YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.
>a scarface reference but with M&M's
So are we just pretty much stuck with all movies looking like an episode of a tv series now?
>>224557>Straight to Disney+>Not streamed in theaters>Viewed on a television
Gee, what should it look like?
everything is releasing on streaming now you dumb nigger, capeshit goes straight to streaming. And it looks equally cheap and bad despite costing real money to make.
It's always been money laundering.
Well the trailer didnt make me vomit uncontrollably so this looks to be a good movie by today's standards.
The whole movie looks like one throwback to the first, there didn't look like there as one original moment, other than the producers' decision to use a fat kid with no charisma or screen presence.
These threads are proof we cannot get in to the holiday spirit. Tis the tism
That and he's not acting like he's at all vulnerable or in a difficult situation, and if he does eventually in the film, it will already appear disingenuous. The original home alone movies had suspense and drama which was interrupted by the slapstick.
I thought he was a spic but his mom is british.
He was probably cast to be racially ambiguous.
Is this some kind of anti-2A movie?>You don't need guns to defend your home. Look how easy it is for your son to do it on his own without guns. He's more of an adult than you, goyim, which means he can consent to sexual relations.
Yeah, he is a 52%/Amerimutt for sure.
And that pseudo-tagline under the title: "Holiday classics were meant to be broken" says it all really. The old classics are being broken by modern, "diverse" remakes. At least they are admitting to breaking the classic.
Yeah there's no worry or fear, just arrogant confidence. Part of the entire appeal, and the hook to the original movie trailers was Kevin's hands on face open mouthed shock at being left alone, and the tension and suspense of not just being forgotten, but also in immediate danger. This just looks like they're ripping off Catherine O'Hare for the getting home scenes (they could have made it the father, they could have made the whole family go, but of course it's going to hit every note the original had.), and I don't know what the hell the home robbery is supposed to be about because this is straight from disney…"sees Kemper and Delaney play a wife and husband who, in order to save their home from financial ruin, go to war with a kid who has stolen a priceless heirloom" and that does not sound to me like I am going to sympathize much with some malicious fatfaced twerp actively trying to murder people.
>>224679>"sees Kemper and Delaney play a wife and husband who, in order to save their home from financial ruin, go to war with a kid who has stolen a priceless heirloom"
Wait, that's also the plot from one of the sequels (4?), the one with Malcolm McDowell and Jodelle Ferland, where the badguys are trying to steal the Scream
painting by Edvard Munch.
>>224679>that does not sound to me like I am going to sympathize much with some malicious fatfaced twerp actively trying to murder people.
He's mystery meat, so should you?
That's the plot to number 5, a Holiday Heist television special. Somehow I think this new one will be right about the same level of quality.>>224687>Mystery
It's no mystery what that little lardball is, one more nail in the lid on America's coffin.
Such an unlikeable face.
The couple thief squad is way more likeable.
Even the mom is unlikeable.
They replaced the Aryan kid with a Jew?
Why are they British and have Black children?
Mark Brahmin is going to love this.
Wait for the inevitable Salon or Vice article spinning this latest take as an anti-capitalist screed with the two robbers as the real protagonists a la the gookflick Parasite.