Live Free Or Die Hard Movie
| Resolution | Size | Download | ||
|
1920x800 | 11052.68 MiB | 1080p | |
|
1280x528 | 6721.59 MiB | 720p | |
|
628x254 | 701.7 MiB | divx | |
|
320x128 | 356.11 MiB | ipod | |
Storyline
TAGLINES PLOT SUMMARY
When a criminal plot is in place to take down the entire computer and technological structure that supports the economy of the United States (and the world), it's up to a decidedly "old school" hero, police detective John McClane (Willis), to take down the conspiracy, aided by a young hacker (Long).
| Bruce Willis | John McClane |
| Timothy Olyphant | Greg |
| Maggie Q | Mai Lihn |
| Justin Long | Matt Foster |
| Jeffrey Wright | Victor Pope |
| Mary Elizabeth Winstead | Lucy McClane |
| Cyril Raffaelli | Rand |
| Yancey Arias | Agent Johnson |
| Yorgo Constantine | Russo |
| Allen Maldonado | Goatee |
| Chris O'Brocki | Angry civilian |
| Chris Palermo | Del |
| Tim Russ | Agent Summers |
| Jonathan Sadowski | Trey |
| Kevin Smith | The Warlock |
| Len Wiseman |
7.70 out of 10 (85429 votes)
Visitor Reviews
Better than 2 or 3, but NOT the best!
posted on 30 Aug 2009Why does EVERY sequel have to try and one up it's predecessors? Die Hard took place one night in one building. Die Hard 2, one night in an airport. Die Hard 3, a one day in an entire city. Now Die Hard 4, a day spread over a few states. What's next, an international Die Hard 5?Bruce Willis has aged parallel with John McClane, older, balder and more bitter--a great performance. Justin Long does a good job playing opposite Willis, keeping up the humor and providing that much needed exposition, try to get the audience (and McClane) to believe that the cyber-terror plot is plausible. Maggie Q's "smokin' hot" presence alone is worth the price of admission. Even Timothy Olyphant can't ruin this ride, but his performance lacks that much needed sense of irony that the truly great bad guys must have--can one be truly menacing without that "I know more than you" smirk?Anyway, the film has some great McClane moments, some really decent old school stunts/action, and a good amount of humor and suspense. The plot is utter nonsense, just like DH2 and DH3. But if you want plot you not going into a Die Hard film anyway.P.S.: Having seen both the PG-13 theatrical U.S. cut and the "unrated" cut, watch the "unrated" cut when it arrives on DVD. Both versions are essential the same film, but Die Hard isn't really Die Hard without the uncensored profanity and violence. Also, I think the few added F-word laced one-liners are pure gems.
it just diddn't had that bit of extra
posted on 28 Aug 2009This film is a good example of a film that has the promise of a great action-packed movie worthy enough to be called a true follower of the Die Hard trilogy, but doesn't live up to it. Instead you get a thin storyline that is not really worth mentioning and a plot that is unbelievable. Especially the use of technique in this film is laughable, I diddn't know hacking was so graphical.Whereas in the previous ones you had some kind of context. You had the original, the second was the joke on the story itself by being put in the same kind of situation again, the third was about revenge. Here it is really like they took the character and just dropped it in a random story about a villain that wants to rob some money with the help of computers, and they thought that would work. The one-liners that are dropped too keep you connected with the sarcastic underdog character of McClane, has lost all of it's drama and impact. You have to see this guy vulnerable and moaning on every hit he takes, but he keeps standing up like nothing happened. He has become a SUPERHERO and that is a big..NONOThis villain that is being portrayed here paled by it's predecessors (Jeremy Irons, etc). The entire movie he has one facial expression and he doesn't even get his hands dirty. The interaction with McClane was very lame. No real clashes or drama either caused by bureaucrats or otherwise was a dominant factor that would cause McClane to fly against the wall. Real tension was also hard to find. There never where lots of people in danger by an eminent thread unless bringing down the traffic-lights is considered to be so threatening that shivers will run down your spine. Just one incident where the parliament building is being blown up, seen on a TV, but turns out to be a fake scene created by the cyber terrorists - that created a little Independence Day moment.The hacker-guy that McClane has to protect and has the most interaction with, misses any real