Honey, I Blew Up the Kid (1992) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
68 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
6/10
give this dumb movie a break!
spectre316-19 July 2005
I expected some negative comments, but nearly every single one? C'mon, it's not that bad! It's really simple, stupid and (of course) illogical, but denying that there's no absurd comedic moments (the baby is kind of funny!) and no funny scenarios (the teenagers being stuck in the "toy car") seems bizarre to me.

I loved this film as a kid. There were specials on the Disney Channel when it finally (after what seemed like forever) premiered on there, and it was a rather neat experience for an eight year old.

In fact, I've watched this movie so many times as a kid that I've seen it a hell of a lot more than the unquestionably superior first movie. It was just one of those things.

Watching it now, I'll admit that the special effects can be rather cumbersome and the lines are almost always pure cheeseball (Rick Moranis' especially). Also, Keri Russell's work here is absolutely terrible; after watching a lot of "Felicity," I for some reason expected her to be at least near that quality. Not to mention the stupid "villian" who hits the baby with some projectile; very, very mock able.

But it's a nice little dumb movie! Who cares! It's certainly not "sequel hell," etc etc. It's entertaining at the very least.
15 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Honey, I Stunk the Script
kenjha12 May 2006
The lovable Szalinskis are at it again. In this inferior sequel to Honey, I Shrunk the Kids, Dad blows up his little son to the size of a redwood. It is enjoyable enough in the beginning but after a while the filmmakers run out of ideas about what to do with a big baby. As with the first film, Moranis brings a lot of energy to his role and Strassman still looks cute but the other kids and the nosy neighbors are missed. The plot line about Moranis' wacky boss just gets out of hand and by the time the action moves to Vegas, the whole plot becomes tiresome. It may have helped if they had a cuter kid play Adam or if they had him do some funnier things.
21 out of 30 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
No it's not as good as the first film, but as far as sequels go it isnt bad either
spencer-w-hensley23 November 2021
I rewatched this film recently as well as its predecessor and although the first film is superior in many ways, many people forget that there have been way, way worse sequels out there than this. Even the franchise's next installment Honey, We Shrunk Ourselves was much inferior to this.

This sequel is more targeted for smaller children than its predecessor was. Although its predecessor was a family film it had some more mature themes as well as moments that were intense.

Enlarging a toddler doesnt have the same comedic possibilities of shrinking four kids like its predecessor did but this is still an entertaining movie in it's own right.

The possibilities of what an enlarged toddler would do invading the streets of Las Vegas probably could have been explored a little bit more but what's on the screen are great special effects and performances as well as time catching up with the characters we loved in the first film.

The other thing is this movie was not supposed to originally be a sequel to its predecessor. It was supposed to be a standalone film about a giant baby from a freak accident. But when the first film became a smash, it would only make sense to re-write that concept as a sequel.

Rick Moranis is delightful as always, and his older son this time has a bit more personality than in the previous film. His daughter only appears briefly at the beginning before going off to college.

Lloyd Bridges offers solid support as the owner of the labs where Moranis works and brings a very welcome presence and this was also Keri Russell's first film and she offers good support as well.

And like its predecessor the special effects are amazing. Even for 1992 they are well done and hold up well in the present day.

If you like the great Rick Moranis whom we haven't seen in years (although we will see him again soon when this franchise's reboot entitled Shrunk hits theaters), or if you liked the first film you should enjoy this film also, although it is more juvenile in tone and humor than its predecessor it's still a lot of fun.

Remember it's a sequel. Everyone involved with or who saw Honey, I Shrunk the Kids I am pretty sure knew this was going to be a small step down in quality.

But that doesnt make it a bad movie. It's still a great childhood movie you can show your kids and have a good time.

