Ain't It Cool News: The best in movie, TV, DVD, and comic book news.

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

ricarleite by Quintus_Arrius	Jun 22nd, 2007 09:08:13 AM
You bastard..
live free or.. by nolan bautista	Jun 22nd, 2007 09:11:50 AM
..be third. This is a lame post
third :( by Reception Fades	Jun 22nd, 2007 09:13:28 AM
third :(
Why it's called 'Die Hard 4.0' outside the US... by Ribbons	Jun 22nd, 2007 09:14:49 AM
...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.
So when is JOHN RAMBO by Fenrisulfr	Jun 22nd, 2007 09:16:49 AM
So when is JOHN RAMBO released again? lol
how can McClane be back... by just pillow talk	Jun 22nd, 2007 09:18:07 AM
if it doesn't stack up to any of the previous sequels Filmcoyote?
DHWAV was not a bad film. by Fenrisulfr	Jun 22nd, 2007 09:19:03 AM
DHWAV was not a bad film. Anyone who says it sucked doesnt have much credibility for me.
To Ribbons by mastes360	Jun 22nd, 2007 09:19:19 AM
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'!.
"I guess it’s like Godfather 3 or Predator 2."... by Stalin vs Predator	Jun 22nd, 2007 09:19:25 AM
And that's all I needed to hear. Don't forget about Highlander II and Batman & Robin Forever.
If this is as good as Predator 2 by PacmanFever	Jun 22nd, 2007 09:21:39 AM
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.
The other dolt's "review" stops when he says DH3 is bad by Stalin vs Predator	Jun 22nd, 2007 09:23:46 AM
and Renny Harlin's opus is "good". Go find that bridge already.
Live Free Or Die Hard by Franklin T Marmoset	Jun 22nd, 2007 09:24:31 AM
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. 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?
I don't think these reviewers understand what kind by comedian_x	Jun 22nd, 2007 09:26:04 AM
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. 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.
Anyone else tired of this film yet? by tiredpm	Jun 22nd, 2007 09:26:52 AM
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. 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.
movie title matters by ric_hard with a vengeance	Jun 22nd, 2007 09:27:05 AM
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".
Ribbons, it's John Stark, not Patrick Henry by Mahaloth	Jun 22nd, 2007 09:27:10 AM
"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?
hmmmm by erichaislar	Jun 22nd, 2007 09:29:11 AM
I hope this is true but I have a feeling its not.
The 2nd review by HitchCock'n'Balz	Jun 22nd, 2007 09:30:18 AM
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.
As For This Film by mastes360	Jun 22nd, 2007 09:31:05 AM
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.
well, there's a nice contradiction in the second review by keyserSOZE	Jun 22nd, 2007 09:33:29 AM
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."
I really dug Die Hard 3 by kikuchiyoboy	Jun 22nd, 2007 09:34:16 AM
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.
I guess... by HitchCock'n'Balz	Jun 22nd, 2007 09:34:21 AM
this reviewer isn't the only nutjob asshat here...Predator 2...for fuck's sake...this shit makes me ill
Die Hard With A Vengence was awesome!!!! by Coughlins Laws	Jun 22nd, 2007 09:35:33 AM
Did you want it to be exactly like the first one? Why would you want a sequel exactly the same? Then you'd have Beverly Hills Cop 2. The only problem I have before seeing this is not lack of blood or swearing, but lack of hair on McClaine's head. I realize the real Bruce is bald as a Muthafucka but John McClaine never seemed like the kind of guy who would try to be hip and shave his whole head. It's been 12 years since DHWAV and his hairline was runnin scared back then, so he should've just had normal baldness going on. He's not the kind of guy that shaves his head every day.
mastes360 and Mahaloth by Ribbons	Jun 22nd, 2007 09:35:58 AM
@ 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...
Don't knock the PG-13 by Da B-Meister	Jun 22nd, 2007 09:36:21 AM
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.
B-Meister... by keyserSOZE	Jun 22nd, 2007 09:39:23 AM
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.
On sequels to Die Hard by Franklin T Marmoset	Jun 22nd, 2007 09:39:53 AM
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.
Predator 2 by mastes360	Jun 22nd, 2007 09:41:45 AM
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.
