403 replies to this topic

[Loomis]

Not so sure myself. Is he a star in the States? He's a nobody in Britain. What's worrying, though, is the way he seems to have co-starring status with Willis, as though the producers are trying to turn DIE HARD into a buddy franchise with one foot in the teen demographic. Do they think Willis won't sell many tickets by himself any more, even as McClane? I mean, one of the clips they've leaked (the one I assume to be the opening sequence) doesn't even feature him!

[The Dove]

WOO HOO!! This looks awesome!!

[Double-Oh-Zero]

BTW, who is this Justin Long everyone on this page keeps going on about? Am I the only one here who has no idea who this person is?

Not so sure myself. Is he a star in the States? He's a nobody in Britain. What's worrying, though, is the way he seems to have co-starring status with Willis, as though the producers are trying to turn DIE HARD into a buddy franchise with one foot in the teen demographic. Do they think Willis won't sell many tickets by himself any more, even as McClane? I mean, one of the clips they've leaked (the one I assume to be the opening sequence) doesn't even feature him!

He's not so much a "star" in North America; before DH4, he's been the "Hey! It's that guy!" guy from a bunch of smaller-scale films (mostly comedies like Dodgeball), and those irritating Mac/PC commercials (he's the Mac). I'm also a bit worried about the "buddy aspect" that the film seems to be taking on. It worked fine in DHWAV, let's just leave it at that.

[HildebrandRarity]

I gave Rocky Balboa a try...heck I even gave Pirates 3 a chance. I'll be there for Live Free too just to see what all the hullabaloo is all about.

[dinovelvet]

Not so sure myself. Is he a star in the States? He's a nobody in Britain. What's worrying, though, is the way he seems to have co-starring status with Willis, as though the producers are trying to turn DIE HARD into a buddy franchise with one foot in the teen demographic. Do they think Willis won't sell many tickets by himself any more, even as McClane? I mean, one of the clips they've leaked (the one I assume to be the opening sequence) doesn't even feature him!

Long is mostly known for some Mac vs PC commercials, which I'm sure can be found on youtube if you really must know...! He's been in some movies like Dodgeball and Accepted, and I guess is a familiar face to the teen crowd.
Yeah I too was a bit disturbed by all the screen time he seems to be getting. I guess the studio thinks that because a whole new generation of moviegoers have come and gone since the original Die Hard was in theaters, teens won't have a clue what the hell this movie is, so they have to appeal to their demographic somehow. God knows who Kevin Smith is supposed to appeal to though.
It does seem to be the trend with ageing action franchises, doesn't it. We're going to be getting Shia Labeouf in Indy 4, Rocky Balboa had a, uh "hunk" son of sorts played by that guy from Heroes, Blade Trinity essentially became the Ryan Reynolds/Jessica Biel show, etc. We're lucky Casino Royale didn't feature Mathis as a 16 year old wisecracking whizkid

[stamper]

The point about any movie is, we shouldn't worry if it's a sequel to a 20 years old film or not, just : is it good ? Engaging characters and situations, action ? Like Craig says, "forget it's a bond movie, let's make a good movie first and foremost".
If this Justin Long is revealed by the audience as annoying the whole movie, I won't go, and I don't care if he is well known or not. If people says the movie is good, I'll go.

[Loomis]

Not so sure myself. Is he a star in the States? He's a nobody in Britain. What's worrying, though, is the way he seems to have co-starring status with Willis, as though the producers are trying to turn DIE HARD into a buddy franchise with one foot in the teen demographic. Do they think Willis won't sell many tickets by himself any more, even as McClane? I mean, one of the clips they've leaked (the one I assume to be the opening sequence) doesn't even feature him!

Long is mostly known for some Mac vs PC commercials, which I'm sure can be found on youtube if you really must know...! He's been in some movies like Dodgeball and Accepted, and I guess is a familiar face to the teen crowd.
Yeah I too was a bit disturbed by all the screen time he seems to be getting. I guess the studio thinks that because a whole new generation of moviegoers have come and gone since the original Die Hard was in theaters, teens won't have a clue what the hell this movie is, so they have to appeal to their demographic somehow. God knows who Kevin Smith is supposed to appeal to though.
It does seem to be the trend with ageing action franchises, doesn't it. We're going to be getting Shia Labeouf in Indy 4, Rocky Balboa had a, uh "hunk" son of sorts played by that guy from Heroes, Blade Trinity essentially became the Ryan Reynolds/Jessica Biel show, etc. We're lucky Casino Royale didn't feature Mathis as a 16 year old wisecracking whizkid

I'm also glad we won't be seeing SYLVESTER STALLONE AND SEANN WILLIAM SCOTT IN RAMBO IV.