chemistry. The dialog is very predictable and cheesy. I almost feel sorry for the guy that he has to say those lines and make it come off believable. Yes, he is the typical stereotype sidekick but without McClane swearing his mouth off it just sounds very lame. But he made it to the end without getting really annoying. That's a plus for him. Also at one point you see Kevin Smith(a director) playing the character of a geek friend of the hacker-guy. All I want to say about that is that he is on screen way to much because I already forgot what his role in the story exactly was. So that's all I want to say about the dialog. Then you have this very stylized action-scenes and I guess you can see the directors mark here. At one time you see this bad guy coming after McClane in a manor that you think it's a vampire with extraordinary powers from his previous set of vampire movies ( which by the way are very good in their own right), but it's totally unbelievable here. That should be in a fantasy movie like True Lies or something where all boundaries of reality are set in a completely other dimension. It was ridiculous. The pursuit of the truck by a fighter-yet and losing it from the truck, the fight with the girl that get's banged threw several walls and still comes back...wait, isn't she from the cast of Heroes - the one that can heal herself -...I can go on. Also the action-scenes are just there for the sake of having action-scenes. That's just annoying. If you remember FirstBlood 3, you know what I am talking about. And that is the ultimate example what I can think of.And then the ending....very boring. McClane suddenly shows up and he exchanges some words with the supposedly villain that keeps his daughter hostage, but might as well be a disgruntled office clerk. I never felt his daughter was in any real danger. He kills him with a single shot and it's over before you know it had ever really began. Then it rushes of to the scenes where they lick there wounds and say some more very cheesy lines. This is just a movie that wants to make money solely based on it's name. It's a movie without a soul. Seeing Bruce Willis playing his role is seeing an average guy being transformed into a superhero. It has little to do with the original McClane character. I actually felt a growing urge to stop watching it after about 20 minutes because of all the ridiculous stuff that was adding up. The fact that Y spend so many words on this comment is because some of the faults they made could easily been avoided and would have been more respectful to the Die Hard brand and too it's audience. The fact they made it a PG-13 rated movie also has a lot too do with it. I don't know who they have in mind in terms of audience, but they must be really shallow and growing in numbers also if they can get away with this. But apparently they can, seeing some of the other comments here.This film is a complete joke if you want to call it a Die Hard movie. If it was possible to get your money back based on reasonable expectations I would do that.
My Opinion: Die Hard 4.0
posted on 28 Aug 2009Die Hard 4.0 is the best out of all of the Die Hard movies. Great acting. Excellent story line. This movie has everything. Bruce Willis and Justin Long are just great. Tough Guy and Geek pair up for a superb movie. Funny lines. Virtual terrorists are conducting a Fire Sale and McClane with the help of a computer geek, Matthew Farrell, are trying to put a stop to these terrorists. The movie gets even better when the terrorists kidnap McClane's daughter, who has the same temperament as her father. So McClane has a plan to get her back "Find Lucy and kill everyone else" Excellent acting and the stunts are amazing. The best action movie. Hope you all enjoy it as much as I did.
The Best! (although, sometimes you're jaw is dropping!)
posted on 28 Aug 2009The best of the Die Hard films! I collect DVDs; some I watch once or twice then leave them for a long while. I could watch this film several times in a year! It's nice to see an action star just a bit younger than me kick ass and, I must admit, I enjoyed seeing Justin Long (the dick from the Mac commercials) having his life threatened repeatedly... although, he DOES play a likable character in the film.Technically: marvelous! Good direction and excellent stunt work, with some of the action scenes (especially Maggie Q and Willis fighting in a car barely hanging in a elevator shaft) setting the bar very high for action hits to come.I'm pretty sure, however, one man couldn't take out an F-35!