Stream it on Disney Plus enjoy some nostalgia, dont compare it to its predecessor and you should have some fun.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
King Baby!
DarthBill9 April 2004
That affable, amiable, absent minded professor family man Wayne (Rick Moranis) is back, but now his experiments in size are funded by a big time company and he's a hot property. Unfortunately, his new toddler son, Adam, is the one who gets zapped this time, but instead of shrinking, he's turned into a toddler of Godzilla proportions. If you thought Wayne's wife was unhappy with Wayne shrinking their older son Nick and daughter Amy (who only cameos here) in the first film, just wait till you see her lose it here when she finds out her little boy Adam here! Now it's a race against time for Wayne to shrink Adam back down to size before he's destroyed by an uncaring society, with help from his now teenage son Nick and his girlfriend, Kerri Russell before she hit it big with "Felicity".

May strain the cuteness for some, will warm the hearts of others. Followed by a direct to video sequel that's not even worth the price of rental.
7 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
"Preeeety lame, Millhouse."
MovieAddict201629 June 2005
I really like the original "Honey I Shrunk the Kids" movie because it was clever, fun and I grew up on it. (Nostalgia always triumphs over film weaknesses.) However the sequel, "Honey I Blew Up the Kid," is absolutely terrible. Although it's not quite as bad as "We Shrunk Ourselves," it's still disastrous and a really poor cash-in on the original (which was an unexpected hit when it came out).

This one involves Wayne (Rick Moranis) the wacky inventor creating the opposite of his last machine - a ray gun that can blow up people (not literally, of course) and make them really huge. (This would certainly replace certain genitalia enlargement pills that exist on the market right now.) But oops, Wayne's toddler gets zapped by the sucker and turns into Godzilla.

The movie tries to rip off Godzilla and all those other cheesy movies by having Big Baby attack the Big City like a giant. Thankfully, he doesn't poop, because that would surely leave a stain on the city.

This movie is just lame. It isn't funny, it isn't clever, it's hard to watch at times. It's a disappointing sequel to a fun movie that never needed one.
17 out of 34 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Repurposed horror doesn't quite work
SnoopyStyle30 January 2015
Wayne Szalinski (Rick Moranis) is at it again in Nevada. His house is full of his inventions. His wife Diane (Marcia Strassman) takes their daughter Amy away to college. His son Nick pines for the lovely Mandy Park (Keri Russell). Wayne has licensed his invention to Sterling Labs but they have trouble enlarging. While Wayne and Nick work on the machine, little Adam gets zapped without their knowledge. Soon Adam is growing larger and larger as he wrecks havoc upon Las Vegas.

There is something fun and magical about kids shrunk down living in the small world. A giant baby isn't the same thing. It plays differently like a B-horror hybrid. I'm not sure why the sister comes and then leaves the movie. Maybe she had something better to do. Also I don't like putting a corporation and military into the mix. It has some fun moments but it gets more and more tiresome.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Hapless inventor at it again
michaelRokeefe23 November 2022
Warning: Spoilers
Wacky inventor Wayne Szalinski (Rick Moranis) is at it again. A couple of years have passed since Wayne shrunk his two kids. The Szalinskis have moved to a new neighborhood and Dian (Marcia Strassman) has blessed the family with a third child named Adam. The hapless inventor now tries his hand at tweaking his machine to make things grow. Success, the alternative machine makes objects grow in size. A two-year old Adam accidentally is zapped and electronics like TV, microwaves and lights unfortunately causes the toddler to begin to grow bigger. He manages to escape his babysitter (Keri Russell) and makes headway to the neon capital of the world...Las Vegas. The bright lights will have what effects on the child's growth and what havoc can be averted?

