Ain't It Cool News (
Movie News

DIE HARD In Japan! Another Reader’s Review!

Hey, everyone. ”Moriarty” here. I have to be honest, guys. I think it’s really, really, reeeeeeeeeeally silly to either praise or condemn a film sight unseen based only on its rating. I have seen fantastic G rated films and absolute dogshit that’s been rated R. I don’t think ratings really matter as long as the filmmaker made the film they set out to make. Having said that, yes... I think it’s an odd choice for Fox to chase the kiddie demographic with a DIE HARD film, since most of the audience they’re chasing probably doesn’t remember the last time DIE HARD was in a theater (1995), and probably doesn’t care. All that ultimately matters to me is the film. Is it good? Is it fun? Is it really DIE HARD? Here’s one more reaction, this one from a reader in Japan:

Just got back from an advance showing of Die Hard 4.0 in Yokohama which retains the original working title on this side of the pond. Having seen Die Hard on DVD a few weeks back and still being blown away by its superiority amongst modern offerings of the action hero genre which I think many would agree the film helped cement, I went into the theater with high expectations having seen the trailers which rocked my soul. Many of these expectations were initially met, and exceeded, only to be left dangling at a little more than halfway through the experience. As this is an action film, I suppose said scenes should be addressed first and foremost. Somewhere between McClane shooting fire exntinguishers, dodging cars in a blacked out tunnel and one of the most creative elevator shaft scenes I've seen since...well....Die Hard, you'll realize you got your 9 dollars worth. Unfortunately for me, I live in Japan and the movie was just barely over halfway over by that point which meant I still had 9 dollars (yep, $18 a ticket here) unaccounted for which I won't be seeing again. I think when you see the film, you'll want to like it because of how fantastic and simple the initial action pieces are. Despite the multi-State scale of the film (something that seems to have been increasing exponentially with each installment) the initial action pieces are dealt with in relatively small and contained area(s). This creates a fantastic sense of claustrophobia that we can share with McClane and sweat bullets right alongside him. Unfortunately by the end of the film we see McClane charging down a collapsing underpass 'fighting' a jet while dodging rockets and yes, jumping onto said jet. Notice 'underpass' and 'jet' used in the same sentence. It's absoutely absurd. But looking beyond that, it's really damn cool and isn't that what you wanted to see? You went to see a movie about a one man army and one way or another, that's what you get. It is indeed FAR too over the top but if this were any other film series I'm sure we'd all be enjoying it. Such grandiose logic-suspending stunts just don't feel right in the Die Hard universe where we once had a shoeless, sockless hero that took time to grunt at centerfolds between shooting Germans the size of a small shed. In that aspect the film fails to live up to its predecessors by delivering a proposterous second half. But I'm sure the first half will have you on the edge of your seat and laughing with McClane as he takes out that helicopter. As far as the script is concerned, everything seems just right on the 'good guy' side. Willis reprises his role with JUST the right zest. He doesn't play the 'down on his luck former hero' card that would have been remarkably easy. He accepts his current situation(s) as you'd expect a considerably aged John McClane to, with a chip on his shoulder and a sense of humor that only needs a few pumps of the primer to get running again smoothly. The various suits in the film deliver line reading which I think everyone expects from them, but its a shame there's no 'Dwayne' of the film to serve as an interesting or useful sidekick in the background. That doesn't mean there aren't characters intended to fill that role, including the cameo of NJ's famous director, they just don't do it as well which is less their own fault and more of a lack of useful things to do in the background. As for the sidekick who is by McClane's side throughout the film, Matt is actually an interesting nerd. They spend some time on the whole, 'wow, you're a creative/amazing action hero and I only use computers' scenario for a few laughs but luckily they don't beat it into the ground and managed to pace the 'changes' the character goes through quite well. You can read what the character will do and how he well progress like a book but I actually enjoyed his presence. The villains here are lacking. The biggest problem is with motivation, while it always seems that Die Hard's have a 'reveal' to show the real scheme, the reveal here is basically throwing away Plan A for a Plan B that's really Plan A with a different name. I had to chuckle to myself thinking who thought it would be an interesting scenario because it fails miserably which is a shame. Regarding the villains themselves, McClane manages to take out the one physically threatening and fully developed villain right around the halfway point. What's left behind for him to inevitably whittle away at is remarkably unthreatening except for perhaps one severley underused and athletic actor whose spryness is something of Bond Villain proportions. The main villain although one cold SOB is unfortunately as harmless as a gnat and has a finish which gets points for creativity but is nowhere near as satsifying as previous installments' finishers. And the story/progression? Well, you just know a story is in trouble when it includes internet and technology beyond more than a research tool. It starts believable and very rapidly escalates to a level of INSANITY that only people who don't know what a Google is could swallow. Our antagonist can instantly access and activate your webcam from his secret base while simulatneously broadcasting to you from his own location without activating futzing with drivers or things like software, and yet he cannot utilize video cameras to secure his own base of operations. Die Hard 2's manipulation of a single airport was pushing the limits of believability even considering it was waaaaaaay before how things are today. But the bastardization of what's possible with technology at the expense of creating a story is sad here. It detracts from the enjoyment of the film which is awful. Lastly, the film isn't the same without creative insults, usually including slang for male or female genetalia, and of course the F bomb. I wouldn't bother mentioning this but for the fact that I went into the film unaware of the PG-13 rating and the drama the ensued overseas. I only found out about it after I got home and did a little reading on the film. It's very strange watching a nearly PC McClane control his language AND, if you can believe it, save one of the badguys who is unarmed. Not cool. All of that said, the first half of this movie WILL rock you and the final big sequence will thrill you in a certain way, but it feels far too updated and thus unbalanced. It hasn't completely lost the feel thanks to the strong start, but the end simply deteriorates into the spastic and unfocused 'blow up as much shit as possible aimlessly' trend that is a dime a dozen today. If this was designed as such to be a transition of sorts for the series, part familiar and part 'WTFOMG!!11' then I can't imagine going to see a fifth. Thanks for your time! Hope this was helpful. I apologize for any spelling errors and grammatical misses. I'm sending it without proofing which begs punishment but I'm also very tired and I'm Greg W from Japan ^_^
Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • June 24, 2007, 8:49 p.m. CST

