Ain't It Cool News (
Movie News

Can It Be?? Two AICN Contributors Swing In To Defend LIVE FREE OR DIE HARD!!

Merrick here...
...with two more looks at LIVE FREE OR DIE HARD, which has recently been getting kicked around a bit here on AICN (HERE and HERE being the most notable examples). Yesterday, I lamented that we'd received no particularly positive reviews of the film. Strangely enough, two reviews later came in which offered more hopeful perspectives on the movie than we've seen so far. Before anyone cries "PLANT!", it should be stated that both of these reviews come from people with a reasonably Geeky pedigree. Both writers have contributed (in one way or another) to AICN before, and don't have a chlorophyllic nature. This said, I've yet to be particularly impressed with anything I've seen from this film - and truly lament the franchise's "softening." Personally, I think the PG-13 approach is a massive mistake. Last night I was discussing this project with five or six "thirty-something" film fans, all of whom...completely without my prompting (really!)...tracked on the notion that PG-13 essentially dispenses with the abrasive attitude & in-your-face violence that defined the franchise thus far. They said, in so many words, "I'm not interested in seeing a DIE HARD movie that has the DIE HARD taken out of it." Also, one has to wonder what Fox is thinking here. Most teens aren't old enough, or familiar enough, with the DIE HARD mythos to warrant accommodating them with a PG-13 rating...especially at the risk of alienating a larger, more mature fan base that is already in place. It's an odd and near sighted tactic. But, fair play is fair play & here's a little third sequel love. Onto the reviews...
First up? FilmCoyote:
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’s kinda fun and in a summer full of disappointments it’s an entertaining time but at the same time it doesn’t really feel like a Die Hard film for much of its runtime (I would say about two hours, five/ten. I guess it’s like Godfather 3 or Predator 2. On its own it’s an okay film, pretty entertaining, solid, fun summer flick but seen as part of a bigger whole, compared to what’s come before it, it doesn’t really measure up that well. That said only the first Die Hard is truly great. Two is a xerox, three is really fun entertainment but again doesn’t always feel like Die Hard. It does now because we’ve all had 12 years to absorb it and I suspect Live Free will be the same. After a few viewings it will feel like it belongs as much as With A Vengeance. I think I found it less disappointing a sequel than the others so far this summer simply because I had low expectations. I didn’t believe there was a hope that the director of Underworld, the writer of Godsend and the producer of such recent Bruce greats (!) as 16 Blocks, Hart’s War, Whole Ten Yards and Tears of the Sun could possible deliver a good film. The thing is, despite them it is fun. I suspect David Marconi (who only gets story credit but wrote the script to the entertaining Enemy of The State and the under-rated The Harvest – worth seeing for a pre-fame Clooney cameo alone!!) had a lot to do with what’s good in the story but the real reason it kind of works is Bruce. He knows this character so well and just slides right back into McClane’s banter, brio and grubby shirt. Its two biggest problems are the set up and the bad guy. It starts weakly. Die Hard wastes no time getting to the terrorists; Die Hard two is with a naked William Sadler before you’ve finished sitting in your seat; With A Vengeance is straight into the department store explosion and next thing you know Bruce is in Harlem. And you know what none of them have credit sequences. Live Free takes its time, you watch a lot of computer screens and keyboard tapping, inter-cut with a credits sequence. I was silently screaming – this is not Die Hard! For much of its run time this could be any film, only made a Die Hard film by the presence of McClane. However, about 45 minutes in the set pieces start stacking up and then it feels more like a Die Hard movie. The scene when it feels like you’re finally in a Die Hard film is a brilliant brutal fight scene between McClane and Maggie Q’s Mai. This is superb. And yes you did read that right, I said brutal. A lot of people have been worried about the PG-13. Don’t be too concerned, all it means it that that the results of the action are less bloody and there’s no swearing but you don’t really notice it too much (except when they sound-effect cover the “ucker” at the end of that famous line!). Bruce has not toned down McClane and his fight with Maggie Q is every but the street fighter McClane we all love. Editing may have softened some of what you see but this fight is so well edited together you are swept up in it and you feel every blow, every crunch. If you are not cheering when the line “enough of this kung-fu shit” is delivered and the immediate following action, and then a few minutes later when McClane is getting typically creative (I won’t say but it is sheer joy). You honestly won’t have a moment to think about the lack of blood and swearing until you look back on it later, by which point you won’t care. But thank God for the gorgeous Maggie Q because Timothy Olyphant is just a lame, lame villain. And this is the film’s biggest issue. The great thing about the Die Hard franchise is they’ve always had wonderful villains. Alan Rickman was a tough act to follow but both the creepy William Sadler and fun Jeremy Irons (who was clearly having a ball in Vengeance) delivered. Olyphant just can’t. He doesn’t seem that clever or dangerous. This may be the problem with having a computer-geek villain but you know what this reminded me of – Jonathan Pryce in Tomorrow Never Dies. It’s that sort of rubbish, nonthreatening villain, and a big let down. Ultimately though it does entertain. Bruce delivers; the set pieces are cool; Justin Long is not half as irritating as I thought he’d be; Bruce’s daughter is the right mix of feisty and Holly-substitute anger - not on good terms with her Dad but appreciates him still; the Maggie Q fight is worth the price of admission alone. It may not quite stack up with the other Die Hard sequels but it’s not a mile off and it’s good to see an old school hero back. And make no mistakes PG-13 worriers, McClane is back and he came to play.

Here's another look at the film, which seems reasonably level-headed as well. This one's from The Lawgiver.
A little history. I, like most people, LOVE Die Hard! Clearly the best action movie ever made, mostly because McClane wasn't a superhuman killer like Arnold and Sly movies. I LOATHE Die Hard 3. Hate it. Only had a few good moments (McClane killing a few terrorists in an elevator within seconds!). DH2 was true to the character and had some great action (except the lame grenades in the cockpit which apparently took 30 minutes to explode). Coming into LIVE FREE or DIE HARD I was skeptical. I wanted the sequel, if not just to see McClane in action again, but the trailers seemed to show that McClane was more of a superhuman hero now. BUT, after seeing a final cut (they stopped it once to check a sound spike or something, but started it back at that point) I have to say that I had a hell of a time watching it! It is not without its faults... no different than Die Hard 2... but damn it's good to see the wisecracking McClane back in action! The good? The action is spectacular. Plenty of true DH scenes where he's in a shaft or trapped in a building/tunnel. Willis' wise guy attitude is there in full swing, something we've been missing for many years. The fight sequences are classic and brutal, just as in the previous films (except the LAME DH3). Willis going at it against the chick terrorist is hilarious and again, pretty brutal at the same time. This is clearly a Die Hard flick to say the least, albeit on a more amped up level compared to the others. Olyphant isn't the classic villain that we saw in Die Hard 1 and 2, but he is far better than the skeleton that was in DH3. The bad? Kevin Smith's part is a bit distracting because, well, it's Kevin Smith... and he can be a bit over-the-top here. The role would have been much better had they cast either a lesser known actor OR a better one like Steve Buscemi or someone like that. McClane's daughter has her good moments and bad. Overall I guess you could say that she's a none issue here. It's more of an extra plot device to raise the stakes for McClane... not needed, but not bad enough to take away from the overall plot. The Mac guy isn't as bad as you'd think, but it would have been nice to see McClane alone again. The end jet vs. the big rig scene is WAY over-the-top and belongs in a different movie all together. A poor decision from the director to include that scene. Everything else? It's a kickass flick. If you manage to enjoy the hell out of Die Hard 2, then you'll love this one as well. One note: I've heard in other reviews that the movie doesn't feel like a true Die Hard experience. I can understand why, but my impression is that this is due to the fact that we're watching a new Die Hard movie. I felt the same way when DH3 came out. But at least this one is worth the watch. It's weird seeing Willis in the role again, this time with no hair (I do miss the receding hairline), and its weird seeing new villains. But after the first ten minutes or so, you settle into the story and realize that yep, it's a Die Hard movie. It's on more of a grander scale with multiple locations, but somehow they manage to create some enclosed tension throughout that somewhat matched and maybe even took a nod to the first two Die Hard flicks. Where does it rank? It is actually pretty close to the original. But I'd say it's more like Die Hard 2, if not a bit better and more focused. It kicks the shit out of DH3... trust me. Basically, it reintroduces McClane very well, and is not thankfully a mere copycat of the first Die Hard, which may have been satisfying but would have been a bit redundant. The whole PG-13 thing is kind of a non-issue in the long run. Strange how you do miss some more f-bombs, but it's nothing to get your panties in a bind about. The numerous kills are still worthy of a Die Hard flick, just a little less bloody. LIVE FREE or DIE HARD delivers though. My expectations were low, but I'm pumped to see it again with a large audience. It may not be as good as the original, but its the next best thing and a hell of a lot better than the shit we see starring The Rock, Vin Diesel, and all of those other bland wannabe action heroes. I'd even go so far as to say that a DH5 would be welcome... but maybe have Stallone direct it;) Wouldn't that be a sight to see.

By the way, there are currently 12 film clips posted at ropeofsilicon. I kinda hate the one labeled F-35 - for many reasons. Then again, I suppose it's no stupider than John-John surfing the dump truck in DIE HARD WITH A VENGEANCE.

Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • June 22, 2007, 9:08 a.m. CST


    by Quintus_Arrius

    You bastard..

  • June 22, 2007, 9:11 a.m. CST

    live free or..

    by nolan bautista third. This is a lame post

  • June 22, 2007, 9:13 a.m. CST

    third :(

    by Reception Fades

    third :(

  • June 22, 2007, 9:14 a.m. CST

    Why it's called 'Die Hard 4.0' outside the US...

    by Ribbons

    ...I'm guessing that some genius at Fox thinks people in international markets either won't get or will be alienated by the reference to Patrick Henry's speech ("Give me liberty or give me death"). Regardless of all that, I think that 'Live Free or Die Hard' is a pretty straightforward title; it's not like you need to be from the United States to get what it means, even if you don't get the reference.

  • June 22, 2007, 9:15 a.m. CST

    When is Stallone coming back?

    by C Legion

    Seeing as Bruce bottled it. Anyway, I still hope this will be at least watchable, just a shame it will not be a patch on the original. Bring on John Rambo!

  • June 22, 2007, 9:16 a.m. CST

    So when is JOHN RAMBO

    by Fenrisulfr

    So when is JOHN RAMBO released again? lol

  • June 22, 2007, 9:18 a.m. CST

    how can McClane be back...

    by just pillow talk

    if it doesn't stack up to any of the previous sequels Filmcoyote?

  • June 22, 2007, 9:19 a.m. CST

    DHWAV was not a bad film.

    by Fenrisulfr

    DHWAV was not a bad film. Anyone who says it sucked doesnt have much credibility for me.

