Die Hard 4K UHD (1988)

[Blu MacReady]

I rank them 1,2.........3......

[Sky_Captain]

Originally Posted by Rick Grimes

While I agree that 5 is the worst... The Unrated Cut of DH5 (AKA Harder Extended Cut), which is essentially DH5 without Lucy McClane is much better.

It makes it look like some shit fan-edit.

[Agent Kay]

Originally Posted by Sky_Captain

It makes it look like some shit fan-edit.

It's REALLY not that good

[Rick Grimes]

Originally Posted by Blu MacReady

I rank them 1,2.........3......

“Try getting a reservation at Dorsia now you f*ck!” Love that sig Blu McReady. Had to add one of my fave Bateman lines as an adjunct.

Back on topic: The biggest issue I have with Die Hard 2 (and while I still think it’s pretty damn good, I put it 4th), is it felt rushed and was a tad contrived. I mean. Christmas Eve, again...

At least in the Die Hard 2 screenplay, they make sure that the obvious isn’t conspicuous by ignoring the issue. There are several references that assist the suspension of disbelief, via John saying “How can the same shit happen to the same guy twice” and Holly at the end remarking “Why does this keep happening to us?”.

And finally, while I find 2,3 & 4 are all entertaining, I got to admit, “Die Harder” definitely has the best use of “Yippee Kiyay Mother F*cker”

Originally Posted by Sky_Captain

It makes it look like some shit fan-edit.

I saw the DH5 Directors Cut first (on Blu-Ray). Hence, when I saw the Theatrical I thought “WTF is Lucy doing in it”... It made no sense and it felt like it had no real flow in the story (and the Lucy addition feels tacked on).
And the car chase scene; where he is on the phone to Lucy, looks pathetic and fabricated for goofy laughs. Something they would never have tried in the first four. It felt as if the addition of Lucy was something requested by the studio: in an attempt to tie the the film to the previous film.

[Sky_Captain]

Imagine a franchise tying together.

The horror...

[Agent Kay]

[guachi]

Originally Posted by Markgway

The first four movies are awesome... why quibble about in which order they belong?

We can all agree that the fifth is the worst, right?

There were five?

THERE.ARE.FOUR.LIGHTS.

[infiniteCR]

[Markgway]

Is the 2.0 stereo also included on the UK edition?

It's not mentioned on the sleeve.

[Alister_M]

Originally Posted by Markgway

Is the 2.0 stereo also included on the UK edition?

It's not mentioned on the sleeve.

Full list of audio tracks on the UK disc:

English DTS-HD Master Audio 5.1
English DTS-HD Master Audio 2.0 stereo
French DTS 5.1
German DTS 5.1
Italian DTS 5.1
Japanese DTS 5.1 (Nachi Nozawa dub)
Japanese DTS 5.1 (Takenori Murano dub)
Japanese DTS 5.1 (Ben Hiura dub)
Spanish (Castilian) DTS 5.1
Polish Dolby Digital 5.1
Spanish (Latin) Dolby Digital 5.1
Czech Dolby Digital 2.0 stereo


100% identical to the US/Aussie one.

[Rick Grimes]

Originally Posted by Sky_Captain

Imagine a franchise tying together.

The horror...

DH5 had John McClane’s son. That was enough to tie it together.
Putting Lucy McLane in at the start, that ridiculous phone call during the chase scene and then at the end, reeked of desperation to give the film some kind of mass market consumption familial perspective and a token female character.

And the “hero walk” (at the end of the film) with John, Jack and Lucy, walking to the plane, made me feel like...


From the seminal brilliance of Die Hard to the pedestrian contrivance of A Good Day to Die Hard: How are the mighty fallen!

[Agent Kay]

Originally Posted by Rick Grimes

DH5 had John McClane’s son. That was enough to tie it together.
Putting Lucy McLane in at the start, that ridiculous phone call during the chase scene and then at the end, reeked of desperation to give the film some kind of mass market consumption familial perspective and a token female character.

And the “hero walk” (at the end of the film) with John, Jack and Lucy, walking to the plane, made me feel like...


From the seminal brilliance of Die Hard to the pedestrian contrivance of A Good Day to Die Hard: How are the mighty fallen!

Are you ok?
She is the only returning actor that is not Bruce, that ties it together.
As for the end, he finally gets his kids back both on side, it's the only character development in the whole movie.

[F34R]

Just realized it's officially 30 years since it was released in Los Angeles!!

[The_Donster]

Originally Posted by F34R

Just realized it's officially 30 years since it was released in Los Angeles!!

I literally watched it for free thanks to a local radio station in Columbus, GA. I remember I went on my own and ex-wife#1 didn't believe I'd be at the movies because..."No movie is over two and a half hours."