    Dare I say it?

    by Mister Fame

    First for the record breaking time.

  • June 24, 2007, 9 p.m. CST

    Glad you didn't. Second.

    by cyrent


  • June 24, 2007, 9:03 p.m. CST

    What country are the terrorists from?

    by Prossor

    DH1+2 was germans, 2 was russians or maybe not (always thought that), 4 i'm aiming for a combo of Indians/Koreans, or how about Italians we haven't heard much from them

  • June 24, 2007, 9:04 p.m. CST


    by naked_mandy

    I had been looking forward to this... but it looks the stars have not aligned. Really, both of the sequels were disappointing but still "Die Hard"y in their own way. Unfortunately its looking like "Live Free" will have neither a weird nude villain OR samuel L Jackson to redeem it.

  • June 24, 2007, 9:05 p.m. CST

    woops 1+3 germans i meant

    by Prossor

  • June 24, 2007, 9:16 p.m. CST

    yah, he's right, we shouldn't judge

    by justin s

    Hostel II was R-rated... and it was absolute dogshit

  • June 24, 2007, 9:38 p.m. CST

    condeming a film cause of its rating

    by LarryTheCableGuy

    sure theres some great g rated films, but theyre for kids, sure planet of the apes and such, the problem with die hard being pg-13 i think is that it can't go full potential, it has to hold back its artistic vision, which is mainly cursing, smoking and bloody gunshots. i don't like my movies watered down. now i'll read the rest of the review.

  • June 24, 2007, 9:40 p.m. CST


    by Little_Alex

    I agree with the point, and was disappointed with the rating myself (though remain cautiously optimistic) but the examples given are hardly comparable. PG-13 borders R as a rating, so it is a fragile line between the two. It's hardly the same as an R-Rated Toy Story. Likewise, people only watch 'Barely Legal' for the porn (I hope. lol.), which a Pg version clearly couldn't have. Whereas, with Die Hard, the violence and language are certainly strongly associated with the franchise, but not it's only appeal.

  • June 24, 2007, 9:41 p.m. CST

    2 was Americans + Colombian drug lord.

    by Christopher3

    Not that it matters. And I'll take truck v. jet over cable v. helicopter for a suitable DH ending.

  • June 24, 2007, 9:42 p.m. CST


    by supercowbell 4 cant stop the cowbell

    then they suddenly want to make this one pg-13 is pretty fuckin stupid for many reasons. i wont judge it til i see it, but going from r to pg-13 is pretty fuckin lame

  • June 24, 2007, 9:46 p.m. CST

    Great review, Greg W!

    by Jonny_Dr_Thunder

    This is great, no retelling of the whole film, honest opinion backed up with examples and really smooth writing style. Dude, send more stuff in!! It's a breath of fresh air to read something that actually makes sense. (That doesn't include you, Vern. Your stuff always smashes my nuts.) Great review, I'll be there!

  • June 24, 2007, 9:47 p.m. CST

    R to PG-13

    by Saluki

    From Robocop to Mad Max, and from Beverly Hills Cop to Alien vs Predator... This move has never been a good thing.

  • June 24, 2007, 9:50 p.m. CST


    by supercowbell 4 cant stop the cowbell

    good to know die hard is in the same league as scary movie

  • June 24, 2007, 9:52 p.m. CST

    He Saves an Unarmed Bad Guy

    by robotdevil

    This movie sounds like a huge shitbomb.

  • June 24, 2007, 10:01 p.m. CST

    Re: Phaedrus007

    by Little_Alex

    'This movie sounds like a huge shitbomb.' You're basing that on the statement 'He Saves an Unarmed Bad Guy.' The whole movie sounds bad, because he saves a character you know nothing about in a situation that hasn't been explained in a movie for which you have no sense of context?

  • June 24, 2007, 10:14 p.m. CST


    by Robots In Das Guys

    Yippie-kay-ay Mother-GUNSHOT.