Well I guess 95 percent of by Fenrisulfr	Jun 22nd, 2007 09:42:56 AM
Well I guess 95 percent of us are sick fucks then, coz we want extreme violence !
Re: Predator 2 by Lord_Soth	Jun 22nd, 2007 09:45:01 AM
On par with the first one in my book. You probably wanted to write Alien 3.
Lawgiver-the word is non-issue by supercowbell 4 cant stop the cowbell	Jun 22nd, 2007 09:45:47 AM
and the movie is called faint soft
Alien3 is godd...best use of aliens as hunters... by HitchCock'n'Balz	Jun 22nd, 2007 09:46:56 AM
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
Loved DH3 by DannyOcean01	Jun 22nd, 2007 09:48:00 AM
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.
good..not godd by HitchCock'n'Balz	Jun 22nd, 2007 09:48:01 AM
nice
Credits and such by 24200124	Jun 22nd, 2007 09:48:21 AM
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-compari son action found in the other "Die Hard" movies...
hmm...wha.... by RockLobster800	Jun 22nd, 2007 09:48:53 AM
I went to the toilet and all of a sudden I miis out on a chance of being first? 35TH!!!
B-Meister by mastes360	Jun 22nd, 2007 09:52:19 AM
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.
You do have to wonder by kwisatzhaderach	Jun 22nd, 2007 09:54:00 AM
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.
I'll watch it by talkbackgeek	Jun 22nd, 2007 09:54:50 AM
Simply Cos I love the series, and I'll support the Bruce. Willis takes chances, you gotta respect that.
why it is PG-13 by stvnhthr	Jun 22nd, 2007 10:02:59 AM
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.
Rothman has infected everything at FOX!!! by expert40	Jun 22nd, 2007 10:03:59 AM
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!!!
Then 6 months later an R rated director's cut by stvnhthr	Jun 22nd, 2007 10:04:19 AM
stupid monkey fingers
I'm a soldier not a monster by stamper	Jun 22nd, 2007 10:05:11 AM
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 !
PG-13 : Skeptical but optimistic by MartinX	Jun 22nd, 2007 10:07:43 AM
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.
Vengeance was great.... by RockLobster800	Jun 22nd, 2007 10:07:45 AM
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 ways...it scares you doesnt it Mac Clane?" "No, but seriously, how the (gunshot) did you get back here?"
lol @ Stamper by mastes360	Jun 22nd, 2007 10:09:37 AM
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.
EVEN IF IS SOMETIMES WORK FOR MONSTER by stamper	Jun 22nd, 2007 10:09:50 AM
ANYONE DISLIKING DIE HARD 3 BUT ENJOYING DIRE HARD 2 AS SUPERIOR MUST BE ONE OF THE MONSTER, OR SHALL WE SAY THEIR TASTE AND CREDIBILITY IN MOVIE TASTE IS SERIOUSLY LACKING
Ime with you kwisatzhaderach by TheLastAngryMan	Jun 22nd, 2007 10:10:06 AM
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.
What 21 out of 42 by stamper	Jun 22nd, 2007 10:11:43 AM
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
I am honored... CHING CHONG CHING by Squashua	Jun 22nd, 2007 10:11:47 AM
Wow. That is some video.
The problem with the PG-13 by blacklodgebob	Jun 22nd, 2007 10:15:20 AM
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!
Stamper by mastes360	Jun 22nd, 2007 10:16:04 AM
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.
Blacklodgebob by mastes360	Jun 22nd, 2007 10:18:58 AM
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'?.
John Hodgman should have been the villain. by Christopher3	Jun 22nd, 2007 10:23:06 AM
That would have been great casting.
mastes360 by expert40	Jun 22nd, 2007 10:23:46 AM
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)!
How two put 4 gallons in a 3 gallons jar by stamper	Jun 22nd, 2007 10:25:42 AM
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)
Dissing DH3 destroys your credibility by JackLint	Jun 22nd, 2007 10:27:02 AM
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.
comedian_x, you're right about the R'ss... by samuraiyao	Jun 22nd, 2007 10:30:20 AM
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...
fighting a bitch? by bamboogrove	Jun 22nd, 2007 10:30:45 AM
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.
There was no bomb in that school by stamper	Jun 22nd, 2007 10:33:16 AM
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 !
merrick merrick merrick by Holodigm	Jun 22nd, 2007 10:35:48 AM
your videos are genius!
