...when none of the original cast returns for it.
...when it's a sequel to a sequel of a movie that was only marginally successful to begin with.
...when it contains the word "Third" (or "Fourth").
...when it contains the word "Beethoven".
When all of the above are true, you're begging for disaster.
[deleted]
I'd agree with the first 2 statements, but the third there's nothing wrong with. However, they should have targeted an older audience though. This dumbing down has been done with many sequels just because they didn't get someone good enough to write the story properly, and just wanted quick cash. That'd be my guess.
I kind of like these family-movies, but this is dreadful. Not so much the dog, but the two clowns, ehr, "bad guys" just took the joy out of it. The second I laid eye upon them, like the first 10 seconds, I was thinking that it's targeting the kindergarten-group if not even younger. Maybe even retarded kids (No offense anyone!).
They kind of acted like drunk midgets and when they had those Sumo-outfits they were kinda fun to watch, if only for a brief moment. For a split second I forgot what I was watching =0P
Anywhoo, this movie should be avoided. If you have to, download it. Not worth buying it!
Top of every forum:"View: ... | ... | ... | nest" <-Choose "nest"!!
Like Home Alone, the first two films were better.
shareHome Alone also falls in this category too. Macaulay Culkin's replacements were not as good as him.
share