  • June 24, 2007, 10:34 p.m. CST

    that review was well written AND i still can't get over

    by future help

    the fact that the new DIE HARD does NOT have a powerful, commanding bad guy/VILLAN. the original, Hans was just as captivating as John. WTF? these films need better BAD GUYS!

  • June 24, 2007, 10:42 p.m. CST


    by WolfmanNards

    I think the readers on this site have done a great job thus far at voicing their unanimous stance on the piss poor move of watering down the die hard franchise. Let us stand up once again and unite, we will not tolerate DIE HARD LITE.

  • June 24, 2007, 10:43 p.m. CST

    Die Soft

    by 'Cholera's Ghost

    PG-13 is the flaming nipple on the Die Hard franchise.

  • June 24, 2007, 10:47 p.m. CST

    They should have just made non-Die Hard action...

    by rbatty024

    film with Bruce Willis instead of pissing all over Die Hard fans. I know, name recognition and all that, but if I was shown those previews without a title I would never in a million years guess it was a Die Hard movie.

  • June 24, 2007, 11:12 p.m. CST


    by Fartgod The IRSTard

    September brings us Clive Owen in pure R Rated Madness- SHOO 'EM UP.

  • June 24, 2007, 11:37 p.m. CST


    by HessenRoots

    Do we have any word on a properly R rated version for DVD?

  • June 24, 2007, 11:49 p.m. CST


    by Boromir187

    Assuming they don't backpeddle on it, Bruce promised on here that there WILL be an unrated cut with stronger language and violence. Willis made it sound like they filmed certain scenes with two different versions, with the intention from the outset of having an unrated cut. I suspect they filmed their toned down sequence and then filmed a more vulgar and bloody version afterwards. What irritates me is the notion of studios already planning ahead for unrated cuts while filming. Why not just film it as an R and release it that way from the get-go? Also, why focus your attention so much on DVD during production and then base the film's "success" off of how well it does in theaters? If you only goal is the inevitable DVD release, then why worry about franchises or big films that underperform in theaters? It makes no sense and is downright bi-polar.

  • June 24, 2007, 11:52 p.m. CST

    Die Hard in Japan?

    by BetaRayBill07

    John McClane american number one superdog why not chief!? You like Mr. Sparkle?

  • June 24, 2007, 11:56 p.m. CST

    All Your Base Are Belong To Us McLane!!

    by CondomWrapper


  • June 25, 2007, midnight CST

    By the way....

    by Boromir187

    I don't see why people are in so much of a fuss over the "over-the-top" sequences in this, like dodging the flying car or jumping onto a jet. Face it people, each installment has gotten more over the top sense the second one. The first one was pretty much grounded in reality, with a few minor extraordinary occurrences. The second had the over-the-top ejector seat scene and probably a few other sequences (I haven't seen it in awhile, will be watching it tomorrow). The third one had him jumping off an exploding subway train, surfing(!) on a dump truck through a tunnel, jumping off said dump truck and grabbing a ladder with tons of water pushing against him, jumping off a bridge onto a moving freighter, jumping of an exploding freighter, and the somewhat silly "killing a helicopter with a power line" sequence. I'm sure I'm probably forgetting something. Anyway, the first one is fairly grounded in reality, the second one is a little over-the-top, and the third one entered James Bond territory already. So why is everyone so surprised that the fourth one continues what was already in full use in the last one? Don't get me wrong, I loved Die Hard With A Vengeance, but you have to agree that reality left this franchise a few installments back. Anyone who attacks Len Wiseman for the over-the-top sequences in this film needs to remind themselves that the almighty John McTiernan did the same thing back in 1995 and likely would have again if he were in charge of this one. If there is a fifth Die Hard film made (and if this does well there probably will be), I'd love for them to place it on a smaller scale to bring the franchise full circle and finish it where it all began. Kind of like the initial idea that they had for Die Hard 4 of McClane having practically know weapons or vehicles at his disposal and having to rely more on his wits and sarcasm to save the day. That'd be a cool way of doing a Die Hard 5 and I hope that's the route they take. That said, if I like this one I'll probably give fifth one a chance no matter what they do.

