The best thing about the film was Jackson's and Willis' chemistry. They were just *perfect* together. "So what's up with this LA thing, you famous or something?" "Yeah, for about 15 seconds." "Don't tell me, Rodney King right?" "Fuck you." :D gets me everytime.
Even 27 years later, this movie is still one hell of a thrill ride. The chemistry between Willis and Jackson is perfect, the script doesn't have a single ounce of fat on it, the delivery by Willis, Jackson and especially Jeremy Irons as Simon Gruber is phenomenal. Why can't they make these kind of movies today?
+Ragitsu I feel the opposite to that claim. Mostly because I think the second one had a cool villain. In part 3 Samuel kind of annoyed me. But I do see the value on what each Die Hard has.
Ragitsu I liked how part 2 came out. I do see the over the top nature but I liked it. Plus, John was still at odds against his enemies since it relates more to part 1. In the terms of his possible mortal peril. I didn't like 3 because of how simple Samuel's character was written. Also, he didn't get to be involved much besides the first half of the movie. He became sort of irrelevant. I wanted to like Simon but he was pretty clever to plot a plan with McClaine. His strained relationship with his wife was pretty apparent in part 2. In part 3, it felt dragged out and I didn't feel invested into it anymore. If anything, part 3 could have involved one of John's children and could have been pretty interesting if a new dynamic was introduced to John's character. I know part 5 did so, but the writing in that one was terrible. It had the chance to make an interesting villain but missed the mark completely... Both 2 and 3 Sequels were campy in their own ways. I still love Die Hard.
Die Hard 4 for me is a good fun movie, sure it's over the top and outrageous in parts, but it could of been so much worse. The cast all worked well together. Let's never mention the 5th entry yeah
His sidekick also works and it's not just a buddy cop thing. Cause we've seen even from #2 that John's always behind the times. In #4 he's nowhere near the times, so he needs a link between him and the cyber terrorists. 4 gets a pass. You can see some cracks appearing, as you said, but it's good enough.
Die hard 4 was pretty well directed and shot beautifully. It got ridiculous at moments But I still prefer it over the 2nd. John McTiernans 1st and 3rd are incredible. The 5 th is pure dogshit.
I enjoy the Die hard 4. For me, I understand why his behavior in die hard 4. He is a flawed man but still respectable in doing his job, going above and beyond to stop the bad guy and also show his fatherly side when his daughter was kidnapped and show how he do anything to save his daughter. Anyway, I still think Die hard with the vengeance still the best of the bunch, just behind the original.
Die Hard 4 or Live Free or Die Hard is a good movie in its own right, that being a fun, guilty pleasure action movie with great action stupid as hell humour and a decent Bruce Willis performance. Whereas Die Hard 5 or A good day to Die Hard went to far with the direction that was used in the 4th movie and pretty destroyed the die hard name. With the movie suffering from a weak plot, far too much of the stupid dialogue and humour from the previous films only worse than ever and also the movie littered with looney toons esk action, which not at all impressive. Sadly this movie also abused the whole part of it feeling like a die hard movie and the partnership- bromance between John and his son in this movie doesn’t work, and there is no chemistry between the two actors. I think that Samuel L. Jackson had amazing chemistry with Bruce Willis in Die Hard with A Vengeance and Justin Long had at least something chemistry with Willis in Live Free or Die Hard but here in this film Jai Courtney and Bruce Willis have no chemistry, I also think they both provide wooden as hell performances. Willis himself just acts like a stubborn old man, rather than McClane, making his character less likeable and also less interesting. Now yes the same can be said about Live Free but at least that film Willis tried with his performance and actually recaptured some of the magic he had in the original trilogy but A good day to Die Hard they go to far, as does Willis.
I think, by far, my favourite line in that movie, probably just for delivery alone, is when Simon calls the police station after McClane and Zeus show up, and he asks to speak to Zeus, to tell him he interfered with his well-laid plan, to which Zeus responds with "Yeah? Well you can stick your well-laid plan up your well-laid ass."
The best line is actually after "Yippee Ki Yay..." when McClane asks Zeus if they should call the fire department to put out the chopper and Zeus says "Fuck 'em. Let 'em cook."
My big issue with this film is that I wish there was a little more focus on why McClaine and his wife separated again, because they seemed pretty happy at the end of Die Hard 2. It just says they had a big fight. Over what, might I ask?
