The W
Views: 95603944
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
18.4.14 0810
The W - Movies & TV - A Good Day to Die Hard review with spoliers.
This thread has 10 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Thread rated: 3.05
Pages: 1
(442 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (7 total)
lotjx
Scrapple








Since: 5.9.08

Since last post: 21 hours
Last activity: 46 min.
#1 Posted on | Instant Rating: 1.12
Its more of a good day to slap the name Die Hard and Bruce Willis to a film. I am a great defender of these films, but man. If you thought it was unbelievable for John to survive being on top of a F-16 then this one makes it look old hat.

In this one, we find out Jack, John's son, is a spy. Yep, a fucking spy for the CIA. He is involved in a plot to rescue a political prisoner from an evil Russian, but it turns out the guy he is saving is actually a scumbag who wants to take the uranium he stashed out of Chernobyl, because he and the other evil Russian caused the accident, to sell on the black market. There a few twists and turns, but its a rather standard line action film. There are some call backs like John's cellphone ringtone is Halleluiah Chorus, Jack's last name is Geannero, Jack kills the villain at the end by shoving him off a building and they re-do the Rickman death scene with more helicopter blades and a few other things, but its not Die Hard. John is basically the Terminator and Jack is T-1000. Even the end is weird where John and the kids are together talking with weird music playing and you can't hear them talk. Its just not Die Hard.

My cousin said it best years ago, they are never going to capture the claustrophobia of the first film. On top of the many moving parts that film had. Even in 2, the worst one as far as I am concerned til today, you had the air traffic control guys trying to come up with plans to save the planes, Holly on the plane trying to stop the reporter and John doing everything he could to save his wife on top of the nosy female reporter and the bad guys. There are no moving parts here. There is also no chemistry. John's partner sans two is always an important part of the plot. Even Justin Long and Kevin Smith were entertaining and important to the plot. Jack is just an asshole. He has no redeeming qualities and is a complete fuck up. There really needed to be a scene or two prior to John's arrival to establish Jack as someone who had a personality and cared about the safety of his Russian target, who he is supposed to protect. Nothing. Either the actor is bad or the script is weak or both.

I know rebooting Die Hard is a sin. Yet, it might be time to put this horse out to pasture and give Willis one last shot at being McClain without the insane special effects. Go back to basics. John in a building or some other tight place with nothing, but his wits and gun against some terrorist who are really thieves. Have him finally die and either end the series or pass it on to his son, maybe re-casting a better actor for that part. The cursing didn't help either. I think it actually helped in 4, but if you see Kevin Smith's one night stand about his time there, probably not.

(edited by lotjx on 16.2.13 1810)


The Wee Baby Sheamus.Twitter: @realjoecarfley its a bit more toned down there. A bit.
Promote this thread!
Kevintripod
Andouille








Since: 11.5.03
From: Mount Pleasant, Pa.

Since last post: 4 days
Last activity: 7 hours
AIM:  
#2 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.64
I was thinking of going to see it, but then I changed my mind after reading this.

http://news.moviefone.com/2013/02/14/a-good-day-to-die-hard-review-bruce-willis_n_2689765.html


'A Good Day to Die Hard' Review: The Pros and Cons of the Bruce Willis Sequel

This weekend, the fifth film in the “Die Hard” franchise, “A Good Day to Die Hard,” opens in theaters. This time around, Bruce Willis's character looks to save his son, Jack, after he botches a CIA mission in Moscow. Yes, John McClane’s son is in the CIA. And yes, 20 years after the first “Die Hard” hit theaters, McClane Sr. still thinks he knows better than everyone else.

Unfortunately, that’s about all you’re going to recognize in this bloated, explosion-heavy sequel, starring Jai Courtney and Mary Elizabeth Winstead. Below, a rundown of the pros and cons of the film.

PRO: The Return of John McClane

Everyone’s favorite no-nonsense, step-on-glass-if-you-have-to-get-the-job-done New York City police officer is back, and that should be reason enough to celebrate. No matter what your thoughts are on the previous -- and somewhat lackluster -- “Die Hard” sequels, audiences still feel attached to this character (at least, the character they remember from the original 1988 film). Granted, that is the problem with all the “Die Hard” sequels: John McClane's “everyman” cop left a long time ago. Still, people always seem to hold out hope that some form of the character they used to know will show up. But if you think that’s going to happen in “A Good Day to Die Hard,” you are sorely mistaken.

CON: The Return of John McClane … as a Supporting Character

Like every other “Die Hard,” this chapter stars Bruce Willis, which is why it may come as a surprise that this isn’t his film. In fact, Willis's McClane is essentially demoted to a supporting role here, making way for some younger talent in the form of his son, Jack, played by Courtney. We’ll give you one guess as to why that is. (It’s more sequels. The reason is to make more “Die Hard” sequels.) This wouldn’t be so bad if Willis seemed to care one iota about this movie and the millions of fans who will pay money to watch him fight his way through terrorists. Unfortunately, Willis is just window dressing here, stumbling around Moscow like an embarrassing father making dumb observations and jokes about Russians and bad guys. He also feels the need to throw in the “I am just on vacation” line every time some jerk with a machine gun decides to shoot at him.

