Live Free or Die Hard (2007) (1 Viewer)

[Chuck Mayer]

I edited John...now you need to

Trust me, the movie didn;t know she was either

Hey, it's worth seeing, because Willis is still extremely charismatic and funny. The film is better than expected, and still a bit unworthy. A little more work on the script, and I think it would have been really good. I was impressed by the action direction (the non-action direction wasn't nearly as good). That's soemthing.

 

[Jose Martinez]

So far THE BEST ACTION MOVIE OF THIS SUMMER! Totally blows away the big 3 movies of May as it totally delivers on all levels. Action! Humor! and Sexy as in the Ninja chick (plus McClane's daughter is cute too!). Good throwback to 80's and early 90's summer movie fun!


Edit: Throughout the movie I kept trying to remember where I've seen McClane's daughter before. Now I remember: Death Proof

 

[Ken Chan]

Eh, LFoDH is just OK. I definitely enjoyed the energy and dynamism of some of the practical stunts and their camera work. But the movie doesn't work well as a cohesive whole. One strong aspect of the original is that it was all in one building. The second slacked in that it was all in one airport. And then they threw it out the window with the third, making it just another action flick. Same here.

The commercials give away maybe half of the cool stunts.

Sad, isn't it? Not a "summer movie", but definitely a good one: I would see Ratatouille first.

 

[Chuck Mayer]

Even Kate Beckinsale, with those great outfits and that lovely haircut, couldn't save either Underworld from being a huge pile to me. When you have a film about werewolves versus vampires with Bill Nighy...counting on some PG-13 T&A to save the film says it all. Besides, I'll take Maggie Q over Kate every day of ever.

I only saw two of the big three, and I liked Pirates more than this. but I lived LFoDH more than I expected. I imagine Ratatouille will be better on every level, all the way down to craft services and legalese in the contracts But comparing this cash-in to Pixar ain't very fair.

And I don't like indestructibe McClane. I know they can't recapture the old DH magic now. Oh well.

 

[Malcolm R]

I'll add to the chorus of those who LOVED this film. The action and stunts were amazing, IMO. By far, the best "summer" movie so far this year. This has to be one of the only movies I've ever seen where people jumped in their seats simply due to car crashes and gunfire. We actually thought the action may even a little too intense at a couple spots, especially given the rating.

And with regard to the rating, the only thing this movie was missing from the rest of the series is that every other word wasn't "f&ck" and, frankly, I didn't miss it at all. I feel sad that anyone would take a pass on this film simply because there ain't enough cussin'.

I very much enjoyed all the performances, including Timothy Olyphant though, as noted by others, he's no Hans Gruber.

In the DH pantheon, I'd rank this second behind the first film. This film seemed a lot more fun than parts 2 and 3. I hope it does well at the box office. I think word of mouth will be very good. This is also one of the only films I've ever attended where much of the audience applauded at the end. Audiences in this area don't generally applaud movies, but they did this one (unless it was all tourists ).

John: I hope you're pleasantly surprised when you see it.

 

[Patrick Sun]

I overheard people coming out of the midnight showing and commenting how much they liked it, and it was probably their 2nd favorite of the Die Hard series. Typically, if a movie sucks, people will flat out say so when leaving the theater (like "I want my 2 hours back." or "That was the suck." or "I couldn't stay awake." or "That blew big chucks."), but most were pleased with what they saw on the big screen. I'm sure there's going to be a naysayer here and there, and they are entitled to their opinion and reaction, but overall, I think the overall response to LFoDH is going to be good, and with good word of mouth to support it, too.

 

[ThomasC]

It doesn't do injustice to the Die Hard series, but it's not a knockout. That said, I had fun with it all the way. This is the first time I've had fun at the movies in a long time. I wasn't too crazy about seeing this movie after watching the trailer, but the trailer undersold the movie. It is definitely better than what the trailer made it out to be. I thought Justin Long was going to be annoying, but I don't think he was bad at all. Lucy McClane was much more of a badass than I thought she would be, unless like her "Daddy?" scene in the trailer that was thankfully cut out. She didn't look too bad, either.

Oh yeah, and John McClane was his usual badass-self.

The original was the best, Vengeance was second best, this comes in third, and Die Harder comes in last, but I like or love them all.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

I had a really great time, and there were plenty of up-close-and-personal action scenes to match the vehicular mayham. The computer stuff, while probably not a 100% accurate, maintained its own internal logic and furthered the story along. And of course Kevin Smith's cameo was hilarious.