  • June 22, 2007, 9:19 a.m. CST

    To Ribbons

    by mastes360

    Because the 'Live Free Or Die hard' title would be too ironic for the rest of the world due to Its due to the 'peception' of America as being a world police force that will invade and kill any country that doesn't 'Live Free', or in other words 'Live Free or DIE HARD'!.

  • June 22, 2007, 9:19 a.m. CST

    "I guess it’s like Godfather 3 or Predator 2."...

    by Stalin vs Predator

    And that's all I needed to hear. Don't forget about Highlander II and Batman & Robin Forever.

  • June 22, 2007, 9:21 a.m. CST

    If this is as good as Predator 2

    by PacmanFever

    I will be satisfied, and frankly very, very surprised. And yes; P2 is hardly a masterpiece. I've got to say I don't agree with the whole "Die Hard is so good because McClane isn't a superhero" theory. I mean, he's more relatable and humble than Rambo or John Matrix, but he still endures some pretty incredible feats. Besides, realism is hardly the primary function I look for in action movies. The thing that made Die Hard a classic was that, for an amalgam of reasons, it was simply GOOD. Something this film doesn't appear to be. But I guess I'll see.

  • June 22, 2007, 9:23 a.m. CST

    The other dolt's "review" stops when he says DH3 is bad

    by Stalin vs Predator

    and Renny Harlin's opus is "good". Go find that bridge already.

  • June 22, 2007, 9:24 a.m. CST

    Live Free Or Die Hard

    by Franklin T Marmoset

    That was such a gloriously stupid title that I couldn't help liking it, so I'm disappointed the film I will be seeing here in the UK is Die Hard 4.0.<p>There was a similar change to XXX 2 (from State Of The Union to The Next Level). It's an odd thing - American culture is so dominant around the world, particularly here in England, but the studios make these changes as though we wouldn't understand what the words mean. Do they imagine that scores of people will walk away from cinemas in confusion, not having bought any tickets to see the new Fox product because they don't understand that the film with the huge fucking picture of Bruce Willis on it that has the words DIE and HARD in the title is, in actual fact, the new Die Hard film?

  • June 22, 2007, 9:26 a.m. CST

    I don't think these reviewers understand what kind

    by comedian_x

    of atmosphere an R rating can create vs a PG-13 in a film. R rated films aren't just the amount of blood or fucks. They can have a much more mature themes and a generally darker atmosphere. <p> Sure, PG-13 films can have action and explosions, but they still have to keep it "light and fun" for any kids that might stop texting long enough to catch some of the plot.

  • June 22, 2007, 9:26 a.m. CST

    Anyone else tired of this film yet?

    by tiredpm

    It's beginning to feel like Serenity -- everyone's talking about it for months, the opinions are out there, reviews are flooding in, but the film hasn't had a general release. I'm at the point where I actually don't know that I have a need to see this movie.<p>Even ignoring the watering down of Die Hard as a franchise, I'm burned out on the film and I haven't seen it yet. Is this good marketing? No. What puzzles me is the thinking by Fox that if they make the film PG13 they will open it to a larger audience when, in fact, they open themselves to a larger base of criticism.

  • June 22, 2007, 9:27 a.m. CST

    movie title matters

    by ric_hard with a vengeance

    in spanish, live free or die hard would translate "libre de vivir o duro de matar". that's a very long title for a cocktail chat. 4.0 is not that bad, but DIE HARDEST would have been just fine (looks like this movie doesn't deserve that title). faith restored upon both reviews? perhaps, but it will "hurt bad" if this "live soft".

  • June 22, 2007, 9:27 a.m. CST

    Ribbons, it's John Stark, not Patrick Henry

    by Mahaloth

    "Live free or die." John Stark "Give me liberty or give me death." Patrick Henry Maybe they should have called it Die Hard 4.0 in America as well since apparently even Americans don't know the source of the title?

  • June 22, 2007, 9:29 a.m. CST


    by eric haislar

    I hope this is true but I have a feeling its not.

  • June 22, 2007, 9:30 a.m. CST

    The 2nd review

    by HitchCock'n'Balz

    I think he's out of his fuckin mind if he honestly felt 2 is better than 3...nutjob asshat.Irons is the man in 3.

  • June 22, 2007, 9:31 a.m. CST

    As For This Film

    by mastes360

    Die Hard for me is the best action film ever made!. Alittle story here, i'm 29 and when i was about 11, i was a huge Arnie fan and Die Hard and Red Heat came out on vid at the same time here in the UK. Anyway my parents and older sister, rented both films and i was so desperate to see Red Heat that i actually watched it in my room while my family watched Die Hard downstairs. i remember loving Red Heat the next day but the rest of my family were saying that Die Hard was the far better film, i wouldn't listen ( i had never even heared of Die Hard or Bruce) and i wasn't going to watch Die Hard (as the film was due back that evening) but my friend had a case of flu and couldn't come over so as i had nothing to do, i watched Die Hard.....well i was blown away and was almost in a fit after watching it!, 'balls to the wall' action and the most 'cool' dialogue i had ever heared!. From that day foward, i loved Bruce Willis and loved Die Hard (Bruce is my No.1 MOVIE hero ever) and could NEVER diss a new Die Hard movie but......this watered down version realy hurts me deeply, i will see the film but FUCK FOX and the dick heads who run it!. Movie fans should pickett outside of Fox Plaza (how ironic and cool would that be!) so that the media would report on it then if the film didn't make the expected box office, maybe movie studios would wake up and "smell what they are shovelling"!. Enough of my rant but i do feel strongly about this franchise. Oh and for the record, I LOVED Die Hard 2 almost as much as the orig and it is Die Hard 3 that i think is the weak link in the series IMO.

  • June 22, 2007, 9:33 a.m. CST

    well, there's a nice contradiction in the second review

    by keyserSOZE

    the reviewer says he loves McClane because he's not a "superhuman killer," and then goes on to point out that the only scene he liked in WAV was when he "killed an elevator full of terrorists in seconds!" see, now, that, to me, equals "superhuman killer" when you can dispatch about 4 or 5 terrorists in seconds. eh, it's a small nitpick. i love me some McClane, and i really enjoyed WAV more than Die Harder to be honest...but obviously, Die Hard is simply the greatest action movie ever made, and as long as i worship at the alter of John McClane, i'll be seeing this one on opening day even if they don't let him say "motherfucker."

  • June 22, 2007, 9:34 a.m. CST

    I really dug Die Hard 3

    by kikuchiyoboy

    In fact everytime it's on, I can't stop watching it. I just love how they used New York. I can't sit through Die Harder too long. It just makes me want to watch the first one instead. Where as Die Hard 3 was it's own thing.

  • June 22, 2007, 9:34 a.m. CST

    I guess...

    by HitchCock'n'Balz

    this reviewer isn't the only nutjob asshat here...Predator 2...for fuck's sake...this shit makes me ill

  • June 22, 2007, 9:35 a.m. CST

    mastes360 and Mahaloth

    by Ribbons

    @ mastes360: You might have a point there. @ Mahaloth: as embarrassing as it is for me to admit, that's the first time I'd heard that quote by John Stark, at least that I can remember. I'd always just assumed it was a reference to Patrick Henry. D'oh...

  • June 22, 2007, 9:36 a.m. CST

    Don't knock the PG-13

    by Da B-Meister

    It really says something about people if they feel that toning down extreme violence and profanity is a BAD thing. You're one sick piece of trash if you feel there has to be gore and extreme violence and the F-bomb sprinkled in as every other word in a movie in order to be entertaining.

  • June 22, 2007, 9:39 a.m. CST


    by keyserSOZE

    that's completely off the point. the reason people are upset about the "toning down" isn't because it'll effect whether the movie is entertaining, but it will completely change the tone of the film and have it stick out like a sore thumb from the other Die Hards, which really had an edge to them. as is, from what i've seen in the trailers the tone seems more like a Tony Scott movie than a Die Hard sequel, and that's a damn shame. toning it down to appeal to a younger audience just sort of breaks the continuity of how raw and visceral the first three were.

  • June 22, 2007, 9:39 a.m. CST

    On sequels to Die Hard

    by Franklin T Marmoset

    I think 2 is more consistent than 3. It's a solid, reasonably enjoyable sequel and doesn't try to be anything else. 3 starts out great, has some fantastic moments, but then goes horribly wrong at the end, which sullies the whole thing for me. Once Irons heads out on that boat, the whole film goes into a steep decline. Also, has any other action story been resolved by the use of an aspirin bottle? Even the writer admits (on the commentary) that he fucked up the third act. Shame, because that could have been a good one.

  • June 22, 2007, 9:41 a.m. CST

    Predator 2

    by mastes360

    I loved the film and although it wasn't as good as the first, it was a good film and a pretty good sequel to a classic. I don't understand the hate it gets but then again, i'm one of the 3 or 4 people who realy liked Alien 3 and far prefered it over the 'horrid' Alien Ressurection!, so what do i know lol.

  • June 22, 2007, 9:42 a.m. CST

    Well I guess 95 percent of

    by Fenrisulfr

    Well I guess 95 percent of us are sick fucks then, coz we want extreme violence !

  • June 22, 2007, 9:45 a.m. CST

    Re: Predator 2

    by Lord_Soth

    On par with the first one in my book. You probably wanted to write Alien 3.

  • June 22, 2007, 9:45 a.m. CST

    Lawgiver-the word is non-issue

    by supercowbell 4 cant stop the cowbell

    and the movie is called faint soft

  • June 22, 2007, 9:46 a.m. CST

    Alien3 is use of aliens as hunters...

    by HitchCock'n'Balz

    and it should have ended with that....Die Hard 2..with the lone exception of death by icicle was way too low rent compared to the scope and free flow of WAV

  • June 22, 2007, 9:48 a.m. CST

    Loved DH3

    by DannyOcean01

    Bristling with the same energy from the 1st, less impact because of the range of locations and the sometimes pointless tasks, but the banter between Bruce and Jackson was excellent and Irons was almost as good as Rickman.

  • June 22, 2007, 9:48 a.m. CST

    good..not godd

    by HitchCock'n'Balz


  • June 22, 2007, 9:48 a.m. CST

    Credits and such

    by 24200124

    The very first "Die Hard" had a full-on opening credits sequence. The second and third movies just showed the titles at the beginning. Also, I think that "Die Hard 4.0" is a better title than "Live Free Or Die Hard". I can't even type that without fucking cringing. Hoping against hope that this movie will actually be a fun one to watch. I mean, that's what the "Die Hard" movies are - fun, with a whole lot of attitude and style. Unfortunately, I'm not having too much faith in Len Wiseman, as his style is a little too fantasy-based to match the much-more-realistic-by-comparison action found in the other "Die Hard" movies...