When John McClane still was John McClane. The new die hard movies are absolute carbage. Die Hard 4 was watchable but had really nothing to do with the originals. Edited my message 4 years later: DH3 is my favorite DH movie after DH1. I actually prefer Die Hard 4 to better than Die Hard 2. I have seen DH5 and to me that movie does not exist.
I still think this is the best sequel of the trilogy. The so called fourth and fifth films aren't Die Hard films, but shameless cash grabs using the name for profit. This film is miles better than the second. Not knocking part 2 just saying it's more of its own thing verses the second film, which apes the first film too closely.
The fourth movie wasn't too bad. I enjoyed it. I thought it was a decent sequel. The villain was generic, his daughter was just a damsel in distress. Lot of the action sequences were bit over the top. But I liked the chemistry between McClane and Justin Long's character. Bruce Willis gave a good performance. It seemed like John McClane in the wrong movie, kinda thing. It was entertaining to see the McClane we grew up with in the 90s in the modern day computer age, and how he is unfamiliar with it. It works better than Indiana Jones 4.
Montgomery Jackson die hard 4 is actually a die hard film, especially when you look at die hard 5 which was a disgrace to the franchise, and now they’re making a new film that’s half prequel half sequel, it has len wiseman as the director again so it could be good
how do you not have more viewers? Your videos are so well made. they rival big production tv shows. love your work and you highlight the films you cover so well. you immortalize them, and your writing, editing and narration is the best I've seen.
Die Hard With A Vengeance is one of the greatest action sequels and action films ever by far! Who would ever think that McTiernan could capture the same tone, feel and realistic level of suspense that made the first film so great? Also, Jeremy Irons was a fantastic choice for Hans Gruber! He made a standard hoaky action film cliche, in this case, the brother seeking revenge for his sibling's death believable! The only thing that might have worked for III is if Franka Potente would have played Hans daughter looking for revenge and got to Lucy McClane to get to John! Orrr maybe not! But I have always felt part three and even more so then that absolute atrocity A Good Day To Die Hard, at least one more great sequel could have been made to this franchise! Let's hope a great writer is working on Die Hard: Year One! If that's still happening!
My kids got me the Die Hard movies on Blu Ray for fathers day last year. Love the first one. The third (this one) was underrated, I forgot how great it was
Fantastic review as always Ollie. Really in depth and thorough. I can always count on you to provide some info that i haven't heard despite watching this movie like 50 times!! Keep up the good work buddy, great job
The racial tension in the film provides a really good real world relatable backdrop for the 2 main characters. On 1 hand they don't want to have anything to do with 1 another, but they somehow manage to co-operate so much so that by the end of the film they like each other despite their obvious differences and backgrounds. It says a lot without making any major political statements. Which is something that today's world can't comprehend without getting the Twittersphere in knots. For me this is the best film in the series because of Samuel L Jackson and Bruce Willis. Both shining through, but not outshining each other.
The reason the cops were portrayed to be bubbling idiots wasn't to drag the film's pace (buzzword) nor for cheap comic relief. It was to show how incompetence and callousness of government authorities. The FBI especially were portrayed to be blase and cruel, causing more harm than good.
Well I wasn't commenting on the cops effecting the pace of the movie. It was more an issue with how they're written. Its an obvious knock at authority the writers are throwing in but I felt they could've been better written. I thought it was great they weren't played for dumb asses in DH3. :)
Oliver Harper It's done to compliment Conservative subtext of the film, which was popular for action films during the Reagan presidency. It was bold move to take a stab at the FBI, whom are often portrayed to be virtuous in film and television.
Oliver Harper An alternative explanation could be that the writers were picking on stereotypes of various law enforcement agencies, perhaps based on their individual reputations. The LAPD was depicted as simultaneously overconfident and incompetent, the FBI was depicted as so "by the book" the criminals could exploit their predictability, and the Dulles International Airport Police were depicted as glorified security guards. Thematically, it makes sense for the NYPD to be shown in a favorable light because they had a good reputation in the 90's and they were John McClane's department. It would be nonsensical for the NYPD to look like idiots, yet produce the clever and stalwart hero of the franchise.
I agree because police and agencies in some form or another make things worse or become an annoyance for the hero e.g Agents Johnson turn the power off which is what the terrorists required to get the money.