PRO: Some of the Action Sequences Are OK

There’s nothing groundbreaking about the explosions and chase scenes in this film -- they happen about every two minutes. But there are a few cool ones, including the aforementioned highway chase scene where McClane Sr. looks to elude a gigantic tank. There's also a scene at the end that shamelessly pays homage to the first movie. One word of advice, though: make sure to leave your “that would never happen in real life” reaction card at the door. There was clearly no one involved in the making of this movie that cared enough to make it realistic. Also, if you’ve seen the last four “Die Hard” flicks, you should know this already.

CON: Everything Else Is Pretty Bad

On the surface, the plot for this film isn’t that ridiculous: John McClane heads to Moscow to find his son, only to discover that he’s a CIA operative in the middle of tracking two Russian oligarchs who caused the Chernobyl meltdown. But the entire film is chock-full of terrible dialogue, and the direction is even worse. John Moore puts the camera right in the middle of the action, so much so that you have absolutely no clue what is going on. Who’s fighting whom? Where did that bullet come from? Wait, why is there a car in a helicopter on the highway? WHAT’S GOING ON?!











"You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life." - Winston Churchill
Oliver
Scrapple








Since: 20.6.02
From: Derkaderkastan

Since last post: 3 days
Last activity: 17 hours
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#3 Posted on | Instant Rating: 2.98
I loved Life Free or Die Hard - and I'm excited to see this. I think people tend to forget that movies like Die Hard aren't intellectual masterpieces. They'll never win Oscars like Amadeus. These movies are simply put, "Check your brain at the door and prepare to have a good time."

I'm gonna see it tomorrow, and I'll be damned if I don't leave with a grin on my face and my blood pumping, much like I did watching the last one.

(edited by Oliver on 16.2.13 2032)


...on a roll!
lotjx
Scrapple








Since: 5.9.08

Since last post: 21 hours
Last activity: 46 min.
#4 Posted on | Instant Rating: 1.12
    Originally posted by Oliver
    I loved Life Free or Die Hard - and I'm excited to see this. I think people tend to forget that movies like Die Hard aren't intellectual masterpieces. They'll never win Oscars like Amadeus. These movies are simply put, "Check your brain at the door and prepare to have a good time."

    I'm gonna see it tomorrow, and I'll be damned if I don't leave with a grin on my face and my blood pumping, much like I did watching the last one.

    (edited by Oliver on 16.2.13 2032)


I have to somewhat disagree with that. Die Hard is a masterpiece. It is for a lot of people the Citzen Kane of action movies. The first one had a lot of twists, turns, character moments and real emotions. Yes, it had a lot of awesome OMG action moments, but there was heart there. I actually think it did win Oscars. Regardless, the more they do of these movies the less it feels like part of the definitive story which is a normal guy who bleeds and gets hurts against impossible odds. Now, the odds are no longer impossible.

(edited by lotjx on 17.2.13 1009)


The Wee Baby Sheamus.Twitter: @realjoecarfley its a bit more toned down there. A bit.
bubblesthechimp
Boudin rouge








Since: 22.3.02
From: Weymouth, Ma

Since last post: 17 days
Last activity: 16 hours
#5 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.00
    Originally posted by lotjx
      Originally posted by Oliver
      The more they do of these movies the less it feels like part of the definitive story which is a normal guy who bleeds and gets hurts against impossible odds. Now, the odds are no longer impossible.

      (edited by lotjx on 17.2.13 1009)


    This is one of the worst aspects of the Die Hard series. In the original you fely like John Mclane was a normal guy who was thrown in way over his head and had no choice but to gut it out and survive. Even in the second movie you felt like his desperation, dumb luck, and confidence in having done it before would get him through. Unfortunately it's reached the point where this normal guy is now convienently stumbling into worldwide terror plots like he's actively looking for trouble. How many times can the right guy in the right place at the right time be the same guy?
Greymarch
Goetta








Since: 24.2.03
From: Toronto, Canada

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 12 hours
#6 Posted on | Instant Rating: 2.00
Though you could look at that he's been through all these things and it's Hardened (;)) him up and made him more aware of what he is actually capable of.

It would kind of stress credibility (ha!) to have a regular Joe go through all of this shit and still just be a normal dude by the end of it.

I also actually liked Live Free or Die Hard, and Die Hard With a Vengeance but have no real urge to see this one.
Scottyflamingo
Bratwurst








Since: 23.6.10
From: Auburn, AL

Since last post: 273 days
Last activity: 2 days
#7 Posted on | Instant Rating: 2.49
No desire to see this. In my world the series consists of Die Hard and Die Hard With A Vengence.
Thread rated: 3.05
Pages: 1
Thread ahead: The Office 9x16: Moving On
Next thread: Community 4x2 "Paranormal Parentage"
Previous thread: New DVDs coming out 2/19/13 (284)
(442 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
I read those too ... It only makes me long for them even more ... the "Fast Times" episode could be freakin' sweet.
Related threads: Beautiful Creatures - Warm Bodies - More X-Men in Days of Future Past - More...
The W - Movies & TV - A Good Day to Die Hard review with spoliers.Register and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.165 seconds.