The Score by mastes360	Jun 22nd, 2007 10:43:41 AM
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.
I do agree that P2 kind of rules by PacmanFever	Jun 22nd, 2007 10:44:06 AM
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.
Too bad (credits) by xannibal	Jun 22nd, 2007 10:44:55 AM
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.
Yippee Kiyay muthaf sound effect by Vadakin	Jun 22nd, 2007 10:49:48 AM
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" 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).
That's Zeus MotherBLAM ! by stamper	Jun 22nd, 2007 11:07:49 AM
Sam Jackson ruled in part 3 ! Whaddaya saying ? You don't like me because you're a racist !
PREDATOR 2 hate? by Motoko Kusanagi	Jun 22nd, 2007 11:13:28 AM
This sickens me. It wasn't as good as the first but it was cool entertainment. And not a crapfest like AvP. First the endless and paranoid whining about the rating and now this. Oh, and you may as well hate me for liking DIE HARDER. P.S.: Fuck you Tom Rothman!
DH3 WAS COOL!!!!! SUCK(GUNSHOT)S!!! by ludmir88	Jun 22nd, 2007 11:25:20 AM
AND THE LAST DIE HARD, THE 5 ONE WOULD BE CALLED JOHN McCLANE a la Jhon Rambo.
I CAN'T EVEN BARE TO SIT THROUGH GODFATHER 3 by THE KNIGHT	Jun 22nd, 2007 11:25:31 AM
....
Bad guys? by Jared Syn	Jun 22nd, 2007 11:26:32 AM
I have a hard time believing Timothy Oliphant is a better DH baddie than Jeremy Irons.
That vid is very funny, Mr Merrick. by TELF	Jun 22nd, 2007 11:26:42 AM
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.
this is how die hard should be next time ... by ludmir88	Jun 22nd, 2007 11:37:50 AM
http://youtube.com/watch?v=BRn H_rRnBAw
Get over the PG-13 issue by slone13	Jun 22nd, 2007 11:43:25 AM
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. Good day.
positive? by alphachemwolf	Jun 22nd, 2007 11:55:29 AM
Sounds like the positive reviews are negative also. I have removed this movie from my schedule, sounds like a joke of a movie.
DH3 Sucks? by Judge Dredds Dirty Undies	Jun 22nd, 2007 11:57:57 AM
Seriously how can anyone take this dude seriously. Like Wiseman could ever do better than Mctiernan.
PLANT PLANT PLANT by ominus	Jun 22nd, 2007 11:59:42 AM
PLANT PLANT PLANT
The annoying part is... by Tenguman	Jun 22nd, 2007 12:11:23 PM
...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.
DH3 was crap by Eh Nam1313	Jun 22nd, 2007 12:14:19 PM
so if it tops 3 i am there.
I saw this by mr.underwater	Jun 22nd, 2007 12:14:50 PM
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. 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. 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.
Only thing I did not like about DH3 was them tied up... by StudioPlant69	Jun 22nd, 2007 12:20:26 PM
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
Over at Rotten Tomatoes by Abominable Snowcone	Jun 22nd, 2007 12:25:23 PM
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.
Die Hard 3 was bad... by moto	Jun 22nd, 2007 12:35:34 PM
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. Die Hard 2 was much better... flawed... but much better as a DIE HARD movie. And it was true to the character.
"threw" by moto	Jun 22nd, 2007 12:36:50 PM
"threw" not "through"... fingers moving too fast.
The title is a clever marketing ploy. by Stalin vs Predator	Jun 22nd, 2007 12:41:11 PM
It's supposed to confuse viewers in USA: "So, do you want tickets to 'Live Free' or to 'Die Hard'?"
PG-13 vs. R by Lord_Soth	Jun 22nd, 2007 12:44:00 PM
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!
The ending of DH3 ruined the whole movie by clockpolitiks	Jun 22nd, 2007 12:47:39 PM
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?
All DIE HARD FILMS SHOULD HAVE THE FOLLOWING by erichaislar	Jun 22nd, 2007 12:55:36 PM
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.
frg10 and Erichaisar by Abominable Snowcone	Jun 22nd, 2007 01:00:42 PM
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. 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.
