22
2nd
The kid and villains may be new, but everything else is the same we already saw twice before. There is no reason to see this film. No reason at all.
Rated 14 Aug 2007
48
5th
The formula for the previous Home Alone movies is there, but it has been tweaked because it's a new kid. This time, the bad guys are international spies who are looking for a stolen and expensive micro-chip. The movie is cartoony and silly. While in the first movie it was a tad more believable that the kid outsmarted the crooks (you don't have to be a genius to break into a house), you would think 4 superspies could handle it. Oh well, it's a PG movie.
Rated 14 Aug 2007
0
4th
I love the first 2 so this was incredibly disappointing.
Rated 14 Aug 2007
30
7th
Talk about a downgrade. Home Alone 3 switches the two small time crooks for four international spy/thieves who turn out to be just as inept as Marv and Harry were in the first Home Alones, but now, not only is it overdone, but it's poorly done. The sense of class that was present in the previous two has been cast aside for a more silly style, and with the inclusion of a lot of weird sound effects, Home Alone 3 feels more like a bad cartoon. Total crap!
Rated 22 Aug 2007
18
19th
ok
Rated 24 Aug 2007
28
7th
Uh, well...I thought it was funny when I was 9.
Rated 31 Aug 2007
13
3rd
shit.
Rated 20 Oct 2007
44
26th
Should have stopped at two.
Rated 26 Oct 2007
22
7th
Disappointing, tired.
Rated 02 Nov 2007
48
13th
This was by no means good, but it was better than the first two. The kid's trap hijynx was more elaborate and violent than that of Kevin, and the kid was also much less of a shit.
Rated 20 Jan 2008
39
10th
Why oh why did they do this? Honestly?
Rated 14 May 2008
30
3rd
Why? There is no reason to continue, how many children out there are really going to be left alone. Maybe this should be turned into a series movie concerning children safety.
Rated 21 May 2008
67
13th
While this film certainly does not hold a candle to the two originals, it still provides plenty of family entertainment.
Rated 02 Jun 2008
58
13th
This is just too far...I mean...it's just that...no, I'm speechless.
Rated 14 Aug 2008
0
4th
Damn. I've heard some say that this film is bad because of the lack of Macaulay Culkin, but they don't know what they're on about. This film is bad because of the horrible direction and the misguided writing. Yes, top secret spies are just as believable in the role of clumsy crooks as.. clumsy crooks. Yeah. This film seems to be made without any sense of wanting to make it good. Awful cash-in.
Rated 08 Sep 2008
5
1st
leave home alone alone
Rated 08 Oct 2008
71
36th
spirit of child struggle to survive
Rated 15 Oct 2008
0
1st
Ugh, someone stop this crap.
Rated 15 Oct 2008
0
3rd
Should have stopped after the first one.
Rated 05 Jan 2009
0
2nd
I don't know if Culkin had enough brains to say "screw this shit", or, given the 5 year gap between movies, the director didn't think Culkin could pass as a 9 year old kid (really?), but Culkin should thank his lucky stars he didn't partake in this rubbish. (I know this isn't supposed to be the same as the original and such, but Jesus Christ, does Hughes constantly have bouts of amnesia? He produces the same story, just changing the main characters name! Grrr!)
Rated 05 Jan 2009
5
3rd
eeeek, not even a young scarlet johansen can saved this pile of unpolished turd
Rated 26 Feb 2009
3
8th
Surprised Michael Jackson didn't try to get this kid too.
Rated 04 Mar 2009
5
3rd
This film was a big mistake. No one actors of the others Home Alone. You know, a movie that just has name, to get some more money from you.
Rated 09 Jun 2009
40
8th
If the side of the package says "eat shit," we'll eat shit.
Rated 01 Jul 2009
7
1st
For how old I was when I enjoyed it
Rated 11 Aug 2009
10
2nd
My grandma took my to watch this film when I was young, sweet woman my grandma was.
Rated 16 Aug 2009
10
0th
Just not the same.
Rated 02 Sep 2009
5
0th
Why?
Rated 10 Nov 2009
10
0th
home alone 1 and 2 are great, hilarious movies with some pretty good slapstick (albeit violent) humor. this movie is a terrible caricature of the 2 preceding it and should be destroyed.
Rated 21 Nov 2009
15
3rd
Shitty, shitty shit.
Rated 10 Feb 2010
1
0th
why?
Rated 17 Apr 2010
9
1st
This isn't Home Alone, this is just awful.
Rated 19 Aug 2010
40
6th
Forgettable sequel with very few laughs. Impossible premise made this almost hard to watch without yelling at the screen. Skip this and watch the original instead.
Rated 16 Dec 2010
25
10th
parrot
Rated 04 Sep 2011
67
11th
The kid ain't too likeable but this rehash, well essentially straight remake, is delightfully violent! Anyone who likes watching home video accidents should get their kicks.
Rated 31 May 2012
15
5th
:/
Rated 16 Jun 2012
33
12th
Ugh
Rated 25 Jun 2012
10
0th
There is absolutely NO reason to ever watch this film. NONE. Outside of maybe being a scholar of Scarlett Johansson. There are better comedies, better Christmas comedies, and better Christmas caper kid's comedies. This is the type of movie ABC Family will play mid-December in the middle of the night just to take up air time.
