VIDEO: Home Alone 2: Lost in New York (1992)

The Unusual Suspect reviews Home Alone 2: Lost in New York, starring Macaulay Culkin, Joe Pesci, Daniel Stern, and Tim Curry!

Scroll down to comment on this video...

You may also like...

  • danbreunig

    Never saw this one all the way through (I can’t believe I actually saw HA 3 all the way through), but seems palatable enough to take in during an uneventful winter night. Thanks for making such a consumable production of this, Suspect. Hughes should be pleased.

    At 5:38 — Horror Guru finds his calling at a young age…

  • maarvarq

    Re: Uncle Frank’s shower bit, I just interpreted that to be UF claiming to so awesomely endowed as to forever put his nephew to shame, which in itself sails a bit close to the wind for a PG movie.

    • Anon

      I always assumed he was saying that Kevin would turn gay and that would be terrible because Uncle Frank is a general jerk and being homophobic hardly seems out of character for him.

  • Muthsarah

    Surely, you mean “starring Tim Curry and a previous movie”.

    Also, I just saw “Plains, Trains, and Automobiles” for the first time last week. John Hughes was a national treasure!

    “A Christmas movie was still in the Top Ten in July.”

    Does this not demonstrate how much the box office has changed over our lifetimes? (You….WERE alive when Home Alone came out, right? You look really, really young.) Movies used to stick around forever. Titanic is probably still playing somewhere. It helped to support good movies over ones merely mass-marketed. Good movies stuck around for months, and movies that stuck around for months were ONLY the good ones. The commutative property of cinema. But now, you make all your money in 2-3 weeks and set sail for On-Demand and RedBox! Movies don’t have to BE good. They just have to OPEN well and SELL well at the start. That’s all it takes to be a hit these days. You don’t see word-of-mouth hits much at all, or even critical darlings that slowly find a small, but acceptable audience. You live or die by how well you sell in the first 12 hours of your existence, and if you do poorly, the bigwigs pull your second-week showtimes, and you’re banished into box office hell forever. And that’s….just friggin’ horrible.

    According to Wiki (I know…) this movie cost only $20 million. Firstoff…even by that time (inflation being what it is, maybe $40 million today), that’s DAMN cheap for a sequel, especially since that’s only 15.5 million after Culkin’s salary (and I imagine Joe “Goodfellas” Pesci wanted even more to debase himself yet again). And the movie looked pretty good. Nowadays, Hollywood can’t make a surefire blockbuster sequel for less than $170 million. Less lens flares, more paint cans in the face.

    Gollum bit….beautiful.

    “Can you imagine all the parents and teachers watching at you just laughing at you like this?”

    Yes. Yes.

    –Wait….what did you do to Mary Jane?! And why, out of all of them, did you go for her FIRST?!

    (Another nice bit, though. Yours are some of the most well-edited bits on this or most other sites I frequent. EDIT: And you edited yourself into the shot with the much bulkier cop. That’s some nice airbrushing, or whatever. EDIT: God, they’re just getting better.)

    That’s way more than fourteen cents, BTW. Not a nitpick on you, but on Marv. Or Harry. Whichever. The one that got the spider on his face.

    “I got the idea when I thought superglue was a kind of lubricant”

    Mucilage is dangerous territory.

    Would you believe there was a time BEFORE Rob Schneider was considered annoying and worthless?

    For all the $#!+ American actors get for doing bad British accents, it’s nice to see you give back. Bless you, and Merry Holidays, US.

    Looked more like Marv was doing that Day-O dance number from Betelgeuse. Which also had Catherine O’Hara. So it had to be true!

    I just noticed that Daniel Stern is really damn good in these movies. Sure, as a slapstick clown. But a very, loud, detestable, and yet pitiable clown. He just sucks at everything, except at screaming. And taking a punch.

    “But Kevin’s got something else to do first.”

    Run out of the room containing his family, who ran to New York to get him having lost him AGAIN just days before, without anyone stopping, or, given his short legs, even SEEING him, and running straight to Central Park. Yeah, this movie was dumb. Dumb in a kids’ way, but, yeah, massively dumb. Or maybe his family is just that negligent. Perhaps….they always meant to lose him. They keep doing it. Maybe they’re the true villains.

    I too think this movie holds up well. Maybe not as well as the first, but while the slapstick stunt numbers are getting pretty tired, they’re not bad. They do hold up well, especially as, as you pointed out, they become more lethal (pointlessly, of course). But, like with the first one, it’s the other scenes that sell it. Yeah, Kevin + Crazy Bird Lady isn’t the same as Kevin + Old Shovel Man with estranged family, but it’s still nice. And, again, the movie looks GREAT for such a low budget. I dunno how they managed it. There musta been SOME location shoots. Also, Tim Curry. As for repeating stuff, the Back to the Future movies do the same thing. I don’t here anybody complaining.

    I grew up with these films. They’re just so damn fun. Unless you’re a hardass. Which, here, I (even to me) surprisingly am not.

  • $36060516

    When you talk about how much money Culkin made on this, keep in mind that he later had to sue his parents for control of that money (a lot of which his father spent before that point).

    • The_Unusual_Suspect

      Yeah, forgot to mention that. Though it was probably his Father that pushed for his high salaries. I bet he though that since it was his connections that got Culkin his acting gigs, he thought that the money should have gone to him. He was wrong of course; should’ve gone to Mac.

      • $36060516

        That’s OK, I forgot to mention something too: your video editing work is very creative, probably more intricate than any other movie reviewer I’ve seen on sites like this… Was impressed with how well you integrated yourself into the footage in several places, getting the lighting just right. Good job!

        • The_Unusual_Suspect

          Thanks :)

          Though it was by pure luck the lighting worked. I didn’t have a spotlight; only two umbrella lights. So I couldn’t light accordingly. I think I could make ’em look better. There’s this YouTube channel called Pistol Shrimps which specializes in putting themselves in films; those guys put me to shame.