Live free or die hard
July 23rd, 2007
When you’re making a Die Hard film you really need to bring your A game to the court. A Die Hard film is not just an action film, it’s a Die Hard film, almost a genre onto itself. So for me Die Hard 4 has a lot of expectations surrounding it, an almost impossible legacy to live up to.
Firstly the name is all shades of wrong. I still have trouble referring to Die Hard 3 as Die Hard with a Vengeance. I barely recognize the Die Harder attached to Die Hard 2 and Live free or die hard is truly awful. Especially as they had a great working title in Die Hard 4.0 considering the computer aspects of the movie.
The name is of course a minor issue and to be honest I think it’ll stay in my head as Die Hard 4 anyway so it really isn’t a sticking point for me. Bruce Willis is awesome as always as the world weary John McClane, he falls back into the role with ease, like Die Hard 3 was yesterday.
The other characters are all pretty good, especially McClane’s daughter who shows that some of his genes have been passed along rather than have her as the helpless whining girl. The only exception is the guy playing the head of the taskforce managing cyber security, he just doesn’t quite fit but again it is only a really minor thing and doesn’t ruin the film.
What does ruin the film at least in part is the widely discussed PG rating and absence of the traditional language, the f bomb is avoided completely with even the precious Yippee Ki Yay is ruined, which really pisses me off. Also the ending is weak and doesn’t compare at all with the previous brilliant movies.
So I like it, but I don’t love it. It’s a great action film with awesome action sequences and very cool in-jokes referencing the previous movies: Agent Johnson.
Popularity: 3% [?]
More posts like this:
Categories: Uncategorized |
I enjoyed it very much. The end was a bit weak, and I spent half the film waiting for Kevin smith to turn up as I saw his name in the credits (I didn’t know he was in it before, i don’t read many movie reviews).
But it had guns and running and cars and helicopters and lots of big bangs, so it was good.
Better than Die hard 2 anyhow.
[Reply to this comment]
It’s definitely quite a bit more ridiculous than the other installments, but I had a good time watching DH4 and Willis does a great job of evolving the character into a modern-day guy who has pretty much accepted the outrageous turns his life has taken.
But a question about the Agent Johnson bit - at first I thought it was a clever throwaway line for the audience, but in the original did McClane ever know either of the agents’ names?
[Reply to this comment]
Dan - I can’t quite go there and say it was better than Die Hard 2 - in Die Hard 2 there is the scene where McClane says ‘just the fax ma’am’ and does the cool thing with his wedding band. He also kills some one with an icicle, which my mother suggested would be an awful mess after it melted. So these are very hard things to overlook.
[Reply to this comment]
Burbanked - that is an excellent question and one that I would need my currently in storage copy of Die Hard to answer accurately.
I don’t think he ever actually speaks to them however I imagine there would have been quite a bit of investigation and analysis of the whole situation particularly by that reporter so I’m sure McClane would have become quite familiar with the good names of the FBI agents. At the very least when drinking a cold one with his new Pal I’m sure he would have told him. But not on screen no.
[Reply to this comment]
I’m sure you’re right about the post-Die Hard fallout, but the problem with making a joke like that in DH4 is that it ends up assuming too much and asking the audience to do too many mental gymnastics - never a good idea with what should be a quick throwaway comedy bit. Things like that in movies just frustrate the hell out of me because it’s actually a decent in-joke, bungled by the filmmakers’ (or perhaps Willis’) desire to have McClane react to the name, even though to do so violates the continuity of the character.
[Reply to this comment]
I have to disagree on this particular reference although I certainly know what you’re saying however I don’t think it’s that much of a stretch to assume that McClane would know the names of the key FBI agents involved in the Nakatomi incident despite not seeing this on screen. It’s called an in-joke for a reason. If you were to continue down this line of reasoning anything that is not shown on screen can not be considered canon continuity and any passing reference would be incorrect to use.
By saying the line in DH4 they are actually adding to the continuity because we now know that the character McClane has been over the details of the event however we aren’t privy to this scene on screen.
I think the line is a good nod towards the original movie and it really didn’t stretch me to make that connection.
Consider that in the movie there are references to Lucy being angry at McClane, they don’t explain why and it isn’t referenced in any of the previous films of them having any specific problems. But we’re aware of the implied history of McClane and his family so the audience accepts the validity of her teenage (20 something) anger directed at him.
[Reply to this comment]
Your points are absolutely well-made. I guess I saw the original DH joke (”This is agent Johnson. No, the other one.”) as being more for us - the audience - than for McClane, so it kind of took me out of the moment in DH4 when suddenly John’s in on the joke and it’s not immediately apparent why he’d know that. I definitely like the continuity of the joke being there, though, and it’s something that the true fans of the franchise are going to pick up on.
As for Lucy, I don’t mind not being told exactly what’s happened between her and John because that comes from what we already know about John’s character and no details are necessary. We know that he can be a bully, perhaps absent from her life, not in touch with listening to her - basically all the same stuff as Holly - and these things ARE immediately apparent. I think her character is a much better use of less-is-more exposition than the Johnson bit.
In the end, it’s all academic. The movie is much better than it’s got a right to be and I think we both had a great time watching it!
[Reply to this comment]
I literally laughed out loud at ‘The movie is much better than it’s got a right to be…’ because it’s so true. I think they cashed in a lot of ‘Die Hard’ goodwill which if they were to do another one they would no longer have. At least it wasn’t Terminator 3!
[Reply to this comment]
Lee, I have to totally agree with you on this one! The ending was certainly not the traditional ‘Die Hard’ ending. I’m hoping on the DVD release it has an alternate ending, or something. I’m sure to give it that extra edge for a wider viewing public, i.e. age groups, certain things were toned down, even the Yippee Ki Yay…
A shame, really; but yet, I still liked it, and will certainly buy the DVD.
[Reply to this comment]
I don’t even think they filmed an alternative - maybe they did who knows. But yeah I’m going to get the DVD when it comes out too.
[Reply to this comment]