A Good Day To Die Hard (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews



Message


Empire Admin -> A Good Day To Die Hard (14/2/2013 12:07:05 AM)

Post your comments on this article




hotvindaloo -> 2 stars because Fox thought we were stupid (14/2/2013 12:25:17 AM)

Fuck this franchise




Toursiveu -> What a difference a good director makes... (14/2/2013 12:35:43 AM)

John McTiernan is happy to be in jail. Because if he saw what they did with his franchise...

This film is terrible. Not that it's terribly bad per se, just that it has no personality, you just don't care for anybody... This is not a DIE HARD movie! Where's the great score? Where is the flamboyant villain? Where are the great supporting characters? Why does Willis keep saying "let's just kill some scumbags, that's what we do!" : this is not John McClane anymore, this is Rambo! McClane, the real one, is a man who doesn't want to fight but who has to. Here? He's just your average indestructible hero.

I'm so pissed-off to see that the filmmakers involved in this mess don't have a clue what made the first three films so great, so memorable.

Nothing here is memorable. Think of the first two minutes of Die Hard With a Vengeance... "Summer in the City" on the sountrack, then an explosion... and you can't turn your eyes off the screen. Here, everything is just meh...

What a difference a good diector makes...

Shame on you John Moore! The only director who had me longing for Len Wiseman or Renny Harlin...




hotvindaloo -> 2 stars because Fox thought we were stupid (14/2/2013 12:51:24 AM)

Fox cut this already mediocre film to 12a so Harry Potter fans could go watch a movie they ain't old enough to watch the 4 prequels to. And it's sad that they thought the UK is Dumber than the US to get away with it. Another payday for Bruce who has sold out yet again. 6 will be PG.




Normal Control -> Gonna have fun watching this fall on its a$$ (14/2/2013 1:35:39 AM)

I noticed Kim's been reviewing some classic re-releases lately, so no way was he gonna let this piece of shit off the hook.

Bruce should retire to the scrapheap along with Arnie. They don't seem to realise it was brilliant directors in their prime who made them icons, along with us the audience. They can't just grab it back by themselves on a whim, the lazy cynical idiots.

Bruce should do us a favour and go to some desert island with his model trophy chick wife and stay the fuck there out the way. The only worthwhile thing he could ever put on film these days would be to release a celeb sex tape.

PS: is McTiernan STILL in jail? WTF?





wgfuzzydunlop1 -> Congratulations, Mr Moore... (14/2/2013 3:09:44 AM)

... You seem to have successfully killed off the Die Hard franchise. You fucking hack.




Phubbs -> RE: Congratulations, Mr Moore... (14/2/2013 11:13:18 AM)

Ah smug mode [;)]




MonsterCat -> RE: A Good Day To Die Hard (14/2/2013 11:30:46 AM)

We could have had something more interesting on our hands if Nicolas Winding Refn or Joe Cornish were hired. Shame.




AxlReznor -> RE: A Good Day To Die Hard (14/2/2013 11:40:13 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MonsterCat

We could have had something more interesting on our hands if Nicolas Winding Refn or Joe Cornish were hired. Shame.


Who cares about "interesting" when remake/videogame guy is so much cheaper? [;)] [:D]




James2183 -> RE: A Good Day To Die Hard (14/2/2013 11:44:20 AM)

Die Hard has turned into Beverly Hills Cop 3 then...




AxlReznor -> RE: A Good Day To Die Hard (14/2/2013 11:47:01 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: James2183

Die Hard has turned into Beverly Hills Cop 3 then...


Even with all of these negative reviews, I'd be extremely surprised if it manages to be as bad as Beverly Hills Cop 3.




Drooch -> RE: A Good Day To Die Hard (14/2/2013 11:49:15 AM)

Assuming this hasn't killed the series, and assuming McTiernan doesn't return, Martin Campbell's the man to direct a new Die Hard. Like McT, he understands masculinity, is an excellent director of actors, and a master of action scenes - good choreography, clear spatial relationships and sober camerawork. Think Casino Royale with an R rating.

That, and a Shane Black script, and Fox might just be able to atone for this, and the dire Die Hard 4. Murdoch has already flushed Tom Rothman, who masterminded both atrocities, as well as hiring an idiot to molest Prometheus' script, so maybe there's hope...







MonsterCat -> RE: A Good Day To Die Hard (14/2/2013 11:55:32 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: AxlReznor

quote:

ORIGINAL: MonsterCat

We could have had something more interesting on our hands if Nicolas Winding Refn or Joe Cornish were hired. Shame.


Who cares about "interesting" when remake/videogame guy is so much cheaper? [;)] [:D]



You see, if I was the head of development of 20th Century Fox, and I wanted to keep one of my most lucrative franchises on track, I would make sure that the script is really good and I would hire a really talented director. Now, it might be a little bit more expensive than hiring hacks like Woods and Moore, but the results would totally justify that.