  • June 25, 2007, 12:14 a.m. CST

    Review: Pre-screening in Japan 06.23

    by twocarsinjapan

    Short review: Watched the fourth installment in the Die Hard franchise this past Saturday in Kobe. In short, I was not disappointed. This is a very good action flick, but far from the best in the series. Willis still is McClane, I bet you he could do it in his sleep by now, that is how good he is. Welcome back, Mr McClane, we've missed you! Justin Long ended up being far from as irritating as you would expect from a guy whose best role so far is playing a Mac. I also found the 'hint' to those Apple spots amusing. Maggie Q was lovely, but could have been utilized more. Her scenes with Willis is kickass, though. Cyrill Raffaelli was spot on as the Parkour performing henchman, but still ended up being underused. Where was the five-minute brawl with McClane? Timothy Olyphant was a good, but not great main villain. I kept on wondering how a guy who could hack into and shut down NORAD with a laptop, ended up having problems with hacking some kid-hacker's encryption. The action scenes were mostly awesome, with a few being a bit over the top (F-35-scene), even by Die Hard standards. The humor in the film was also well implemented, and Kevin Smith's Warlock ended up being as funny as you would expect, without being destracting. You can also tell that he had a finger in the scriptwriting, especially in the scenes he was in himself (Hint: Star Wars reference). The special effects were very good, but that was expected. It will not win an Oscar (Transformers, anyone?), but I have no complaints in this department. So, what was bad you ask? Well, one thing kept nagging me throughout the entire movie. The lip-sync. In places, it is horrifyingly bad. No, it had nothing to do with the theatre I was in, it was the movie. There are multiple scenes were one character speaks, and everything is golden. Then there is a camera change, and the character can be seen in the background, still talking. The problem is that now the audio does not match with the lip movements. In one scene, no one opens their mouths, yet we can clearly hear one of them speak. In the next close-up, everything is fine again. Really bad ADR. Seriously, I hope they fix this before it is released on DVD, as I am sure many will miss it in the theatre, but repeated viewings will clearly damage the atmosphere of the movie. In the end, I still feel this is a valid entry into the franchise. The PG-13 rating is not an issue. They push it as far as they can. There is blood, worry not. And swearing, although cleverly camouflaged. Total: 7/10 Ps. If they fix the audio issues, I would give it an 8/10. twocarsinjapan out.

  • June 25, 2007, 12:20 a.m. CST


    by mooniewawee

    with more explosion, aka 24 with a bigger budget. Sheez, no way i'm paying for this.

  • June 25, 2007, 12:20 a.m. CST

    Well written review

    by Darth Thoth


  • June 25, 2007, 12:27 a.m. CST


    by mooniewawee

    with more explosion, aka 24 with a bigger budget. Sheez, no way i'm paying for this.

  • June 25, 2007, 12:31 a.m. CST

    yep, a very good review. thanks!

    by Mogwai Democracy

    just want to second that emotion. fair and balanced. you can tell that this isn't a plant & you can tell that this film maybe we won't be completely terrible, but it sure will be dissapointing. yippie-ki-yay, motherjumper.

  • June 25, 2007, 12:35 a.m. CST


    by HessenRoots

    Thanks for the info. I assumed they'd do something like that.<br><br> I completely agree with your sentiment on filming and R film then cutting it for a "more accessable" release, especially with something like the Die Hard franchise. It isn't as if they filmed an R rated Harry Potter then cut 30 minutes to make it PG13. <br><br> The violence and language (etc) certainly isn't required for an entertaining film but when you're working with a character and theme that's built on a hard R why bother softening it?

  • June 25, 2007, 12:44 a.m. CST


    by MrFacety

    I watch films at home. Gone are the days of the kickass R rated Christmas season films. Now I turn the ac up, blast the home theater surround sound, dim the lights, and pop in something foreign and too hardcore for candy ass Hollywood.

  • June 25, 2007, 12:54 a.m. CST

    John McClane doesn't shoot first?????????

    by My Ass Smells

    Fuck this PG-13 bullshit.

  • June 25, 2007, 1:30 a.m. CST

    where did (gunshot) come from?

    by Prossor

    and where did kurt russell laughing come from? i'm so behind on the fads

  • June 25, 2007, 1:35 a.m. CST

    What's up with the racism monkeyass?

    by Bass Bastardson

    Seriously. Nip? Are we back in 1945? And if you're going to claim it's just short for Nippon, well... If you're smart enough to know that, you should be smart enough to know better. That's right bitches I'M THE PC POLICE!!!

  • June 25, 2007, 1:39 a.m. CST

    Prossor the (gunshot)ing (gunshot)...

    by Bass Bastardson

    Came from the fact that in the PG-13 rated LFODH, the "Fucker" portion of "Yippy Ki Yay Motherfucker" is obscured by - you guessed it - a gunshot. As for the Kurt Russel laughing thing... I'm as lost as you but I'm guessing it came from some Grindhouse thread.

  • June 25, 2007, 1:43 a.m. CST

    *yawn* And another DIE HARD 4 thread...

    by Motoko Kusanagi

    ...with mindless bitching about the rating by some jerks who haven't even seen the movie yet.

  • June 25, 2007, 1:55 a.m. CST



    Hire this guy!

  • June 25, 2007, 1:55 a.m. CST

    I (gunshot)ing love the Die Hard series...

    by GravyAkira

    But I may have to force myself not to see this in the theaters. I just cant see myself supporting a watered down for the masses pg-13 Die Hard film. Have you no respect for the true fans Fox? This still could have a made a shit-load of money with an R rating(as witnessed by the first 3 films, the Matrix trilogy, Bad Boys 2, fucking 300). I may have to purchase a ticket for Pirates 3 and walk into into Die Hard 4 for this travesty. I still love you though Bruce!

  • June 25, 2007, 2:51 a.m. CST

    At least it will be better than Pirates 3...

    by andrew coleman

    But Pirates 3 was one the worst movies ever made so that is not saying much. I keep trying to forget it won't be rated R but I can't! Sadly I'm seeing it anyway on wendsday because frankly I love Bruce and the series and I just can't not see this movie when it comes out. "When Alexander saw the breadth of his domain, he wept for there were no more worlds to conquer, the benefits of a classical education."- RIP Hans Gruber

  • June 25, 2007, 2:59 a.m. CST

    Its not about the rating its about...

    by Judge Dredds Dirty Undies

    what the rating represents. This is not going to be a Die Hard film and everyone knows it.