A fun way to rewatch this is when you realize it's a retelling of how the Olympians defeated the Titan Cronos who is the Titan of time. McClain is Poseidon always in water. Zeus is obvious, also he is an electrician. Simon is Hades Lord of the underworld. McClain and Zeus are constantly sent on missions where they have to beat a time limit aka Cronos. Simon is also trying to beat the clock. Back to the future is the same retelling.
Whenever I hear the argument about the guy in the end coming 'back to life' in the end of the first film, I feel like I should say that the scenario for someone actually survives a hanging and perceiving to 'revive' themselves is completely plausible. Do a little reading, and you'll find it happened quite a bit back when they would hang criminals. Some would actually survive the hanging (appear deceased) and come 'back to life' even sometimes in their coffins being prepared for burial (sometimes a day later). Long story short, that kind of thing is actually within the realm of possibility!
Totally addicted to your Retrospective videos! been watching a ton of them since I found your channel! This movie is one of my fav's for sure! :D I guess you had to mention the 5th movie... which I don't even associate with the franchise myself, I mean it's like Bruce Willis was like "Oh another one? hmm okay easy money" and he just phoned it in really... got his paycheck ;D To me, i think he still had his John Mcclane character and personality in the 4th movie (despite the new bald look) And in the 5th movie, he just does insane stunts in public not caring about collateral damage... nothing... feels like a totally different person :\
Oh man, I thought you were going to place the Michael Scott Die Hard 4 monologue from the office there for a minute, it's very similar to what you are saying (almost verbatim!). Awesome retrospective as always.
The explosion in the opening scene looks so good, its one of the best explosions in movie history. Also Die Hard with a Vengeance is my favorite Die Hard Movie, its so tense and fast paced
I have the first and third neck and neck. I really like the first one because Willis does it on his own. But I like the chemistry between him and Jackson in the third film as well.
Great work on all your retrospects. I am about the same age as you, born in 83 and I love that you nail most of the films that I as well grew up on.. Keep up the great work
love the quote ''like watching your mate piss around on grand theft auto'' i am that mate that used to piss around on that game... pavement rampage...aka 5 star madness
In my mind this and the first DieHard are the only ones to exist. I felt the second simply just fell flat, it's astonishing to discover that Diehard 3 was a mashup of ideas, when it turned out to be a very slick and well done plot.
My points: -I saw the original Die Hard for the first time last October and loved it so much it put me in an action movie phase which still hasn't dissipated - in the months since I've seen The Rock, Kill Bill Vol. 2, Face/Off, Aliens, Enter the Dragon, Death Wish, Terminator 1-3, First Blood, The Hunt for Red October, The Crow, this film, The Matrix, Predator 2, Lethal Weapon, and Top Gun. Planning on watching Die Hard 2 today. The original Die Hard is my favorite non-sci-fi action movie (and 4th overall behind Aliens and Terminator 1/2). -I saw With A Vengeance for the first time last January and thought it was a fun ride, if nothing too special. Like, the first Die Hard is 10/10 and this is 7/10 (as far as other McTiernan films, I'd say Predator and Red October are also 9/10). Would not work without Samuel L. Jackson (one of my favorite actors, big surprise there, IMO Kingsman and even Pulp Fiction would probably be substantially worse without him - also a huge indictment on George Lucas for wasting him completely in the Star Wars prequels). It was also cool to see Jeremy Irons again after The Lion King. -There's no way an action movie like this would be made today, all the heinous terrorist acts in New York are just that much more wince-worthy in a post-9/11 world.
My heart melts when I hear a Michael Kamen score. I've never heard anyone else produce a score that sounds at all like the sophisticated compositions he created. Even check out what he did on Cronenberg's The Dead Zone. I watched Die Hard With A Vengeance again a few months ago, and it's an okay sequel. It does feel more akin to a Lethal Weapon movie than a Die Hard one, in my view, due to the brighter visuals, less intense style, and the buddy cop dynamic. However, my main issue in why it feels weaker to me is that the supporting characters are very forgettable. The first two movies had a lot of characters that were charismatic, distinct, and colorful. They stood out and made a strong impression. Die Hard With A Vengeance really only has McClaine, Zeus, and Simon to hinge itself on. Despite the NYPD being portrayed as very capable, I couldn't tell you one memorable thing they said or did. They're just cogs in the plot instead of being vibrant personalities meant to either entertain you or emotionally invest you in the story. And I do agree that the ending is a bit lacking. It could use a more personal pay-off. It is a good movie, but it's just never done much for me as a Die Hard movie. However, I've only seen the first three, and have no plans to see the other two.