Die Hard 2 by mastes360	Jun 22nd, 2007 01:05:08 PM
Also has the most on screen kills ever (or it did at the time), something tells me that LFODH will not!.
bruce willis by stemp11	Jun 22nd, 2007 01:05:08 PM
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.
DIE HARD series = LETHAL WEAPON series by palimpsest	Jun 22nd, 2007 01:07:44 PM
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.
"John Hodgman should have been the villain". by mr. brownstone	Jun 22nd, 2007 01:07:51 PM
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.
DIE HARD WITH A VENGEANCE by kwisatzhaderach	Jun 22nd, 2007 01:08:23 PM
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.
Christmas by mastes360	Jun 22nd, 2007 01:10:26 PM
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!.
Lethal Weapon by mastes360	Jun 22nd, 2007 01:13:14 PM
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.
mastes360 by kwisatzhaderach	Jun 22nd, 2007 01:13:26 PM
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).
Seconded by palimpsest	Jun 22nd, 2007 01:16:23 PM
The opening of DH3 is sublime.
Right by mastes360	Jun 22nd, 2007 01:17:12 PM
I get what your saying, i forgot about the start with the song. I could of sworn the kid says "Its Christmas" though.
mastes360 by kwisatzhaderach	Jun 22nd, 2007 01:20:57 PM
Yeah he does say ''Its christmas'' but he means that all the shops are deserted so everybody is stealing stuff.
mastes360 by mr. brownstone	Jun 22nd, 2007 01:21:27 PM
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.
lol by mastes360	Jun 22nd, 2007 01:25:07 PM
Yeah good point about Cliffhanger Mr.brownstone!.
Top Christmas movies by palimpsest	Jun 22nd, 2007 01:38:58 PM
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...
You can’t really compare the tardiness of LW4 + LFODH by PacmanFever	Jun 22nd, 2007 01:47:07 PM
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.
SCROOGED! by palimpsest	Jun 22nd, 2007 01:57:16 PM
Ah. I missed that one. Good call.
Tardiness/retardedness by palimpsest	Jun 22nd, 2007 01:59:32 PM
Let's call the whole thing off.
PG-13 equals pussy shit. by The-Warrior	Jun 22nd, 2007 02:00:38 PM
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.
Hey, it's capitalism. by palimpsest	Jun 22nd, 2007 02:07:21 PM
That is all.
LAME DH3?? by whataboutbob25	Jun 22nd, 2007 02:14:34 PM
Is this guy on CRACK or has he just been sniffing his mothers panties.
To ALL who hate the idea of a PG-13 Die Hard.... by moto	Jun 22nd, 2007 02:27:28 PM
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. 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.
R rated dvd by Bouncy X	Jun 22nd, 2007 02:31:46 PM
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.
zbobroberts by Bouncy X	Jun 22nd, 2007 02:51:54 PM
yeah..i'm one of those nutty, crazy people who actually liked it. :P
Basically the people that dont like DH3 are saying... by Judge Dredds Dirty Undies	Jun 22nd, 2007 03:08:07 PM
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.
Whenever these reviews slam Die Hard 3... by loafmeat	Jun 22nd, 2007 03:13:55 PM
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!!!!!!
Have to agree.. DHWAV owned by tailhook	Jun 22nd, 2007 03:15:39 PM
Seriously... I put it just under the original Die Hard. At least it didn't have insanely idiotic situations like McClane running into a shitload of guys in the airport packing M-16's and have him win with just his 9MM in a straight shoot-out. Seriously... thats not Die Hard.. its Die Stupid... which is what he would have done in that situation. Overall I'd rank them DH, DH3, DH2.
How do they fuck up Timothy Olyphant as the villian? by DanDelion	Jun 22nd, 2007 03:35:11 PM
He's the fucking man as the super sleeze Kelly in Girl Next Door, and was a total badass on Deadwood. Seriously, I was so excited for him to be the villian, I'll be WICKED pissed if his part doesn't take advantage of his sleeze.
the third die hard rocked by WolfmanNards	Jun 22nd, 2007 03:44:09 PM
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.
With a Vengeance rocked by Jack Burton	Jun 22nd, 2007 04:00:57 PM
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?
LW4 & DH 2 Are awesome by barnaby jones	Jun 22nd, 2007 04:02:07 PM
and hopefully when we get the Unrated dvd of LFODH, it will be too.