[Rick Grimes]

Originally Posted by Agent Kay

Are you ok?
She is the only returning actor that is not Bruce, that ties it together.
As for the end, he finally gets his kids back both on side, it's the only character development in the whole movie.

There is still some character development, albeit limited, with the banter between John and Jack. But yes, I appreciate that the scenes with Lucy where there for exposition. For me though, it just felt “tacked on” is all. Especially since I saw the Director’s Cut first, the addition of Lucy felt unnecessary, in the context of the film (with Lucy only being in it beginning, middle and end).
The phone call between John and Lucy during the car chase added nothing overall, except for a bit of “action humour” and that’s what I found most irritating. That phone call was completely capricious.

Having DH5 start “in transit” felt more like a traditional Die Hard introduction (similar to the original and DH2) and the ending, with the slo-mo walk and nostalgic music, was unlike anything that came before in closing out a Die Hard film. IMHO, the end was too formulaic and it felt like a garden variety action movie ending.

When it comes to comparing character development, in reference the addition of the kids on screen in the original, it is poignant to note that Lucy and Jack’s intro in the original was more a plot device disguised as character development; Placed in the screenplay for the turning point when

[Show spoiler]Gruber sees the children on TV, the penny drops and he lifts up the overturned picture frame of the McClane Family, realising Holly Genaro was John’s wise..

The former is a perfect illustration of how Die Hard was an expertly crafted screenplay and A Good Day to Die Hard was clutching at straws when trying to achieve authenticity. Sadly, the two films are light years apart in overall quality. Where Die Hard is based on a novel, DH5 is a star vehicle, with a synopsis that lacks credibility when we find out who Jack has become. While it’s not entirely unbelievable, there is however, a huge suspension of disbelief.

I will admit, if they dropped the phone call mid-chase, I wouldn’t have had so much of an issue with Lucy’s inclusion, IF it was merely dropping off John at the airport and the ending wasn’t so schmoltzy. Compared to 1-4, the end of 5 had a very different feel to it, and as stated previously, it was an “Action Movie 101” textbook ending, something that the previous movies avoided.

[indianajmb]

Has anyone tried watching this on fandangonow? The sound is way off and backgrounds appear blocky and blurry. I compared the hdx on vudu and no issues.

[indianajmb]

When John is getting off the plane and when he is in limo talking, the blocking is awful. And no I don't mean grainy.

[Blu MacReady]

Sometimes it’s like the studios can’t win. The original of any franchise will normally always be the best. So popular in fact that sequels are demanded. Main characters/Hero is a favourite, so people want to see them again and again with different stories. See all horror franchises, James Bond etc.

But then they just get slated cause they’re not as great as the original and don’t give that same feeling when you saw the first. But that can’t really be repeated. Some of these sequels, if they were stand alone films, would probably be more popular or more loved.

[Rick Grimes]

The sequels, overall, are not that bad.
DH2 had more of an ‘80s action film vibe (i.e. Commando/Predator) in it’s attempt to replicate the original.
I quite enjoyed DH3 (seen in the cinema) which had more of a 90’s action vibe (eg. Point Break, Speed).
And with DH4, I appear to be in the minority. However, I only like the R-rated Die Hard 4.0, since the PG-13 is shite (with the lack of F-bombs, bloodless bullet wounds and sanitised violence). I find that there is a world of difference.

I saw the Unrated Live Free or Die Hard on DVD first viewing and I only ever watch the Unrated Die Hard 4 (watched the PG-13 Blu-Ray once).

’No Sir I don’t like it.’

27 Violence Cuts; 37 Dialogue Cuts:
https://www.movie-censorship.com/report.php?ID=4522

Having John McLane not dropping F-bombs is like watching the sanitised Negan on The Walking Dead AMC broadcasts. Pathetic.
And once again, DH4 had a different vibe, much more contemporised (and part of the fun was John being an analog hero in a digital world), I still found it to have that “Die Hard entertainment” factor.

While I am not a fan of DH5, I would watch it when doing a Die Hard binge watch... But above everything else, while 2-4, and to a lesser degree 5 would be good films if they stood alone, the original was a seminal motion picture: expertly crafted and changed the worlds expectations of what you got from the action genre. Just like Beverley Hills Cop and Lethal Weapon changed the face of cop and buddy cop movies, respectively.

PS. Lethal Weapon is one film that is in dire need of a better transfer. Would buy a UHD of that film (and Beverley Hills Cop), for that matter.

[Talal86]

I like 2 and 3, but the fourth one was boring, and I never bothered with the last one, and probably never will