The point about any movie is, we shouldn't worry if it's a sequel to a 20 years old film or not, just : is it good ? Engaging characters and situations, action ? Like Craig says, "forget it's a bond movie, let's make a good movie first and foremost".

You're absolutely right, but the problem is that I don't see much about LIVE FREE OR DIE HARD/DIE HARD 4.0 that suggests it's anything other than a very bad movie. But, yeah, if it works on its own terms, whatever those turn out to be, then it's all good. If.

Something tells me that it sorely needed a Paul Haggis to rescue the script and give it a touch of class.

[Harmsway]

You're absolutely right, but the problem is that I don't see much about LIVE FREE OR DIE HARD/DIE HARD 4.0 that suggests it's anything other than a very bad movie.

Precisely.

Something tells me that it sorely needed a Paul Haggis to rescue the script and give it a touch of class.

That, and a different director. There's no visual pop to LIVE FREE OR DIE HARD. That is needed, as is a hard edge to the violence (which in all these clips, is nowhere to be found... the violence is about as hard as the violence in DIE ANOTHER DAY).

[The Dove]

The point about any movie is, we shouldn't worry if it's a sequel to a 20 years old film or not, just : is it good ? Engaging characters and situations, action ? Like Craig says, "forget it's a bond movie, let's make a good movie first and foremost".
If this Justin Long is revealed by the audience as annoying the whole movie, I won't go, and I don't care if he is well known or not. If people says the movie is good, I'll go.

Agreed with you Stamper.. We all know that this was not going to be exactly like the other Die Hard movies (personally I think it'll be just as good as if not great on a whole different level than the other 3 films). The only thing that matters is that Bruce is back as McClane and from the sneak peek I've seen, he recaptures the magic of the character..so to me its Die Hard all the way. As for Justin Long, I think he'll be fine in the movie, his character is essential to the story, so I really don't know why people are worried about the whole buddy aspect to the film.. He certainly will NOT be as annoying as Mos Def and his whinny accent was in 16 Blocks.

[Qwerty]

After seeing the trailer on the big screen (for Ocean's 13), I was left a little underwhelmed. It reminded me of Mission Impossible III in a way, but not as fun.

I'll definitely see it, but I think the key to enjoyment here is keeping one's expectations low.

[Loomis]

A review is up at AICN. Seems the film is neither a total triumph, nor an unmitigated disaster, but a mixed bag.

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/33072

[dinovelvet]

A review is up at AICN. Seems the film is neither a total triumph, nor an unmitigated disaster, but a mixed bag.

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/33072

Yeah the overall impression I get is "Diet Die Hard". This will not exactly be a Rocky Balboa-like triumph, will it.

[ACE]

Yippe-Ki-Yay-Motherfunster

(as they edit things on UK tv!)

Still gonna see it. For me, DH is not about violence or swearing or even action per se. It's all about McClane. His humanity and regular guy, David Addison "Big-Man-on-Mulberry-Street"-ness are what I am looking for. Each DH film has got progressively less good but they started so high, they are easily in the top tier of action thrillers. They all tell engaging stories.

LFODH aka DH 4.0 will probably not live up to the Die Hard of yesteryear. But I love Moonraker and Dr No.

Roll on muthafunsters. And when Bruce gives up the role, recast Vince Vaughn as John McClane in this movie idea Die Hard: Dragon's Den.

And then bring out Bourne!

[Loomis]

And when Bruce gives up the role, recast Vince Vaughn as John McClane in this movie idea Die Hard: Dragon's Den.

Cheers, ACE.

I do take the points about DIE HARD not being "about violence or swearing or even action per se" (although they certainly seem relatively important ingredients!), and I'd agree that the MOONRAKER of the DIE HARD franchise could be good fun in the same way as, well, the MOONRAKER(s) of the Bond series.

No, the problem is: it just looks poor.

But then, as with Marc Forster, the proof of the pudding....

[Harmsway]

For me, DH is not about violence or swearing or even action per se. It's all about McClane. His humanity and regular guy-ness, his David Addison "Big-Man-on-Mulberry-Street"-ness are what I am looking for.

For some people that's the draw. But honestly, I just don't get all the love for McClane. He's a fun character, but he's not enough to make a movie worthwhile (for me). I love the original DIE HARD because of the film's overall quality, not just because John McClane is in it. I can't get excited about this film unless the movie itself is good, with good action and a good story. And this movie seems to have neither.

[ACE]

For me, DH is not about violence or swearing or even action per se. It's all about McClane. His humanity and regular guy-ness, his David Addison "Big-Man-on-Mulberry-Street"-ness are what I am looking for.

For some people that's the draw. But honestly, I just don't get all the love for McClane. He's a fun character, but he's not enough to make a movie worthwhile (for me). I love the original DIE HARD because of the film's overall quality, not just because John McClane is in it. I can't get excited about this film unless the movie itself is good, with good action and a good story.

Totally agree. It's about character and story.

I'll see it and then decide.

Will you be watching it in theatres, Harmsway?

[Harmsway]

Will you be watching it in theatres, Harmsway?

If I get dragged to it by some friends, yes. If not, then no... I'll wait for DVD (if that... I may never check it out on my own initiative... I've disliked what I've seen of this film that much).

[Qwerty]

Yippe-Ki-Yay-Motherfunster

...the things TV censors come up with. My personal favourite is "Yippe-Hi-Yay Mr. Falcon!" for the scene in Die Hard 2.

[The Dove]

Well clearly some of us are more excited about this movie than others and thats fine. From the clips I've seen of the movie, I like what I see.. Clearly this isn't the same sort of Die Hard film as the other 3 (its been 12 years since the last one). I certainly will be catching this in the theater and will post my thoughts and comments for those of you who are not sure about seeing it.. Roll on June 27th!!

[Loomis]

A positive review on AICN. Beware very heavy plot spoilers:

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/33085

Mind you, the reviewer does admit: "I liked the UNDERWORLD flicks but I'm easy pickings." LIVE FREE OR DIE HARD sounds like a meat-and-potatoes DIE HARD LITE with an outlandish, uninteresting plot that's merely a coathanger for Bruce Willis and plenty of overblown CGI-stuffed action scenes (and we knew all that already). For some, this will be more than enough. Others should probably concentrate on arthouse fare like Bond.

[Harmsway]

For some, this will be more than enough. Others should probably concentrate on arthouse fare like Bond.

That review is pretty darn positive, though. Loomis, are you going to go see it in theatres?

[Safari Suit]

This review doesn't seem so enthusiastic however
http://www.aintitcool.com/node/33108

But I'm still going to see it because, um, well, err, because I was settled on seeing it a long time ago. (Before it was ever announced, really)

[Loomis]

For some, this will be more than enough. Others should probably concentrate on arthouse fare like Bond.

That review is pretty darn positive, though. Loomis, are you going to go see it in theatres?

Yes, although I'll be walking, not running. Time was when DIE HARD 4 meant as much to me as CASINO ROYALE or ROCKY BALBOA. Not any more. But, yes, I'll see it on the big screen. Apart from BOURNE 3, there's nothing else on the horizon for me this year at the cinema, so I might as well cling to the very frayed shreds of fanboy duty and stump up for McClane at the "theatre". And something tells me that this will be the last gasp of the DIE HARD franchise, so I doubt there'll be another chance.

[Harmsway]

Well, once you've seen it, let me know if I should bother.

[The Dove]

I'll give you my comments and recommendations as well, Harmsway! I'm definitely checking this film out next week!

[Harmsway]

I'll give you my comments and recommendations as well, Harmsway! I'm definitely checking this film out next week!

And I'll be interested to read them. Admittedly, I don't feel as though you and I are coming on the same place re: LIVE FREE OR DIE HARD, but I'll still be more than interested to see if your anticipation pays off.

This new AICN review fills me with dread:

Hi there...

Never written in before but such is my aching disappointment with this I feel obliged to put pen to paper. I clocked DH4 at the UK premiere last night. Les Wiseman, Bruce Willis et al were there to introduce it. Readers will be pleased to know that BW made a joke over the absence of "cursing" in the movie, to be fair that was the least of its problems.

Everything about it, bar one or two action set pieces (the tunnel scene in particular is pretty darned good), felt utterly derivative. Where JJ Abrahams made a decent stab of re-vamping the MI formula in MI3, Len Wiseman was clearly not up to this challenge. The claims Len made that they took the key elements of the franchise and updated them is simply not true. It felt like an extended episode of 24, it moves at pace but at the expense of logic or any meaningful characterization.

Whilst there are some self-referential nods to lift shafts, basements and walkie talkie banter with bad guys it all lacks grit, any sense of realism or any real tension. Indeed the dialogue is shockingly hokey (Kevin Smith is no actor by the way), the acting (as opposed to the action) poorly directed and the lines delivered awkwardly, almost to the point you actually feel a little embarrassed about it. The cyber geek side kick has a paint by numbers story arc, when he is not explaining the plot to the audience he is subjected to "What it means to be a hero" lectures from Bruce which come out of nowhere and are said with little provocation.

It seems they kept the intelligence levels proportionate to the movie's PG rating, which is totally unacceptable when this film has an adult fan base.

The villain who is supposed to be a logistical genius does some utterly stupid things and lacks any gravitas. The villains of the previous DHs felt like men, this guy felt like a boy and you don't send a boy to take on the Bruce.

The plot devices involving Bruce's daughter were perhaps the most shamefully unimaginative, in fact the whole way she was crow barred into the story line to increase the non-existent emotional tension was cringe worthy. When she is kidnapped she acts like a real hard for no other reason than she is John Mclanes daughter, it feels utterly unrealistic. Think back to when Holly was kidnapped in DH 1, she plotted and schemed with cunning guile to escape. Well in this replace "guile" with "head butting terrorists" and you have a fair idea of the film's idea of sophistication.

And since when was cyber terrorism every exciting? War Games probably, Enemy of the State just about, but this misses the target time after time. Wow they turn the traffic lights all to green and cause traffic mayhem (save when Bruce needs a car of course then the streets are empty), they turn off the power, they steal bank account numbers - yawn yawn yawn

It has been said before and I will say it again, explosions and glossy production values do not an action movie make. It should not be assumed that an audience will automatically suspend their disbelief or turn off their brains simply because they are promised big bangs and plenty of them

I hate to bitch coz I love Bruce and he does deliver some killer lines in this (some of which were right on the edge of racially prejudicial) but it is utter MTV, teen age, diet coke, Bad Boys II, Michael Bay bollocks from start to finish. Its the Godfather III of die hards ..... and then some as a great man once said.

J2theB

[Harmsway]

Here are two positive reviews from AICN regulars, and they fill me with hope (one of 'em even gives a Stallone shout-out, which will undoubtedly please ya, Loomie). The second review, which is the more positive of the two, has a perspective on the franchise that I line up with, so maybe I'll end up liking LIVE FREE after all.

[box]Hey guys, the Filmcoyote back again. Still in England and yesterday saw another press screening, Live Free Or Die Hard (or Die Hard 4.0 as they are lamely calling it in the UK, why?).

Basically it

[The Dove]

Here are a few reviews from Rottentomatos.com, Harmsway.. Most of them are pretty positive! A couple of negatives.. Sure not everyone is going to like the movie, but I think that we can rest assure that this movie will NEVER be as bad as say...Batman & Robin!! lol..

http://www.rottentom...views_users.php

[chris-o]

STIRB LANGSAM 4.0 (Die Slowly 4.0)

[Loomis]

Here are two positive reviews from AICN regulars, and they fill me with hope (one of 'em even gives a Stallone shout-out, which will undoubtedly please ya, Loomie). The second review, which is the more positive of the two, has a perspective on the franchise that I line up with, so maybe I'll end up liking LIVE FREE after all.

Here's a new AICN review:

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/33132

Unusually for AICN, this is a well-written, measured and intelligent review aimed at the moderately discerning middlebrow viewer (in other words, it's not a review that's expletive city and concerned purely with whining about the PG-13 rating). What's also refreshing is that the reviewer refrains from blowing the plot wide open just to show off that he's seen it. (That said, there are a couple of spoilers, so read at your own risk.)

Seems the highlight of the film is

Spoiler

the fight between Willis and Maggie Q

, while the low point and a real snoozefest is

Spoiler

the incredibly overblown fighter jet finale

.

Going by this review, it does seem that LIVE FREE OR DIE HARD is worth seeing, but that one should go into it with eyes wide open on two points:

- It's a very far cry, in terms of both believability and quality, from the first film (not that DIE HARD was believable, as such, but it appears that LIVE FREE OR DIE HARD goes over the top to almost DIE ANOTHER DAY levels in places).

- It's very silly in parts. In terms of goofs relating to technology and to military equipment, it's basically INDEPENDENCE DAY.

Still, with lowered expectations and a relaxed mood, it does look as though this flick could be quite fun. I think I'll end up finding it a superior retread of DIE HARD WITH A VENGEANCE, which was also a very silly movie but one that seemed to take itself a tad too seriously.