I still don't know. Walter B promised it would be good by trombone	Jun 22nd, 2007 04:03:24 PM
But then again, he promised to answer all of our questions, too... And krack was so nice to collate them for him and all, too.
It's all relative... by emp	Jun 22nd, 2007 04:17:46 PM
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.
Die Hard 3 was originally a Lethal Weapon script... by Bill Clay	Jun 22nd, 2007 04:19:13 PM
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.
R version being saved for DVD. by GibsonUSA Returns	Jun 22nd, 2007 04:20:21 PM
So you pay $10.50 for the theater then $25 for the 2-disc "uncut" version. You think Fox is stupid?
IT DOESN'T REALLY FEEL LIKE DIE HARD?! by NepomukProebstl	Jun 22nd, 2007 04:34:43 PM
Well then fuck off. YEAH! FUCK OFF! 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?! 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. 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?! 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!) 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. 20th Century Fox needs to be kicked in its fucking balls.
LFoDH has chosed PG-13 and here's why... by StudioPlant69	Jun 22nd, 2007 04:35:58 PM
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 fuers have a nice day.
Oh btw... by NepomukProebstl	Jun 22nd, 2007 04:40:46 PM
I just got fined several credits for constantly violating the Verbal Morality Statute. Yeah, welcome to fucking San Angeles. Dr. Cocteau would be proud of this reduced kid-friendly rip-off version of a Die Hard movie. Happy Halloween. 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.
DH3 wasn't a Lethal Weapon script by Jack Burton	Jun 22nd, 2007 04:50:06 PM
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.
DHWA is great by lionbiu	Jun 22nd, 2007 04:54:54 PM
I can never undersatnd why this reviewer bashed it....also Predator 2 is not bad either
here's what we need to do... by PeteBogs	Jun 22nd, 2007 04:55:34 PM
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
MERRICK WHY ARE YOU SHITTING ON BRUCE WILLIS? by CopOnTheEdge	Jun 22nd, 2007 05:17:59 PM
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.
I don't get the DH3 bashing. by Mosquito March	Jun 22nd, 2007 05:50:21 PM
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.
How the fuck do you hate Die Hard 3? by Neo Zeed	Jun 22nd, 2007 05:55:04 PM
That movie fucking ruled. Lame action? That reviewer is on crack.
The problem with Die Hard 3 is... by NepomukProebstl	Jun 22nd, 2007 05:58:33 PM
...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.
"Attitude and violence that defined the franchise"? by Billy Goat	Jun 22nd, 2007 06:08:38 PM
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.
Billy Goat by NepomukProebstl	Jun 22nd, 2007 06:16:27 PM
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.
I'm not saying let's get rid of profanity and violence by Billy Goat	Jun 22nd, 2007 06:28:05 PM
... 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.
Fu(Gunshot) this movie by Doc_Strange	Jun 22nd, 2007 06:35:03 PM
Sorry, but all the negative hype surrounding DH4 is just too much. Maybe a rental.
DH3:WAV problem by theBigE	Jun 22nd, 2007 06:51:49 PM
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.
Loved the Silent movie clip too! by theBigE	Jun 22nd, 2007 06:52:44 PM
That was fun!
Live F Word Free or Plant Hard by Err	Jun 22nd, 2007 07:28:19 PM

The reviewer said part 3 had lame action. by Neo Zeed	Jun 22nd, 2007 07:31:34 PM
What was lame about it?
Goddamn you NepomukProebstl by RedEyeDistrict	Jun 22nd, 2007 07:38:31 PM
Now I gotta go watch Demolition Man.
Be well. by RedEyeDistrict	Jun 22nd, 2007 07:39:06 PM
Be fucked.
Oh, he doesn't know how to use the 3 seashells. by RedEyeDistrict	Jun 22nd, 2007 07:44:35 PM

Die Hard 3 USED to be the weakest of the series... by Bill Clay	Jun 22nd, 2007 08:03:20 PM
...now LFODH will hold that (dis)honor.
The thing I really didn't like about ""DH3"... by JackBauer@CTU	Jun 22nd, 2007 08:05:13 PM
...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.
The DH3: Simon Says story... by Bill Clay	Jun 22nd, 2007 08:06:39 PM
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.
Neo Zeed...reviewer never said "lame action" by moto	Jun 22nd, 2007 08:32:57 PM
Read it again. He said the FIGHT SEQUENCES were lame... and they were, compared to Die Hard 1, 2, and apparently 4.