He's Back!
posted on 28 Aug 2009After 12 years of waiting for a new Die Hard, what I got was an incredible return! John McClane is now in his fifties and is now taking on a cyber terrorist group lead by Timothy Olyphant. McClane as usual is in the wrong place at the wrong time but he always pull through! He is aided by hacker Matt Farrel played by Justin Long to stop the terrorist before the send the US into another Great Depression. Good Things: I like how it shows the relationship between McClane and his daughter now, it was pretty funny in the beginning. The action, as always is super and well-made like when McClane takes on a jet, that was crazy! Bad Things: The villain Thomas Gabriel was not one of the greatest of all the others in the Die Hard series and PG-13? What the hell? Should have been R rated! That's what made these movies great is because the R rated. Rent it or buy it and see for yourself.
Bruce back to the future, and about time!
posted on 26 Aug 2009After a very long wait, and watching the original films on DVD far too many times for healthy eyesight, Bruce returns in the franchise that made his name. People forget that Die Hard was released in 1988, Twenty years old next year and was at the cutting edge for stunts at the time. This time they have gone old school, and all the stunts are the real deal, only the jet shown on the trailer is CGI (apparently you cannot fly combat jets low level in US cities, bet they asked) Anyway, when you see the stunts you will gasp, the pauses for plot are not too frequent or wordy, and you see the original John McClane shining through. Yes he is different to the original wise cracker, but people change. If they just did die hard 1 over again, you would be bored and complain. However there are nods in the direction of the first movie, so watch out for them.This movie is brilliantly directed by Len Wiseman and the entire crew did a fantastic job. If you think, oh just another sequel, it is not, this movie can stand alone and will probably outlast some of this summers poorer offerings.
Live Smarter or Die Harder
posted on 24 Aug 2009This movie so far is the best action movie I have ever watched. Die Hard 4.0 basically has it all: quirky humour,a damsel in distress and a whole lot of shooting,jaw-dropping stunts and lots of explosions. This movie also has a great cast with the likes of Bruce Willis as the lovable John McClane,Justin Long as Matthew Farrell,Timothy Olyphant as the villain Thomas Gabriel,Cliff Curtis as Deputy Director Miguel Bowman of the FBI and Maggie Q as the villainous henchwoman to Thomas Gabriel,Mai Lihn. If they make a 5th installment of Die Hard,some titles for it should be Live Smarter or Die Harder,Die Hard 5,Live Soft-Die Hard,etc.But overall,this is a great action movie not to be missed and makes some other action movies look like Disneyland.
Top this one!!
posted on 20 Aug 20092007 is proving to be a remarkable year. Whereas the creative bombs have been bigger and yet made tons of money, we got films like these, giving us exactly what we demand from movies: loud, entertaining, interesting, funny, and thrilling, without an ounce of tedious dialogue or unnecessary flash. Bruce Willis knows how to pick them, and he works hard at making sure he delivers what we want.McClane is a lethal weapon again, targeting just about what he needs in order to achieve his goals. Military Planes, trained assassins, trucks, cars, automatic weapons are all just different types of hurdles that he overtakes, not without a bit of risk along the way.His detective is still pretty lively and gutsy, with a caustic sense of humour and ready to dispatch batches of sarcasm, as the situation demands. This time he must somehow from the country from an economic and cybernetic catastrophe, and though he is a little behind in technology, he manages to take advantage of a computer hacker, who might or not help him bring down the terrorists.This film shows every bit of the budget, as cars, roads, buildings, elevators, people, computers, and more are blown up and scattered all over the screen. It also contains a couple of scenes that immediately become classics, as McClane uses a helicopter for target practice and finds new ways to leave a flying plane.There is not a single boring moment in the film, and this is the biggest compliment a Hollywood movie can receive this year. It is a bit over 2 hours and is as lean as a thriller has ever been made. The only reason it doesn't get full marks is because of a bit of puzzling facts, is this all happening on the 4th of July? Why are so many people in suits all over the cities? Still, if you like loud, entertaining, and exciting films, this one is as perfect as they make them!!