The only two areas I found lacking was the lack of blood when anyone but a main character got shot (Are the henchman made of air?) and the free flying use of fuck. I thought the signature line was delivered fine (more like mother fuck-*gunshot* to my ears.) but I know if a jet fighter started firing at me I'd be letting a few "what the fuck?"s fly. Other than that, his language didn't seem the slightest bit turned down. It's strange to think that this which (VIOLENCE spoiler) has a guy ground up in a combine-style rotating cylinder
gets the same rating as the upcoming Harry Potter movie.

 

[Patrick Sun]

I found it weird how so much violence (and violent deaths) made it into this film, while some extra utterances of some cuss words would have made it an R rated film. It just very strange how the MPAA operates in applying "standards".

I was the one muttering some cuss words (WTF! HS! Damn, that's gonna leave a mark, yadda yadda) from the concussive impact of some of the collisions and explosions thoughout the film. You really felt like you were right there with McClane when all hell is breaking loose.

 

[ThomasC]

Poor Agent Johnson...

 

[Brent M]

It's because the MPAA are, plain and simple, a bunch of ass clowns.

 

[Malcolm R]

Not to mention the first few minutes of the film feature some breast-groping and use of the word "asshole".

That "F" word really makes all the difference, apparently (well, that and/or a nekkid boobie).

 

[Zack Gibbs]

Saw it this afternoon. The movies out, don't read the thread if you don't want spoilers.

I had four big problems going into the movie that concerned me. The director, the techno-terrorist plot, the youth appealing inclusions of Justin Long and Lucy McClain (whoever she is), and the castrating rating of PG-13.

The direction was fairly good, I don't think much of Wiseman's Underworld but he proved himself to be reasonably capable here in my eyes.

The techno plot, while not perfect, served the film well enough. I think it's only real letdown was that they kept us in the dark until the end, and then when they reveal the truth it turns out to be about nothing more than money. I think the Die Hard films have seen enough of that.

Justin Long and even Lucy do not bring the film down in any way, Long is actually just as good a straight man partnering as Sam Jackson, but in a totally different way.

Well, 3 out of 4 ain't bad, right? The PG-13 of this film is awful. It's even worse then I thought it could be. The language was VERY mild, I still expected to hear one solid "fuck" but it's not there. They even hold back on the "shit", but Long used that effectively a couple of times I thought.

Then there's the violence, which I thought would remain intact from all the comments about how "hard" the movie would still be. Not so. If you pay attention, virtually every gun shot in the entire film is out of view from the camera. Lots of "see the gun shooting then pan to a dead body" bullshit. Lots of people getting shot from the front but the camera is behind them. Virtually no blood. What's worse is that the "YippieMotherFucker" line is used in a clever piece where McClain shoots through his own chest to take out the villain. Presumably through a gunshot wound he already received, although that's not clear as we didn't really see him get shot. This would have been far more effective if the film could show it to us clearly and creatively, but it has no choice but to quickly hint at it.

Overall the movie is pretty fun and doesn't do the others injustice, but that makes the PG-13 even worse. Had it not been for that the movie could proudly hold its own with the first and third of the series (I hate DH2, prime example of how not to make a sequel). I don't think an R-rated cut on DVD will redeem it either as the rating really steered the direction of the film in many ways. Although if we did get a harder cut that isn't afraid to stray farther from the theatrical version than most "UNRATED EDITION DVD"s tend to do then I bet we'll be very pleased. I have a feeling the R-rated DVD (we all know its coming) will be virtually the same movie with heavier language. There were a number of scenes where the dialog didn't sync at all with what they were saying on screen.

 

[Holadem]

Eh.

It started OK, but wore thin somewhere in the middle. For all I said earlier about not being beholden to this franchise, I seem to remember that McLane actually had to out think the bad guys in the previous installments.

I didn't know how accurate my comparison to 24 would turn out to be, this thing was clearly and heavily influenced by that show, right down to technobabble like "patch thru to network" and such, and that's not a good thing... the power grid and network thing made no sense, too much eye-rolling computer stuff... My suspension of disbelief was just assaulted all over the place. Really the script is just silly.

