Die Hard 4K UHD (1988)

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Jay H.

Just my opinion, but I strongly disagree. The unrated version changes one of the best lines in the film, completely omits another great line, and the CG blood/ADR f-bombs are distracting. Live Free or Die Hard succeeds in spite of its PG-13 rating, and does a great job of letting a certain word get past the MPAA. It's my second-favorite of the series.

I do agree with your take on A Good Day to Die Hard, though. That movie is awful.

I agree with both viewpoints on Die Hard 4. The movie is just plain choppy in either version because they never quite knew just what it was going to be, as such I could live with the theatrical version from here on out particularly because it retains those lines (that'll wake the neighbours/I ran out of bullets) and the action is still good and crunchy. BUT I watched the unrated cut again a while back and I really enjoyed it, not so much for the rubbish CG blood but for all the cursing. Lots of it happens off-screen but some still happens on-screen and it gives it that proper Die Hard flava.

[Scottishguy]

Die Hard 4 is fine, satisfactory entertainment. Ma da is coming ta kill ya pal. Naw he's not, aye he is. Oh look here's my da tae kill you *kills him* . Right let's go hen. The end.

[dcx4610]

Originally Posted by Jay H.

Just my opinion, but I strongly disagree. The unrated version changes one of the best lines in the film, completely omits another great line, and the CG blood/ADR f-bombs are distracting. Live Free or Die Hard succeeds in spite of its PG-13 rating, and does a great job of letting a certain word get past the MPAA. It's my second-favorite of the series.

I do agree with your take on A Good Day to Die Hard, though. That movie is awful.

This is interesting. So without spoiling since I haven't seen any of them, the unrated version adds CG blood and ADRs extra curse words? Does the regular version not have CG blood?

I would have naturally went for the unrated version but if that's the case, I'm going theatrical.

[Jay H.]

Originally Posted by dcx4610

This is interesting. So without spoiling since I haven't seen any of them, the unrated version adds CG blood and ADRs extra curse words? Does the regular version not have CG blood?

I would have naturally went for the unrated version but if that's the case, I'm going theatrical.

It shouldn't be a spoiler to say in LFODH, lotsa people get shot. In the original theatrical version, there is very little blood when they are shot. Also, the f-bomb is only used once. In the unrated cut, there are CG blood bursts when the people are shot. There is also quite a few f-bombs looped in, mostly when you can't see the actor's mouth.

Oh, and in the unrated cut, one death is a few frames longer. In the theatrical version, you see some blood. In the unrated, you see a little more blood.

I would say watch the theatrical. If you like it, watch the unrated and see if you like it more.

[dcx4610]

Originally Posted by Jay H.

It shouldn't be a spoiler to say in LFODH, lotsa people get shot. In the original theatrical version, there is very little blood when they are shot. Also, the f-bomb is only used once. In the unrated cut, there are CG blood bursts when the people are shot. There is also quite a few f-bombs looped in, mostly when you can't see the actor's mouth.

Oh, and in the unrated cut, one death is a few frames longer. In the theatrical version, you see some blood. In the unrated, you see a little more blood.

I would say watch the theatrical. If you like it, watch the unrated and see if you like it more.

I'm going theatrical. I remember now but had forgotten that the film got crapped on for going PG-13. It sounds like the changes were made after the fact just to appease those fans.

If it's PG-13, it's PG-13. I don't need fake blood and inserted curse words to make it seem hardcore. I'll just accept it for what it was at the time.

[DJR662]

Originally Posted by Jay H.

It shouldn't be a spoiler to say in LFODH, lotsa people get shot. In the original theatrical version, there is very little blood when they are shot. Also, the f-bomb is only used once. In the unrated cut, there are CG blood bursts when the people are shot. There is also quite a few f-bombs looped in, mostly when you can't see the actor's mouth.

Oh, and in the unrated cut, one death is a few frames longer. In the theatrical version, you see some blood. In the unrated, you see a little more blood.

I would say watch the theatrical. If you like it, watch the unrated and see if you like it more.

Also (* link contains spoilers!!!*):

https://www.movie-censorship.com/report.php?ID=4522

Without the added profanity and violence, even if it's looped F-bombs and CGI blood, it just isn't a Die Hard movie to me. IMO the theatrical cut changes too much of the movie's tone as well as McClane's character. I especially dislike

[Show spoiler]the gunshot interrupting McClane's Yippee-ki-yay...

which I have always found cringeworthy.

They should have just stuck with the R-rating during filming to begin with....

[TXMoviebuff77]

There’s about 5 or 6 more F bombs added in the unrated version of DH4, mostly towards the end & said by John, I think the tech kid got one in too. That being said yes I’m fine with DH4 & the PG-13, it’s certainly better than A Good Day.

