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

[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

[JacksSR]

Die Hard 4.0 is a guilty pleasure and certainly isn't as bad as the god-awful mess of Die Hard 2, but that's as far as it goes. John McClane has none of the vulnerability of the first film and the dialogue lacks the effective banter of the third. In Die Hard there's a tenderness to McClane despite the stylish kills and quips, such as when he's telling his cop friend to say sorry to his wife in case he doesn't make it. In Die Hard 4 however he's obliterating hovering helicopters with airborne cars and driving through a comically OTT encounter with a jet fighter on a collapsing motorway. He's about as vulnerable as a fuel air bomb.

Die Hard 3 had its silly moments but benefited from the easy charisma and chemistry of Willis and Jackson. Willis and Justin Long was never going to work as well.

You should also consider the bad guys. You just can't beat a clipped English thespian in villain mode. The quiet malice and cold, casual brutality Alan Rickman and Jeremy Irons provided is the perfect foil to the loud, American, everyman hero of John McClane. In contrast, Timothy Olyphant never seems to be anything more than fist fodder for Willis. Clearly the only true sequel is Die Hard 3.