Given Moore's proven track record of sucking and failing, what the hell were Fox thinking when they give him the gig?




AxlReznor -> RE: A Good Day To Die Hard (14/2/2013 11:59:41 AM)

Except it doesn't really matter how bad a franchise gets... if people will still go and see Transformers: Dark Of The Moon after Transformers: Revenge Of The Fallen, it's pretty much confirmation that they really don't have to give a shit about "keeping their franchises in check". They also don't care about the future... they keep on going while it makes them money, and then they'll stop and move onto something else as soon as it doesn't. That's always been the way. It leads to some shit films, which is sad, and it's pretty fucking stupid, but that's how it is.

I don't see myself liking this film, but considering how much I like Die Hard 4.0, and how much derision that gets, and how much acclaim Die Hard 2 gets when I think it's an awful film, I might just end up loving it. No intention of paying to see it, though...




UTB -> RE: A Good Day To Die Hard (14/2/2013 12:05:49 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: AxlReznor

quote:

ORIGINAL: MonsterCat

We could have had something more interesting on our hands if Nicolas Winding Refn or Joe Cornish were hired. Shame.


Who cares about "interesting" when remake/videogame guy is so much cheaper? [;)] [:D]



Its probably more to do with "does what he's told" than the price.





MonsterCat -> RE: A Good Day To Die Hard (14/2/2013 12:09:37 PM)

As flawed as it was, at least it looked like Len Wiseman was actually trying with Die Hard 4. It was a fun film.

I just think at one point it kinda lost sight of what makes the character of John McClane.




AxlReznor -> RE: A Good Day To Die Hard (14/2/2013 12:11:44 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: UTB


quote:

ORIGINAL: AxlReznor

quote:

ORIGINAL: MonsterCat

We could have had something more interesting on our hands if Nicolas Winding Refn or Joe Cornish were hired. Shame.


Who cares about "interesting" when remake/videogame guy is so much cheaper? [;)] [:D]



Its probably more to do with "does what he's told" than the price.




Probably that too. One of the things in the thread about the 12A rating I couldn't understand is some people talking about the "director's vision", as if John Moore was anything more than a guy the studio hired to put their vision on the screen. I doubt he's under any illusions as to whose film it is... he's hardly a Tarantino or even a Nolan.




jackcarter -> RE: A Good Day To Die Hard (14/2/2013 12:13:00 PM)

I donít know where I got it from but i was under the impression that if they were going to do another after 4.0, itd be back to the original - McClane sans sidekicks vs. terrorists in one place (maybe even another building), darker/more serious, hard R/18, lower budget, little-no CG etc.

it was like hed gone from a building to an airport to NYC to the whole of America so the only place to go was back to a claustrophobic location like the original. Back to basics.

Instead he takes on Russia in 4.0 part 2 (when I heard it was going to be about his action man son I got a bad vibe)

Oh well maybe they get the final part of this 2nd trilogy sort of right (like Sith)




matty_b -> RE: A Good Day To Die Hard (14/2/2013 12:21:12 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MonsterCat

quote:

ORIGINAL: AxlReznor

quote:

ORIGINAL: MonsterCat

We could have had something more interesting on our hands if Nicolas Winding Refn or Joe Cornish were hired. Shame.


Who cares about "interesting" when remake/videogame guy is so much cheaper? [;)] [:D]



You see, if I was the head of development of 20th Century Fox, and I wanted to keep one of my most lucrative franchises on track, I would make sure that the script is really good and I would hire a really talented director. Now, it might be a little bit more expensive than hiring hacks like Woods and Moore, but the results would totally justify that.

Given Moore's proven track record of sucking and failing, what the hell were Fox thinking when they give him the gig?



Ah, but that's you, who puts some thought into it.

One of my mates has been trying to persuade me and two others to come and see this with him.

"But it looks really, really shit.", I said.

"Who cares? It's DIE HARD!"

So for him, the brand beats everything else involved. And I'm guessing there will be a lot of people who will take the thinking that he does.

quote:

I just think at one point it kinda lost sight of what makes the character of John McClane.


I think that's true to the franchise in general. Each film has slowly lost sight of what was great about the first film and the character, and just turned him into an invincible Arnie-clone.




jcthefirst -> RE: A Good Day To Die Hard (14/2/2013 12:23:56 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: matty_b

quote:

ORIGINAL: MonsterCat

quote:

ORIGINAL: AxlReznor

quote:

ORIGINAL: MonsterCat

We could have had something more interesting on our hands if Nicolas Winding Refn or Joe Cornish were hired. Shame.


