Because he makes more off of 2. He was paid a lot more, plus owns 5% of net profits and 15% of all merchandising for the second film.
Macaulay Culkin says Home Alone 2 is better than the first
by Anonymous | reply 11 | August 8, 2025 11:25 PM |
He’s right.
by Anonymous | reply 1 | August 8, 2025 10:43 PM |
I found it inexcusably cheap and boring
by Anonymous | reply 2 | August 8, 2025 10:49 PM |
r2 You never saw it.
by Anonymous | reply 3 | August 8, 2025 10:53 PM |
They're both great, but the "you've been smoochin' behind my back" scene gives the sequel the edge. I could have lived without Brenda Fricker, though.
by Anonymous | reply 4 | August 8, 2025 10:55 PM |
I like the New York one because Trump is in it.
by Anonymous | reply 5 | August 8, 2025 11:00 PM |
He's a whore.
And a closet case.
by Anonymous | reply 6 | August 8, 2025 11:00 PM |
R5 grow up.
Tim Curry alone makes the sequel better
by Anonymous | reply 7 | August 8, 2025 11:01 PM |
r6 Inaccurate
by Anonymous | reply 8 | August 8, 2025 11:18 PM |
R6 no he isn’t. Grow up.
by Anonymous | reply 9 | August 8, 2025 11:19 PM |
As a 90s baby I adored Home Alone 2. It’s one of the first movies I remember watching. I got a Talkboy as a Christmas gift the year after it came out and I loved playing with it. Then I grew up, watched both movies through more discerning adult eyes and realized the truth. The first Home Alone is superior and Home Alone 2 is just a knockoff inside the Plaza hotel. It’s still a good movie and I watch both every Christmas season.
by Anonymous | reply 10 | August 8, 2025 11:20 PM |
R10 I find the opposite. I first thought the sequel was inferior, but I find it now to be better.
Maybe because the NYC pictured in the film really doesn't exist anymore. It is a wonderful time capsule of a pre-Bloomberg Manhattan.
by Anonymous | reply 11 | August 8, 2025 11:25 PM |