4 was terrible. I wanted the Mac kid to die so bad & Kevin Smith???
With any luck FOX will see their mistakes and make an R rated DH5 with a real action director (Stallone anyone?)
DH 1 2 and even 3 are great action movies and the series deserves to go out on a much higher note that does not involve jumping off a jet onto an offramp.
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2007 1:35 pm Posts: 4407 Location: Philadelphia/Los Angeles Gender: Male
John McClane is my favorite movie character, I (I think along with many others) consider the original DH to be the definitive action movie of all time, that was the first rated R movie I ever saw in a theater at the ripe old age of 12. I don't think DH4 was necessarily bad, but it even edges out part 2 as the weakest of the franchise (I'd really like to believe that when Willis called 4 the best one yet that deep down he knew it wasn't, was only saying it for the sake of promotion). Get a quality director and screenwriter, number 5 could make up for the last one at least.
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2007 1:35 pm Posts: 4407 Location: Philadelphia/Los Angeles Gender: Male
diaglo wrote:
Die Hard 4 was a good action movie but a terrible Die Hard movie.
Well and I know it probably sounds insane to harp on a detail like this, but I hated that Willis was bald in it. Even though we'd all know it was a piece, he should've had the ole' receding hairline, that's distinctively part of McClane. The way it was, it played as just another generic Bruce Willis action picture.
Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2007 6:21 am Posts: 23078 Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina Gender: Male
Samwise wrote:
diaglo wrote:
Die Hard 4 was a good action movie but a terrible Die Hard movie.
Well and I know it probably sounds insane to harp on a detail like this, but I hated that Willis was bald in it. Even though we'd all know it was a piece, he should've had the ole' receding hairline, that's distinctively part of McClane. The way it was, it played as just another generic Bruce Willis action picture.
... Oh Samwise
_________________ For more insulated and ill-informed opinions, click here.
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 7:19 pm Posts: 39068 Location: Chapel Hill, NC, USA Gender: Male
The truck/plane scene was pretty stupid, but only marginally more so than the dump truck surfing scene in 3.
_________________ "Though some may think there should be a separation between art/music and politics, it should be reinforced that art can be a form of nonviolent protest." - e.v.
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2007 1:35 pm Posts: 4407 Location: Philadelphia/Los Angeles Gender: Male
theplatypus wrote:
Samwise wrote:
diaglo wrote:
Die Hard 4 was a good action movie but a terrible Die Hard movie.
Well and I know it probably sounds insane to harp on a detail like this, but I hated that Willis was bald in it. Even though we'd all know it was a piece, he should've had the ole' receding hairline, that's distinctively part of McClane. The way it was, it played as just another generic Bruce Willis action picture.
... Oh Samwise
Hey, for what it's worth I've heard a number of others bring this up, too
Also, no matter what you may think of the actual DH4 movie, listening to Kevin Smith talk about his experience on the set is pretty damn funny.
3 is an absolute blast until the last act. Willis and Jackson's chemistry is great throughout, and McTiernan's direction is top notch. But the script really falls apart in the end. I like it more than 2, though, because it's not trying to be a retread of the first movie, situation-wise, like 2 is. It's got its faults, though.
2 doesn't have the same spirit that the first and third movies have. That's probably because Renny Harlin is one of the most boring action directors out there. The sizzle just isn't there.
The original Die Hard is about a perfect movie as they come. Great characters all around, great script, great direction. None of the sequels match it terms of everything that Die Hard is.
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2007 1:35 pm Posts: 4407 Location: Philadelphia/Los Angeles Gender: Male
diaglo wrote:
3 is an absolute blast until the last act. Willis and Jackson's chemistry is great throughout, and McTiernan's direction is top notch. But the script really falls apart in the end. I like it more than 2, though, because it's not trying to be a retread of the first movie, situation-wise, like 2 is. It's got its faults, though.
This might be very common knowledge these days, I'm not sure, but for those who don't know part 3 was originally a standalone script called "Simon Says" just about some deranged terrorist picking on this one particular cop the entire day in NY making him run thru hoops, once they decided they wanted to make DH3 and found this script, they then tailored it to fit McClane's character specifically.
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 3:08 am Posts: 22978 Gender: Male
diaglo wrote:
3 is an absolute blast until the last act. Willis and Jackson's chemistry is great throughout, and McTiernan's direction is top notch. But the script really falls apart in the end. I like it more than 2, though, because it's not trying to be a retread of the first movie, situation-wise, like 2 is. It's got its faults, though.
2 doesn't have the same spirit that the first and third movies have. That's probably because Renny Harlin is one of the most boring action directors out there. The sizzle just isn't there.
The original Die Hard is about a perfect movie as they come. Great characters all around, great script, great direction. None of the sequels match it terms of everything that Die Hard is.
I dont see the fascination with 3, at all.
I will agree that Die Hard 1 is a fantastic film. Hans Gruber is one of the greatest villians in movie history.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
?