  • June 22, 2007, 9:48 a.m. CST


    by RockLobster800

    I went to the toilet and all of a sudden I miis out on a chance of being first? 35TH!!!

  • June 22, 2007, 9:52 a.m. CST


    by mastes360

    Please dude, Die Hard is a R series END OF STORY!, it doesn't mean we are all rapists, drug dealers, criminals, etc because we are upset at the PG-13 rating! sigh.

  • June 22, 2007, 9:54 a.m. CST

    You do have to wonder

    by kwisatzhaderach

    when people start slagging off DIE HARD WITH A VENGEANCE. The last 15 minutes sucked but the first hour and 50 minutes are incredible. So when a reviewer says VENGEANCE is awful and then goes on to say LIVE FREE is great, I am very worried.

  • June 22, 2007, 9:54 a.m. CST

    I'll watch it

    by talkbackgeek

    Simply Cos I love the series, and I'll support the Bruce. Willis takes chances, you gotta respect that.

  • June 22, 2007, 10:02 a.m. CST

    why it is PG-13

    by stvnhthr

    This is why it is PG-13. 95% of us who love the Die Hard franchise will see this no matter what the rating, even if only so we can complain about how it should have been R. Teens who couldn't see it if it was R will see it in mass and make up for the 5% who stay away because it is not R. The pg-13 dvd will be released and everyone will buy it because it is an okay action flick. not great, but we need to complete our Die Hard collections. The 6 months later an R rated director's cut will come out on dvd and we will all buy it again because this time it is the real deal. In the long run the studio will make more money with a PG-13 flick than an R.

  • June 22, 2007, 10:03 a.m. CST

    Rothman has infected everything at FOX!!!

    by UGABugKiller

    Is ANYONE surprised that just about every, single damn "tentpole" movie coming out of FOX in the last 3 years sucks giant donkey dick? Whose fault is it? TOM MOTHERFUCKING ROTHMAN!!! He has infected every single decision that FOX makes, and you know what... the movie going retarded public is EATING IT UP!!! How else can you explain that that worthless piece of shit known as X3: The Ratner Edition made as much money as the first two great films combined? Or how does yet another worthless Marvel adaptation done by FOX, The Shit-tastic Four, is now into is SECOND horrible, corny, campy, SOULLESS movie? George Lucas didn't rape your childhood, bitches... Tom Rothman has. And now his policies and precedent are raping your adulthood by giving as a Die Hard movie without any Die Hard in it!!! Tom Rothman will burn in hell for the dumbing down and great source material. The Lord Xenu will eat Rothman's soul for his raping of those of us who demand greatness from our movies. FUCK YOU TOM ROTHMAN!!!

  • June 22, 2007, 10:04 a.m. CST

    Then 6 months later an R rated director's cut

    by stvnhthr

    stupid monkey fingers

  • June 22, 2007, 10:05 a.m. CST

    I'm a soldier not a monster

    by stamper

    This was the greatest line ever told in the history of action movies, I trust Walter B, I'm going to flog my 8 bucks and see this one in the theater, in support of the great B, and against all the morons on this site who gnarl and all the motherBLAM assBLAM who weren't there on Die Hard in 1988 in opening night. IF YOU WEREN'T THERE YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO SNARL ! HAILZ WILL B !

  • June 22, 2007, 10:07 a.m. CST

    PG-13 : Skeptical but optimistic

    by MartinX

    It seems to me that what they can get away with at PG-13 has been creeping towards the more violent in recent years. Plus it tends to be sex and/or pointless sadism rather than violence that pushes ratings up in US movies. I suspect (not having seen it) that unless you're looking for gore-porn (saw, hostel etc) levels of brutality, you'll probably be pleasantly surprised by what they get away with. At least I'm hoping to be, I want a solid, focussed action movie, with minimal silliness (no Truck Surfing, no quadruple-crosses, no attempts to make hacking/hackers look sexy/cool and if anyone gets a BJ while "Hacking" I'll want my money back). If they can deliver that, I'll be happy.

  • June 22, 2007, 10:07 a.m. CST

    Vengeance was great....

    by RockLobster800

    in the first 45 minutes or so-the whole "Simon says/Dirty Harry" stuff was class. I think it was a bummer to just reveal Simon that early-would it not have been cooler to have Mac Clane hunt him down in the final 40 minutes? I dunno-I just didnt think Jeremy Irons in a blue vest was ever going to be as cool as Rickman in an Armani.Anyway, I know I'll probabaly go to see this cos theres that little out in the cinema at the moment. At least they didnt go all Fantastic Four 2 and bring back the bad guy with no explanation. "So Hans, how did you come back to life?" "oooooh, I have my scares you doesnt it Mac Clane?" "No, but seriously, how the (gunshot) did you get back here?"

  • June 22, 2007, 10:09 a.m. CST

    lol @ Stamper

    by mastes360

    So unless you saw Die Hard at the cinema, you have no right to comment on this new film?, lol what an ass!, i was 11 when the first film came out but i saw it on vid and fell in love with the film but no according to you, i can't comment on the films!. Dumbass.

  • June 22, 2007, 10:09 a.m. CST


    by stamper


  • June 22, 2007, 10:10 a.m. CST

    Ime with you kwisatzhaderach

    by TheLastAngryMan

    Not wishing to slag off DH2, which was pretty good, but to say DH3 is awful shows either a blindingly staggering level of ignorance, of a brain full of rat shit.

  • June 22, 2007, 10:11 a.m. CST

    What 21 out of 42

    by stamper

    YOU'RE EXCUSED FOR AGEOK you were too young you're excused. But the guy who says part 3 sucked his old enough to be your dad

  • June 22, 2007, 10:11 a.m. CST

    I am honored... CHING CHONG CHING

    by Squashua

    Wow. That is some video.

  • June 22, 2007, 10:15 a.m. CST

    The problem with the PG-13

    by blacklodgebob

    Is that the main character can't say his signature line as a result. What kind of backward thinking people go for a rating where the main character CANT SAY HIS OWN TAG LINE!

  • June 22, 2007, 10:16 a.m. CST


    by mastes360

    Die Hard 3 is a good film and a worthy part of the series but i prefer the 'enclosed' Die Hard 2 as it was similar to the orig Die Hard, McLane having to think around his surroundings etc. The Die Hard films for me have been about a guy trapped in a clostrophobic area that has to take out the terrorists almost single handidly. vengeance for me was not the same as the first 2 and although a great action film, it didn't feel like Die Hard imo, same with the new film.

  • June 22, 2007, 10:18 a.m. CST


    by mastes360

    What i don't understand is that the MPAA allows upto 2 'fucks' in a PG-13 right?, so why did they have to have the infamous 'gunshot' over the 'Motherfucker'?.

  • June 22, 2007, 10:23 a.m. CST

    John Hodgman should have been the villain.

    by Christopher3

    That would have been great casting.

  • June 22, 2007, 10:23 a.m. CST


    by UGABugKiller

    The two "fucks" in question cannot be the sexual use of the word. Hence, no "let's fuck," "motherfucker," "unclefucker," etc. Bascially, "fuck" cannot be used as a verb in a PG-13 movie. It can be used as an adjective, or modified exclamation (fuck!). But that's it. Once "fuck" is used in a sexual way, as a verb, that is immediately "R" territory. Thanks for the memories, Jack Valenti (rest in peace)!

  • June 22, 2007, 10:25 a.m. CST

    How two put 4 gallons in a 3 gallons jar

    by stamper

    I respect your opinion, but I think part 3 is more like the 1st, whereas the 2 is just a carbon copy making excuses for the original (ie good journalist to the bad journalist of 1 etc)

  • June 22, 2007, 10:27 a.m. CST

    Dissing DH3 destroys your credibility

    by JackLint

    Except for the slightly tedious bomb in the school segment and the last 15 minutes with Irons, it is nearly a flawless action movie. The chemistry between Willis and Jackson alone makes it nearly as good as the first.

  • June 22, 2007, 10:30 a.m. CST

    comedian_x, you're right about the R'ss...

    by samuraiyao

    I like watching R-rated films at the movies, because i hate teens and youngsters. They ruined every movie going experience i'd ever had. Thats why i laugh when kids get molested...

  • June 22, 2007, 10:30 a.m. CST

    fighting a bitch?

    by bamboogrove

    i have a problem with the notion that a bitch would even give john mcclane a run for his money. he'd floor the ho with one punch. only a firely/buffy fag would buy that shit.

  • June 22, 2007, 10:33 a.m. CST

    There was no bomb in that school

    by stamper

    I ran the original Die Hard trailer about 520 times on the VCR before the movie came out and I was there on opening night, bought 20 of my friends who had no clue who Bruce Willis was (I knew him from Moonlighting and I knew Predator directed by McTiernan so 1+1 = 2000 volts !) They all kissed me on the lips and with the tongue when the movie finished, it was the biggest, best, baddest, badass, exciting movie we ever saw in the 80's and the theater was motherBLAM empty ! Some retard publisher even refused to let me issue a book on Moonlighting because he thought that Will B star wasn't shining enough, can you realise that ???!!! DIE HARD IS THE SHIT and even if the new one is not up there with the 1st or the 3rd, I'll pay my due to the man because he single handly re-wrote the action movies map for the next 10 years !

  • June 22, 2007, 10:35 a.m. CST

    merrick merrick merrick

    by Holodigm

    your videos are genius!

  • June 22, 2007, 10:43 a.m. CST

    The Score

    by mastes360

    Isn't anybody else bothered that the score seems totaly different than the other Die Hards?. Not only does it not look like a Die Hard, but it doesn't sound like a Die Hard!. I don't know what it is with Studios/Producers but whenever a sequel to a series that has not had a sequel in say 10 years, they always seem to change the score and look for the new addition, its a real pain in the arse.

  • June 22, 2007, 10:44 a.m. CST

    I do agree that P2 kind of rules

    by PacmanFever

    I just said it was "no masterpiece" as a disclaimer to save myself from accusations of idiocy. Whether or not those would be fair accusations is irrelevant.

  • June 22, 2007, 10:44 a.m. CST

    Too bad (credits)

    by xannibal

    Just heading about the credit sequence alone (at the begining instead of at the end) makes me groan. At least Byran Singer knew enough/cared enough about the continuity of Superman to do the credits the same - at the begining, similar style (Yeah, I know Superman III's credits were originally over the lame slapstick opening). I guess this is what happens when you get an established director who feels he needs to put his own spin on the franchise. Sounds like this really is Die Hard: Reboot, instead of a part IV, and since they keep getting away from the "trapped in a..." the next one might totally drop the plot device the series originally created.

