Product Details

• Actors: French Stewart, Erick Avari, Barbara Babcock, Jason Beghe, Clare Carey
• Directors: Rod Daniel
• Format: Closed-captioned, Color, Dolby, DVD, Full Screen, Letterboxed, Subtitled, Widescreen, NTSC
• Language: English (Dolby Digital 2.0 Surround), English (Dolby Digital 5.1)
• Subtitles: English, Spanish
• Region: Region 1 (U.S. and Canada only. Read more about DVD formats.)
  
• Aspect Ratio: 1.78:1
• Number of discs: 1
• Rating: Unrated
• Studio: 20th Century Fox
• DVD Release Date: September 2, 2003
• Run Time: 83 minutes
• Average Customer Review: 2.0 out of 5 stars See all reviews (42 customer reviews)
• ASIN: B0000A02WB
• Amazon.com Sales Rank: #38,532 in Movies & TV (See Bestsellers in Movies & TV)

  Popular in this category: (What's this?)

  #12 in

  Movies & TV > Comedy > Series & Sequels > Home Alone

Editorial Reviews

Product Description
It's tough being nine. Tougher still is spending Christmas with dad (Jason Beghe) at his new girlfriend Natalie's (Joanna Going) mansion even though it's loaded with all the techno-gadgets any kid could hope for! But this Christmas, Kevin (Michael Weinberg) is really in hot water again, and so are Marv (French Stewart) and his sidekick (Missi Pyle), who are trying to rob Natalie's house!

With funnier and more high-tech, crime-stopping wizardry at his disposal than ever, Kevin just might finally put these crooks on ice forever - and keep his parents together while he's at it - in this uplifting, hilarious comedy the whole family is sure to love!

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

16 of 16 people found the following review helpful:

1.0 out of 5 stars Weak Story, Unfunny Humor, and The Boy: Everything Is So Misguided, November 23, 2005

By	Tsuyoshi - See all my reviews (TOP 500 REVIEWER)

"Beethoven's 5th" and "Home Alone 4." Back in the golden era of John Hughes, who was really something in the 80s, I couldn't imagine the day would come when we see his name in this direct-to-video sequels. Even if he only permitted to use (or recycle) the main characters, it is a shocking thing to witness this.

But the film is made by 20th Century Fox, one of the major studios in Hollywood, and to be fair, the production designs are decent, Yes, Kevin McCallister is no longer played by Mr. Culkin, but kids all grow up someday. And look, Marv, one of the original burglars comes back to Kevin's house, but sorry, it is NOT Daniel Stern. (It's French Stewart, who is not bad).

Some viewer, quite understandably, don't like the story about Kevin's parents who live separately, but it could be OK. Today that is not a rare thing. Some viewers again don't like the idea of different actors playing the main characters, but hey, that happened to James Bond or Dumbledore, and we didn't care.

[THE REAL PROBLEM ] is this. This time Marv doesn't steal. Why? For he needs money so desperately that he and his girlfriend (Missi Pyle) decide to kidnap Prince. I mean it, THE PRINCE, a child of the royal family. But from where? The big mansion of Kevin's Daddy's girlfriend. But how? Oh, this is a big surprise, but there's an insider. And what happens? Many slapsticks, many of them just unfunny.

But the most embarrassing is Kevin, the kid himself. Sorry but I must tell you. The character of Kevin is really awful, even offensive. Kevin not only frustrates the burglars' plans by booby traps (so far, fine); he also enjoys doing it! If you don't see what I am trying to say, see the scenes in which Kevin, sitting on a sofa, sees French Stewart and Missi Pyle literally trapped in the rotating bookshelf, which goes round and round, faster and faster. See how the boy laughs, like watching a movie on TV! Yes, he laughs with loud voice as if he's one of the Warner Brothers' animation characters. I saw all the `Home Alone' series, but this is the first time I really wished that the burglars would win and take everything away. They surely deserve that.

I thought `Home Alone 3' was enough. John Hughes and other people did think otherwise. Now I think `Home Alone 4' is truly enough, and really hope that they think the same way.

11 of 12 people found the following review helpful:

1.0 out of 5 stars Horrible Movie, April 9, 2005

By	GS1984 - See all my reviews

Home Alone 1 and 2 very some of my favorite movies growing up in the 90s. Home Alone 3 I also liked a lot. Though it was about different people, the story was very well written, the acting was good, and the movie was well produced. Despite being older now, I still enjoy those movies when they're on TV.