Good old fashioned brain dead actioner!!
posted on 20 Aug 200912 years after the pretty poor 'Die Hard With A Vengeance' everybody's favourite action hero John McClane is back.This time he's taking on computer hackers, hell bent on bringing the good old US of A to it's technological and economic knees.Bruce is his usual wise ass self, and he is well supported by Justin Long and Kevin Smith (yes Silent Bob!) as computer geeks, Mary Elizabeth Winstead as his daughter and Maggie Q as the super sexy ninja baddie Mai Lihn.The only disappointment cast wise Timothy Olyphant as head honcho Thomas Gabriel, he didn't seem to exhume enough menace I felt, which is a pity as this is just what he did as Todd in the awesome 'Go'.The action is crash bang wollop as you would expect from the Die Hard franchise, though it must be said the finale involving a US jet fighter is one of the most ludicrous action scenes I've bared witness to for some time, that pilot really was a poor shot! Leave your brain in the lobby, kick back and enjoy folks, "Yippee Kiya Mother......."(no swear words in the pc 21st Century folks!)
John McClane Falls Mainly on the Plain
posted on 18 Aug 2009What distinguishes Die Hard films from the other thrillers with pyrotechnics, is the relationship the John McClane character has with his buddy and his antagonist, in the film. Sometimes, as tn the first Die Hard, the buddy and the antagonist are the same guy: "Happy Trails, Hans!"The dialog that ensues from these relationships is sometimes superb and always interesting. Bruce Willis' John McClane distinguishes himself as something more than a show host serving up the blown up cars and imploded rail lines and bus terminals.McClane must relate.The new and most interesting curve in Die Hard Four is Matt Farrell (Justin Long), a charming and impish young geek and computer hacker, who in manner and demeanor is the opposite of the muscled take charge McClane.McClane is casually attempting to break up a relationship his daughter is having with a lowlife, when the FBI calls to have him do a routine pickup of Farrell, part of a larger roundup of computer hackers nationwide.McClane has trouble finding Farrell. Meanwhile, pandemonium is breaking out in the Y2K world of Terror that surrounds us today. A clean cut goody-two-shoes government anti-terror planner, smeared and fired for trying to alert the government how easy a high tech disaster could be launched, gets angry and decides to create mayhem and chaos himself.This clean cut Thomas Gabriel (Timothy Olyphant) is the bad guy match for McClane's affections, to Matt Farrell's shape-shifting slipperiness. That's good. McClane needs at least one guy who is simple and easy to understand.Gabriel is already setting off cherry bombs and firecrackers everywhere before the aging McClane -over fifty now and hairless- manages to track down and corral the smooth and elusive Farrell. McClane's capture is difficult. But Farrell backpedals with Matt pretending he is all cooperation with Mac, when in fact he is stalling and planning to escape.McClane really has almost no time to take him to the Precinct. Instead he finds himself enlisting Farrell's high tech know-how in a pinch. Farrell warns him, at one point, that if he tries to hot-wire this car the old low tech way, he is liable to set off the airbags knocking them both senseless. Farrell instead pulls a PDA from his backpack, and fakes his way into the car's computer to start it. McClane is impressed, but not admitting it.Quickly the FBI Bureau Chief Learns that Gabriel is so many leagues more sophisticated than Government agencies, it is going to be difficult to stop him let alone catch him. McClane learns that many of the other geeks in the roundup have been assassinated, except Farrell, who narrowly escapes that fate moments into his capture by McClane. Big John deduces that the murders have something to do with Gabriel's plot to show America how easily it can be devastated and reduced to a pile of steaming rubble.McClane eventually helps Farrell escape the clutches of the bureau so the two of them can track down and defeat the Gabriel Nemesis.They are a dynamic duo. McClane's stress becomes unmanageable when he learns that Gabriel has taken his daughter prisoner. I was for him bringing the lowlife boyfriend along for the ride because there would be more laughs, but the producers wouldn't listen to me.Young Farrell keeps riding to McClane's rescue, always diffident and fearful that he has no tactic that will work this time. Finally, Farrell pulls out the stops. He's out of ideas and needs to commune with HIS GURU from