  • June 22, 2007, 10:49 a.m. CST

    Yippee Kiyay muthaf *sound effect*

    by Vadakin

    Ok that's bullshit...I know catchphrases are a little cheesy but even so, fucking with that line would be like having Hannibal Smith say "I love it when a plan...oh look at the time, I've got a date with a hooker tonight" <p> It may just be a small thing...but the little things add up. I hate it when Hollywood hacks think they know better than everyone else (looking at you Story with your sodomy of Doom and Galactus).

  • June 22, 2007, 11:07 a.m. CST

    That's Zeus MotherBLAM !

    by stamper

    Sam Jackson ruled in part 3 ! Whaddaya saying ? You don't like me because you're a racist !

  • June 22, 2007, 11:13 a.m. CST

    PREDATOR 2 hate?

    by Motoko Kusanagi

    This sickens me. It wasn't as good as the first but it was cool entertainment. And not a crapfest like AvP.<p>First the endless and paranoid whining about the rating and now this.<p>Oh, and you may as well hate me for liking DIE HARDER. <p>P.S.: Fuck you Tom Rothman!

  • June 22, 2007, 11:25 a.m. CST


    by ludmir88


  • June 22, 2007, 11:25 a.m. CST




  • June 22, 2007, 11:26 a.m. CST

    Bad guys?

    by Jared Syn

    I have a hard time believing Timothy Oliphant is a better DH baddie than Jeremy Irons.

  • June 22, 2007, 11:26 a.m. CST

    That vid is very funny, Mr Merrick.

    by TELF

    Ta. I dunno man. I like all the Die Hards. The first one is pretty much the perfect action film. The second one an enjoyable retread. The third is, to me, the better sequel of the 2 it understands the whole Die Hard sensibility, but is ableto open itout into an urban playground. The Harlem scene, the the ambulace trick, the bikes and subways...It just feels like the first film let loose. So it's not claustrophobic, but its is frenetic and definitely feels like Die Hard to me. Die Hard isn't about being in a confined area with bad guys. It's about being, for whatever reason, the only hope to save the day when baddies (who are not who they seem to be) come along to manipulate and use all the systems and organizations that are ordinarily there to protect/serve us against us. McClane is the unpredictable element that the baddies haven't counted on (or, in the 3rd, underestimate), who with cunning, aggression and sheer will just will not stop. I don't see anything in the trailers that contradicts this.

  • June 22, 2007, 11:37 a.m. CST

    this is how die hard should be next time ...

    by ludmir88

  • June 22, 2007, 11:43 a.m. CST

    Get over the PG-13 issue

    by slone13

    <p>Seriously. Bitch, bitch, bitch, bitch, bitch, bitch, bitch. We've heard it already. We all wanted it to be R. So did Bruce. It isn't. Tough shit. You douches need to learn to deal with disappointment. That's life.</p> <p>Good day.</p>

  • June 22, 2007, 11:55 a.m. CST


    by alphachemwolf

    Sounds like the positive reviews are negative also. I have removed this movie from my schedule, sounds like a joke of a movie.

  • June 22, 2007, 11:57 a.m. CST

    DH3 Sucks?

    by Judge Dredds Dirty Undies

    Seriously how can anyone take this dude seriously. Like Wiseman could ever do better than Mctiernan.

  • June 22, 2007, 11:59 a.m. CST


    by ominus


  • June 22, 2007, 12:11 p.m. CST

    The annoying part is...

    by Tenguman

    ...IF the PG-13 has any effect on the box office, then the producers will probably assume its because the Die Hard name brand lost it's attraction.

  • June 22, 2007, 12:14 p.m. CST

    DH3 was crap

    by Eh Nam1313

    so if it tops 3 i am there.

  • June 22, 2007, 12:14 p.m. CST

    I saw this

    by mr.underwater

    And would even submit a review, but seeing that this site has never posted anything I've sent them I won't waste my keystrokes.<br><br>But, the gist is, if this was some other Bruce summer action film, it would be a pretty good one. Not great, not one for the ages, pretty good. A three star affair.<br><br> That said, it's not just some other Bruce Willis summer action flick, it's a Die Hard sequel, and because of that, it's a disappointment, and ultimately doesn't live up to it's pedigree.

  • June 22, 2007, 12:20 p.m. CST

    Only thing I did not like about DH3 was them tied up...

    by StudioPlant69

    and Irons leaves him with the asprin bottle. I kept thinking of Ausin Powers when Dr. Evil send Austin and Ms. K. to be eaten by sea bass and he doesn't even watch them die! I mean Simon has them tied up and leaves!? gOODfORyOU

  • June 22, 2007, 12:25 p.m. CST

    Over at Rotten Tomatoes

    by Abominable Snowcone

    they have a couple exclusive clips, since the 10 minute clip has been pulled. Pretty good looking, IMO. Enough to make me drop trou and rub it.

  • June 22, 2007, 12:35 p.m. CST

    Die Hard 3 was bad...

    by moto

    THAT was the film that took the premise of Die Hard and through it out the window. I think it would have been great as a stand alone flick (it was actually a non Die Hard script in the first place called Simon Says), but I thought it was a little ridiculous seeing McClane running around trying to solve riddles. Sam Jackson was good, but all together it just didn't feel right. Every once in awhile it had shades of Die Hard, but overall it was nothing more than a stand alone flick/script with McClane thrown into the mix. Funny thing is, the original Die Hard director himself was helming it. I'm all for different... but DH3 just didn't play for me. <p> Die Hard 2 was much better... flawed... but much better as a DIE HARD movie. And it was true to the character.

  • June 22, 2007, 12:36 p.m. CST


    by moto

    "threw" not "through"... fingers moving too fast.

  • June 22, 2007, 12:41 p.m. CST

    The title is a clever marketing ploy.

    by Stalin vs Predator

    It's supposed to confuse viewers in USA: "So, do you want tickets to 'Live Free' or to 'Die Hard'?"

  • June 22, 2007, 12:44 p.m. CST

    PG-13 vs. R

    by Lord_Soth

    So once again why not release both in the same time? PG-13 on 2000 screens, R on 500. Thus the Shia-lover teen bitches would not mix with real men. Also the R version could have an alternate storyline, in which the dude gets killed in the first minute. Spare us the nonsense casting, not the trademark fucks!

  • June 22, 2007, 12:47 p.m. CST

    The ending of DH3 ruined the whole movie

    by clockpolitiks

    It was awful. I prefer the first one and Die Harder a lot more. The beginning of DH3 was good though, I'll give you guys that. To be honest, I thought predator 2 was more fun than the first one. Oh, and the Alien 3 directors cut is great. Although Alien 3 is probably the most depressing movie ever, I think it's just as good as the first two. Too bad the CGI was god-awful. Why are we even talking about this?

  • June 22, 2007, 12:55 p.m. CST


    by eric haislar

    1. Take place during or close to Christmas. 2. The situation should take place in a closed off facility. 3. Lots of fucks and shits. 4. Action should be believable. 5. Every villain should be at least on par with Gruber.

  • June 22, 2007, 1 p.m. CST

    frg10 and Erichaisar

    by Abominable Snowcone

    I also love Die Hard 2. No, it's not as good as the first one, but what is? I loved it in the theater, had a great time, and it has always held an esteemed place in my home library (first as VHS, now DVD, then deluxe DVD, blah blah blah). I don't get the hating on that movie. For Renny Harlin, it's pretty damn good. I liked DHWAV a lot, but had some problems with it. Still, good stuff. I just bought tix for the new one on Wednesday. Can't do the midnight thing on Tuesday.<p> Erichaisar, I agree with all that, but add that most, if not all, action should occur at night. I'm okay with not all of them being Christmas. That's just too much of a stretch.

  • June 22, 2007, 1:05 p.m. CST

    Die Hard 2

    by mastes360

    Also has the most on screen kills ever (or it did at the time), something tells me that LFODH will not!.

  • June 22, 2007, 1:05 p.m. CST

    bruce willis

    by stemp11

    bruce willis sleeps with a pillow under his gun! DH3 was bad ass! DH was the best, DH2 was awesome, the third best. i would see it if it was rated G, because bruce said so in my dreams.

  • June 22, 2007, 1:07 p.m. CST

    DIE HARD series = LETHAL WEAPON series

    by palimpsest

    It's a fact, gang. A first movie of stone-cold asskicking genre genius, set at Christmas. A second movie that opens out the concept a little, adding lighter comedy and toning down the excesses of the lead character. A third movie that's got some nice ideas (Stuart Wilson, bad cops in general and exploiting of the then-new LA underground), but is descending into outright silliness (Willis surfing? What the fuck is Joe Pesci doing there?). Then a fourth made solely for the money, years too late (Don't even get me started about WEAPON 4's awfulness). Sad but true.

  • June 22, 2007, 1:07 p.m. CST

    "John Hodgman should have been the villain".

    by mr. brownstone

    That made me laugh. I've decided to see the movie on opening day. All told... IT'S A NEW FUCKING DIE HARD MOVIE! Gotta see it and judge for myself. Yes, I am oh so weak willed.

  • June 22, 2007, 1:08 p.m. CST


    by kwisatzhaderach

    was probably the last studio action film that had great characters, witty quotable dialogue, exciting situations, hairtrigger excitement and a sense of scale, pace and momentum. God, I miss the glory days of James Cameron, Paul Verhoeven and John McTiernan.

  • June 22, 2007, 1:10 p.m. CST


    by mastes360

    Who else here used to or does watch Die Hard/Die hard 2 with the family at Christmas?, people also forget that these 2 films (not realy 3 as you can't tell its Xmas until that brat on the bike says it is) are set at Christmas and seem even better when you watch them with snow falling through the window and festive lights scatterd around your room, perfect Christmas films!.

  • June 22, 2007, 1:13 p.m. CST

    Lethal Weapon

    by mastes360

    Danny Glover had his 60th birthday today which means he was only 39 when he did LW (and he was playing a 50yo!), that explains to me why he never looks very old, even in number 4.

  • June 22, 2007, 1:13 p.m. CST


    by kwisatzhaderach

    The brat on the bike is saying its xmas because of all the deserted shops around. The film is set in the summer hence the Lovin' Spoonful's 'Summer in the City' at the start (which is one of the greatest film openings of all time by the way).

  • June 22, 2007, 1:16 p.m. CST


    by palimpsest

    The opening of DH3 is sublime.

  • June 22, 2007, 1:17 p.m. CST


    by mastes360

    I get what your saying, i forgot about the start with the song. I could of sworn the kid says "Its Christmas" though.

  • June 22, 2007, 1:20 p.m. CST


    by kwisatzhaderach

    Yeah he does say ''Its christmas'' but he means that all the shops are deserted so everybody is stealing stuff.