  • June 25, 2007, 3:11 a.m. CST

    I agree with rbatty....

    by Bill Clay

    They should have called it "Hostage 2" or "16 1/2 Blocks" and just let Bruce play a generic hero in a generic action film. Calling it "Die Hard" and then failing to live up to the series' legacy is a mistake that is going to haunt them.

  • June 25, 2007, 3:15 a.m. CST

    Die Hard 4 = Mission Impossible 4?

    by Sulis

    Fighting jets in a tunnel = fighting a helicopter in the Channel Tunnel. Utter bullshit.

  • June 25, 2007, 3:20 a.m. CST

    Wow, what a brilliant review...

    by ScarranHalfBreed

    ...A rarity for this site.

  • June 25, 2007, 3:21 a.m. CST

    What did you guys thing about...

    by Mr Gorilla

    Mission Impossible 3? Really. I mean, apart from the lame last 60 seconds, I really really enjoyed the hell out of it. The bridge attack. The Vatican bit. Am I wrong? It was all exciting.

  • June 25, 2007, 3:24 a.m. CST

    Never saw Mission Impossible 3....

    by Bill Clay

    At this point, I can't stand to look at Tom Cruise. He has literally turned himself into box office poison with his wacky cult rantings.

  • June 25, 2007, 3:36 a.m. CST

    This review contains poile!!

    by Franklin T Marmoset

    I never used to notice all the exclamation points on the front page of AICN, but today they're all I can see for some reason!! It's exclamatory!!!<p>By the way, I also liked M:I:III. A pretty enjoyable film, even if it has the title with the least to do with actual English I've ever seen. Plus, I though Philip Seymout Hoffman was great in it, and I don't much care that Tom Cruise is a wacky cult member. What the fuck do I care what clubs he wants to join?

  • June 25, 2007, 4:53 a.m. CST

    Is it silly to condemn a film based on... LEN WISEMAN?

    by JackPumpkinhead

    There's a reason why some prisoners are classified as beyond rehabilitation and beyond another chance. Is it silly to condemn a film in advance because Uwe Boll directed it? You know it's not. And "wise" man has already shown that the same thing goes for him.

  • June 25, 2007, 5:20 a.m. CST

    "Jesus Christ Powell!!!!!

    by kwisatzhaderach

    Could be a fucking bartender for all we know!" Just watched DIE HARD on DVD and the movie still rocks 19 years on. What sets it apart is the quality of the story structure and ideas contained in the screenplay. The sequence where McClane and Gruber meet near the roof and deceive each other is brilliantly inspired. There's going to be nothing lke that in LIVE FREE. Never mind, we still have the original to watch, the most ferocious and intelligent action movie ever made.

  • June 25, 2007, 5:38 a.m. CST

    There is no PG-13 Beverly Hills Cop!

    by PacmanFever

    A somewhat watered-down, massively inferior BHC yes; but it was rated R, at least give it that. If they really do make a fourth one though, you can bet your [gunshot] it will be PG-13.

  • June 25, 2007, 6:04 a.m. CST

    To the guy named "CondomWrapper"

    by Motoko Kusanagi

    For that quote I tip my hat at you Sir! I guess 99% of the other talkbackers don't have a clue what you're talking about ^_^

  • June 25, 2007, 6:23 a.m. CST

    why they're chasing a different demo

    by partyflavor

    Mori said "I think it’s an odd choice for Fox to chase the kiddie demographic with a DIE HARD film, since most of the audience they’re chasing probably doesn’t remember the last time DIE HARD was in a theater (1995), and probably doesn’t care." You should know as well as anyone else here that sequels are about making money. Your observation in completely correct about many people not having seen Die Hard in a theatre. I would venture to say that goes beyond the demographic. I'd go far as to say more people have seen the edited version of the original on FX than have seen all three combined in theatres. If they want to appeal to widest possible audience and make the most money, they can give those people what they expect. And besides, It's the rule, not the exception, that the lower the rating, the more money a picture will make.

  • June 25, 2007, 6:32 a.m. CST

    good review, and it seems to hit on all the problems...

    by just pillow talk

    Since it comes with the name "Die Hard", it fails to live up to the expectations that come with that name. Flags at half staff..

  • June 25, 2007, 7:39 a.m. CST

    Over the top endings

    by bender7

    A bit over them. Fighting a jet in an underpass, a sea battle in a whirlpool, giant sandmen. The best climax in an action film for a while had to be the car chase in The Bourne Supremacy

  • June 25, 2007, 8:13 a.m. CST

    This review only harks back to Die Hard 1,

    by pokadoo

    and goes on about preposterous action scenes in place of gritty bloody-footed reality. What about pretty much all of Die Hard 2? Yeah, it had some great action/violence, but it was hardly Bourne Hard. The Ejecta-seat scene. Mclane fighting a guy on the wing of a plane, then yipee-kay-eeing it with his Zippo? Die Hard 3 had him Surfing on a Truck!! Hardly a "Directed by Sean Penn" film. It's Die Hard, baby, and the law of sequel averages say it's never going to live up to the first movie. That said, I can't wait to see it! Ho Ho Ho.

