Gingertom
Well-Known Member
I agree with the general consensus here; 1 is the best, followed closely by 3. For me 2 and 4 are tied for 3rd place, I still like them but they're not as good as the other two.
The Die Hard Films
- Thread starter stiggie
- Start date
stiggie
pop
I bought all four really cheaply on blu-ray the other day and having watched them all in a couple of days I'd have to say that Die Hard 2 really hasn't aged well.
YF19pilot
Well-Known Member
The first is the best. Having recently watched (at least the opening part), it's amazing how much subtlety is in the 'intro' dialogue, makes the characters seem natural. Also, of the four movies, possibly the least preposterous, and certainly the least 'over the top.'
2 is over the top in the set up. Ceramic glocks, ATC/ATM, and a whole host of other things are given 'artistic liberty' in order to make it work. Yes, it hurts my head to think about the errors/"liberties taken", but it's easy to maintain 'suspension of disbelief', and I would argue that 2 is easier to watch (for me) than With a Vengence.
With a Vengence is, of course, still fun, and I'm not going to refuse watching that movie. There is still quite a bit of 'glossing over'/'creative liberty' of things, like in Die Hard 2, but it gets a pass because again, it's easy to maintain 'suspension of disbelief'.
The first three movies were fun, had tension and drama where it needed to be, but stayed toungue-in-cheek with the dialogue and witticsms.
4.0/Live Free or Die Hard seemed a bit pretentious, like it wanted to be gritty/dark in a series that's generally been fun. And it seemed like the script writers didn't understand the character of John McClane. I felt it lacked the fun, witty banter, and replaced the classic "Oh SHI-" moments with stupidly over the top stunts and explosions. In the first three, McClane seemed more like an average Joe in an extraordinary situation. And every stunt had a real sense of danger, that if it didn't go right, our hero would be quite dead; and further more, these stunts were not something our hero did as his day to day routine. 4.0 seemed to lack that sense of danger, even in the overly rediculous stunts (like the Semi-truck vs. JSF fight). It seemed less "what would someone like our hero do in this situation" and more "wouldn't it be AWESOME and EXTREME to fight a JET PLANE with - get this - a SEMI TRUCK!! Oh, but we'll make the rest of the movie gritty and emo, because obviously everyone who were huge fans of 1,2, and 3 fit into that demographic and aren't old enough to remember Moonlighting or Hudson Hawk."
2 is over the top in the set up. Ceramic glocks, ATC/ATM, and a whole host of other things are given 'artistic liberty' in order to make it work. Yes, it hurts my head to think about the errors/"liberties taken", but it's easy to maintain 'suspension of disbelief', and I would argue that 2 is easier to watch (for me) than With a Vengence.
With a Vengence is, of course, still fun, and I'm not going to refuse watching that movie. There is still quite a bit of 'glossing over'/'creative liberty' of things, like in Die Hard 2, but it gets a pass because again, it's easy to maintain 'suspension of disbelief'.
The first three movies were fun, had tension and drama where it needed to be, but stayed toungue-in-cheek with the dialogue and witticsms.
4.0/Live Free or Die Hard seemed a bit pretentious, like it wanted to be gritty/dark in a series that's generally been fun. And it seemed like the script writers didn't understand the character of John McClane. I felt it lacked the fun, witty banter, and replaced the classic "Oh SHI-" moments with stupidly over the top stunts and explosions. In the first three, McClane seemed more like an average Joe in an extraordinary situation. And every stunt had a real sense of danger, that if it didn't go right, our hero would be quite dead; and further more, these stunts were not something our hero did as his day to day routine. 4.0 seemed to lack that sense of danger, even in the overly rediculous stunts (like the Semi-truck vs. JSF fight). It seemed less "what would someone like our hero do in this situation" and more "wouldn't it be AWESOME and EXTREME to fight a JET PLANE with - get this - a SEMI TRUCK!! Oh, but we'll make the rest of the movie gritty and emo, because obviously everyone who were huge fans of 1,2, and 3 fit into that demographic and aren't old enough to remember Moonlighting or Hudson Hawk."
Red_Bull
Gives you wings?
Also, 1 had Alan Rickmann.
Aston Martin
Proudly supports terrible french cars
"Hans, bubby."
YF19pilot
Well-Known Member
"I'm your white knight."
stiggie
pop
filmdude03
New Member
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2012
- Messages
- 1
The already filmed Die Hard, the trailer just came out. I was an extra in it, because they were filming in my neighborhood a while back. They made us sign a NDA. They wanted to keep the details of the plot super secret so they put on a "search" for John McClane's son to distract. They cast an unknown actor a long time ago. They are going to be doing crazy marketing from what I understand.
[video]http://youtu.be/TNqEJczNf4g[/video]
[video]http://youtu.be/TNqEJczNf4g[/video]
stiggie
pop
That trailer doesn't make it look like Bruce Willis is in it very much. You wouldn't even think he was the star.
_HighVoltage_
Captain Volvo
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2006
- Messages
- 9,964
- Car(s)
- 1998 Volvo S70 T5M
It's fake. No let me correct this...it's obviously fake.