  • June 22, 2007, 1:21 p.m. CST


    by mr. brownstone

    yeah, we watch Die Hard every Christmas... along with Die Harder, Christmas Story and Christmas Vacation. I like to throw Cliffhanger in there too just cause it has lots of snow.

  • June 22, 2007, 1:25 p.m. CST


    by mastes360

    Yeah good point about Cliffhanger Mr.brownstone!.

  • June 22, 2007, 1:38 p.m. CST

    Top Christmas movies

    by palimpsest

    DIE HARD. LETHAL WEAPON. A CHRISTMAS STORY. BAD SANTA. SCROOGE (but only the Alistair Sim version). And the opening of LIFE OF BRIAN. IT'S A WONDERFUL LIFE. GREMLINS. Mind you, I've a sneaking regard for CHRISTMAS VACATION...

  • June 22, 2007, 1:47 p.m. CST

    You can’t really compare the tardiness of LW4 + LFODH

    by PacmanFever

    By tardiness I mean lateness and not some kind of insult about their mental capabilities. The time elapsed between the first Lethal Weapon and the Fourth is less than the period in-between this movie and the last Die Hard. Will their artistic merit be comparable? We shall see.

  • June 22, 2007, 1:57 p.m. CST


    by palimpsest

    Ah. I missed that one. Good call.

  • June 22, 2007, 1:59 p.m. CST


    by palimpsest

    Let's call the whole thing off.

  • June 22, 2007, 2 p.m. CST

    PG-13 equals pussy shit.

    by The-Warrior

    Anything else is just a song and dance and movie star bullshit. Time to stand up. No more. Bury this thing opening weekend and send a message. Steal the money out of their wallets. This is not Die Hard. Don't be tricked. DO NOT GO. See you in Hell.

  • June 22, 2007, 2:07 p.m. CST

    Hey, it's capitalism.

    by palimpsest

    That is all.

  • June 22, 2007, 2:14 p.m. CST

    LAME DH3??

    by whataboutbob25

    Is this guy on CRACK or has he just been sniffing his mothers panties.

  • June 22, 2007, 2:27 p.m. CST

    To ALL who hate the idea of a PG-13 Die Hard....

    by moto

    I myself have no problem with it in the long run. Watch the 8 minute clip on Yahoo and there was plenty of cool kills there. Watch the Bourne movies and Casino Royale, which were all great and sometimes brutal... all while being PG-13. <p> BUT, be hopeful because Fox would be IDIOTS if they didn't see the money that could be made by releasing the R-Rated version of "Live Free or Die Hard". Sucks that we couldn't get it in the theaters, but hey, studios are idiots... nothing new. So rest easy, if you're dying for the R-Rated version, it'll be out on DVD. Doesn't make it right, but it's better than nothing.

  • June 22, 2007, 2:31 p.m. CST

    R rated dvd

    by Bouncy X

    i have no doubts this will happen, its become a trend. but i have a feeling it wont be the complete R rated version like the previous 3. it'll just be little bits here and there, sorta like the AVP R rated dvd, yes there was a bit more gore and shit but it wasnt THAT different than the theatrical version. i think like others here that this was made with PG13 in mind so the "unrated" version or whatever they end up calling the dvd wont really be that different. i could be wrong, hope i'm wrong, but this isnt like that Cursed movie which was made and filmed to be R rated but got hacked to pieces to be turned into PG13. either way i'm exctied to see this, it'll be my second theatrical Die Hard experiece so that alone makes it cool.

  • June 22, 2007, 2:51 p.m. CST


    by Bouncy X

    yeah..i'm one of those nutty, crazy people who actually liked it. :P

  • June 22, 2007, 3:08 p.m. CST

    Basically the people that dont like DH3 are saying...

    by Judge Dredds Dirty Undies

    Is they want another cookie cutter version of the original. DH 3 was good because unlike DH2 it wasn't just a rehash. It was ridiculous enough when McClane said self referentially "how can the same shit happen to the same guy twice" without twice being replaced by 3 or 4 times.

  • June 22, 2007, 3:13 p.m. CST

    Whenever these reviews slam Die Hard 3...

    by loafmeat

    I call PLANT!!!!!!!!! Because Die Hard 3 was not the worst Die Hard... Die Harder was and everyone knows that... except the studio plants who think we all hate Die Hard 3. I personally LOVE Die Hard 3... not as much as Die Hard but it still has a special place in my heart... so as for the second review... PLANT!!!!!!

  • June 22, 2007, 3:44 p.m. CST

    the third die hard rocked

    by WolfmanNards

    it was the 2nd that was kind of lame. The third had developed the character, put him in a new situation. Lots of great moments. The opening explosion. The ride through central park. The sign in harlem. The binary liquid bomb was a great concept. The robbery was great fun. Simon was an excellent villian. The elevator scene was grand. Cutting the guy in half with a tow cable. Bashing a guys head in with a door. Simon shooting Zeus in the foot casually. Pretty much all of Zeus's dialogue. The subway explosion. John laughing after surviving the subway blast. All of the car stuff was great. Fuck anybody who didn't like die hard 3. Fuck 'em.

  • June 22, 2007, 4 p.m. CST

    With a Vengeance rocked

    by Jack Burton

    I'm with those of you that put it just below Die Hard 1. The 2nd was ok but pretty much a mess. With A Vengeance took it back to basically 1 man fighting alone. Yeah Zeus helped but it was more or less McClain's show all the way. All the other cops were occupied and that only left McClain. So I thought it was a GREAT Die Hard movie without being a cliche of itself. From what I've seen of the movie based on the clips, LFODH is a pale imitation of the rest of the series. Even if it is "good" it's not enough. It's been over 15 years since Vengeance, why bother if you are not making a Home Run? If it isn't a great script rewrite until it is. And get a director with some style. Come on, Len Wiseman? What was Brett Ratner busy?

  • June 22, 2007, 4:02 p.m. CST

    LW4 & DH 2 Are awesome

    by barnaby jones

    and hopefully when we get the Unrated dvd of LFODH, it will be too.

  • June 22, 2007, 4:03 p.m. CST

    I still don't know. Walter B promised it would be good

    by trombone

    But then again, he promised to answer all of our questions, too...<br> And krack was so nice to collate them for him and all, too.

  • June 22, 2007, 4:17 p.m. CST

    It's all relative...

    by emp

    Separately it could probably be judged as OK, but this will suck compared to the original (and the other two), just like Predator 2 sucked compared to the first. Hollywood is running out of fresh ideas.

  • June 22, 2007, 4:19 p.m. CST

    Die Hard 3 was originally a Lethal Weapon script...

    by Bill Clay

    THAT'S why it has never felt like a real Die Hard movie. Willis and Jackson were shoehorned into the script to replace Mel Gibson and Danny Glover. We probably were lucky, though. The original script for Die Hard 3 ended up being made as Speed 2: Cruise Control.

  • June 22, 2007, 4:20 p.m. CST

    R version being saved for DVD.

    by GibsonUSA Returns

    So you pay $10.50 for the theater then $25 for the 2-disc "uncut" version.<BR><BR> You think Fox is stupid?

  • June 22, 2007, 4:34 p.m. CST


    by NepomukProebstl

    Well then fuck off. YEAH! FUCK OFF! <br><br><br>Why should I pay for a fucking movie called fucking DIE HARD, when it's actually just a random feeling PG-13 action movie with Bruce Willis in the lead?!<br><br> I say: DON'T WATCH IT! DON'T PAY FOR IT! LET IT FAIL! FORCE FOX TO LEARN ITS LESSON ONCE AGAIN! THEY RAPED THE ALIEN AND PREDATOR FRANCHISE, AND NOW THOSE FUCKHEADS DARED TO RAPE DIE HARD.<br><br> Super stylized Michael Bay like direction and cinematography (who's Bay's favorite DoP anyways?), absolutely wrong choice of composer (I mean Marco fucking Beltrami?! BELTRAMI?! Sure he uses Kamen's themes, but neither has he the wit nor the playful lightness, nor the originality. Beltrami simply can't compose a good, ironic, interesting score a Die Hard movie needs), a very bad cast (and this "good" review also said the main villain is a joke), and now EVEN A FUCKING PG-13 RATING?!?! JOHN FUCKING MCCLANE WITHOUT SWEARING?! A CUT OFF YIPPY-KI-YAY, MOTHERFUCKER?!?! WHAT IS THIS CHEAP FUCK?! A FUCKING PG-13 PRIME TIME TELEVISION SERIES?!<br><br> What were they thinking? What are they thinking? Those dumb fucks at Fox destroying the potential of an entire movie, just because of fucking greed. This movie would be entirely different, and MUCH BETTER, if it was done from the start for the R-rated crowd. No need for MTV style direction. Intelligent plots. Intelligent one-liners. Intelligent score (I BET they don't use a classical music piece like in all other three Die Hards. The fucking kids wouldn't get it anyways, so why use it? Oh man, Beethoven's 9th, Finlandia, When Johnny Comes Marching Home... THAT was ironic and intelligent. THAT'S what Die Hards made stand out from the other random action movies. The intelligent plots, the music, the over the top action, AND the swearing AND the violence, and MUCH MORE!) <br><br><br> And don't get your hopes up for that fucking Unrated DVD. It will just be cheaply and quickly thrown together shit. It will be the same fucking shit they pulled with the "unrated" AvP DVD. Some fucking fake CGI blood and nothing new.<br><br> 20th Century Fox needs to be kicked in its fucking balls.

  • June 22, 2007, 4:35 p.m. CST

    LFoDH has chosed PG-13 and here's why...

    by StudioPlant69

    Sorry I just wanted to use that. I love all the Die Hard films, but I don't watch them at least once a year except for the original. So I'll go see LFoDH and then watch DH on DVD to remember why I love it. DH in order of greatness: DH = greatest action film. DH3 = 2nd best one. DH2 = Fun, but that grenade scene pisses me off every time. As someone who's actually thrown grenades it really pisses me off. LFoDH = Jury still out. You fu<SOUND EFFECT>ers have a nice day.

  • June 22, 2007, 4:40 p.m. CST

    Oh btw...

    by NepomukProebstl

    I just got fined several credits for constantly violating the Verbal Morality Statute.<br><br> Yeah, welcome to fucking San Angeles. Dr. Cocteau would be proud of this reduced kid-friendly rip-off version of a Die Hard movie. <br>Happy Halloween. <br><br>Ironically enough, it's Sylvester Stallone, who will save us all from this political correct bullshit by delivering John Rambo, the real man's movie, with real uncensored violence, and uncensored brutality. Exactly like John Spartan rocked the fake, hypocritical, political correct house in Demolition Man.