Philly: WARLOCK!McClane is leery about this tangent, but agrees finally. He and Farrell journey to a rundown alcove in Philly, Warlock's lair. It looks suspiciously like the ruins of the black neighborhood Philly's mayor ordered torched a few years ago, to quell an insurrection of black folks. The Audience is dismayed to learn that Warlock is just plain old Clerks Director Kevin Smith, now on his knees after several flops, and forced to play portly character parts in other people's films. You remember Kevin. He's the silent guy who stood outside the convenience and video stores in Clerks selling drugs, while his taller, slimmer partner dripped a patter of obscenity-laced sexual innuendos to passing women. Anyway, Kevin Smith is the Guru here. The audience reluctantly accepts this. Even Warlock, who has also narrowly missed being murdered, is out of gas idea-wise. Both he and Matt Farrell have been able to use the cell phone system even though it is dead for the rest of the country, by harnessing system algorithms through their PDAs. With this avenue fading too, the two geeks' blackberries gasping for power, Warlock and Matt go looking for some low tech information: they look up an address in the phone book.There are showdowns with Gabriel, attempts to save McClane's daughter at a power plant, more high tech derring-do, and many last minute saves of the doddering McClain by the Y generation Farrell. It all comes out in the end. The film is able to put its heel down in two major demos, the Ys and the Boomers, so the end is set to come out foursquare behind the values of movie audiences in both generations.Watch this space for a Revenge of the Nerds sequel to DH Four, when Farrell goes ballistic and tries to date McClane's daughter!
It's always about the money
posted on 18 Aug 2009John McClane is back and he's gone digital… Thomas Gabriel (Timothy Olyphant) is trying to scare America. He is a virtual terrorist… or so it seems. He is actually setting up a very elaborate scheme that involves quite a lot of very expendable computer hackers just to cover up the fact that he wants to steal some cash. When this little fact becomes known, you fully realise that you are watching a Die Hard Movie.Live Free or Die Hard is the fourth installment in arguably the best action movie franchise ever seen and Die Hard 4.0 does not disappoint. It is full of the ingredients that we have come to love about the Die Hard movies. You have very intelligent, well-dressed, charismatic bad guys, John McClane getting more beat up and dirty as the film progresses (his distinctive white muscle vest is missing this time round) and thieves posing as terrorists. All of this is fairly familiar ground for the Die Hard movies; however, at no time does it seem unoriginal or clichéd, instead making you feel a little bit nostalgic as you enjoy the watching the unbelievable stunts interlaced with the odd sarcastic comments from the man himself, John McClane and his particularly sassy daughter.There is the odd nod to the other Die Hard movies to keep the movie geeks happy. You have a Special Agent Johnson, (no relation), a brilliant cameo from Kevin Smith, and a couple of very obvious Star Wars references.In short, Die Hard 4.0 is funny, action packed and has moved with the times. John McClane has never let us down…
too much
posted on 16 Aug 2009by far not as good as the other die hard movies... the story isn't as good as in the other parts (though they weren't that good), and the jokes weren't as funny as usual. McClain was also better earlier times. some action scenes were pretty intense and extremely well done (eg. in the tunnel with all the cars crashing in walls)but some were just too extreme and exorbitant. and thats when the movie turned into crap (im talking about the scene with the truck and the jet,total crap) and what also sucked was the yippee ya yeah. normally he blows something up but in 4.0 he shoots through his own shoulder... all in all its no competition to the older parts.
Random thoughts....
posted on 12 Aug 2009Here are my random thoughts after viewing this film:Bruce Willis is a class act! Justin Long has his great moment in an On-Star bit with Bruce. It's obvious Kevin Smith absolutely loved doing this film and he played his part perfectly. Timothy Olyphant, who plays the snarky antagonist, is an all-around good guy. Len Wiseman did well to hire Acrobat/Stunt Coordinator, Cyril Raffaelli (District 13) as a bad guy.This could have been a perfect 10, but it still delivers enough sarcasm, bullets, explosions, kicks and punches to make it well worth your time. A solid summer flick.