Silly and enjoyable as the first. The cast also features Lloyd Bridges, John Shea and Robert Oliverl.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Really not that bad for a sequel
TheLittleSongbird22 March 2010
I don't mind sequels, some are great like Home Alone 2 and Empire Strikes Back, some are nothing special but can be an improvement over their originals like Garfield 2 and others that belong in the garbage like Home Alone 4 and NeverEnding Story 3. This sequel really isn't that bad, at this point I don't think it belongs in either of these categories but in a category titled "a sequel that isn't as good as the original, but a sequel worth watching". It is very daft, even more dafter than Honey, I Shrunk the Kids, with a very silly final 20 minutes and the pacing at this point in the film isn't as strong as it was in the first 40 minutes, which was fun, fun, fun personified. Still, it is very entertaining for a number of reasons. It is nicely filmed, with a good soundtrack and some fun gags and physical comedy. But it was the performances that made it worthwhile. Rick Moranis reprises his role as Wayne and is immensely likable as always, and Marcia Strassman is great as Diane. Daniel and Joshua Shalikar are very cute as Adam, who has a nice, funny little laugh that doesn't grate, thank goodness. The other kids give appealing performances once again, the teen romance is evident here and is rather sappy, but hey I can live with that. Overall, for a sequel, this is really not bad. 7/10 Bethany Cox
20 out of 26 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
When will they learn?
grahamsj312 February 2004
That sequels almost never work? When will I learn not to bother to see sequels? At any rate, this is a typical sequel and, like most sequels, it stinks next to the original. The first film was pretty decent, but not great and this one is a very large step down. Few sequels have even come close to the original film and this isn't one of them. I liked the first film (but didn't love it). I didn't think much of this one. You probably won't either.
7 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Nothing To Hate But Nothing To Love,
lesleyharris3027 April 2013
Honey I Blew Up The Kid is a decent family movie with an average story line.The movie will definitely entertain a younger audience,but adults watching this movie with their kids will probably be bored,although I will say it isn't a horrible family film,its not the best,but its not the worst.The original,Honey I Shrunk The Kids,is definitely a much better movie for the whole family to watch.Honey I Blew Up The Kid will appeal to very young children,but the older audience will be bored,and fans of Honey I Shrunk The Kids will be disappointed by this sequel.

Wayne Szalinski (Rick Moranis) gets himself into another very difficult situation when a new experiment causes his youngest child keep growing more and more stories tall.
5 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Honey, they blew the sequel
rooboy8430 June 2002
This is a bad sequel. Bad acting, bad script. I'm surprised Wayne Szalinski did such a poor performance after he was great in the first movie.

Only up side is mild entertainment.

4/10
4 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Sequel Slightly Better
ccthemovieman-16 October 2006
Here's another example of the sequel being slightly better than the original, at least in my humble opinion. However, the original ("Honey, I Shrunk The Kids") was nothing super, not something you'd call a "classic." It was "pretty good." This one is "good."

It had more laughs and less irritating kids. There is still the stupid teen romance, but not emphasized as much as in the first movie. The little kid in here, who is turned into a giant, is cute and affable and his giggle is fun to hear.

The first 40 minutes of this film are the best. It gets a little too silly after that. At the end, Disney succumbs to the craze of the early '90s: having a woman punch out a man. In this case, it was nice mother (Marcia Strassman.) Give me a break!

The special-effects were okay but not totally convincing. In fairness, it's not easy trying to produce the effects of a 100-foot child walking down the streets of Las Vegas, but they've still come along way from the days of "The Attack Of The 50- Foot Woman" in 1958. However, there is still room for FX improvement.

Overall, some good laughs in the film and - with one exception - likable characters.
34 out of 52 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
A Large Adventure Perfect for the Whole Family
bwayjaime20 February 2017
I personally loved "Honey I Shrunk The Kids" and am a huge fan of Rick Moranis's work. As most sequels are, "Honey I Blew Up The Kid" is not nearly as good as the first. I however still found it enjoyable and a lot of fun. The effects could be considered a little dated when compared to more modern movies, but I think it still holds up considering the movie is almost 30 years old. I also felt the movie played it too safe with its action and did not take the risks of its predecessor.

I did enjoy getting to see Nick, who was only 11 in the first movie, as a young teen, dealing with fitting in and relationships (much like Amy's struggle in the first). Also fun fact, this is the first film appearance of Keri Russell from The Americans.

One thing that I wish this sequel would have given is a little bit of discussion on the aftermath of the kids who were shrunk in the first movie. I don't know about you but I would have some PTSD. Then again this movie's main demographic are children and families.