@@prltqdf9 Let's be honest here, the only thing the fourth film gets wrong is the cartoonish invulnerability of John. It hits every other beat: a dynamic between John and the villain, a villain with a personality (both things most missing from the second film), the motive ultimately being money despite appearances (just about the only thing five gets right), mostly practical effects, John's increasingly deteriorating social life and mental state, a competent partner (imo, though it's debatable I admit). But what makes four a worthy addition imo is its commentary on John himself. What every other film was missing was this sense of self reflection: who or what is John McClane? As much as John was supposed to be the "every man", after 3+ films (depending upon what you like to consider existing) it's not possible to portray him in such a way when he continuously finds himself in these situations. Probably my favorite scene in the film, and possibly a contender in the series, is the scene between hacker stereotype and John in the car where John laments his misfortune. His response is simply"well maybe that's what makes you that guy." It's the perfect way to sum up his character: the thankless hero. The film doesn't attempt to give him the hollywood blockbuster happy ending either (unlike the fifth film). That isn't who John is, that isn't what he represents. Instead he does get a bittersweet moment with his daughter (for fucks sake he deserves something) but you aren't given definitive proof their relationship has changed in the long term (just like the endings of the previous films where all seems well... then the next movie happens), though you hope it has, that isn't the point. It gives you the sense through its final acts that he's accepted his role as the thankless hero no matter the consequences, that he is genuinely happy for the first time in a long time.
David Thewlis as Simon would have been quite good, just because they could have pulled off a relation to Hans way better. Just look at Thewlis at 5:26 and then at a pic of Alan Rickman as Hans... totally believable.
"Terrorist scavenger hunt across the landscape of NYC" is such a thrilling concept which is what makes this work so well. As well as amazingly well written and likable supporting characters, and the great performances of Bruce Willis and Samuel Jackson. I like it just as much as the original, it's just different in some ways
Interesting note, the finale with the helicopter was filmed at a truck stop in Jessup, Maryland off of Route 1, I got to go see the filming as a young man. Good memories.
My favourite in order Die Hard, Die Hard (with a vengence), Die Hard 2, Die Hard 4, DH 5 A Good Day to Die Die Hard. To me with a vengence was the last one because the last two were just so bad.
Alex Rodriguez It's mostly due to the PG-13 rating. The R-rated version is better simply because there's swearing in it. Without the profanity, it just doesn't feel like a Die Hard movie.
A great review Oliver. I have to say that this is probably the one I watch the most from the series. I love the original and I really like the second one but I guess I like the third mostly because like you said the supporting characters are really likeable but also because I find the movie really quotable. Die hard 4 and 5 just never really clicked with me, 5 especially as while I didn't think it was all that bad as an action movie it just didn't feel like a Die Hard movie.
The fifth film was indeed a disappointment. It just became a generic action film that could have been interpreted by any characters outside of the Die Hard universe. It also had too many silly moments like McClane falling quite lengthy distances and barely getting so much as a scratch on him. I didn’t mind the fourth one, especially as there were some great comedy moments caused by his ever-present technophobia (it also helps that I saw the “Ultimate Action Edition” of the film, which has the original uncut version that the MPAA originally rejected because they wanted a PG-13 and not an R, so had more of an edge to its action as well as a certain catchphrase not having the strong language partially obscured by out-of-place gunfire!).
Fantastic video! TBH I think 3 is the best Die Hard for all the reasons you outlined in the video. I still love the first movie and the second as well, but the issues you've highlighted and how they aren't issues in 3 is what tips it over the edge for me.
I love this film so much. It's without a doubt the best Die Hard film. I loved the alternate ending too although in the end, the big fire fight chopper ending was best for this one.
This is my favorite of ALL Die Hard films. I think some people shit on this in comparison to the first just cuz it isn't the first one. This is the most brilliantly written and done of the entire series IMO.
It was a genius idea to make the villain the brother of the villain in the first movie; you get to effectively recycle a character without all the critics accusing you ripping off a character from the original!
