Re: A Good Day To Die Hard
 

Die Hard 3 and 4 are definitely the worst. I give the edge to part 2 because it has real McClane and because Die Harder as a title is just so fucking ridiculous I end up loving it. Action wise, I don't think ones better than the other.

Re: A Good Day To Die Hard
 

While Die Hard 2 is not great I think it's way more watchable than Live Free or Die Hard.

I would rank them:

Die Hard
Die Hard with a Vengeance
Die Hard 2
Live Free or Die Hard

Re: A Good Day To Die Hard
 

/\ My exact order, although Live Free or Die Hard is a distant fourth.

Re: A Good Day To Die Hard
 

Director John Moore Says ‘A Good Day To Die Hard’ Will Feature A Humorless John McClane

http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplayli...clane-20120727

Re: A Good Day To Die Hard
 

I'm with those who liked Part 4. It was a good PG-13 action movie. I don't get why everyone was butt hurt that it didn't get an R. Although Olymphant was a weak villain, but how could anyone not like Maggie Q? She was an awesome kickass villainess and that role lead to her getting the lead part on the TV series Nikita where she also kicks ass.

Re: A Good Day To Die Hard
 

Same here, I meant to put a space between the first three and the fourth.

Re: A Good Day To Die Hard
 

That's just a total misunderstanding of John McClane as a character. :thmbsdwn:

Re: A Good Day To Die Hard
 

I don't know what "real McClane" means but I think the hung over, divorced from his family, forced into a shitty situation McClane in With A Vengeance is way better than the wisecracking, "How many times can the same thing happen to the same guy twice" McClane of Die Harder.

Re: A Good Day To Die Hard
 

Who has ever gone out of their way to watch 'softcore' porn unless they had absolutely no fuckin alternative?

Re: A Good Day To Die Hard
 

Bald gave him a bad ass look instead of a regular joe hero look.

Re: A Good Day To Die Hard
 

I can't believe I'm saying this but I agree with wm lopez. McClane isn't quite McClane when he's bald. I feel sick now...

A humorless McClane? Fuck that! Tears of the Sun was a humorless Die Hard! If John McClane is not cracking wise then what's the point?!

Of course I'm still pissed that Mary Elizabeth Winstead isn't his partner in crime this go-around. :grumble:

Re: A Good Day To Die Hard
 

I hated Die Hard 2 so, so much. I saw it in a budget theater and haven't watch it since. It suffered extremely from sequelitis and had ridiculous action sequences.

I liked Die Hard 3 a lot more than 2. I think that the fact that the screenplay started out as not a Die Hard movie kept some of the "sequelits" at bay. Opening up the "under siege" area to all of New York was good as well. I also liked how the movie took moments to highlight other cops, like the emergency line operator and the bomb squad tech, to show that McClane wasn't just a one-man army.

Die Hard 4, was, to me, pretty meh. I didn't hate it, but I didn't love it, and I barely remember it.

Re: A Good Day To Die Hard
 

Loved Die Hard 2. Die Hard 3 is like the perfect movie to me. Very funny, fun, and quite a bit of intensity. The music, editing and general asthetics were perfect. Jeremy Irons, the voiceovers, the twists, all that stuff.

Die Hard 4 was alright, but a letdown. Blowing up a power plant was a bit much. There was something about the car crashing through and illogical (or just illogical within the editing) geography that made that scene feel like a fever dream. Everything else seemed to work within the Die Hard logic.

Die Hard 4 was just too slick or something. I don't know exactly what it is. But they (John McTiernan, Jan de Bont, etc) bring that asthetic from movies like Die Hard, Lethal Weapon, Speed, Jack Ryan movies, etc.

I don't remember Max Payne too well. But I remember hating the way Behind Enemy Lines looked. It felt like a new director was tying to utilize as much camera rigging equipment as possible. Weird.

Re: A Good Day To Die Hard
 

Real McClane is a wisecracking guy who is forced into shitty situations. I think the McClane of the first three movies are "real McClane." I don't know who the fuck the action automaton of Live Free or Die Hard is. It looks like action automaton McClane will be in A Good Day to Die Hard also.

P.S.-I'd rank them the same as Ragingbull80.

Re: A Good Day To Die Hard
 

Die Hard 4 was so fucking awful it makes me violent just thinking about. *punches my own face, with my own face*

Re: A Good Day To Die Hard
 

The best name for what will be the final film (the next one) is Old Habits Die Hard. Die Hardest sounds clunky and stupid.

This exactly. In the 4th he was not John McClane...he was every other typical Bruce Willis action role over the last couple of years. It comes down to him even shaving his head, which I thought was an awful move. He wore hairpieces in other films, even as late as Moonrise Kingdom. He needs to have the hair back, the wife beater, he needs to crack wise comments. He doesn't need to end up in fucking Russia saving the world. He just needs a small contained situation. Yes the 4th was a good ACTION movie, but it was no way Die Hard. Yes killing a helicopter with a car is cool, but come on....

Re: A Good Day To Die Hard
 

:lol: at people thinking McClane of 1985 should be the same in 2010+. People change in 25 years.

Re: A Good Day To Die Hard
 

Not McClane...

Re: A Good Day To Die Hard
 

McClane changed so much that he doesn't have a personality anymore!

Re: A Good Day To Die Hard
 

People evolve over time - but if they stray too far from the original blueprint, then people don't like it.


That said, I don't get the hate for DIE HARD 2.

At least that one FELT like a DIE HARD movie. Ridiculousness aside, at least we get Bonnie Bedelia, Reginald Veljohnson, William Atherton, and "Let It Snow, Let It Snow, Let It Snow."

Die Hard 3 and Die Hard 4 were DIE HARD movies only because they plugged Bruce in an action movie.

Re: A Good Day To Die Hard
 

You mean "HeyZeus." I'd be down for that.

Re: A Good Day To Die Hard
 

That was the problem. They repeated the original beat-for-beat, character for character. Not only was McClain's wife in danger again, and they brought back William Atherton's sleazy journalist, but they're on the same plane. They stretched the lines of credibility to shoehorn in everything from the original.

I do think they modified Die Hard 3's script enough to make it feel like a Die Hard movie. Besides the villain being the brother of Hans Gruber from Die Hard, there was also the basic plot of masterful thieves disguising their actions as terrorism, with McClain being the thorn in their side that they just can't shake.

Re: A Good Day To Die Hard
 

I can see your point. But I don't think it was as blatant a rip-off as, say, HANGOVER PART II was.

I'll grant you the William Atherton stretch of the imagination. :)

But aside from that, I thought they did a good job of making a sequel out of something that seemed "un-sequel-able."

Re: ...and John McClane's son is... (Die Hard 5 talk)
 

Well that's just dumb.

Re: A Good Day To Die Hard
 

Probably not (haven't seen Hangover 2), but there was a lot of deja-vu going on. McClain even travels through air vents again.

I also didn't like the action sequences much. I only remember the snowmobile sequence and the fight on wing of the plane, but that fight on the wing was ridiculous. Not only should they have been blown off the wing, when McClain does fall off, he should've got his face burned off when his lit the line of feul leaking off the plan, since he was lying right in the path.

Interestingly, Die Hard 2's script was an adaptation of an unrelated novel, similar to how Die Hard 3 was originally an unrelated screenplay:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Hard_2