They've done it all now
posted on 12 Aug 2009Giving Die Hard 4.0 a 7 is flattering it. I think it only deserves a 6,5 and I think the current 7,7 average is well too flattering. THe reason for this is that the action sequences try and top everything McCLane ever had to endure in the other Die Hard movies. They do succeed in doing this, but bigger is not always better. Sometimes Willis, Wiseman and Co. just try too hard to include bigger bangs and it makes some of the scenes seem ridiculous.I think this is a letdown from other Die Hard movies and Willis seems nothing more than a tired hero. He does also seem more human though, which is something I enjoyed. A few scenes were quite touching and I must admit, that in that perspective Die Hard 4.0 made a good impression. Nonetheless I feel the need to be honest and I'll have to say that I feel it is time John McClane should retire. He Deserves it.6,5 out of 10
the best no-brainer action flick of the year?
posted on 10 Aug 2009How much more world weary can Bruce Willis get in his role as super-cop John Maclean? How many more times can he survive car crashes, bullets, strafing, falls off tall buildings, kung-fu killers and explosions that demolish entire apartments yet leave him with only a slight, short-lived limp? This Die Hard has thrown caution, reason, logic, human physiology and budgetary restraint to the winds - and is so much better for it! It's like the producers and Willis have given up any semblance of reality and just gone for some of the most staggering stunts and action sequences I've ever seen - and lots of them look non-CGI enough to make you really grip the armrests. The direction of all the action is fantastic, the script is just this side of laughable and the characters are just about human enough to make you give a damn.The first half of the movie is really something, with good old fashioned stunts dominating, but the whole thing takes a turn for the dumb after that with Willis the target of various killers (who always leave him alive just a second longer than they should have), and even more various death machines, big trucks and faulty infrastructure. The stunts then become so over the top that they lose any credibility and the last 20 minutes of the film are ho-hum. But loud ho-hum. My biggest criticism of this and similar franchises is that characters go through stuff that would leave them crippled in a heartbeat and yet somehow manage to defy death or even hangnails. It severs any illusion of reality and makes what could have been an exciting sequence merely laughable. I certainly laughed more at Die Hard 4.0 than I did at The Simpsons movie. It is truly ludicrous in places. The hi-tech computer-controlled premise of the film is interesting but, presumably for reasons of billing, had to give way to the low-tech Willis machismo. Still, it made for a different and original backdrop for an above-average action flick.
4.Oh Dear - a good action movie, but not a Die Hard movie
posted on 10 Aug 2009I was always very worried when I heard a new Die Hard film was on its way, especially after learning that John McTiernan was not directing. However, the trailer raised some hopes for me - things looked pretty good.Before I continue, I want you to know, I AM a Die Hard "Die Hard" fan. I really did give 4.0 a chance, but I came out of the cinema thinking; "That was John McClane in an ordinary action movie, that wasn't a Die Hard movie".My main concern was how the music was going to keep the production up. When the lights dimmed & the movie started, I wept with joy as I heard Kamen's "Die Hard" motive in the music. As I watched, I could instantly tell the camera-work was going to be completely different in this film to the others, and it was. But I thought, providing the score is accurate to the previous Die Hard movies, everything would be alright.But oh how disappointed I was. The score quickly moved from Kamen's "Die Hard" to "Just another generic action movie score". Which was a great shame. Without the Die Hard music, I was having trouble really believing it was a Die Hard movie. As an action film, this movie is very good. The action is well thought out, great fun to watch & not to over the top with CG, which is a VERY good thing. But somehow, it just didn't work for me.Sadly, Bruce Willis' amazing talents playing McClane were devastated in this movie. He had very little screen time compared to the majority of the other characters. There were never any scenes where we would see his face & some expressions for more than 3 seconds. In previous Die Hard's, the camera would always hold on McClane to see how he reacts to what's being said to him. Completely not the case here.The editing was very average & generic of an action movie. It wasn't edited like previous Die Hard films. There were some fantastic shots in there but really only "some", the majority were plain & boring. McClane had too few lines, everyone else got to say far more than he did. Everything else they said was pretty mundane, and