Great review full of interesting insights. I think i would have preferred Thewlis to Irons, i never saw the connection between him and his supposed brother. Also i feel it would make more sense to have a vengeful younger brother rather than an older one.
yes!!!! i remember seeing this in the movie theater, i believe it was the first time i heard real surround sound in the cinema ... and the sound was fantastic, you could swear that real bullets were wizzzing by your ears... it was a really great time at the theatre, definatly one of my best cinema experiences
Excellent review. You justly praised the score, perhaps the composer's best, but forgot to mention the neat interweaving of a Civil War hymn "When Johnny Comes Marching Home". And home for John McClain is NYC, and where he is at, finally, after different locales the first two times. [... Not sure what airport he was at in no. 2 -- and it may even have been conceivably Kennedy (old Ildewild), in NYC -- but it is sort of irrelevant, as all action takes place at, or adjacent to that, airport.... So therefore he could have been almost anywhere, U.S.A. And action commences in no. 3 "Vengeance" at his old police station in Manhattan. .... But No. 2 was at Reagan (Washington)? ... ] ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- This does turn into a police buddy film to a degree, but why not...? And the police and minor characters here are all very believable, and the script is intelligent as it is witty. How about the scene prior to the finale, where McClain and the good Samaritan are tied to a huge bomb? They cannot think of anything better to do, than to swear at each other for 2 minutes, lol. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Three is my favorite of the first four, but I did like it in 2 where they introduced that Commando Squad at the end... That was an interesting turn, and the (black) actor playing lead there was great. It really beefed up the film, and provides a sort of platform and transitioning to the third movie, if only accidental. McClain: "Maybe your not such an asshole after all...?" Commando leader: "Oh, I'm an asshole alright; just your type of asshole..." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ All the cursing and rude language is not to be taking literally, is obvious, as anyone who has survived public schools in the last 45 odd years. Merely it is to be scene as colorful exclamation points.
The alternate ending was significantly better in my opinion. There was an intimacy between him the the big bad that just wasn't there with the whole helicopter thing, and I like how it kept the whole Christmas theme running between the movies. The canonical ending just doesn't have that prescence the way Die Hard did with Hans, and making it just between McClane and his foe, cutting Holly and everybody else out of the equation, made it work so much better because things were already personal between them before McClane's name and career was ruined, and it gives both of them a reason to not just oppose but *hate* each other,and thats some much needed tension. He also didn't just stumble into victory like the theatrical ending either, and the little bit about him getting the patrons to leave the building still shows that he's still a good guy at heart. It would've also forced the still inevitible Die Hard 4 to do something more than "cop in over his head" thing again so that hopefully that it would've been forced to innovate the way Die Hard 3 did. Die Hard 4 did do some things right, but did even more wrong, and honestly the fact that he was a cop is more or less irrelevant since he wasn't really beholden to any authorities like he was in the first three anyways, so there's not even a real point in keeping that link.
Like the first two Die Hards which take place the day before Christmas, this movie, Die Hard with a Vengeance took place in the hot and sticky summer in New York City and concludes on aCold night in Eastern Canada.
I like all the Die Hard films, except the fifth that was horrendous. The first is my favorite, the 2nd is more of the same, but still fun, and the third with easily the best supporting characters, and story, just lacks for me, mainly in the second half. The fourth Die Hard I really enjoyed, as a one last hurrah film like it should've been. Yes McClane is different, as is the visual style, but considering the time between it, and the third, I feel it mostly worked. I do agree that they made him too indestructible, but the previous films had over the top stuff too. The only difference is that it doesn't seem to affect him as much, which it should given his age. I also thought Timothy Olyphant was good villain, probably the third best of the series. The PG-13 rating was unfortunate, but the unrated version restores some of that language, and violence even if the blood splatter was done digitally. Die Hard 5 is where the series really crapped the bed, and that was rated R which shows rating has little to do with the quality of a film.
An R rating can help the quality of a film, and give the creators more room to create more gritty believable action. It was just not well implemented in A Crap Day to Eat Shit and Die. Still I agree with your sentiments.
no hassle No doubt, I've always felt that if a franchise started with an R, or PG 13 rating, it's subsequent films should follow suit, I was only mentioning that a rating doesn't make a film good, or bad. I personally feel like a lot of people bash the fourth Die Hard, because of it's PG 13 rating, and it's a much better film than the shitty fifth movie. I hated the PG 13 rating of Die Hard 4, but I still enjoyed it, something I can't say when it comes to the fifth pile of shit.
deraj nitram I know what you're saying. Yeah, the fifth Die Hard was very insulting to the fans of the the series. I mean Bruce Willis does not give a flying fuck about John McClane anymore. His performance was utterly lazy and his involvement with those hacks Director John Moore and writer Skip Woods was stupid beyond belief. It made a ton of money too no doubt because of the Die Hard brand, but it is one of the worst films I have ever seen.