  • June 22, 2007, 4:50 p.m. CST

    DH3 wasn't a Lethal Weapon script

    by Jack Burton

    It was a stand alone script called "Simon Says" that was adapted to fit Die Hard. Die Hard 2 was based on an unrelated book called "59 Minutes" (I think) and the original was based on the novel "Nothing Lasts Forever" by Roderick Thorpe. I've read that book, it's worth tracking down just to see what the original idea was.

  • June 22, 2007, 4:54 p.m. CST

    DHWA is great

    by lionbiu

    I can never undersatnd why this reviewer bashed it....also Predator 2 is not bad either

  • June 22, 2007, 4:55 p.m. CST

    here's what we need to do...

    by PeteBogs

    everyone write or call Fox to let them know you'll be skipping the movie - at the theater... tell them you're going to wait for the inevitable R-rated or unrated version that will be out on DVD in a few short months anyway... this was a cowardly, misguided move by them... I DO think about the rating of a movie when I'm watching it because I think of the possibilities it presents or prevents... I want a profane McClane! say it with me: Profane McClane! Profane McClane! that's showing 'em! LOL

  • June 22, 2007, 5:17 p.m. CST


    by CopOnTheEdge

    You have NOT SEEN THE FILM and yet you're TRASHING it, after Willis came to the site and gave graciously of his time and effort to join the talkbacks and said MANY TIMES that in his opinion the PG-13 rating does not ruin the edgy tone of the film. I'm not expecting you to lie and say you liked the film if you didn't, but don't GO OUT OF YOUR WAY to trash it SIGHT UNSEEN. Yes, you've seen clips and you say you don't like the clips...but clips are not a complete film, you should know this, and it's unprofessional and petty to trash the biggest star to visit your site and participate, not to mention stupid because word will get around to other stars that they'll be backstabbed should they take the chance to come here. There's room for Stallone AND Willis in this world, geeks, but from the moment Bruce showed up here, everyone trashed him for this rating bullshit and held Stallone up as his superior. Fucking geeks, always have to be angry and feel superior. Rocky Balboa could have been PG, but Stallone puts up one clip reel online from Rambo with extreme gore and suddenly that means Bruce is a pussy. Huh? How about they're BOTH bad-asses and we should support their movies because they're better than WWE/wire-fu/Underworld/torture porn bs? Now go hump a ronto Merrick and the rest of you fools.

  • June 22, 2007, 5:50 p.m. CST

    I don't get the DH3 bashing.

    by Mosquito March

    I think as time has gone on, that's the one I've re-watched most often. I love that it wasn't limited to one location - it was a more freewheeling film than the first two, and if it hadn't been, it would have cemented the DIE HARDS as the schticky films that the first movie's countless imitators (UNDER SIEGE, PASSENGER 57, etc.) quickly made rote. It was also about time to see John McClane have to work in his own backyard and really buddy up with somebody, and the chemistry with Jackson was fantastic. It was exactly the direction that the franchise needed to go. And, the five-second elevator shootout scene inside the bank ranks as one of my all-time favorite gunfights - quick, brutal, and more badass than anything in either of the previous movies.

  • June 22, 2007, 5:55 p.m. CST

    How the fuck do you hate Die Hard 3?

    by Neo Zeed

    That movie fucking ruled. Lame action? That reviewer is on crack.

  • June 22, 2007, 5:58 p.m. CST

    The problem with Die Hard 3 is...

    by NepomukProebstl

    ...only the ending. The entire movie is so great, but the ending with McClane just shooting the helicopter is too rushed and not big enough to match up the scope and feel of the rest of the movie. They should have also shown in more detail how the rest of Simon's army is stopped by the police. The ending of Die Hard 2 on the other hand... GOLD... Yippy-ki-yay, motherFUCKER. KABOOOOOOOOM. Woaa! Hahahahhihihi! Holly!! There's your fucking landing light! And then all those planes landing and the final shot of all the planes standing together on the runway. Fantastic.

  • June 22, 2007, 6:08 p.m. CST

    "Attitude and violence that defined the franchise"?

    by Billy Goat

    Why do people keep saying that? I always thought the Die Hard franchise was defined by the battle of wits. Clever solutions to tight situations. "Shoot the glass!" "How can I get the patrol car's attention?" "I'm William Clay." That sort of thing. Every action movie has attitude and violence.

  • June 22, 2007, 6:16 p.m. CST

    Billy Goat

    by NepomukProebstl

    Why do you say that? A good Die Hard can be done without the battle of wits. You don't understand why we want our profanity and violence, and I don't understand why you want your battle of the wits. Those arguments like you and some other people use them are pointless. Why don't we just take the action out? I'm sure it could be a good movie without action. Why do we even need McClane? It could be a good Die Hard movie without Bruce Willis. Just let someone else die hard.

  • June 22, 2007, 6:28 p.m. CST

    I'm not saying let's get rid of profanity and violence

    by Billy Goat

    ... I'm just saying that they're typical of all action movies. The battle of wits was the spice that set Die Hard apart, for me anyway. Without it, it's (yawn) just another action movie. ...Eh, maybe I'm just getting too old for this shit.

  • June 22, 2007, 6:35 p.m. CST

    Fu(Gunshot) this movie

    by Doc_Strange

    Sorry, but all the negative hype surrounding DH4 is just too much. Maybe a rental.

  • June 22, 2007, 6:51 p.m. CST

    DH3:WAV problem

    by theBigE

    The problem with DH3 is that it wasn't really a Die Hard film. It was written as a "Mad Bomber in New York" script with the name "Simon Says." Not to be confused with the Dennis Rodman pic. Anyway, when they wanted to do DH3, they took the script for Simon Says and rewrote it with McClane's character in it. So there are elements that feel out of place from the previous DH films. They did this with Ocean's 12 too - took another original script, and adapted it as a sequel for Ocean's 11. Still, it's not bad, and holds up ok after a few years. I however prefer #2 over #3 myself. But I clearly understand those who hate DH3.

  • June 22, 2007, 6:52 p.m. CST

    Loved the Silent movie clip too!

    by theBigE

    That was fun!

  • June 22, 2007, 7:28 p.m. CST

    Live F Word Free or Plant Hard

    by Err

  • June 22, 2007, 7:31 p.m. CST

    The reviewer said part 3 had lame action.

    by Neo Zeed

    What was lame about it?

  • June 22, 2007, 7:38 p.m. CST

    Goddamn you NepomukProebstl

    by RedEyeDistrict

    Now I gotta go watch Demolition Man.

  • June 22, 2007, 7:39 p.m. CST

    Be well.

    by RedEyeDistrict

    Be fucked.

  • June 22, 2007, 7:44 p.m. CST

    Oh, he doesn't know how to use the 3 seashells.

    by RedEyeDistrict

  • June 22, 2007, 8:03 p.m. CST

    Die Hard 3 USED to be the weakest of the series...

    by Bill Clay LFODH will hold that (dis)honor.

  • June 22, 2007, 8:05 p.m. CST

    The thing I really didn't like about ""DH3"...

    by JackBauer@CTU

    ...were the secondary characters (i.e. - McClane's fellow NYPD officers). They all came off as annoying. Everyone from the chief to the woman cop to the cop who bites on his glasses to the cop who plays his badge for the lottery & then gets killed. They all came across as afterthoughts, or stereotypical NY bad asses. And don't even get me started in that anti-climatic finale. I'm sorry, friends, but it is by far the weakest of the franchise. And how the hell do you end a "Die Hard" movie with that classic marching soldier song? (Anyone know what it's called, btw?) This is not some pedestrian, middle of the road, action flick...THIS IS DIE HARD! (Obviously, you can't end it again with "Let it Snow", but, jeezus, that's how you're gonna close out your franchise??) In fact, just because I like sequels which bring back old familiar faces from the original film, "DH2" just might have a slight edge over the original...Yeah, I said it.

  • June 22, 2007, 8:06 p.m. CST

    The DH3: Simon Says story...

    by Bill Clay

    DHWAV is based on a script written by Jonathan Hensleigh originally titled Simon Says, which was originally conceived as a Brandon Lee action film, then later considered for use as the fourth installment of the Lethal Weapon series. The first half of Die Hard with a Vengeance is almost identical to Simon Says; the robbery was added to bring the story in line with other Die Hard films.

  • June 22, 2007, 8:32 p.m. CST

    Neo Zeed...reviewer never said "lame action"

    by moto

    Read it again. He said the FIGHT SEQUENCES were lame... and they were, compared to Die Hard 1, 2, and apparently 4. <p>

  • June 22, 2007, 8:48 p.m. CST

    Two things crack me up... "Plant" and DH3 love...

    by moto

    versus DH4. <p> Why is every positive review a "Plant"??? If you think like that, then every NEGATIVE review is a plant from competing studios. It's hilarious... no, it's just stupid. Not everyone likes or dislikes the same shit as everyone. Go see the movie and judge it for yourself rather than doing the typical TBer thing and relying on Quint, Harry, Merrick, or Moriarty or any other reviewer to do your own thinking for you. Fact is, until you see the movie you can't say it's awesome and you can't say it sucks. You can say it doesn't look good based off of what you've seen for your own personal reasons, but you can't say Willis fucked up, Wiseman fucked up, or whoever until you see it. Someone else made a good point... EVERYONE thought the first Pirates was going to bomb. We had every right based on the fact that it was a movie based on a Disney ride (not to mention it was about Pirates), but it surprised a majority of us. <p> I'm not comparing DH to Pirates, but just saying you never know. <p> The thing that cracks me up when people bitch about Live Free or Die Hard is that they constantly say that it's not Die Hard because it should be in an enclosed place (i.e. Building and airport) and what not... then they defend DH3, which obviously only had John McClane in common with the previous DH flicks.

  • June 22, 2007, 11:39 p.m. CST


    by kilerb

    I agree that Diehard 1 was the best, but I'm actually really surprised that many are saying part 2 was better than part 3. I HATED part 2. Part 3 was definitely better in my book. I think this new one is better than Diehard 2 even if the previews were the entire movie!

  • June 23, 2007, 1:05 a.m. CST

    I like the first one, sceptical of the second...

    by ScarranHalfBreed

    He "HATES" the third one and likes this? And then he says that if this one was a copycat of the first film, it would be redundant. Which was what the third one was trying to do. Make your fucking mind up. The second reviewer is either a plant or an idiot.

