SamSuka
EricReacts
EricReacts

patreon


Home Alone 2 Full Movie Reaction!

Link: https://ws.onehub.com/files/n2sjjyxc

Commentary: https://youtu.be/QUKMH-0-J-w?t=708

Comments

So people can’t change and become a better person anymore? Yikes

Angela

I haven't seen him in anything before, but I guess that's about to change with him playing Sully in the Uncharted movie :\

Eric Reacts

Mark Wahlberg's crimes in his youth against people of color, and his drug history have always tainted my opinion of him. Despite him being a some-what accomplished actor with a solid movie career. ( We shall forget The Happening... lol )

Chris

I feel like sometimes it can, though, and it also depends on the deed. For example, I don't think anything undoes child abuse or hate crimes. Those things can and should never be forgiven. But I also feel like the statement is meant to imply forgiveness. I don't think the erasure thing is meant literally. I've always been of the mindset that it's amazing how many things can be made better with a simple apology. That doesn't mean it will always be enough. And when I say that a good deed can erase a bad one (again, replace the word erase with forgive) that doesn't mean I don't think a person doesn't also need to apologize. I guess when I say that I agree with the sentiment, it's because I took the word erase less literally and thought of it more as making up for. I think it's meant to be a metaphore for forgiveness.

Raven Dark

Great acting choice by Joe Pesci!

Eric Reacts

I disagree with the idea that a good deed can erase a bad deed. For instance if you did something to hurt them and then something to help them, you should still apologize sincerely for hurting them. Reminds me of Mark Wahlberg committing hate crimes when he was younger and he tried to have his record wiped clean because he's become successful and done good things. I think he can be redeemed, but I don't think his bad deeds can be erased. Just semantics but wanted to clear up my pov.

Eric Reacts

and those movies were fake and especially made for these movies <3

Natasha G

More answers to your questions. As you know, Patreon eats comments sometimes when I try to edit, so I'll leave them, so, a separate comment here. No, Duncan's Toy Chest is not a real store. Too bad, because it looks awesome. It is based off a real store though, the FAO Swartz store in New York. I always thought that the credit card comes back as stolen because the police told Kevin's parents they would track the cards so that they could get a location on Kevin if and when he uses them, and the only way to track a card is if it is reported as stolen. It's just an unfortunate thing that the notification ended up in the hands of a low-key villainous hotel employee who was determined to prove Kevin was up to no good. You're right, Kevin isn't a thief, but remember, the hotel guy only knows that the card came up stolen. He doesn't know the circumstances under which the card was reported as such, by the cops so they could track the card and find Kevin. The irony is, he said, "Let's see what the police have to say about this," and if Kevin had let him call the cops, the cops would have looked into it and realized he was a missing child and understood what happened, so he wouldn't have been in trouble. But Kevin is nine, and nine year olds might only hear the word police, think jail, get scared, and run off. The sequence with It's A Wonderful Life in Spanish is a callback to the first film. In the first one, the family was watching the same film in French. About Harry's line, "Grown men go into the park and don't leave alive." Here's the thing. TV and shows make New York sound like there is a murder every day, often grisly ones that have the cops constantly investigating homicides. These days, we know it doesn't work that way in real life. But enough people buy into the idea of New York as a big bad place because of TV that movies like this can play off of that and people will suspend their disbelief enough to accept it. This was even more the case back when this movie came out. The line leaps out at you as being wrong as much as it does because you are from New York. Most people who aren't wouldn't care. Also, the thing we have to remember is that these are kids movies. Okay, they're family movies, but when movies are geared toward a child audience, they have to stretch logic a bit. That's why the villains are kind of cartoonish. Otherwise Kevin outsmarting them would be ridiculous, and the movies would be too scary for kids. Yes the concept of NY with scary streets is being played up. Kids movie. I think they were also doing it to get a chuckle out of the adults. If you want to see another family movie like this that does that same thing with NY, check out Adventures in Babysitting. It's funny, but it also has some heartwarming moments too. It's an 80s classic. I feel like a good deed can absolutely erase a bad one, and not just for kids. I've seen plenty of people make some pretty bad mistakes but make up for them by doing something wonderful or heroic. It's surprising how easy it is to forgive someone when they've turned around and done something good. Please don't think I'm picking at you for your comments. In the same way that some viewers find it fun to pick out things in movies that don't work or didn't age well, I love logic-ing out how they can work. I love the music they play when Kevin sets up the traps for the robbers. That was the first time they had it in this film, but it is also the same music they used in the first film when he set up his house as the trap. John Williams is a legendary composer and one of my favorites. He's the same one who did the music for Star Wars, Superman, E.T., and Jaws. Oh, yeah. I meant to say something about the mumbling gibberish Harry does (the thing you imitated a few times). Marv does a little of it in this film when Kevin is hitting him with the bricks. So, since this is a family friendly film and a kid's movie, they didn't want a lot of swearing in the film. At the same time, Harry and Marv are supposed to be hardened criminals. They are a parody of hardened criminals, but still, it wouldn't work if they didn't come across aggressive and angry, which is hard to do without swearing for grown men who have done time. So Joe Peschie (Harry) came up with that gibberish as a way to sort of sound like he could be swearing to a kid's ear, and give the feeling of growing rage without risking turning parents off of letting their kids watch the movies. It fits with the slightly cartoonish tone of the villains. I think it was a really cool move on his part. Loved this reaction.

