A Good Day to Die Hard

[Kevin Holly]

Garbage.

[Abdrewes]

Grbg.

[Aerodude73]

Originally Posted by IronWaffle

A friend emailed me his review: Died Flaccid.

I'll be skipping this.

This could be the post of the day.

Originally Posted by bowlingbilly10

Shut up haters. I really liked it. Go see safe haven or beautiful creatures instead

It's called an opinion. You have yours, others have theirs.

[bowlingbilly10]

I know I just didn't think the movie was that bad like everyone has been saying.

[Walts Ghost]

Originally Posted by bowlingbilly10

I know I just didn't think the movie was that bad like everyone has been saying.

That's fine, but you don't need to call people haters because we don't agree. No need for name calling. We can all get along here if we try.

[Aerodude73]

Originally Posted by Walts Ghost

That's fine, but you don't need to call people haters because we don't agree. No need for name calling. We can all get along here if we try.

[AGH]

Originally Posted by mlittle3

What's wrong with mindless action?

All Die Hard movies are mindless and highly implausible. I just watched Die Hard 2 and it has plenty of mindless shooting scenes.

I just noticed this now. I've been reading through a lot of the posts above and they all pretty much answered that question. Mindless and implausible? Not necessarily. Sure, there are a few reaches in terms of realism, but the new one is following in the footsteps of movies that force feed you constant artificial crap and rely on it to maintain your attention. The Expendables is the same type of film, but it was supposed to be that way. How many action stars can we get into one movie and make everything blow up? In my opinion, the original Die Hard series wasn't intended for the same purpose. It was to provide a good story with the action and killing having justification/reason/purpose. In addition, the fantastic acting from Willis, Rickman, Irons... Hell, even the Big Guy, Carl Winslow... I mean, Al (VelJohnson)! ... is nothing to scoff at. Give me some story. I want some build up. I would like dinner before the bang.

[MovieKing101]

Originally Posted by aoife

You people are hilarious. Critics bash a movie, you all jump on the same wagon and bash it, too. Critics love it, and you do the same shit as well.

Personally, I don't care what critics say, I enjoyed this movie for what it is. Sure, it's not as good as the original three movies, but it is, in no way, worse than the fourth. They're just entertaining movies! And this latest Die Hard film is fun, it never takes itself too seriously and I love that. That's part of what makes the Die Hard movies so much fun.

It seems every movie today has to be dark and gritty to be considered good. I wonder how old most of you people are. I enjoyed A Good Day to Die Hard and I'll be getting it on blu-ray as soon as it comes out.

You need to watch more movies.

Originally Posted by slimdude

Of all the negativity this movie is getting, I bet everybody can't wait for the blu-ray release, to add it to their collection.

Heck no. I will never buy this.

Originally Posted by Ao-Pyramid

For those who have seen it, would you buy it on blu-ray?

Nope

Originally Posted by bowlingbilly10

Shut up haters. I really liked it. Go see safe haven or beautiful creatures instead

Safe Haven was better then A Good Day to Die Hard, hell even Beautiful Creatures was more entertaining.

A Good Day to Die Hard - was an awful piece of shit. 0/10
The horrible chemistry/daddy issues between John and his son was annoying.
slow motion
stupid script/plot
terrible pace
action wasn't all that enjoyable.
Bruce Willis looked bored in it.

Don't know how any can enjoy this POS.

[Foggy]

Originally Posted by Abdrewes

Thanks for clarifying that a bit. The relationship between a movie and the history it draws from, should be discussed. It's just the constraints of the written word and online forums that made your initial post to be a bit vague.

(Un)Regrettably I'll be seeing this on Tuesday, but it seems to be another knock against the film that it's just as drenched in xenophobia as the Taken series. I mean cone on Chernobyl is like 700 kM away from Moscow anyways.

And they drive there in just a few hours.

[HotRats]

Another disappointment from Skip Woods, who has never lived up to his debut, fun little crime film Thursday. God knows what the Kane and Lynch film will be like. Meanwhile, write your own Die Hard 6


Die Hard 6: Well Hard.

McClane in London uncovers the fiendish plot by Prime Minister David Cameron (Alan Ford, whose ability with colourful language guarantees the coveted R Rating) to contaminate hamburgers with horsemeat thus bankrupting McDonalds and leaving the way open for a global empire of jellied eel stalls. McClane fights off a deadly Pearly King played by Jet Li and a homicidal Widow Twankey (Ian McKellen). No car chase because of the congestion charge so Prince Harry (Ray Winstone) transports McClane by helicopter to Cameron's lair, a pie and mash shop at the top of the London Eye which becomes dislodged in the battle, rolling into the Thames where McClane comes under attack from trained killer eels. The London Eye crashes into Parliament during the State Opening. McClane seizes the staff from Black Rod and defeats Cameron who is armed with the Mace. Last minute surprise in the form of The Lord Speaker of the House of Lords (Vinnie Jones) attempting to steal the Crown Jewels. Queen Elizabeth (Angelina Jolie) knights McClane and gives him Surrey and Pippa Middleton

[spanky87]

One of 2 things needs to happen:

Either Die Hard dies here and now or FOX gets a top notch writer/director for Die Hard 6 to end the series on a high note. And that will be that, no more sequels or a remake.