  • June 23, 2007, 1:50 a.m. CST

    D3 is far superior to 'Die Harder', but...

    by Negator76

    ... Can't we get a director's cut with the original ending? The ending of D3 is god-awful, so bad that it almost completely ruins everything else. They cut it because it was too reminiscent of the Oklahoma City Bombing. But Jesus Christ, that was 12 years ago. GIVE US THE REAL ENDING, NOT THAT GODDAMN ABORTION IN CANADA! But even if we never get the real cut, D3 doesn't have McClane illogically out-shooting a team of terrorists that just hours earlier wiped out a team of armored S.W.A.T.S without breaking a sweat, or kiling a guy with a fucking icicle. And D3 had a great sense of location, something I appreciate as a resident of NYC and as someone who'se sat through to many movies with CG backgrounds and Vancouver-as-your-hometown sets.

  • June 23, 2007, 5:04 a.m. CST

    The original ending of DH3 isn't that great...

    by Bass Ackwards

    ...I never really understand the clamoring for it, its neat as an alternate look but as an actual ending I think its a bit anticlimactic. Not that the one they used is spectacular, but I always liked it just for the male bonding moment it ends the movie on with Willis and Jackson. Oh and I dig the hell out of DH3 (completely agree with the sense of location statement above), the two reviewers are on goofballs, the original and DH3 contrasted with DH2 should have been a good lesson that McTiernan is the only guy who needs to be directing McClane.

  • June 23, 2007, 7:10 a.m. CST

    I agree about McTiernan

    by Otto-parts

    I cam out of the screening saying you need two people for a really great Die Hard film and this one only had Bruce (though Bruce is enough.) Suspect I was at the same screening as one of the reviewers and largely agree. It's a solid if unspectacular entertainment - the action sequences feel like things you've seen before, Wiseman's direction is fairly anonymous but it is so good to see Willis back in action. It doesn't excel but it does entertain and after seeing Transformers it suddenly feels like a masterpiece

  • June 23, 2007, 8:06 a.m. CST

    If they decide to fix the crappy scenes...

    by BannedOnTheRun

    will they re-release it as Die Hard 4.1? (Motherfu[gunshot] bug fixed.) P.S. Just watched Road Warrior again last night: ah, sweet R-rated '80s goodness. When's John Rambo coming out?

  • June 23, 2007, 8:23 a.m. CST

    Ah, sweet Road Warrior memories...

    by Motoko Kusanagi

    Truly a great sequel. Still not sure if it's better than part 1 or not...<p>I agree with "Otto-parts": good to see Willis back in (real) action and Wiseman's directing didn't hurt (and we're talking about the hack who directed the godawful Underwurlde crap). Would've been cool to bring McTiernan back for doing DIE HARD 5 - of course with R-rating-worthy cursing and action :-)

  • June 23, 2007, 10:01 a.m. CST

    Hell why Not Heap Praise on DH4

    by JaySmack

    You've certainly been shameless enough about pimping Transformers. Guess Len Wiseman didn't give you enough free swag to merit the "bad review immunity" that Bay seems to get.

  • June 23, 2007, 10:43 a.m. CST

    DH2 is more true to the premise than DH3

    by darthkittens

    I guess I'm in the minority of liking DH2 better than DH3. I think there a few reason it works better: McClane is better fighting an enemy and authority. And he's better without a buddy. DH2 might have copied DH1 a bit too much, but it has the same feeling. In DH3, you get about 30 sec of McClane fighting authority and then he's okay. I liked the relationship between McClane and Captain Lorenzo in DH2. While I love Sam Jackson, he upstages McClane in every scene. I guess that's why they hired Justin Long for DH4... no way he can upstage McClane. All that said, I saw DH2 in the theater on opening weekend and it felt like Die Hard (of course it was only 2 years later). When I saw DH3 on opening weekend, the magic had passed. Hoping they somehow recaptured it (doubtful).

  • June 23, 2007, 12:25 p.m. CST

    Thank god for Mastes360

    by 'Cholera's Ghost

    I too really liked Predator 2 and Alien 3. Of course I saw P2 before P1, so the feeling that it was a letdown didn't register. I just thought the Predator idea was so badass seeing it for the first time. 'course I was in my early teens at the time. And Alien 3 is underrated IMO. A nice, brooding complement to the first two. Resurrection never should have seen the light of day.

  • June 23, 2007, 1:09 p.m. CST

    How ironic!

    by mastes360

    I only just came back after a good few hours on to the forum and i have a great responce concerning Pred2 and Alien3 at the same time i came back on!. Predator2 doesn't have Arnie which already turns a good percentage of movie fans off and the city setting just didn't register with many people. Pred2 is not as good as the orig but it is a great film in its own right and a good sequel, without Pred2 we would of not had any AVP comics or games etc (due to the infamous alien head scene). As for Alien3, its souch a atmospheric and tense film, much like the orig in its style and delivary. It also looks fantastic and realy sucks you in to this penal colony setting and if it wasn't for the totaly awesome 'ALIENS', Alien3 would be thought of in a higher regard!. Alien Ressurection was a poor (compared to the others imo) concieved and delivered sequel thats average in every way (you only actually see the aliens in 2 scenes!) and smelt more like a cash in than an attempt to keep the story arc going. Jim Camerons much rumoured 'Aliens 5' with a squadron of Colonial marines going to the Alien homeworld to wipe them out once and for all, is probably the only way the series can end well but with FOX at the helm, it will never happen or not happen the way we want it to!.

  • June 23, 2007, 1:17 p.m. CST

    Memories of Murder

    by mastes360

    I have and always will prefer 2 over 3 but i am the biggest Bruce Willis/Die Hard you will find! (check my earlier post for my Die Hard history). You say that you can't like Die hard if you don't love 3 but Die Harder is far closer to the tone and circumstances of the orig than 3 which is pretty different in every way than Die Hard (except Bruce Willis). To make a statement that you MUST love 3 over 2 to be a TRUE Die Hard fan is quite silly as we all have our own opinions and imo 2 is better than 3 but....i love ALL the Die Hard films (how could you not!)so most people may prefer 3 but i do not.

  • June 23, 2007, 1:26 p.m. CST

    Whatever bud

    by mastes360

    Each to there own but please don't try and shove you're argument as if its fact, each of us has our own opiions and feeling and we can decide on our own which sequel we prefer!. Have you even read this talkback?, you may be suprised at how many prefered 2 over 3!.

  • June 23, 2007, 1:37 p.m. CST

    Thanks Memories you sexy GOD you!

    by mastes360

    Die Hard is my favorite action film ever and no film (except Aliens) has had an effect on me Like Die Hard did when i saw it for the first time (as an 11yo!) so please don't try and make out that i'm mistaken or 'a fake fan' for prefering 2 over 3, all 3 films are fantastic in there own way but i just prefer Die Harder over Vengeance!!!. Its nothing to take personally, its just my opinion. Lets all just agree that this series is one of the best action series of all time...yes?.

  • June 23, 2007, 3:01 p.m. CST


    by mastes360

    lol, lol, lol...........GOD!.

  • June 23, 2007, 3:15 p.m. CST


    by Albean

    Whilst I think it's a HUGE mistake to trim the swearing and violence in such an iconic film series after watching that joyous boyznite die hard vid on youtube with a cavalcade of classic clips from all four films i'm really looking forward to ANYTHING with mclane as a character....

  • June 23, 2007, 3:23 p.m. CST

    PG13 on die Hard = Nipples on Batsuit

    by Big Dick

    Their all a bunch of fucking plants!

  • June 23, 2007, 4:10 p.m. CST

    Question Concerning the Ridley/Cameron Alien 5 (or 6?)

    by 'Cholera's Ghost

    I've read and heard a lot of things about the idea of a Ridley/Cameron double team of a new Alien but by now I'm just confused, and I guess it doesn't matter since it seems the possibility of that asskickery was washed down the drain with AvP. Nevertheless, does anyone have the straight scoop on this old legend? Did it actually come down to a decision by Fox to opt for the budget and story-slashing hackwork of Anderson over a (potentially) Dynamic Duo, or did Cameron or Ridley say no to the thing at the time? Anyway, with all the dumbass sequels and remakes coming out these days this is a series in desperate need of a reboot or a recharge. Mastes, I of course quite agree on the atmosphere and delivery in Alien 3. I really admire it (director's cut, not stuido cut, obviously, which ruined it). Getting back on topic--Die Hard is awesome. I have to go throw up now--AvP does that to me whenever I talk about it.

  • June 23, 2007, 4:59 p.m. CST

    Geeezuz, people...

    by TheRevenge

    I'm amazed at how many people on this site are so obsessed with their childhood...but even more amazed at how many people seem to think we're supposed to CARE about their childhood. Every damn review (or talkback) starts with "When I was 11, my mom took me to the mall movie theater and..." or "I remember being 9 and sitting in the theatre". Just review the movie and leave your personal stories about the first time you got an erection to yourselves, please. And stop bitching about this movie by saying "THAT'S NOT DIE HARD" or "THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BE DIE HARD" or "BUT THIS IS A DIE HARD MOVIE, SO IT SHOULD HAVE THIS...etc." Each one of the 3 previous Die Hard movies is noticeably different from one another. Why the fuck wouldn't the fourth one be that way? And, for everyone bitching about the PG-13 rating...aren't you the same people who bitch that you want movies that aren't just gore, special effects, and language flying around? You guys are never satisfied. Damned movie isn't even out yet.

  • June 23, 2007, 6:05 p.m. CST

    I think...

    by Albean

    i'd like a Die Hard theme park..the possibilities are endless!

  • June 23, 2007, 9:06 p.m. CST

    whatever happened to Bruce coming on here?

    by GQtaste

    I thought he was supposed to do the same thing as Sly. What gives? Did he just say fuck it?

  • June 23, 2007, 9:46 p.m. CST

    WHY Should Bruce come back to AICN??

    by moto

    Think from a filmmaker's perspective. Imagine if you will, that any one of you got off the Monday morning quarterback chair and actually made a movie that was going to be released. So you want to spread the word about it and you go to AICN. And all you hear is people talking shit about the rating that the studio decided to release it under, and how you've sold out, and how it's a piece of shit, and how your character should have said fuck a bunch more times, etc. etc. etc. <p> To top it off, you know for a fact that all of these people haven't even seen your movie yet. <p> Think about it. How would you react? Would you waste your time? Knowing every possible positive word you say about your film will be taken as false statements to sell tickets or just outright lies. <p> So I wonder, with all of the press that the studio contracts make him do both domestic and internationally... I wonder why he wouldn't put AICN as priority #1. Hmmmmmm. I'm willing to bet that if any one you were fortunent enough to break into the film industry, make a movie, and have it released, and then you visited an AICN talkback about your movie... you'd have an eye opening experience. <p> Damn... I don't know where that rage came from. But hopefully you get my point.

  • June 23, 2007, 10:11 p.m. CST

    Why? Because he said he would.

    by GQtaste

    The way I heard it he was excited after Sly told him how cool it was doing this. And he wanted to try it out himself.