Rated 11 Dec 2012
10
0th
Poor Lenny Von Dohlen. He will always be in my heart, together in electric dreams
Rated 18 Aug 2013
8
1st
Not that good, since the main character isn't the same with "Home Alone 1" & "Home Alone 2". It's not that bad, but not that good either.
Rated 17 Nov 2013
69
54th
this one was more funny than the first and second Home Alone.
Rated 05 Mar 2014
54
30th
A crazy plot, executed in a silly way but it's still funny in its quirky way.
Rated 25 Mar 2014
4
5th
Kills the name
Rated 03 Apr 2014
20
6th
Tries and fails at leeching off the success of the past two Home Alone movies. Avoid.
Rated 10 Dec 2014
1
2nd
Home Alone 3 is a completely unnecessary and forgettable sequel. Many would argue that the second film was pointless, but personally I always enjoy re-watching it and at least it starred Macauley Culken and the wrest of the original cast. However this third film shares absolutely no resemblance to the previous films whatsoever. That said in hindsight I'm glad Macauley Culken didn't appear in this disaster. If anything this film just tarnishes the Home Alone title and it's best to be forgotten.
Rated 19 Aug 2015
100
91st
Home Alone 3 is the first movie in the series that didn't feature McCauley Culkin as the lead character. The franchise had to move on without its star and create a new set of heroes and villains which are disappointing. Instead of two small time house robbers, this home alone kid has to deal with some not so bright international thieves who are looking for a computer chip that can control nuclear weapons.
Rated 23 Aug 2015
35
5th
Terrible!
Rated 12 Nov 2016
5
4th
F
Rated 22 Dec 2016
60
25th
The first film I've watched in the cinema. While Home Alone 3 isn't the best of films it is a fun and sweet film. The main protagonist is a lot more likeable than Culkin's was in the first two films and the traps are the best in the series. Sure there are a lot of riddiculus things about the film, but it honestly isn't much worse than the second Home Alone, which was decent as well.
Rated 22 Jul 2017
27
6th
Home Alone 3, unlike its predecessors, amps up the slapstick to such a degree that it becomes dull.
Rated 07 Aug 2017
30
9th
There really isn't a point to it; I might have liked it as a child, I see now I only liked the first one, that's been repeated to diminishing returns.
Rated 25 May 2018
0
2nd
An utter disaster. This totally disrespected the first two movies by being not only terrible, but completely unrelated beyond the fact that it used the same name, its a lot like the Sandlot 2/3 and that is not good.
Rated 30 Jun 2018
6
20th
I loved it when I was a child. Good old days.
Rated 26 Feb 2019
0
1st
Why did they bother?
Rated 27 Dec 2019
72
59th
WarchipinRCcarlol+chickenpox+scarjosis:P+thinkcryinwolf+trappartsokaylikeothermovies+ladytyingupoldladystillsexylmao+siblingsteasedwholetimebutshowtheycarenow+criminalsallgotchickenpoxlool
Rated 29 Apr 2008
80
8th
I didn't like it so much. The first 2 series were better.
Rated 14 Apr 2009
10
1st
Defines unnecessary (and unoriginal). Lifts all the stereotypes straight from 1 and 2, but with a new uncharismatic cast and none of the charm in the execution. The 'comic' relief parrot was a particularly inexcusable inclusion. Scarlett Johansson is in this, which was a surprise.
Rated 07 Jan 2011
93
67th
~5
Rated 21 Nov 2016
7
0th
Each Home Alone film is worse than the previous installment. But only Home Alone 3 stands alone in providing such a large dropoff.
Rated 26 Jan 2020
55
13th
If this movie was not called Home Alone 3, it would be a whole lot better.
Rated 27 Jan 2020
28
7th
The first one was fairly good, the second movie was decent, but this movie was crap. I have a hard time believing I liked this when I was younger.
Rated 08 Oct 2020
5
1st
This movie should not exist. It receives 5 points for not being DeadPool.
Rated 20 Dec 2020
8
6th
Awful.
Rated 21 Dec 2020
30
5th
Much more of a caricature of criminality than the first two films, and for the worse. Some laughs here and here. One of Scarlett Johansson's first major roles.
Rated 13 Mar 2021
1
4th
He's not even doing the face on the poster. What the fuck?
Rated 30 Apr 2021
51
5th
Maybe skip this one lol.
Rated 19 Dec 2021
31
2nd
This is a pointless sequel movie. The lead is not as charming or funny as the one from the first 2 films of this series. The script is bad and the supporting characters are unfunny and uninteresting. Overall this movie is a big misfire.
Rated 11 Jun 2022
60
18th
Missing Culkin, Pesci and Stern, the nostalgia bug doesn’t bite on this one: fair to middling example of the basic “HOME ALONE” formula that infected many a 90s family film; Linz lacks the Culkin spark but acquits himself fine, with the inclusion of too many villains making the final third even noisier and more chaotic than it needs to be. Blandly passable; props at least for giving a young Johansson a bit of a leg-up; her evil brother and sister double act with Smith is quite amusing.

Collections

(19)
Compact view
Showing 1 - 19 of 19 results

Similar Titles

Loading ...

Statistics

Loading ...