Who cares about "interesting" when remake/videogame guy is so much cheaper? [;)] [:D]



You see, if I was the head of development of 20th Century Fox, and I wanted to keep one of my most lucrative franchises on track, I would make sure that the script is really good and I would hire a really talented director. Now, it might be a little bit more expensive than hiring hacks like Woods and Moore, but the results would totally justify that.

Given Moore's proven track record of sucking and failing, what the hell were Fox thinking when they give him the gig?



Ah, but that's you, who puts some thought into it.

One of my mates has been trying to persuade me and two others to come and see this with him.

"But it looks really, really shit.", I said.

"Who cares? It's DIE HARD!"

So for him, the brand beats everything else involved. And I'm guessing there will be a lot of people who will take the thinking that he does.



Like me.

I mean, it might be terrible, but it is still (technically) a Die Hard film and I'll be there.




matty_b -> RE: A Good Day To Die Hard (14/2/2013 12:25:35 PM)

There you go, blame JC if there's a part six.


Well, blame him for that and for spoiling the end of Paranormal Activity 4.




jcthefirst -> RE: A Good Day To Die Hard (14/2/2013 12:27:32 PM)

Sheep everywhere.




AxlReznor -> RE: A Good Day To Die Hard (14/2/2013 12:28:28 PM)

Heh... I've never understood the people who think of the original as anything but a generic 80's action film. One of the better ones, to be sure, but considering the quality of most of them, that's not saying much. It's certainly not some kind of untouchable holy relic. And he was already doing unlikely generic action hero things in that film... but for some reason people think that because he cut his feet on glass, he was an "everyman".




MonsterCat -> RE: A Good Day To Die Hard (14/2/2013 12:30:10 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: matty_b

I think that's true to the franchise in general. Each film has slowly lost sight of what was great about the first film and the character, and just turned him into an invincible Arnie-clone.


I think one of the reasons that makes DH2 the best sequel is that the writers understood that McClane has vulnerabilities and sometimes fails. Check out the bit when the plane crashes and Col. Stewart gets the upper hand over McClane.

Die Hard 3 was a fun romp, but seem a bit half-hearted in its execution. Die Hard 4 was fine but it often strayed into a cartoonish, Neveldine/Taylor territory.




matty_b -> RE: A Good Day To Die Hard (14/2/2013 12:33:32 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: AxlReznor

Heh... I've never understood the people who think of the original as anything but a generic 80's action film. One of the better ones, to be sure, but considering the quality of most of them, that's not saying much. It's certainly not some kind of untouchable holy relic. And he was already doing unlikely generic action hero things in that film... but for some reason people think that because he cut his feet on glass, he was an "everyman".


I would only count one moment as unlikely in the film - the roof jump which he undertakes as an absolute last resort and knows how potentially fatal it is. Everything else is quite stripped back - he loses his machine gun and ultimately has to rely on a bit of sticky tape to finish off the last two terrorists. It's also easy to forget just how much of the film is spent on John hiding and scurrying away from a fight while he figures out a plan.

It's this kind of measured, vulnerable approach that makes the original stand out, I think.

And what MC said about DH2.




AxlReznor -> RE: A Good Day To Die Hard (14/2/2013 12:36:58 PM)

A shame that DH2 is one of the most mind-numbingly boring action movies I've ever seen, then. And that it's just a remake of the original if the original were as shit as it could have been.




MonsterCat -> RE: A Good Day To Die Hard (14/2/2013 12:39:10 PM)

Yeah, but Axl, you think 4 is the best so far. What the fuck do you know about anything? [:D]




AxlReznor -> RE: A Good Day To Die Hard (14/2/2013 12:39:48 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MonsterCat

Yeah, but Axl, you think 4 is the best so far. What the fuck do you know about anything? [:D]


I know, right? [:D]




Shifty Bench -> RE: A Good Day To Die Hard (14/2/2013 12:41:08 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MonsterCat
I think one of the reasons that makes DH2 the best sequel is that the writers understood that McClane has vulnerabilities and sometimes fails. Check out the bit when the plane crashes and Col. Stewart gets the upper hand over McClane.

Die Hard 3 was a fun romp, but seem a bit half-hearted in its execution. Die Hard 4 was fine but it often strayed into a cartoonish, Neveldine/Taylor territory.


Yeah....pretty much this...... *nods approvingly*




UTB -> RE: A Good Day To Die Hard (14/2/2013 12:42:49 PM)

I suppose the issue is that since Die Hard we've had every version of it with other films. You can't put him on a bus (Speed), or a plane (Air Force One/Passenger 57), a boat (Speed 2) etc, so the enclosure gets widened in order to make it seem 'bigger' than the last. Nakatomi Building > Airport > New York City > Eastern Seaboard > Russia.





Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.046875