I would recommend watching this sequel if you were a fan of the first, or are looking for a fun, family adventure flick.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
they tried, but it just wasn't funny
helpless_dancer6 April 1999
This sequel was just not funny. The nutty professor screwed up again, but this time he made the baby into a 50 foot monster. I was not impressed.
8 out of 26 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
I Wish They Had Blown Up the Negatives to the Film.
tfrizzell30 May 2005
Another sleeping pill that doubles as a family picture for those without discriminating tastes. The terrible title is only the start of a whole list of problems in this smelly sequel to "Honey, I Shrunk the Kids". Mad scientist Rick Moranis accidentally turns his toddler son (the unbelievably hard to look at Daniel & Joshua Shalikar) into a giant that keeps growing and growing thanks to electronic pulses from appliances. It is as hopeless as it sounds. Anyway the youth starts to grow and grow as the audience's interest shrinks and shrinks and soon he is on his way to the Las Vegas strip. Basically a remake of "Attack of the 50 Foot Woman" and other wastes from the 1950s that were little more than interesting special effect yarns. Nothing unsuitable for wide audiences except for the fact that the picture is a critical dud. Lloyd Bridges is wasted as Moranis' silly boss. Watch for a young Keri Russell in a prevalent part. 2 stars out of 5.
4 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Anything for a Buck
Hitchcoc5 January 2017
The people at Disney are smart when it comes to making money. They knew that when "Honey, I Shrunk the Kids" was a real financial success, they could do the opposite thing and it would also bring in more bucks. And it did. However, the story has a big problem, which is mentioned by others. Everything is predicated on a baby, getting to be 100 feet high, reacting to things like a baby would to colors and light and interesting objects. The problem is that the joke gets stale about half way through the movie. When the little big guy becomes a threat, it gets sort of serious. It's up to Wayne to figure something out. If you don't want to use your brain at all, go see this. Otherwise, save a few buck and check out something with a little substance.
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Solid effects, weak story
Leofwine_draca15 January 2013
HONEY, I BLEW UP THE KID is the 1992 sequel to HONEY, I SHRUNK THE KIDS. Its premise is much the same as many 1950s era B-movies, involving a character growing to gigantic proportions before wreaking havoc in a US city.

The thing that wowed me with this production was the calibre of the special effects. The back projected scenes of the toddler stomping through the streets are integrated superbly with the actors and backdrops, as are the scenes when the toddler is a 'mere' seven foot tall. Back projection can sometimes look really obvious and cheesy, but never so here.

Sadly, the film's storyline is a lot weaker. There's some initial set-up involving nutty scientists and the like, but once the kid starts growing it all falls by the wayside. Rick Moranis and Marcia Strassman, both returning from the original, have little to do other than chase around after their kid and act concerned, and there's a lot less of the camaraderie and high spirits from the first movie. The villain is poor, the script poorer, and it's all very forgettable come the inevitable climax.
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Honey, I blew up the movie
Smells_Like_Cheese31 March 2004
Oh, wow. What a lame movie. I can't believe that that was Keri Russell. But you have to start somewhere. As for the movie, it's pretty stupid. There are a couple funny moments, but I wasn't impressed. The first one was more original, while this one just copies and copies. Wayne builds a machine that can blow up things now(make them bigger). His baby boy just happens to step in it's way. The son takes over the town like a Godzilla movie. That's pretty much it. I was also disappointed. I really wished they had brought the neighbors back from the first one. I thought that they stole the original. Stick to the first "Honey, I shrunk the kids". It's a lot better.

3/10
3 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Not Bad
matthewssilverhammer20 April 2018
The best part of this somewhat hacky comedy sequel is the genre change. The first is an adventure film with a suburban backyard as the wilderness. This one is a fairly straight-ahead comedy-cover of an old giant monster flick with a baby playing Godzilla. Sure, the cavalier reactions, obnoxious villains, and incredibly thin story aren't great. But the effects are still super impressive, the humor is good-natured, and Moranis can make almost anything worth watching.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Honey, I Blew Up the Kid
phubbs18 September 2017
Warning: Spoilers
After the first (successful) movie surrounding shrinkage, and being heavily influenced by some classic sci-fi flicks of the 50's, it was inevitable that we'd see this. Again heavily influenced by some classic black and white sci-fi movies of the 50's, we now find the Szalinskis' with a bigger problem. Yep its basically 'Attack of the 50 Foot Baby' or another 'King Kong' clone/homage.

