'THE GOOD SON'. What in the world was I thinking!? (1 Viewer)

[Inspector Hammer!]

Perhaps nobody here cares to discuss this extremly mediocre thriller from 1993 starring little Mac Culkin as a psychotic lttle runt who wants to push his own mother off a cliff, but I have to get this out.
WHAT THE HELL WAS WRONG WITH ME!?
I asked this because I used to like this movie! I saw in theaters, and owned it on vhs for a time, and genuinly enjoyed it. However I recently saw it again on (GASP) AMC!?!?
After it was over, I was just floored by how fooled I was by this film into thinking it was ever a good movie. The films gimmic is that we get to see Culkin be evil and do horrible things to people, well so what? He does the same things in the 'HA' films too, I was never that entertained seeing him pummel and punish Joe Pesci and Danial Stern into a bloody pulp, to me, it always seemed more sadistic than funny.
And oh boy, their's the ending! Don't get me started. Too late.
What mother would choose to save her nephew rather than her own kid!? Especially when she has barly had time to grasp that her son was disturbed, I mean she just found out! So i'm a mother right, I think FOR 10 YEARS that my kid is an angel, I love him dearly and would die for him, BUT THEN one day I find out that he's not an angel at all, but an evil malicious little kid, so I immediatly write him off and drop him from a cliff to save a kid who I barly even know!? She didn't even seem upset!
I didn't even buy the fact that he was labled "evil". To me, the word "evil" implies something almost supernatural, something that the devil himself has a hand in, Culkin in this movie just came across as an arrogant little bastard who liked to do bad things, not really "evil", just twisted.
This film pushed my buttons in all the wrong places this time. In fact the films only saving grace is the boy who would become 'Frodo Baggins' Elija Wood, he was great in this film, perhaps HE should have played Culkins part, and vice versa. No, i'm wrong, just leave Culkin out of the film altogether.
I want to say thanks in advance to those that reply to a thread caring enough to talk about a film from 93 that nobody remembers, and nobody cares about.

 

[Eric Walsh]

It is weird you bring this film up because I saw a clip of it the other month when I was home visiting my family and like you, I used to really enjoy this movie. I probably saw it a great number of times and being fairly young then was pretty scared of the boy in the film. My girlfriend has stated numerous times she too really enjoys this film. But also like you neither of us have seen it for a great many years. I would really like the chance to revisit it to see if I still like it or am like you and now hate it.
You seem pretty angry about not liking the film this time. Did you just really want to like it to take you back to when you used to or what? I guess sometimes (in my case anyway) we grow out of films, especially if we watch a great number of them. I find myself getting more and more critical these days with films and not watching them just for the fun of it and not really caring that much about them. I think I will attempt to catch this one again soon and maybe come back here with my feelings about my current viewing, because it would really shock me if I did not like it now because I did really used to like it a lot. No chance that this is on DVD is there? (I'll be checking once I post this, I can't resist.)
-Eric

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

Well, this is how it happened, I was thumbing through the t.v. guide looking for something to watch and saw that it was coming on so I thought "Hey, that's a pretty good movie." so I sat down and started watching it. But a funny thing started happening as I was getting deeper into the running time of the movie. I started getting this sinking feeling in the pit of my stomach as I bagan to see all of the flaws in this film that I did not see before, and I finally came to the conclusion, much to my shock, that their was no mistaking it: this is a bad movie!

Then I read Roger Eberts review, and he had all the same problems with the movie that I had just witnessed, and that just nailed it, I no longer cared to see this film again.

Maybe it's because i've become a more cynical movie watcher since last seeing this movie, in fact, that is PRECISLY the reason. So i'm not really "angry", but just a little taken aback, I thought I would enjoy it again.

 

[Dome Vongvises]

See John, your problem is that as you've grown up, you also got that maturing disease. Shame on you.

:p)

 

[Scott Weinberg]

I'm with you, John. This is NOT a movie to re-visit! The Good Son is as poorly acted and simplistic as it is derivative and insultingly manipulative.
I suppose this one works as a 'so bad it's good' flick, but life's too short to waste time on movies this wacky...especially more than once!

 

[Sean Oneil]

The "Asian Sensation" is correct. -LOL

 

[Nick Sievers]

I haven't seen the Good Son since it first came out on VHS, I have good memories of it - but like you guy's say I guess it is something that should not be revisited. I was only 12 or 13 at the time

 

[Ricardo C]

I STILL enjoy the movie. Culkin's best acting yet. I must have Jim Steinman syndrome, I just refuse to grow up