Gets so embarrassing to see a classic action film from the 80s become one of those endless movie franchises. Why couldn't it have just been Die Hard (1988). That way people wouldn't roll their eyes when you call Die Hard a classic. I say this even though I really like Die Hard 3.

[DoubleDownAgain]

82 votes so far and NO 5-star votes.

Glad I caught up with Silver Linings Playbook instead.

[duggie walker]

Originally Posted by MovieKing101

You need to watch more movies.

This is true. I do forget that many of the members here probably haven't seen many of the classics, so they probably don't have much to compare modern films to.

I grew up watching movies from Hollywood's Second Golden Age, the 70s, when mainstream thrillers didn't require you to turn your brain off, by and large. That makes it very difficult to be satisfied with what's offered up today. Of course, there were very few "action" films in those days ie films in which the destructive setpieces are everything - Bond was pretty much the only game in town. But I'd maintain that that wasn't a bad thing. Without decent plot and characterisation, no amount of action can be very thrilling.

When people can give a film a pass purely on the thunderousness of the soundtrack, we're pretty much lost.

[TheWildWhelk]

Originally Posted by spanky87

One of 2 things needs to happen:
Either Die Hard dies here and now or FOX gets a top notch writer/director for Die Hard 6 to end the series on a high note. And that will be that, no more sequels or a remake.

Die hard 1 and 3 Director John McTiernan should be out prison by the time DH6 is ready to go into production, so i'd re-hire him, as he isn't going to be able to get a job directing traffic after his legal problems.

The idea of passing the torch by having a named action star like Vin Deisel or Dwayne Johnson teaming up with Willis for the 6th film would be dynamite. Reboot and sequel in one.

[unsung122212]

Originally Posted by TheWildWhelk

Die hard 1 and 3 Director John McTiernan should be out prison by the time DH6 is ready to go into production, so i'd re-hire him, as he isn't going to be able to get a job directing traffic after his legal problems.

The idea of passing the torch by having a named action star like Vin Deisel or Dwayne Johnson teaming up with Willis for the 6th film would be dynamite. Reboot and sequel in one.

If they are going to pass the torch for the die hard series, it will go to John McClane's son character. So, Jai Courtney will end up being the new face of die hard, IF they actually plan to do that.

[TheWildWhelk]

Originally Posted by unsung122212

If they are going to pass the torch for the die hard series, it will go to John McClane's son character. So, Jai Courtney will end up being the new face of die hard, IF they actually plan to do that.

I'd rather they didn't, as unlike Bruce Willis when he appeared in DH1, i've never heard of Jai Courtney before. A named action star is the only way to go with the series, and there are plenty of them around. Even Jason Statham would be a good choice. Die Hard in London Tahn!

[srinivas1015]

Originally Posted by TheWildWhelk

I'd rather they didn't, as unlike Bruce Willis when he appeared in DH1, i've never heard of Jai Courtney before. A named action star is the only way to go with the series, and there are plenty of them around. Even Jason Statham would be a good choice. Die Hard in London Tahn!

Statham's action is too 'clean' for Die Hard.

[unsung122212]

Originally Posted by TheWildWhelk

I'd rather they didn't, as unlike Bruce Willis when he appeared in DH1, i've never heard of Jai Courtney before. A named action star is the only way to go with the series, and there are plenty of them around. Even Jason Statham would be a good choice. Die Hard in London Tahn!

I agree with you, but I don't see the studio moving away from the McClane family. I want them to just build new character that has no ties to the McClane family, but is able to embody the essence of what type of character causes a film to feel like a die hard film.

[TheWildWhelk]

Originally Posted by unsung122212

I agree with you, but I don't see the studio moving away from the McClane family. I want them to just build new character that has no ties to the McClane family, but is able to embody the essence of what type of character causes a film to feel like a die hard film.

If that's the case, then they have dropped the ball badly with DH5. They could have had a named actor in his late 20's or 30's as Jack McClane. Heck, i would have gone with a fan-favourite actor like Jensen Ackles.

[srinivas1015]

Originally Posted by TheWildWhelk

If that's the case, then they have dropped the ball badly with DH5. They could have had a named actor in his late 20's or 30's as Jack McClane. Heck, i would have gone with a fan-favourite actor like Jensen Ackles.

Ackles would have been awesome! Especially with the McClane style wisecracks . He does it naturally in Supernatural anyway.