The plot: Well the title says it all really. Oh OK, set five years after the tiny events of the first movie, the Szalinskis' now live in Nevada. They have a new two year old son called Adam, Nick is now a teenager and Amy has gone to college. Funnily enough Wayne (Rick Moranis) is now working on a ray gun that will increase the size of objects. On a routine trip to his work space at Sterling Labs, little Adam is accidentally zapped with the ray but nothing seems to happen. Later on at home Adam is exposed to electrical waves from the microwave which appear to trigger the enlargement process. Slowly Adam begins to gradually grow bigger and bigger; Wayne and Nick must now try to reverse the process before Adam becomes a danger to himself and others.

So again the main draw here are the effects, the big breezy colourful effects. How do they stand up? Well not too well really. OK lets start positive, there are numerous sequences where it appears that they used someone in a large bodysuit. In some scenes we see live action shots Moranis with a live action giant toddler, but if you look closely this does appear to be a very good bodysuit on an obviously tall person. These shots are always from behind the large toddler so as not to give the game away but they are very effective. This showcases the innovation of the effects crew which unfortunately could only go so far. Other than the usual oversized and undersized props, which are always highly effective if sometimes a bit rubbery looking, much of this movie has to rely on bluescreen and rear projection.

And this is where the movie really falls down, the terrible terrible bluescreen/rear projection effects. The bulk of the effects are unfortunately reliant on these techniques and alas it all stands out like a sore thumb. There are clear brightness differences between the live action in the foreground and projected background. Thick black lines outline much of the effects and the colours are faded throughout. Overall the effect is just way too obvious and really takes you out of the movie. Heck even some of the large sets are bad looking, when Nick and his young female counterpart are riding in Adams oversized pocket, it just looks poor. There are some nice touches of forced perspective in a few shots but again you can see right through them. Don't get me wrong I give them an A for effort but clearly the effects team needed more money or skills, many movies came out before this and looked way better.

Other than the effects there isn't a great deal on offer here frankly. The plot sees a clichéd company villain (John Shea) going after the oversized Adam for his own nefarious dastardly deeds (still not entirely sure why he gets fired by Sterling, for being mean?). This inevitably brings about the inevitable 'King Kong' homages as they use helicopters to try and tranquilise Adam. Lloyd Bridges pops up as Clifford Sterling, president of the Sterling company, a company that does...scientific type stuff. Obviously Bridges brings his own brand of spoof-esque humour which is fine but a bit childish, yeah I know its a kids flick but still. Moranis brings home his lovable nerdy Louis Tulley-esque character again; complete with more outrageous inventions which are admittedly pleasing to the eye. Nothing new really, they reverse or mirror some scenes and dialog from the first movie.

The movie ends in Vegas which generally looks horrendous from start to finish effects wise. The movie also becomes very stupid as they apparently evacuate the Las Vegas strip in around five minutes. They also manage to coordinate getting all the lights switched off down the strip in five minutes, like all of them! No one gets hurt, nothing gets damaged, and the way they placate Adam is vomit inducing. I guess its all understandable seeing as its essentially a kids movie but its still very lame, lazy and dull.

Doesn't help that the kid they use for the role of Adam is just kinda annoying, but that's just me. I think the problem here is the over use of an idea, the Kong sized threat. Add to that the fact its a giant toddler which isn't particularly interesting or threatening, and of course the fact the first movie used a less common theme which was executed way better. Overall its all adds up to a relatively fun movie with the odd decent moment. Its just fails to capture the magic of the first movie; in this case miniature things are more fun I think.

5/10
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
The story is stretched fairly thin, but the visual effects still hold up pretty well
cricketbat14 June 2021
While not as creative or fun as the original movie, Honey I Blew Up the Kid is still an entertaining film for the family to watch together. The story is stretched fairly thin, and the acting is pretty cheesy, but the visual effects hold up surprisingly well in parts. This sequel isn't bad, it's just not as good when you compare it to Honey I Shrunk the Kids.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Not as good as HISTK
abrafocus9 March 2006
Aside from the cute twins who played Adam this movie is relatively dull. I have the book, that has pictures from the movie, and it is practically the same.

