The Hidden Genius of Home Alone

Ahh, there you are. Welcome cinephiles, one and all, to these hallowed pages where we, masters of the craft, can hide from the weekend box office smash watching rabble. I am Pavarotti Killington, your guide to the movies.

Movie critics agree that there have been numerous ground breaking pictures followed by, arguably, even greater sequels: “The Godfather” and “The Godfather II,” “A New Hope” and “The Empire Strikes Back” and “The Fellowship of the Ring” and “The Two Towers,” to name a few examples. But all of these films must bow to the greatest one, two combination of all time, the Ruth and Gehrig of movie pairings: “Home Alone” and “Home Alone 2.”

Surely you jest, sir, you are saying, as you grab the nearest pitchfork and wrap this lighted article around your freshest torch. But, please, sit, and instead grab your monocle and pipe and light your finest tobacco as you ponder my argument.

At their surfaces, these two films are already high in the canon of cinematic taste for good reason. Both are hysterical, emotionally touching, and feature the fine acting of Macaulay Culkin, who is perhaps the greatest young thespian to ever grace the screen, matched, perhaps, only by Haley Joel Osment of “The Sixth Sense.”

However, in its simple packaging as a classic John Hughes comedy revered by young and old, it’s easy to miss the nuances and messages which these films truly wish to convey. Do not feel depressed or curse your supposed good taste. This is something even the greats of the illustrious American Film Institute have failed to realize with all of their tweed jackets and beard rubbing.

Enough cannot be said of the sheer genius of Hughes. Take his satirical portrayal of the suburban family in all its greatness: the big house, the fancy possessions and the wealth to send themselves and Uncle Frank’s family on not one, but two vacations.

Yet, somehow amidst this capitalist prestige, society’s model family manages to forget their youngest son, not once, but twice, causing a chain of calamity that only comes to an end thanks to the street smarts of said youngster. Would an inner city welfare mother working two jobs to make ends meet be met with such forgiveness and robust laughter, or would the forgotten child, soaked in tears, be ripped from mother’s arms to the repeated cries of “I did the best I could. It was an accident.”

The brilliance does not stop there. In “Home Alone 2,” Hughes shows us one of the grandest five stars hotels the world has ever seen. But, with all of The Plaza’s glitz, glamour and supposed hospitality, the young Kevin turns to a feces covered bird lady, who is so much of a hermit that she does not even chant, “toppins for a bag.” Hence, the two stereotypes are flipped upside down as she befriends Kevin and ultimately saves him, which the dolts at the hotel fail to do.

Sure, they were tricked by a Talkboy and foiled by the antagonist of “Angels with Even Filthier Souls,” but as adults responsible enough to run a fine hotel, society would expect them to possess the wisdom of forgiveness to save the boy. Again, Hughes’ shows that society’s labels are not always so fitting. Furthermore, that a world with no labels would perhaps be a true utopia.

The examples of such genius in these two cinematic achievements are endless, so I will digress no further as you clearly get the point. Every artist aims to create something unreachable and ever lasting. May there be hope that these “family” films are not perfection. That artists will not pack their creativity, forever depressed by the revelation that these films make future cinema irrelevant.