I'm sorry to say however, that this movie is a disgrace to Hollywood and to the movie making profession. Believe me, I am not exagerrating a bit. Every single aspect of this movie is unbelievably horrible.

First of all, the character development is awfully confusing and makes no sense whatsoever. This movie is supposed to be a sequel to the original Home Alone family from HA1 and 2 - the McCallisters. Kevin is back, along with his mom Kate, dad Peter, brother Buzz, etc... One of the original criminals, Marv, is back too. The other criminal in this movie is his girlfriend. Now here's the problem. Every single one of these characters is played by different people now. Not only that, but their age makes no sense whatsoever. Kevin in this movie is younger than he was in HA2. His brother Buzz and his sister high school juniors and seniors back then. In this movie, it's as if they're in junior high. There are many other such wierd nonsense contradictions.

The plot is awful too. I'm not going to go into the details, but the story is a disgrace to screenwriters. Let's just say that the writers thought they were making a story about present-time thieves trying to rob the Jetsons in the future.

The acting is awful too. This was a low budget movie, and the actors do their best to make that obvious. Just look at the cover

The soundtrack of the movie sucks too. It's no surprise though. Who would ever want to license out their music for such crap?

Overall, I don't think this movie was meant to be a sequal of the original Home Alone movies. It was probably meant to be a parady of them. This movie doesn't deserve a single star. The only good purpose this movie can serve is to train people what awful film-making looks like.

13 of 15 people found the following review helpful:

1.0 out of 5 stars How Could They Do This?, June 15, 2004

By	Micheal Hunt (Hellbourne) - See all my reviews

Oh god, how could they do this? If you havent got the original cast of a film, then dont make a seaqull using the same names!

This movie could have worked, and just been an average movie to me. But they had to use the name Makilister. The name from the original 2 movies that starred Macully Culklin. Why oh why oh why would you try to pull off a brand new set of cast as the same people that made the original box office hit's over ten years ago?

The kid in this film looks nothing like the original Kevin Micalister, who resembles Culklin in now way, not to mention he's about 3 foot shorter, 2 pounds larger, and 10 times as less intelegent. Then they tried to pull off the parent's of the first 2, which look nothing like them either, nor did French Stewart trying to be Harry, who was original Daniel Sterns charactor.... they looked nothing like the originals, they didnt act anything like the originals, and why oh why would they even try to use the same name's of the charactors?

If they had have given them new names, and try'd to pull this off as beeing a completly different fammily then the Macalisters, then it could have been an OK, 2 or 3 star movie. But when your sickend by whoever's idea it was to use the same name, and expect the audience to be dumb enough to go with it, then it get's 0 star's.

YOU DO NOT TRY AND SELL A MOVIE AS BEEING THE SAME CHARACTORS AS THE ORIGINAL, IF THEY ARE NOT THE ORIGINALS, OR DONT EVEN RESEMBLE THE ORIGINAL ACTORS

If they beleive they have made a good movie here by using the original name's, then they might as well make a 5th seaqull to bury the franchise, and get a fully grown Chris Rock to play Kevin Macilster and Leslie Neilson to play the mother, Rosie O'Donnel can be the father, the brother can be played by the rapping granny from The Wedding Singer, and we can get a new guy to play the old man from part 1? hmmm.. maybe Jim Carey? they can expect the audience not to notice the diffrence in age appearence and persinalty to take your mind away from the bad casting arrangment's.

the movie could have worked if it was maybe a different fammily name, and not supposed to be the same fammily as 1 and 2's..or maybe even if they made it a cartoon? But dont mess with classic, reciginised names and charactors and expect people to buy into it? Whoever had that idea made a very big mistake.... ignore the fact that there supposed to be the same fammily, and that the kid is supposed to be Maculy Culklin, and you still will see it's not a great movie anyway. But it was a horrible idea to use the same name's, at least part 3 had a chance, because it wasnt meant to be the same kid!

On a final note: Just look at the rip-off and ridicules price they want for this film?! Then look at how many + how much, used copys are going for!?!?!?! The movie isnt even worth watching for free~!