The same actors from the first movie, minus the Thomsons, come back and they have a new addition to the family. Adam is a two-year old mischief maker who can get out of almost everything. The Szalinskis have moved to Las Vegas, and have a bigger house. Still, the place is often a mess.

Wayne has a new invention, a machine that enlarges matter, instead of shrinking it. But when an experiment goes awry, Adam is enlarged. The problem gets worse when he keeps growing due to a electromagnetic fuse. (or something like that) One of Wayne's fellow employees, Charles Hendrickson, is a typical villain. He wants to take credit for everything Wayne does, and almost gets away with it. Fortunately, h'es fired by his boss, Clifford Sterling. But that doesn't stop Charles. He later tries to take Adam away from his family to undergo tests, but Adam is eventually shrunk back down to two feet.

What could have been a better movie was a major disappointment.

My Score: 5/10.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Wayne Szalinski does it again, except now he has a machine that makes things grow.
clck200123 July 2007
This one is pretty good. Those who say that he runs around in a stupid King Kong or Godzilla like fashion are wrong. Does he eat anybody? No. Does he kill anybody? No. He is just a normal baby that has had an accident that most babies never have. He does break things, but that does not mean that he is a terror to society, or should be killed, or tranquilized. Moranis is excellent as his usual "eccentric" role in all three of these movies. Too bad the Szalinski's moved, because I liked the Thompsons from the original. I bet they either had to move because of Nick and Ron always at each others throats, or because Amy and Little Russ could never be parted. But it seems like Amy has forgotten all about Little Russ Thompson by now, because she just goes off to college with no regrets or worries. Bridges was good as Wayne's boss-totally different than his much earlier role as Harvey, the deputy, in the priceless classic, High Noon.
14 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
"I blew up the baby"
mvpdom26 May 2020
Warning: Spoilers
This sequel is worse than the original. I would not consider this a good sequel. It is not the a movie I would recommend almost ever. 4.8 I think is not fair it is not like it is the worst thing ever. As a movie itself it is ok. It made me laugh a couple times. There was a corny villain. There was an Indian Jones ester egg for some reason (I don't know if that is good or bad). The rules of this universe if changing the size something make no sense, but who cares. It does not fall into the trap of most bad sequels where they recast everyone. Half the cast is not really there, but they have the Dad, Mom, and Son. With the addition of a young Keri Russel to the cast Nicky's crush and ten family's babysitter. It made me laugh a giant baby is a little funny by itself. Specifically a few of the comical bits were:
  • the baby carrying the kids in his pocket the whole time.
  • the baby told a light up cowboy "howdy partner"
  • Martin, I think is the main guys name, has a speak about American be in a haven for crack pot inventors, with America the beautiful in the back ground.
  • the Marshall's office guy who was super excited to drive the ice cream truck for no particular reason.
Really no of these are that fun just "eh" That is what this movie is I just ok I sat down an watch it had few complains few praises and was entertained. Though the movie did not have a good story, no one expects that. If I had one major complaint it was the Dad'l singing twinkle twinkle little star to the baby in a really annoying bunny voice and it happened many times. I hated it, but I do not care. The original is a great family movie, this is a lake luster sequel.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
It just does not work, fails to captivate intended audience
rebeljenn30 December 2005
'Honey, I Blew Up The Kid' is the sequel to 'Honey, I Shrunk the Kids'. This time, the professor builds a machine that makes objects larger, and you can see the direction that this film is going in.

I found this film to be more geared to adults. The previous film was all about the children, but this film is about the parents and their baby. It's also not a funny film, but it tries to be funny. The characters also seem far removed from the previous film; I was expecting to see the same characters that I enjoyed watching in the original.

The film takes on the approach of the baby as Godzilla or King Kong. I suppose that this had to be a baby because the older children are more reasonable and know what they are doing, but a baby cannot comprehend on this level. I think this is the fault of the whole film. It's really not a film that children are going to want to see. (Children don't like babies because it is a big responsibility, with no pun intended.) The characters just are not believable or particularly engaging, and the story lacks substance. I would not recommend it because I think it fails to captivate a majority of the audience and the intended audience.
2 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed