TF Issue 191: Is It Just Me? Die Hard 4.0...

[Lizhawkins]

On page 145 of TF issue 191, Paul Bradshaw asks:

"Is it just me... or is Die Hard 4.0 the series’ only worthy sequel?"



Here are a few excerpts:

The last few years have been rough for children of the ’80s. Forget existential angst and postmodern apathy. Our generation has been driven into underground fight clubs by Indiana Jones in a fridge, Greedo shooting first and ugly rumours of a new Venkman-less Ghostbusters. With the mighty Hollywood re-boot machine stamping on every childhood memory it still has the rights to, anyone who grew up with John McClane was prepared for the worst going into 2007’s Die Hard 4.0. The third sequel to the Greatest Action Movie Ever MadeTM, Len Wiseman’s entry got everything right, avoiding the mistakes of its predecessors. They might be half-decent Bruce Willis movies, but they just don’t feel like Die Hard.

...

Die Hard 4.0 isn’t without its faults, but it’s knowing, funny and relentlessly exciting. More important, it gets McClane right. Back trying to save his family, back in the wrong place at the wrong time and back to his old bleeding, pissed-off, smart-ass self, it was the first time we saw the real McClane since 1988. Older, balder and more jaded than ever, this is a cop who’s spent years nursing his wounds behind a desk instead of turning into a one-man army. Baddie Timothy Olyphant’s sci-tech meltdown moves the peril to a dangerously big stage, but the action is kept rough and ready: crashing cars into choppers, brawling in lift shafts and twisting gun barrels into open wounds. Every shot McClane fires, every punch he throws and every fistful of hair he yanks out of Maggie Q’s head feels like the ’80s fighting back for all the ignominy they’ve suffered. It might not have come out on VHS, but Die Hard 4.0 was the yippee ki-ay we’d all been waiting for, the only true sequel to the classic original… Or is it just me?

Check out the full article in Issue 191 - on sale 16 February 2012.

Agree? Disagree? Have your say below - a selection will be printed in the next issue...

[jaykays hat]

It was almost the series most worthy sequel except for the ridiculous jet fighter scene....unbelievable.

At least in the original you could believe that a normal man could take out the bad guys in the Nakatomi Plaza using the only means he had at his disposal. Its because of its believability that I know if I was ever put in that situation I know that I could run around a tall office block with no shoes on, taking out Chris Tarrent with long hair look a likes, getting my vest dirty in air conditioning ducts, dropping office chairs strapped with C4 down lift shafts and generally making a nuisance of myself while Yippee ki- aying every muthafucka in the room.

[parochial1]

Originally Posted by jaykays hat

At least in the original you could believe that a normal man could take out the bad guys in the Nakatomi Plaza using the only means he had at his disposal.

True dat! (I believe that's the vernacular.)

The John McLane of the franchise is not that of the original feature. There, he's a great hero because, when facing his moment of jeopardy, he finds the secret muscle to help him overcome people far more resourceful and skilful than he is. In the rest of them, he is the seasoned expert despite the fact than any success in number one is as much down to luck as judgement. He's only the expert to call next time a terrorist cell captures a Japanese Multinational's American HQ!

Not that any of the sequels are "bad!" Two and three are Miss-Marple-Meets-Blue-Collar-Rambo-High-Octane-Blah-de-Blah. Spicy chewing gum for the brain. Die Hard 4.0 is Jack Bauer in his day job. Justin Long is Chloe and Mary Elizabeth Winstead is the movie's Kim Bauer. A winning formula, yes, but true sequel, no.

True dat, as they say.

[fortunesfool]

No. 'With a Vengeance' is the only true Die Hard sequel as John Mctiernan is (was) one of the best in the business. His staging and choreography of scenes (not just action) has a fluidity and, dare I say, art that is spectacularly lacking from Die Hard 4.0.

Die Hard 4 isn't even a good film, far less a good Die Hard film. That fact that you'd even suggest such a thing tells me your grasp of film criticism would be better suited to Grazia or Hello.

[PorkChop81]

Originally Posted by fortunesfool

No. 'With a Vengeance' is the only true Die Hard sequel as John Mctiernan is (was) one of the best in the business. His staging and choreography of scenes (not just action) has a fluidity and, dare I say, art that is spectacularly lacking from Die Hard 4.0.

Die Hard 4 isn't even a good film, far less a good Die Hard film. That fact that you'd even suggest such a thing tells me your grasp of film criticism would be better suited to Grazia or Hello.

Agreed!

[robinho67]

I thought the plot for 'With a Vengeance' was actually for the Lethal Weapon series, and altered to fit in with the Die Hard films.

Anyway, I prefer the first two of the series but that's just my preference. I don't think the 4th of the series has the same feel as the earlier films, and yes out of all the films the jet set-piece is by far the most ridiculous

[PorkChop81]

Character is KEY to any long-running franchise. You stay true to the people your audience first fell in love with, thus spawning sequels, or you'll end up disappointing a LOT of people! Die Hard 4.0 saw John Mclane return with no receding hairline, no dirty vest, no swearing and no real chance of beating any of the highly-trained, parkour-flouting, ninja bad guys he comes up against.

JM in the first film had audiences gripped with the humour in which he faced his Nakatomi nightmare as well as the fact he was a normal guy, a cop, throwing himself up against a team of soldiers of fortune and coming out on top through gun play, grit and sheer force of will.

The JM in Die Hard 4.0 is a shadow of the JM I loved watching as a kid as the Powers-That-Be pander to the focus-group demons that insist this action film includes 'totally awesome' fancy free-running, target potential buyers that would all love to control satellites through their mobile phones and get and get some 'sweet' product placement cash, and to make sure the 'cool' of this film is cemented get Kevin Smith to show up - ensuring this film can in no way be taken as seriously as the first. Could you honestly see Silent Bob showing up at Nakatomi?

It's a sad day for a much-loved action hero when he can't even say his famous catch-phrase in case it offends the pre-teens.

Die Hard 4.0 is for boys.
Die Hard is for men.

Would the REAL John McClane please stand up?

[stuxmusic]

Die Hard 4.0 was good fun, but it was also missing the motherfucker from the Yippee Ki-ay due to the film 'needing' a lower certificate. I just wonder if there were any other sacrifices to get that teen audience in. I wonder the same for all the sequels but that's the first time I've really noticed anything like that in them. But still, I don't care whether the scenes are probable or not though, it's not really like any of the situations you see in big action films really happen now is it?

[BobbyTwoTimes]

If Die Hard 5 comes out an 18 cert with PROPER good old fashioned blood-squibs bursting out of bad guys and old school rolling-down-a-flight-of-stairs-and-accidently-breaking-someone's-neck kinda scraps, then consider my loins tingled.

If it comes out with no swearing and swamped in cgi-bullsh*t - then consider me entertained in an extended episode of 24 kinda way, but sadly resigned to the fact that McClane is dead!

[gusdesilva]

Not normally compelled to write threads in disagreements but cant believe this article. Yes agree that we 80s kids are getting horrible sequels in an attempt to relieve the past like Indy 4, Ghostbusters 3 even a possible Beverly Hills Cop 4. But dont pick Die Hard 4 as the exception. I didnt see John Mclane that I know and love in the first three movies. DH 1 and 2 were very comparable and 3 slightly deviated away from the theme of the first 2 thanks to an independently planned story called simon says. But 4.0? Or Live Free Die Harder has lost its way. Apart from Bruce who was there from the first film. No twinky loving fat cop, no Bonnie Bedlam, no Samuel L dont f*ck with me or I will shove a thunderbolt up your a*se Jackson Zeus. And where was John McClane? All I saw was an overpaid bruce willis who frankly if I am honest looking a bit like Homer Simpson (come on its true). There was some truly unbelievable stunts but the reality of it all was lost. I started to think McClane is invincible whereas the other 3 I thought he was vulnerable. The only bit that reminded me of the first films was the fight scenes with Maggie Q down the lift. The rest with aircraft and that was crackers. Villan was pants too. I think 4.0 should have been standalone. What hollywood are doing wrong is they are afraid to recast classics. Bruce willis should handover to a new actor like Matt Damon has done to Jason Bourne or Superman or James Bond. Likewise with Indy, I did think Kevin Costner could play Indy after Untouchables but even he is past it now. Perhaps Patric Wilson. I loved Bill Murry in Ghostbusters 1 and 2 but he is not the same Bill Murray anymore (he's uber old for a start). There are so many funny people that can do that. No further questions your honour