Raven Dark

one of the FEW sequels I actually highly enjoyed!

Natasha G

Haha, this reaction was as much fun as the first movie. I watched the other one right before this one. What a good time, Eric. I really like the way they were able to continue the series with this film, hitting all the same tropes, but making this one feel different enough that it doesn't feel like a retread. It's a hard thing to do, but they did it. The others in this series aren't nearly as good, so in case you're wondering if you should watch the sequels, I wouldn't bother with them. Buzz called the old man in the first film "old man Marley." I think you are right and people aren't allowed to sit up front in vans like that anymore, but that's because of the frequency of people attacking cabbies and other service drivers in the last fifteen years or so. Back when this movie came out, that wasn't as big of a concern, since it wouldn't have started happening a lot yet. Times have changed. Tim Currey's character (the guy behind the desk at the hotel) told the bellhop to "find out everything you can about that young fellow" because Kevin is a little kid alone in an extremely expensive hotel, which is odd. He didn't hear the story he told the woman who served him, so it didn't nullify him the way it did the woman. The bellhop was then looking at the tag on Kevin's bag and snooping because he was doing what Tim Currey's character said. Yes, the movie clip is from a sequel to the fictional film Kevin was watching in the first Home Alone movie. It showed the case for the film on the TV for a second. The movie Kevin was watching in the first Home Alone was called Angels With Filthy Souls. It's a fictional movie made up specifically for that movie. The film he was watching in this one was called Angels With Even Filthier Souls. Oh, before I forget, a comment I wanted to make while watching the reaction to the first movie. In the first bathroom scene where Kevin screamed, that stuff he poured from a bottle onto his hands and put on his face was aftershave. The implication is that it's his dad's. Aftershave is a funny thing. It tingles a little. On a grown man's skin, it's a pleasant sort of feeling that some guys like. The stuff smells nice, and it's meant to help prevent razer burn. But on a little kid's cheeks, the feeling would be too intense and sting. In case you think Kevin's reaction doesn't make sense, here's a fin fact about that scene. When filming that scene, Macaulay Culkin was supposed to put the aftershave on, but he accidentally put too much on and he wasn't expecting the feel of it to be that intense. So he slapped his hands to his face and screamed in shock. The reaction was so good that they left it in the film. So the actor's reaction in that scene is real. Since the director wouldn't have knowingly wanted macaulay to be that uncomfortable on purpose, I'm guessing that in the second scene where he does the same thing, the bottle was filled with just water and he recreated the hands to face scream. It's funny that the reaction the first time was real and it became one of the most iconic moments in movie history. So much that they have the Statue of Liberty with her hands to her face and screaming on the movie poster for the second film. Ohhh, the ice cream thing in this film. When you pointed out that there was already three scoops, I went back and watched that part again. You're right. The server put three scoops in, and then when they show the tray again from a different angle, there's only two. It's an editing flub. You'd be surprised how often these sort of mistakes happen in films and shows. Usually, it's things like, an actor's shirt is done up in one scene, and then when they cut back to him again, the top button is undone, or they're wearing sunglasses in one take, then when they cut to the actor again, they're holding them, then in another, they have them on again. I always find those sorts little mishaps interesting and love picking them out. Things like that usually happen because they have to do another take of a shot in the scene and forget some little thing when doing it over (in this case, they didn't make sure the number of scoops matched up with the previous shot). The editorial department will sometimes leave the mistake in instead of reshooting it since most people don't notice flubs like this when they're small. About the photo of his family Kevin was looking at. Maybe he isn't in the photo because he took the photo for his dad. We see a clip earlier in the film of him taking pics around New York, so he obviously likes doing that. I can see him asking his dad to let him take it. Or maybe it was taken before he was born. As to the unfit state of the house Kevin was setting up the traps for the robbers in. In the scene where he was looking at the photo and his dad's address book, he said he would visit his aunt and uncle if they were back from Paris. The way I see the scene with the house, it was like that because they were having major renovations done while on holiday in Paris. Sometimes a family will let renovators do that if they're going to be gone a while and the renovations will be really disruptive. What's interesting to think about is that aunt and uncle are probably going to be wondering what the hell the renovators got up to while they were gone with the horrendous mess Kevin would have left the house in.

Raven Dark


More Creators