  • June 23, 2007, 10:38 p.m. CST

    So let me get this straight. . . . .

    by DirkAngerReloaded23

    The second reviewer said that DH3 was shit & that DH2 was a great movie along the lines of thge first one? Are you friggin kidding me?! Die Hard 2 was terrible! Let me say that again. . . IT WAS TERRIBLE! So bad in fact that BW himself has said that it was EASILY his least favorite of the series. DH3, on the other hand, offered not only a return to form to the wise crackin, no bullshit taking, kill them any possible way you can McClane that we all love; along with great performances from Sam Jackson & Jeremy Irons. DH2 offered a nuetered McClane playing off of Traffic Controller #1, Traffic Controller #2, & William Sadler, who was the only thing I liked about that piece of shit I wasted 2 hours watching. For these reasons I throw out the second review. Hell, while I'm at it, anybody that sticks up for Godfather 3 & Predator 2 as good stand-alone movies should never be allowed to ever post anything on this website ever again, so screw the first review too.

  • June 23, 2007, 11:16 p.m. CST

    everyone is forgetting one important thing..

    by Cotton McKnight

    and if Bruce ever gets around to answering questions (doubtful at this point), I would love to ask him this: In this day and age, you can release an UNRATED version of a popular movie on DVD. The question I want to know is, will this happen to Die Hard? I mean really, why the hell not? If that's all we are complaining about.. the yippykyeyay line.. it's an easy fix.

  • June 23, 2007, 11:18 p.m. CST

    Anyone that doesnt like Die Hard 2 can fuck off!

    by Cotton McKnight

    Just kidding, but seriously, thats a damn good movie.

  • June 23, 2007, 11:20 p.m. CST


    by BetaRayBill07

    Sorry....just had to throw that in.

  • June 24, 2007, 12:38 a.m. CST


    by moto

    He never said DH2 was a "great" movie along the lines of the original. Where did you read that? He said that if you enjoyed the hell out of DH2, then you'll enjoy this one. Also said that LFDH is along the lines of DH2, both not without their faults. So he said DH2 had faults but still liked it... what is wrong with that? <p> AND, Bruce Willis clearly said in the AICN talkbacks that DH3 was a misstep.

  • June 24, 2007, 12:54 a.m. CST

    Cotton McKnight

    by ScarranHalfBreed

    They shot a PG-13 film, but Willis used the f-bomb a LOT in improv), and the censors always ask the producers to trim down certain scenes of violence for a PG-13, even if it's shot that way. An unrated version is a certainty - what better way to sell a bad movie twice to people?

  • June 24, 2007, 1:12 a.m. CST


    by Cotton McKnight

    How do you know it's a bad movie? I have kept the spoilers to a minimum but the main gripe I have heard so far is that this is a watered down John McClane. Doesn't the R rated (or unrated) version solve that problem?

  • June 24, 2007, 1:16 a.m. CST

    I'm trying to think of what happened in the 2nd and 3rd

    by Cotton McKnight

    movies that warranted an R rating, violence wise. I honestly can't think of any seen that was over the top. This first one, sure.. even the walking on broken glass thing was "R" in my opinion.. but hell, Indy once fought a guy who had a nasty face to face encounter with propeller blades. That wasn't R.

  • June 24, 2007, 2:20 a.m. CST

    Oh, and FWI: DH3 was badass!

    by GQtaste

    With the exception of the ending. Justthesame, it was better than 8 out of ten action pics they put out presently.

  • June 24, 2007, 2:57 a.m. CST

    The only people who prefer Die Hard 3 over Die Hard 2..

    by Bill Clay

    ...were kids who were in diapers, or not born yet, when Die Hard 2 came out. As a previous tb'er said, when you sat watching that in the theater you FELT you were seeing a Die Hard movie. It did a fair job of recapturing the lightning in a bottle from the original. When Die Hard 3 came out, the feeling was gone. It was just another Lethal Weapon/Bad Boys action film that happened to have a guy named McClane in it, with only the most ludicrous connection to the previous films. Sort of like Die Hard 4, which looks to be a True Lies/Casino Royale wannabe. It just ain't Die Hard, folks! And those of us who were there from the start know it.

  • June 24, 2007, 5:45 a.m. CST

    Bill Clay

    by TheNorthlander

    That's Bullsh(gunshot). It would be like saying Alien 3 is more of an Alien film than Aliens - which again is bullsh(gunshot). I'm old enough to have seen both Die Hard 2 and 3 in theaters, and when I watched Die Hard 2 all I saw a crappy action movie sequel. "How can the same thing happen to the same guy twice"? WTF(G)?

  • June 24, 2007, 7:21 a.m. CST

    Cotton McKnight, re: violence in DH2 and DHWAV

    by Osmosis Jones

    No violence worthy of an R rating in either of those films? Remember McClane stabbing a bad guy in the EYE SOCKET with an icicle? No cutaway, the camera lingering over the bloody stump of ice sticking out of the guy's eye...I vividly remember the SCREAMS of revulsion from the audience when I first saw that film. And what about McClane biting William Sadler's hand and spitting out a wad of bloody flesh? John Amos getting sucked into a jet engine? The absurdly bloody squibs everywhere? WAV wasn't quite as insanely violent as DH2, but it had it's moments, like McClane getting literally showered with blood in the "elevator" setpiece, or Simon's mute girlfriend filleting the guard and a high-pressure jet of blood shooting onto the wall. Every single previous DH film has had at least once wince-worthy moment of violence that definitely earned it's R rating.

  • June 24, 2007, 9:17 a.m. CST


    by NepomukProebstl


  • June 24, 2007, 9:18 a.m. CST


    by NepomukProebstl


  • June 24, 2007, 9:18 a.m. CST


    by NepomukProebstl


  • June 24, 2007, 9:25 a.m. CST

    Memories of Murder

    by mastes360

    You are doing it again kid, trying to press your views onto us as if its fact and not opinion!. The good thing about being human is that we all have our own opinions so let please try and remember that instead of insulting people for having a different opinion!.

  • June 24, 2007, 10:07 a.m. CST

    BUT DIE FLACCID... oh what a fucking piece of shit

    by NepomukProebstl


  • June 24, 2007, 10:36 a.m. CST

    Fox is going over rthe top to sell this....

    by Russman

    usually a sign of a stinker.

  • June 24, 2007, 12:08 p.m. CST

    Fantastic Four had a 65% drop this weekend...

    by Bill Clay

    Every sequel this summer is tanking after it's opening weekend. Next week will be Die Hard In Name Only's turn.

  • June 24, 2007, 12:12 p.m. CST

    I like all three DH films...

    by andrew coleman

    I'll probably like this one too but that's still in question of course. DH1 is in my opinion the b est action movie ever! That's just my opinion though. DH2 I liked because of the idea of using airplanes as hostages without having bad guys on the plane. Also I dug the gun fight with the painters/terrorists and the ending was great too as someone already said. DH3 amazing opening and great bad guy. Plus I love when they steal the gold. The only problems with the movie was it felt like McClane only had half the time in the movie because Sam Jackson was too busy yelling for the other half. The ending sucks I really hate how he just takes down the helicopter and the other bad guys get arrested LAME! The other scene that still bothers me to this day is when McClane is on the boat and the one German runs up waving his hands and McClane just shoots him and then we find out he was saying "Don't shoot" I always found that out of style and kind of dick. But I guess if I was on that boat and crazy German was running at me yelling I'd shoot him too. Anyway I really like the LFDH trailers so I'm hoping I'll enjoy this movie wendsday.

  • June 24, 2007, 12:30 p.m. CST

    How can the same thing happen to the same guy 12 times?

    by Bill Clay

  • June 24, 2007, 1:13 p.m. CST

    Except Jonathan Pryce is one of the best

    by ImFixingtoDie

    Carver is the best of the Brosnan era Bond villians. Nevertheless, sound effect covering of ucker = this film is dead to me.

  • June 24, 2007, 1:28 p.m. CST

    DHWAV gripe

    by sefsterJ

    Like many people here, I think this movie is masterfully crafted for most of the time, until the end. But the thing that pisses me off the most about the shoddy ending is that McClane is out of character. The guy really hates to fly; we see this both in DH1 and DH2 ("I don't like the fly, I don't like to lose either!"). He seems pretty comfortable at the end of DHWAV. Don't know why, but that has always pissed me off.

  • June 24, 2007, 1:39 p.m. CST

    Another case of audiences accepting SHIT for lack of


    anything good.Hollywood keeps lowering the bar so much that even barely acceptable crap is perceived as good.Fuck the easily amused.Die Hard? How about Hollywood TRY HARD.

  • June 24, 2007, 2:11 p.m. CST

    DHWAV only problem was the ending.

    by SID 8.0

    After such great action pieces it ends with a bit of a thump. The elevator shootout ranks as one of the best in the series. Still have my fingers crossed for the new one.

  • June 24, 2007, 4:36 p.m. CST

    Yeah, Children of fucking men

    by Motoko Kusanagi

    deserved the Oscar. For camera AND best movie.

  • June 24, 2007, 4:45 p.m. CST

    Just watched Die Hard 1 again

    by TheNorthlander

    The thing that struck me was this: Who was the LEAST violent and dangerous bad guy? The Hacker.

  • June 24, 2007, 5 p.m. CST

    At least it wasn't directed by Len Wiseman!!

    by football

    Wait a goddamnpickin moment!

  • June 24, 2007, 5:07 p.m. CST

    I liked Predator 2!!!

    by CuervoJones

    Bill Paxton, Ruben Blades and those crazy raggae boys.

  • June 24, 2007, 5:34 p.m. CST


    by TheNorthlander


  • June 24, 2007, 5:54 p.m. CST

    the problem with both reviews

    by BurgerKing

    The first review said that Predator 2 and Godfather 3 were good films on their own, and said this is like them. No, they are just bad, so I guess this is bad? Second review says that Die Hard 3 sucks and that this movie is more focused than Die Hard 2, yet he says there are plots that aren't necessary and it's in multiple locations, doesnt sound focused to me. Besides, everyone knows Die Hard 3 is ten times better than Die Hard 2.

  • June 24, 2007, 8:10 p.m. CST

    Die Hard - Hard =

    by kolchak


  • June 25, 2007, 1:39 p.m. CST


    by Motoko Kusanagi

    I don't have the slightest clue. I liked PAN, but the cinematography wasn't that great. Whereas the cinematography in CHILDREN OF fucking MEN was da shit!

  • June 25, 2007, 3:02 p.m. CST

    Motoko Kusanagi

    by TheNorthlander

    There might be kids below the age of 13 present. Please mind the language and call it CHILDREN OF f(gunshot) MEN. Thank you.