everything he got to say, was never quite that thrilling.Sadly, as with most films - if you've seen the trailer, you've pretty much seen all the best bits. Again, the case with Die Hard 4.0. I have more gripes, too. Firstly, the bad guys. They're all a bunch of weedy, boring geeks. None of them have any slique or style, or real menace about them like the Gruber brothers or even Colonel Stuart. Also, what they're doing really didn't seem like a threat. No innocent people were killed giving McClane MUCH MORE of a reason to take the "terrorists" out. And at moments when there are huge crashes, McClane doesn't get frustrated about people being injured/dying. McClane's conscience is ESSENTIAL to a Die Hard movie but it really did NOT show in 4.0. Granted, when the taxi is smashed, he does care for the driver :)Secondly, the fact they've made it PG-13. This is a MAJOR problem. When I go to Die Hard, I want to feel like an adult integrating into McClane's world. I didn't. I felt like a child, being given a sneak preview of what McClane's adult life is like. Coarse banter is again an essential part of McClane.And even if it isn't, why has he become so clean without any explanation? Why has he given up smoking?Also, I've read here that some people loved the references to other Die Hard movies. I noticed 1, it made me laugh, but it was pretty lame. It would've been nice if he'd reminisced about his time with Zeus, or mentioned Al. Those would've been better moments for me.Also, the bad guy's final line; "And on your headstone McClane, it'll read; Always in the wrong place at the wrong time." This SUCKED. That was a throw in quote to make people chuckle and it SUCKED. He just comes out with it, it's completely out of context (because during the movie McClane is BARELY in the wrong place ever at the wrong time). Also, this is a phrase only McClane would know from Die Hard 2. So how does the bad guy know to come out with it? It was a disappointing, sucky one liner.The death of the bad guy is also incredibly short & lame. So is the title; Die Hard 4.0 - that is an absolutely awful, boring name. Why couldn't we have had "Live Free or Die Hard" in the UK?All in all, it was a good action movie, but it wasn't a Die Hard movie. They've catered far too much for a new, younger audience than Die Hard's older audience. McClane is a dying breed, if this is his last film - he really has NOT gone out with a bang. He's kind of fizzled out slowly & boringly.Sincerely though, I hope that isn't the last. If there is to be another with Bruce, I hope to God its more of a trip down memory lane (like Rocky Balboa) rather than just-another-action movie.There's lots more to say but if I keep going I will just feel even more disappointed. So, as per always, here's my list of favourite Die Hards; 1. Die Hard (obviously) 2. Die Hard with A Vengeance 3. Die Hard 2: Die Harder 4. Die Hard 4.0
Cinematic Excellence
posted on 10 Aug 2009This is the most fantastic piece of cinema I have ever viewed. That is, if cinema is defined purely by the amount of entertainment experienced by the viewer. I saw this in a tiny theater in the Adirondacks, my living room is bigger. It was still the greatest and most exciting movie I have ever seen. The time flew by. If you missed this in the theater, I highly recommend going to your local Videostop located in Hanover, Lebanon, and Andover NH, and Ludlow and Springfield VT. The part where he jumped on the jet was the most exciting (and funny) thing I have seen in a long time. Seriously, if you haven't seen this movie yet, make an effort, its great.
Die Hard 4.0 is merely a 3.0......
posted on 06 Aug 2009A true shopping mall movie and a hopeless attempt to inject new life in a long-dead series, Die Hard 4.0 feels as though it began most of its life as a totally unrelated thriller before someone decided to change the main character's name to John McLane at the last minute. Even twenty years on, the original remains the strongest, most exciting action thriller of all time, but this is extremely bland and totally anonymous in comparison, lacking even the character of the flawed second and third instalments. Unattractively shot in hues of grey, the plot is some techno-nonsense about disillusioned (and decidedly unthreatening) Timothy Olyphant holding the US to ransom; in the meantime, McLane (Bruce Willis, going through the motions) teams up with a whiny computer hacker (Justin Long) to work out the blah, blah, blah, we've all been here before, right? Maggie Q looks great but has no discernible personality or character to work with, and Kevin Smith should have stuck to his Silent Bob ethos, as every time he opens his mouth, he exposes the fact that he's not very good at acting. The action is spectacular but difficult to get worked up about, the script is dull and overall the whole enterprise just feels like an 'in one ear, out the other' example of sheer product. Bafflingly, this film is proving to be very popular, but believe me, the original is all you'll ever need.