  • June 25, 2007, 8:20 a.m. CST

    18 bucks for a movie ticket?

    by roccotheripper

    that is fucking insanity!

  • June 25, 2007, 8:32 a.m. CST

    Bruce Willis was doing promo spots on Spike

    by Stuntcock Mike

    last weekend. There seemed to be a little desperation in his voice. "It's hardcore". Meh.

  • June 25, 2007, 8:39 a.m. CST

    If the R-rating worked in the past and the films were

    by Bong

    successful why it wouldnt work now?

  • June 25, 2007, 9:15 a.m. CST

    Right on, kwisatzhaderach

    by amrisharmpit

    The original Die Hard was brilliant for many reasons, but primarily it was because of its script, far better than most of the action genre. If you dig online, you can find an analysis of the script by a screenwriting professor, who points out the many layers the script works on.

  • June 25, 2007, 9:36 a.m. CST


    by Bishop6

    download it off a torrent then and STFU u nerd..

  • June 25, 2007, 10:07 a.m. CST

    Die Hard for Tweens

    by Strabo

    I'd love to see someone organize an online protest with the aim of getting people to stay home and buy/rent/watch the original Die Hard on opening night instead of seeing this limp-on-arrival piece of (gunshot). I rewatched the movie about a month ago...holy (gunshot), it's good.

  • June 25, 2007, 10:38 a.m. CST

    Like 300, you'd have to be gay to not get hard from...

    by CuervoJones


  • June 25, 2007, 11:15 a.m. CST

    Blood... more blood.

    by Fenrisulfr

    One thing typical of John McClane is that he always ends up the movie covered with blood. You could even say it's his masochistic trademark. In DH1, there was the fight with Karl and the "feet sequence". Same in DH2 after falling off the plane wing. Even more in DH3 after fighting Targo. And talking about DH4 and this jet finale, McClane doesn't appear to have one drop of blood on his body, appart from the few lame PG-13 scratches seen in the trailer (especially while driving the truck). All I'm saying is that even though a lack of blood doesn't ruin the movie, it just feels LESS like Die Hard. And after all those mediocre to fair reviews, I just don't feel the urge or the need to watch the latest McCLane. Sad. I still remember the magic of watching DH3 in theaters in 1995.

  • June 25, 2007, 11:27 a.m. CST

    Over-the-top action is getting pretty boring.

    by rbatty024

    With CGI you can do just about realize any absurd action scene you want to, but it also means it's less impressive. We've seen it before. Now, it's thrilling if a movie is actually gritty instead of glossed over.

  • June 25, 2007, 11:28 a.m. CST

    I choose Bruce

    by CuervoJones

    over a bunch of Hasbro toys.

  • June 25, 2007, 11:29 a.m. CST

    Bruce Rocked the House (and me, silently)

    by Verogem

    Ok. Yes, some parts were way over the top...but we expect that. If not, the movie would be way too short and you woudn't get your moneys worth ($18 bucks, that's harsh!). I was lucky to be invited to the NYC Premiere at Radio City and enjoyed the after party. Unfortunately, Bruce...they brushed you right pass me and I didn't get a chance to thank you for the great entertainment!!! Next time, I hope! I loved the kick ass scenes, the Fire extinguisher move was my favorite of all, it just gets you. So, Yippe Ki Yay Mother (BLEEPS)!!!

  • June 25, 2007, 11:39 a.m. CST

    bought good reviews

    by sokitome

    OK. so now here we go in the "don't judge a movie on it's ratings excuse" i can already tell the "reviewers", and i use that word lightly, are already making excuses to give this a good review. The fucking reason you CAN judge this film is because all the previous die hards set a tone for this movie that CANNOT be duplicated in a PG 13. This isn't a new movie, it's a movie with an already established characters and tone. I don't give a FUCK if it's a good "pg13" movie, I don't want a good "pg13" action movie called "diehard' fucking call it something else. I thnk it's VERY CHEAP of MORIARTy to say it's not right to judge this on it's ratings. How many fucking times have we bitched on this site that people in hollywood are putting out crap, cuz we make reasons up to make us hope to enjoy or get paid to enjoy, i.e. reviewers on this site. I've been coming to this site for a fucking long time(almost 9 years) and have seen shit movies get reviewed well for no appparent good reason (i.e. daredevil and FF2, FF2 really are u fucking kidding me). It's a shame. what the people who run this site have become.

  • June 25, 2007, 11:41 a.m. CST


    by la_sith

    Not Bruce's fault, but how is it that Stallone can do a "hard R" John Rambo, and we're stuck with a Die Hard that would make Jack Valenti smile? It ain't right.

