रिची रिच

I don't know why it has such a low rating. The movie does not want to be taken serious. So it is not serious. The movie is aimed at kids and that makes it great. I watched it in my early twenties and had a good evening watching the movie. Great for family's and kids.

This movie - Macaulay Culkin's Last movie as a child is not his best but not his worst - that goes to the unfunny Ted Danson Action 'comedy' Getting even with dad which came out the same year- But it's pretty sickly sweet and you can see why it bombed at the Box Office. The plot concerns the richest boy in the world 'Richie Rich' Played by Culkin, But by this time he was at 14 looking too old to play the title role. He's the boy who has everything, wealthy parents lives in a big mansion has a butler (wonderfully played by Johnathan Hyde) - But he's very lonely, he has no friends. So one day he tries to join a group of inner city kids playing baseball but they don't want to know him. one of Richie's father's associates Lawrence van dough (John Larroquette) wants to get his hands on the company and the family's fortune, so he tries to kill mum and dad -Ritchie needs the other kids's help to save the company, his parents and his fortune aided by The butler.

Not a bad movie it has a very good moral story (all the money in the world can't make you happy)- But strictlty for KIDS or easily amused adults

Rating 7/10

This was Macaulay Culkin's first major flop, when he was finally un-cute enough that viewers noticed he couldn't act. Other than that, compared with other mindless, shallow, hopelessly far-fetched pseudo-adventures designed for either very small or very uncritical children, it's really not worse than one would expect. Well, the comic book on which it's based is not exactly Stan Lee either… From a pedagogical point of view, one must say that Richie takes control of his situation in the absence of his parents, makes decisions that are largely sensible and practical, and carries them out mostly without adult help. He combines emotional and rational qualities without violating his basic identity as a kid. To me, that's all good, and redeems the entertainment value of this movie for a young audience.

I gave this movie a 7 on a scale of 1-10 because I took into consideration it is a kids movie and should be judged as such. When this movie came out I was 13 and of course I enjoyed it much more then as opposed to now but having watched it as a child and as an adult I do remember how much I enjoyed the film as a kid. From the harsh grade of a 4.4 average I assume people where comparing this to complex movies with great plots. Kids should not be subjected to nothing but adult theme. So when you grade the movie remember what audience it was desighned for.As a child I would have gave this movie a 7. Would you drive a metro and act as if it should perform like a porsche?

I didn't absolutely hate Richie Rich, but for me it wasn't that great either. As usual, there were some good things, but some not so good things as well.

THE GOOD THINGS:

1) Macaulay Culkin, personally I think he is better an actor than people give him credit for. He is one of the main reasons why I love the first two Home Alone movies so much. Here, he gives a very spirited lead performance, admittedly not as cute as he was when he was starring in underrated gems like Uncle Buck, but he shows once again what a talented actor he was.

2) Jonathan Hyde as the butler comes very close to stealing the show, a very funny and sly performance. Also Edward Hermann and Christine Ebersole give humorous performances, while John Larroquette plays the villain of the piece more than adequately.

3) The scenery is quite impressive, captured well by the breezy cinematography. The Biltmore estate was gorgeous.

4) The soundtrack was decent, nice background music especially.

5) I liked the moral the film taught; All the money in the world can't make you happy, thinking about it that is true.

THE NOT SO GOOD THINGS:

1) While I liked the moral of the film, the story itself is predictable and somewhat contrived. it probably doesn't help you have seen it all before.

2) The script is quite weak in general. Don't get me wrong there were some good spots like "Oh my god I look like Michael Jackson!" but the jokes are admittedly very silly and juvenile, and the scripting does fall in the danger of becoming clichéd.

3) The pacing. Now I don't mind films that move fast. I do have more of a problem if the pacing is TOO fast, despite the feel good nature of the film, and its valiant attempt to rise above superficial material, the film feels a little too rushed, the ending particularly felt skimmed over.

4) The characters feel rather stereotypical. Maybe that is an unfair complaint as it probably couldn't be avoided, but I couldn't help thinking yeah I recognise that type of character.

Overall, definitely not a bad film, worth watching at least once, but I personally didn't find it that great. 5/10 Bethany Cox