A Disgrace to a True Die Hard Fan
posted on 02 Aug 2009Director Len Wiseman has created a massacre of the Die Hard series name. This film is nothing more than a glorified version of two of Willis' other films "16 Blocks" and "Hostage." For the first hour, McLane is in charge of transporting a hacker on the FBI wanted list from New Jersey to D.C. For the second half, he is finding a way to "get in and find the bad guy," the same idea in Hostage (only Hostage was good movie).I have been a huge Die Hard fan since the beginning, there are a few things that you must have for this series to be the Die Hard franchise that it is, One, a central location, Two - a damn plot, Three- McLaine, and NO SIDEKICK THAT JUST TAGS ALONG. In Die Hard: with a Vengeance, "Simon" required Sam Jackson's character to be involved, thus the idea to make it harder for McLane to find him. In this film, the kid takes the line "I don't be on you" in a sentimental moment to go with McLane and help him - NO! People what is going on? Four- There needs to be an antagonist against McClane, EVERYONE INVOLVED LISTENED TO HIM!!!! WHAT!!!! NO ONE EVER LISTENS TO McLane, THAT IS THE IDEA!!! He is supposed to be challenged by the people he is working with, there were plenty of opportunities for this to happen, but instead "Bowman" (Cliff Curtis) is always helping him, and never questions McLane's actions. Do your research people, watch the other three films, and you will see the differences that could be corrected.The back story to "Thomas Gabriel," the terrorist, was terrible. A 30 second spot between Bowman, a member of the NSA (who has no name) and a CIA member (also, no name) state how Gabriel tried to alarm the FBI and NSA about this idea that is happening in the film. Then they find out he is going after a secret location that, HA, guess who created it before he got fired, Gabriel. All of this should have been the VERY first thing you see in the film, explaining in great detail the back story, of not only Gabriel, but the entire film itself. It takes well over 45 minutes to about an hour, to find out who this Gabriel is, or who he is connected to. Die Hard (1) is the only exception that did not follow this rule from the start of the film, that film introduces John McLane first, then on his way to his wife's Christmas party, as he gets there, we are introduced to the plot of the film, all that took about 30 minutes.As a true Die Hard fan, I was very unhappy with this film. Somehow they managed to keep Johm McLane the same, but the story was so far fetched, and very thrown together in mass chaos, and somehow McLane stays "cool" and can walk through it all, through glorious actions scenes (and the F-35 scene, give me a break, he would have died).Save your money, see it on DVD or at the Dollar Theater in your home town.
Impeccable Sequel
posted on 30 Aug 2009I read the e-controversy of Die Hard IV and it's PG-13 rating, and I was immediately disappointed in the rating. However, I decided that I would be neutral and not judge the movie until after I had seen it.Trust me, Live Free or Die Hard is amazing.In a year in which disappointing sequels such as Pirates of the Caribbean 3 are bringing untold pain on massive audiences, Die Hard fans and noobs alike can enjoy John McClane's latest romp.While all of the other Die Hard movies have had humor, this one is definitely the one I laughed at the most, and the audience laughed a lot as well. When the action simmers down a bit, expect to be entertained even through the other parts, as the characters are so enjoyable.As expected, the government people and enemies are decidedly stereotypical (Die Hard 1's villain was the exception), but this does not detract from the movie.The Cyber-Terrorism plot seems a little far-fetched, but it creates a lot of cinematic moments that you will have to see to appreciate.I realize that I have rambled a little bit, but stick with me a little longer.The bad: There is some wince-inducing dialog. There are a couple of unbelievable stunts as well for the "reality-type" viewer. Finally, while the PG-13 rating does not detract too much, it makes it a little weaker, but hopefully the lower rating will appeal to an audience who has never been introduced to our "Yippey KiYay" gun-toting hero.