Two things crack me up... "Plant" and DH3 love... by moto	Jun 22nd, 2007 08:48:45 PM
versus DH4. 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. I'm not comparing DH to Pirates, but just saying you never know. 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.
Hmmmmmmmmm by kilerb	Jun 22nd, 2007 11:39:42 PM
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!
I like the first one, sceptical of the second... by ScarranHalfBreed	Jun 23rd, 2007 01:05:33 AM
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.
D3 is far superior to 'Die Harder', but... by Negator76	Jun 23rd, 2007 01:50:02 AM
... 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.
The original ending of DH3 isn't that great... by Bass Ackwards	Jun 23rd, 2007 05:04:27 AM
...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.
I agree about McTiernan by Otto-parts	Jun 23rd, 2007 07:10:53 AM
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
If they decide to fix the crappy scenes... by BannedOnTheRun	Jun 23rd, 2007 08:06:40 AM
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?
Ah, sweet Road Warrior memories... by Motoko Kusanagi	Jun 23rd, 2007 08:23:15 AM
Truly a great sequel. Still not sure if it's better than part 1 or not... 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 :-)
On TV Last Night! by DanDelion	Jun 23rd, 2007 08:45:03 AM
The FXMovie channel had a marathon, and they were all better than I remembered. I think it's because I've usually seen them edited down for TV, and uncensored they just work a lot better, even the weaker sequals. Ironic, considering that the 4th film is already edited down and doesn't have an uncensored version to make me realize how cool it is.
Hell why Not Heap Praise on DH4 by JaySmack	Jun 23rd, 2007 10:01:07 AM
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.
DH2 is more true to the premise than DH3 by darthkittens	Jun 23rd, 2007 10:43:11 AM
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).
Thank god for Mastes360 by 'Cholera's Ghost	Jun 23rd, 2007 12:25:01 PM
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.
How ironic! by mastes360	Jun 23rd, 2007 01:09:37 PM
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!.
Memories of Murder by mastes360	Jun 23rd, 2007 01:17:03 PM
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.
Whatever bud by mastes360	Jun 23rd, 2007 01:26:55 PM
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!.
Thanks Memories you sexy GOD you! by mastes360	Jun 23rd, 2007 01:37:43 PM
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?.
lol by mastes360	Jun 23rd, 2007 03:01:24 PM
lol, lol, lol...........GOD!.
well.... by Albean	Jun 23rd, 2007 03:15:59 PM
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....
PG13 on die Hard = Nipples on Batsuit by Big Dick	Jun 23rd, 2007 03:23:32 PM
Their all a bunch of fucking plants!
Question Concerning the Ridley/Cameron Alien 5 (or 6?) by 'Cholera's Ghost	Jun 23rd, 2007 04:10:46 PM
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.
Geeezuz, people... by TheRevenge	Jun 23rd, 2007 04:59:45 PM
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.
I think... by Albean	Jun 23rd, 2007 06:05:53 PM
i'd like a Die Hard theme park..the possibilities are endless!
whatever happened to Bruce coming on here? by GQtaste	Jun 23rd, 2007 09:06:42 PM
I thought he was supposed to do the same thing as Sly. What gives? Did he just say fuck it?
WHY Should Bruce come back to AICN?? by moto	Jun 23rd, 2007 09:46:58 PM
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. To top it off, you know for a fact that all of these people haven't even seen your movie yet. 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. 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. Damn... I don't know where that rage came from. But hopefully you get my point.
Why? Because he said he would. by GQtaste	Jun 23rd, 2007 10:11:38 PM
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.
So let me get this straight. . . . . by DirkAngerReloaded23	Jun 23rd, 2007 10:38:18 PM
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.
everyone is forgetting one important thing.. by Cotton McKnight	Jun 23rd, 2007 11:16:04 PM
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.
Anyone that doesnt like Die Hard 2 can fuck off! by Cotton McKnight	Jun 23rd, 2007 11:18:22 PM
Just kidding, but seriously, thats a damn good movie.
THIS....IS.....SPAR(Gunshot) by BetaRayBill07	Jun 23rd, 2007 11:20:36 PM
Sorry....just had to throw that in.