  • June 25, 2007, 11:44 a.m. CST

    and hollywood wonders why people download

    by sokitome

    becuz we don't want to pay to watch shit movies like this, i'm not for pirating movies but when u have complete disregard for the fans then FUCK YOU FOX! I'm gonna make DIEHARD4 the first movie i ever watch on bootleg bit torrent...haha fuck you

  • June 25, 2007, 11:51 a.m. CST

    fucking drones

    by sokitome

    to those who say you can't judge amovie before you see it. People do it all the fucking time, that's why u don't see every fucking movie it comes out. let me ask u u need to watch kiddie porn to know it's disgusting, No? i didn't thnk so...i'm not gonna blow $11 bucks in the theater to give this a chance, i'll give them a 99 cent rental fee from my local video store.

  • June 25, 2007, 11:53 a.m. CST

    oh yeah

    by sokitome

    i said i'd download it, i guess they won't even get 99cents outta

  • June 25, 2007, 12:11 p.m. CST

    "The Man who Brought Die Hard into the 21st Century"

    by Fenrisulfr

    Yeah... don't you remember folks? Willis said it himself. WalterB was quoted saying Len Wiseman was gonna be remembered as "the man who brough Die Hard into the 21st Century". Indeed, when 21st Century action movies mean pussified, michael-bayish, bloodless, one-f worded flicks with one over-the-motherfu(Gunshot)-top CGI-rotten climax.

  • June 25, 2007, 12:12 p.m. CST

    So I guess...

    by Fenrisulfr

    ... WalterB was honest with us. He didn't lie.

  • June 25, 2007, 12:23 p.m. CST

    Never mind the rating...

    by NapoleonDynamite

    Why hasn't this thing been screened for critics yet? It's supposed to be one of the big summer popcorn movies, it's less than 48 hours away from opening and they still haven't shown it to the critics? That screams "SHIT BURGER" to me far more loudly than the PG 13 rating (which also screams "shit burger, don't get me wrong. It just doesn't scream it as loudly as the fact that the studio is hiding it from the critics).

  • June 25, 2007, 12:28 p.m. CST

    Sorry, but I'm going

    by Abominable Snowcone

    It's Die Hard. Or at least, they're saying it's Die Hard and Bruce is in it. So I'm going to see it, and it'll be all I can do to not rub my pee-pee in the theater. Thank you

  • June 25, 2007, 1:03 p.m. CST

    Its been how many years since......

    by BetaRayBill07

    Speed 2!?! Die Hard 5- do John and Holly finally reconciling on a cruise ship- its gold, baby!!

  • June 25, 2007, 1:56 p.m. CST

    let's hope you don't leave the movie..

    by just pillow talk

    dancing like Parker Abom....<p>Sandra Bullock wants to ride an exploding speeding bus. She's on her way over to your place (don't mind the limp).

  • June 25, 2007, 2:13 p.m. CST

    Both this and Transformers

    by PacmanFever

    Currently have an average rating far over "8" on the IMBD. Now obviously I can not say with absolute certainty that these movies do not deserve these ratings, but nonetheless I think this strongly suggests that either; a) Plants are abusing the rating system en masse, b) Fanboys abuse the rating system en masse to fit their own personal views (almost certainly before they've even seen the film), or most likely c) both sets are abusing the rating system en masse. Now I don't really give a shit about the IMBD ratings, but it's interesting how far people seem to be going to curb bad buzz.

  • June 25, 2007, 2:15 p.m. CST


    by Abominable Snowcone

    I've always kinda dug her. Not a lot upstairs, but cute and a nice cushion for pushin'. I'll keep it above 50.

  • June 25, 2007, 3:41 p.m. CST


    by Serpico1974

    Have you seen the film? McClane actually gets shot up pretty bad.

  • June 25, 2007, 3:52 p.m. CST

    Mori that's not the issue, at all

    by BitterMan23

    It's an R rated series. The whole theme of all 3 films has been one of anti-establishment and a fuck you attitude. You can't tell me that it doesn't strike the wrong chord to make this film PG-13. They weren't simple, basic R movies either - they were HARD R. Each one has over 100 uses of 'fuck'. Again, it's all about the general attitude, of which this film can't possibly have if they are making it with families in mind. Besides, as you say yourself, kids won't remember the last time a Die Hard movie came out. The only reason the movie exists is because fans have been asking/demanding it for 12 years. Even if they snuck into the originals, they would still be old enough now. Harry Potter and Star Wars did the right thing - they accepted that the audience had gotten older and moved the rating up accordingly, allowing the filmmakers to stay true to the source material. FOX went the other way, and it will cost them. <br> <br>And, according to FDM ( they are already preparing an R rated version for DVD. So it's purely a (poor) marketing decision and has nothing at all to do with the film 'they wanted to make'. Christ.

  • June 25, 2007, 4:07 p.m. CST

    and yeah, no advance screenings

    by BitterMan23

    There's one "all media" (read: assholes from radio stations and homeless people invited too) tonight in LA, and most journalists will be next door covering the LA Film Fest. Even for the press conference, media was only allowed to see the first 20 minutes (which was fun, but NOT DIE HARD. It was more like Jeff Tally starring in Mercury Rising 2. And the scene with his daughter was an exact copy of the one in Armageddon, right down to her not calling him 'dad')

  • June 25, 2007, 5:17 p.m. CST

    its just sad

    by sokitome

    i've shown alot of anger towards this movie but i thnk its not anger but sadness. It truly is sad they've chosen this rout to end the series(oh and this will DEFINITELY END the series). I cannot thnk of one movie franchise that had success with changing ratings from an R to PG13. If i'm wrong please tell me so (as i know you talkbackers will).