[IndyMLVC]

Originally Posted by TXMoviebuff77

There’s about 5 or 6 more F bombs added in the unrated version of DH4, mostly towards the end & said by John, I think the tech kid got one in too. That being said yes I’m fine with DH4 & the PG-13, it’s certainly better than A Good Day.

Check the link literally right above yours and count.

There's almost 30 of them.

[TXMoviebuff77]

Originally Posted by IndyMLVC

Check the link literally right above yours and count.

There's almost 30 of them.

Meh whatever I counted 27, but I stand corrected, been awhile since I seen the movie.

[IndyMLVC]

Originally Posted by TXMoviebuff77

Meh whatever I counted 27, but I stand corrected, been awhile since I seen the movie.

Correct. 27... which is almost 30

[Scottishguy]

Originally Posted by IndyMLVC

Correct. 27... which is almost 30

That's some stunning maths sir.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fNwV...ature=youtu.be

[Markgway]

We need a hybrid director's cut.

Basically the PG-13 version with the ON CAMERA swearing restored.

No CGI blood, no overdubbed effs, no alternate one-liners.

[seagal]

Hopefully "Die Hard 2- Die Harder" will be released this year.

[StingingVelvet]

Originally Posted by Markgway

We need a hybrid director's cut.

Basically the PG-13 version with the ON CAMERA swearing restored.

No CGI blood, no overdubbed effs, no alternate one-liners.

That would be lovely, but chances are nil I'd guess. Especially now with Disney.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Markgway

We need a hybrid director's cut.

Basically the PG-13 version with the ON CAMERA swearing restored.

No CGI blood, no overdubbed effs, no alternate one-liners.

Just put those two lines back in the unrated and I'm good with the rest of it.

[guachi]

Originally Posted by dcx4610

What really surprised me as how funny the movie was with tons of satire which almost reminded me of Robocop. I think what truly made the movie great though was the writing.

That's the late '80s for you. Satire was in.

The movie had so many set ups and pay offs. Just absolutely brilliant writing. Everything had a purpose. The barefeet, the glass, the fear of heights, the 2 bullets at the end, the story of Al not using a gun. Just when you thought John was in a rough situation, it got even worse and you were wondering how he was going to get out of it.

And this is, ultimately, why the movie goes from merely good to classic. No scene is wasted. Everything you see on screen has a purpose. And there's a ramp of danger and escape so that a scene like shooting a rocket launcher at a cop car doesn't seem completely stupid when it finally happens.

[Dave_6]

This is probably a really dumb question, but I'm asking anyways. If I pick the 2.0 audio track, my receiver should not be playing it via 5.1 correct? It plays the Predator 4.0 track correctly or at least it did last time I watched it. I didn't think I have to manually select 'Stereo' on the receiver for it to output correctly. It usually seems to play these original audio tracks correctly without me having to change anything as I don't upmix anything except games and Netflix, etc.

[notops]

Originally Posted by Dave_6

This is probably a really dumb question, but I'm asking anyways. If I pick the 2.0 audio track, my receiver should not be playing it via 5.1 correct? It plays the Predator 4.0 track correctly or at least it did last time I watched it. I didn't think I have to manually select 'Stereo' on the receiver for it to output correctly. It usually seems to play these original audio tracks correctly without me having to change anything as I don't upmix anything except games and Netflix, etc.

If you want it to sound the way it did originally in the theaters back in 1988, you should use a matrix decoding method like Dolby Pro Logic. That will properly unfold the surround information that is baked into the 2.0 stereo mix.

Movies mixed in Dolby Stereo never played theatrically in just 2.0 stereo. They had a center channel and a mono surround channel folded into the 2.0 optical audio tracks on the film print and the Dolby Stereo processor unfolded them for the intended surround mix. This is called LCRS. If you are set up for surround sound, you should not play 2.0 stereo tracks on just your left and right speakers, since they were never played that way in theaters.

[Dave_6]

Thank you, that's what I was ultimately trying to figure out and recreate. If there are multiple tracks to choose from, I was always one that wanted to listen to latest remastered audio instead of the original. I'm trying to watch films now with the original audio if possible.

[WBMakeVMarsMovieNOW]

Originally Posted by notops

If you want it to sound the way it did originally in the theaters back in 1988, you should use a matrix decoding method like Dolby Pro Logic. That will properly unfold the surround information that is baked into the 2.0 stereo mix.

Movies mixed in Dolby Stereo never played theatrically in just 2.0 stereo. They had a center channel and a mono surround channel folded into the 2.0 optical audio tracks on the film print and the Dolby Stereo processor unfolded them for the intended surround mix. This is called LCRS. If you are set up for surround sound, you should not play 2.0 stereo tracks on just your left and right speakers, since they were never played that way in theaters.

didn't tons of theaters lack the rear speaker though?