DirkAngerReloaded23... by moto	Jun 24th, 2007 12:38:57 AM
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? AND, Bruce Willis clearly said in the AICN talkbacks that DH3 was a misstep.
Cotton McKnight by ScarranHalfBreed	Jun 24th, 2007 12:54:56 AM
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?
scarrenhalfbreed.. by Cotton McKnight	Jun 24th, 2007 01:12:19 AM
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?
I'm trying to think of what happened in the 2nd and 3rd by Cotton McKnight	Jun 24th, 2007 01:16:40 AM
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.
Oh, and FWI: DH3 was badass! by GQtaste	Jun 24th, 2007 02:20:06 AM
With the exception of the ending. Justthesame, it was better than 8 out of ten action pics they put out presently.
The only people who prefer Die Hard 3 over Die Hard 2.. by Bill Clay	Jun 24th, 2007 02:57:07 AM
...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.
Bill Clay by TheNorthlander	Jun 24th, 2007 05:45:35 AM
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)?
Cotton McKnight, re: violence in DH2 and DHWAV by Osmosis Jones	Jun 24th, 2007 07:21:36 AM
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.
DIE HARD 1 IS A MASTERPIECE by NepomukProebstl	Jun 24th, 2007 09:17:37 AM
Yeah
DIE HARD 2 IS EXCELLENT by NepomukProebstl	Jun 24th, 2007 09:18:00 AM
Yeah
DIE HARD 3 IS OUTSTANDING by NepomukProebstl	Jun 24th, 2007 09:18:27 AM
Yeah
Memories of Murder by mastes360	Jun 24th, 2007 09:25:31 AM
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!.
BUT DIE FLACCID... oh what a fucking piece of shit by NepomukProebstl	Jun 24th, 2007 10:07:28 AM
Yeah
Fox is going over rthe top to sell this.... by Russman	Jun 24th, 2007 10:36:09 AM
usually a sign of a stinker.
Fantastic Four had a 65% drop this weekend... by Bill Clay	Jun 24th, 2007 12:08:54 PM
Every sequel this summer is tanking after it's opening weekend. Next week will be Die Hard In Name Only's turn.
I like all three DH films... by spectrebeeyatch	Jun 24th, 2007 12:12:56 PM
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.
How can the same thing happen to the same guy 12 times? by Bill Clay	Jun 24th, 2007 12:30:46 PM
http://tinyurl.com/3267pv
Except Jonathan Pryce is one of the best by ImFixingtoDie	Jun 24th, 2007 01:13:04 PM
Carver is the best of the Brosnan era Bond villians. Nevertheless, sound effect covering of ucker = this film is dead to me.
DHWAV gripe by sefsterJ	Jun 24th, 2007 01:28:07 PM
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.
Another case of audiences accepting SHIT for lack of by TORTURE PWN	Jun 24th, 2007 01:39:32 PM
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.
DHWAV only problem was the ending. by SID 8.0	Jun 24th, 2007 02:11:28 PM
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.
Yeah, Children of fucking men by Motoko Kusanagi	Jun 24th, 2007 04:36:14 PM
deserved the Oscar. For camera AND best movie.
Just watched Die Hard 1 again by TheNorthlander	Jun 24th, 2007 04:45:20 PM
The thing that struck me was this: Who was the LEAST violent and dangerous bad guy? The Hacker.
At least it wasn't directed by Len Wiseman!! by football	Jun 24th, 2007 05:00:44 PM
Wait a goddamnpickin moment!
I liked Predator 2!!! by CuervoJones	Jun 24th, 2007 05:07:54 PM
Bill Paxton, Ruben Blades and those crazy raggae boys.
frg10 by TheNorthlander	Jun 24th, 2007 05:34:02 PM
Yeah.
the problem with both reviews by BurgerKing	Jun 24th, 2007 05:54:27 PM
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.
Die Hard - Hard = by kolchak	Jun 24th, 2007 08:10:54 PM
shit
frg10 by Motoko Kusanagi	Jun 25th, 2007 01:39:51 PM
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!
Motoko Kusanagi by TheNorthlander	Jun 25th, 2007 03:02:20 PM
There might be kids below the age of 13 present. Please mind the language and call it CHILDREN OF f(gunshot) MEN. Thank you.

Talkbacks

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

User login

Quick Talkback

Talkbacks