  • June 25, 2007, 5:20 p.m. CST

    to people who say pg13 is ok

    by sokitome

    try watching an edited version of SCARFACE and tell me the language and violence is not needed.

  • June 25, 2007, 5:23 p.m. CST

    Sadly, there is one

    by BitterMan23

    Alien/Predator. Also an 80s franchise from FOX. AVP was the highest grossing predator movie, 2nd highest alien. as long as you're considering only "financial" success, there ya go. but thats the only one.

  • June 25, 2007, 6:15 p.m. CST


    by sokitome

    I wonder if they calculated that in inflated dollars considering AVP was recent. Also Fox execs should also realize AVP is kind of like a new franchise as it was the first featuring both Aliens and Predators...either way I can almost guarantee LFODH will not do as well as DHWAV.

  • June 25, 2007, 7:30 p.m. CST

    the problem with die hard 4

    by jonboy83

    look die hard was great because john mcclane was a drunk bad ass cop put in an extraordinary situation. now hes some homeland security guy driving a cab through a helicopter while probably drinkin a diet coke and saying yippie kay yea mother frickers! everything about this is wrong.

  • June 25, 2007, 7:31 p.m. CST

    does this mean we get the Bruce Willis talkbacks, or...

    by ArcadianDS

    or no?<p> Also I'm buying everybody in this TB a big giant peach pie - tomorrow.<p> Bring a fork.

  • June 25, 2007, 7:48 p.m. CST

    Write Well and Die Posting

    by BannedOnTheRun

    It must be repeated: Nice review, motherfu(gunshot). Reading can be fun!

  • June 25, 2007, 7:53 p.m. CST

    Reviews are in for Hollywood

    by PrettyNursePoppie

    Reviews are in for Hollywood Reporter, Variety, and Newsday. And they like it. Maybe everyone needs to take a breath.

  • June 25, 2007, 8:57 p.m. CST

    I am sure it will be a good action movie

    by BitterMan23

    It just won't feel like Die Hard. itll be like the hobbit next to lotr - it sticks out.

  • June 25, 2007, 9:48 p.m. CST

    the world needs more live action G rated movies

    by TAF

    Who cares if John cannot drop the F bomb. He's had his quota. I'm a big fan of live action G rated movies. The Rookie is one of my all-time favorites. It's not missing anything. I'll see Die Hard 4 Tuesday evening. I've got an extra free ticket. Anyone want to go?

  • June 25, 2007, 10:44 p.m. CST


    by sokitome

    Are you serious? Why don't u keep living in a g-rated world and i'll live in the real world... and pretty nurse poppie...who gives a flying fuck if those guys liked, did they say it was a good "diehard" movie or it was as good as the diehard movies. if not then they're pointless. God I can't believe no one gets it..pg13 people are u fucking kiddingme...

  • June 26, 2007, 2:02 a.m. CST

    Fox doesn't know how to make money

    by stamper

    Who are they kidding about ? They are a bunch of sellers who don't know how to make a sale. Basically, all the executives have just hijacked the board and are pillaging 30 years+ of culture, raping it, squeezing the life out of them and killing any moneymaking prospect those franchise may have had in them once. These people come from schools of commerce ? They wouldn't know anything commercial if they were selling burgers at mac donald, all the menus would be cancelled to be replaced by the kid menu priced at 12 $ instead of 4 $. I think it's time someone just fire the whole lot at Fox, and replace them with guys who know how to make commercial movies : us.

  • June 26, 2007, 3:30 a.m. CST

    i am going to watch the

    by ominus

    i am going to watch the movie this thursday.i know it wont be a worthy addon to the die hard mythology,but still i love willis and i love a good action flick.and i am sure that the movie will deliver. but still i wished they had made it an r-rated film with a better director..

  • June 26, 2007, 6:07 a.m. CST

    Light at the end of the tunnel?

    by mastes360

    "Anyone concerned that the action might be toned down to appease a lesser PG-13 rating shouldn't worry, since the movie is also the most violent and brutal "Die Hard" movie since the first". Taken from the very positive review over at Its hard to believe but this does give me hope!.

  • June 26, 2007, 6:18 a.m. CST

    Anyone concerned that the

    by Fenrisulfr

    Anyone concerned that the action might be toned down to appease a lesser PG-13 rating shouldn't worry, since the movie is also the most violent and brutal "Die Hard" movie since the first". ARE YOU FU(GUNSHOT) KIDDING ME?

  • June 26, 2007, 6:59 a.m. CST

    so in this movie,we can see

    by ominus

    so in this movie,we can see a man chopped into pieces when he gets sucked in an airplane turbine?

  • June 26, 2007, 9:52 a.m. CST

    92 %

    by brassai2003

    on the tomato meter. 'Nuff said.

  • June 26, 2007, 11:50 a.m. CST

    The violence may be intact

    by BitterMan23

    The literal and figurative 'fuck you' attitude is not.