haha, I
vaguely remember the Home Alone games and yeah, they're a perfect example of what I'm talking about. Does Macaulay Culkin have a pistol? If he does (which I'm assuming he doesn't) that's fantastic. The idea that the kid from Home Alone is about to shoot a man in cold blood is beyond hilarious to me (maybe that's an exaggeration, but it's still pretty damned hilarious).
there's a huge difference in humor value when it's not about real actors but pixel characters.
I think I see what you're saying, but I'm a bit confused. Do you mean this kind of ridiculousness is funnier if acted out by real people as opposed to in games? Like, a horrible film rendition of Moby Dick starring scythe-leg-Ahab would be funnier than a horrible game? If so, I agree completely. People tend to be more accepting of this kind of ridiculousness in games (as questionable plots seem often to be forgiven in the name of fun, engaging gameplay), but to me there's something uniquely charming and funny about it. Take the following quote from Wikipedia which, for the sake of my argument, I'm hoping is accurate:
The purpose of the game is to escape the Wet Bandits while bringing all the McCallister's fortunes from the house down to the safe room in the basement. Once all items have been sent down the chute to the basement Kevin must make it past rats, bats, and ghosts he encounters in the basement then fight the spider king so he can make it to the safe room to lock away all his families riches.
It's pretty obvious to that these additions were made in an effort to "game-up" a decidedly un-gamey license, and the thought of this stuff in the context of the original movie is just... wow. If a ghost and a giant spider had shown up half way through the movie... brilliant.
Developer