I like Tim Olyphant from Deadwood, but the film needed a much bigger presence for a bad guy. Did no one else want the job? Or did Willis eat up all the budget? There are plenty of other relative unknowns that could have done a better job. Pretty big misfire there I think.

Is a truly satisfying summer blockbuster experience that much to ask?

:star::star: /4.

--
H

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

I'll let you know in a few hours, but I have a good feeling and that usually translates to me liking a film.

I feel compelled to explain further my philosophy towards cursing, particularly in this series, I look at the amount of F bombs that McClane drops, in addition to the one's that explode , as a fundamental character trait, he's a tough cop who grew up on the streets of Jersey and that's simply the way he talks, to have him suddenly watching his mouth will, I suspect, draw a lot of attention to itself, unless of course they explain it in some way like he met a new girlfriend and she's gotten him off exsessive cussing or he found religion or something and no longer curses because of a personal choice.

Just letting you know that i'm not into cursing for cursing sake I want the curses because they are part of who McClane is.

There are simply some people that like to say "fuck" every few words.

 

[TheBat]

I saw die hard 4 tonight.. I must say that its the best sequel since the original film.. I also was worried about the PG-13 rating, but it was very violent and still kept the attitude of mcclane. I have to agree that its the best sequel of the summer compared to spidey 3 and other big may movies.

you have to remember that this is a new die hard movie for the 21 century.. its like comparing the original star wars films to the prequels. the look and feel is much differnt.. but then find its own path during the movie.. there is alot of action in it.
the audience was really into it..

more so then the other movies that I had seen this summer.

Jacob

 

[Kirk Tsai]

I guess I'll be in the minority and say that I thought this was the worst of the four movies. If the movie worked, it was because of some stunts and the Die Hard staple of "John's day becoming worse and worse."

Len Wiseman can't shoot a picture to save his life. Every single person is shot in a closeup. For all the grief Ratner, Bay or Tony Scott get, Wiseman must be the worst action director in Hollywood today. The baddie was underwhelming, and every minute spent with the FBI is a waste of film. They just keep on spewing non-sense like "get me the NSA, NOW!" The plot itself, which I guess we don't necessary entirely blame the director, stretches credibility beyond a reasonable latitude.

 

[Holadem]

Another observation: I've always liked the way McLane shot his handgun in the older flicks: With two hands, his face turned to the side, weary of clips (or whatever it is that comes out of these things), rather than the carefree way other action heroes go about it. No such thing here.

Strange how much of the older flicks is coming back to me now. The more I think about this one in that context, the more I dislike it. DH4 is no more than a generic action flick.

--
H

 

[Chad R]

"Die Hard" was a magical combination of premise, actor, director and time. To hope that any other retread or sequel will be like that experience is wishful at best. There can never be another "Die Hard" exactly like that film was. There can be other great action films that have that magical combination, but it would have to be a completely different premise, actor and director.

With that in mind, you really need to approach all of the Die Hard sequels as "the Further Adventures of John McClane." What I mean by that is that you have to accept that the only reason to name these films "Die Hard" is so Bruce Willis can practice his schtick without being accused as a one-note actor simply because of the excuse that he's "playing the same character."

Forgetting all comparisons to the original, and just judging this on an action film standard -- it's pretty average. Much of the action is good, but whenever there isn't action the movie grinds to a halt. The villain is bad, the feds are boring and the interaction between Willis and Long is banal.

This film badly needed a better editor. A good action movie is edited within an inch of its life to build momentum and pace. This film had neither. An audience should feel where a film is going even if it hasn't figured out the intricasies of the plot, not to say this film's plot was complicated. However, you never feel where it's going to resolve. You're never sucked up in it. You know there's going to be explosions at the end and a shootout because that's what action films have. The film substitues formula for plot more shamelessly than any action film in a long time.

However, the action is well staged even if it's not as creative as it could have been. An average film at best.

A quick note on the rating. It is indeed ridiculous that a film with this high of a body count is rated for kids to see. Violence is not about bloodletting. You don't have to spill another man's blood to violently hurt them. It's about aggressive behavior to which underdeveloped minds should be limitedly exposed. I'm not so upset that the studio aimed for the lower rating, I'm more upset they were successful. The MPAA should be ashamed of themselves for passing this one.

 

[TravisR]

Yep, the MPAA's PG-13 rating means that you can kill 100 people but as long as blood doesn't shoot out of their wounds, it's perfectly OK. And that really is a major flaw in the rating system.