This is my second favorite Die Hard film in the trilogy. I enjoy all 3 films and they're 3 of my favorite Fox films of all time. The fourth film is mediocre, while the fifth film is garbage.
The slit throat in the vault and the elevator scene is enough to warrant a R rating, not PG-13. In the UK they usually edit out things for both the theatrical releases and dvd releases, though this isn't the case with every movie, but specifically common with the Die Hard trilogy. I bought the uncut Die Hard box set way back in the UK, and it was still edited down from the U.S. version. The reason the end train carriage flipped near Zeus was because the rest of the train carriages were still moving forward. Kind of an odd edit though.
Great review. One fun fact that didn't make it in is that Jonathan Hensleigh, after he completed the script, was detained by the FBI because of the accuracy in how he describes the Federal Gold Reserve.
This is as good as the first one for sure. People just say the first is the best to sound original. This film is very good. The ending is kind of goofy but besides that it’s a top tier action and Die Hard film.
I thought that Jeremy Irons was great in this film until they revealed him. The Blofeld-like nature of an unseen villain pulling all the strings was great for the first half of the film, but once they freely showed him he basically turned into Rickman 2.0. He did an alright job of it, but there wasn't a whole lot new about him after that. They probably could have kept the reveal (not the ID in the truck, but showing him moving around) until later in the film, to give the final confrontation more of a boss-battle feel.
Another great retrospective and totally agree with you on the Die Hards. I think the first half of Die Hard 3 is the tightest with the best dialogue and - like you say - best supporting roles but although I love the film, I do find it tends to fall a little flat once the dump trucks leave Manhattan. I shall have to get Kaman's score too. Thanks.
Hi, I'm a great fan of your work. Just one thing ... volume of the sound at the beginning and the end is so different from the middle section it makes me jump out my headphones. every time. Please consider to level the sound volume across whole video.
Love the third one too and the ending is the only weak part where he dosent face off with Irons. The intelligence of the film is really good with the scenes having to solve a riddle; water jugs and Jackson was great and surely helped his career along.
It feels good to hear a critic with credibility voice the same opinion I've had since high school in preferring McTiernan's vision of Die Hard (films 1 & 3). Personally, I've never been a big fan of Renny Harkin movies to begin with. I do respect him for sure, but I think he does over-the-top, non-stop action type of movies the best and Die Hard 2 needed a director to put more thought in other areas. This franchise won me over by being so much more than just another action flick, a standard set by the first movie and further cemented in the third. It has always baffled me how they chose to move forward with parts 4 & 5 and feels disrespectful to the original vision...
What I like about the supporting cops in this, is even though this is the only time we see them, you kind of feel like you know them all. Like your watching an episode of a cop show
Thanks for the reply Oliver. Well yes, for some reason, Dialogue sounds very tinny in most of your videos, including this. While music and soundtrack sounds perfect. So it's not the final encoding of sound. Which audiotrack do you select for your montages, is it a mixdown from 5.1?
The cops and the final terrorist trying to shoot the hero at the end of Die Hard are in the original book - they weren't added in for cinematic licence.
This movie is a Classic Summer Block Buster. The Warmthy Film feeling of a 80’s/90’s Movie Masterclass Action and Tension. Awesome character chemistry. And iconic Villain, not too comical, not too Admirable. It is rare for a 3rd entry, to be as good as the 1st movie. Also good that you mention and recognize, the thing with the issue of the last 2 sequels looking too cold and saturated. I think the cause might be that they chose, a more sharper more reminiscent of modern digital looking aesthetic. They loose their warmness and grit and texture. That mostly came from the Film era. A lot of movie sequels in the 2000’s and 2010’s did and still do that.
![[#2024MAMA] ROSÉ (로제), Bruno Mars - APT. | Mnet 241122 방송](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/dgGqD28J6aQ/mqdefault.jpg)
The best thing about the film was Jackson's and Willis' chemistry. They were just *perfect* together.
"So what's up with this LA thing, you famous or something?"
"Yeah, for about 15 seconds."
"Don't tell me, Rodney King right?"
"Fuck you."
:D gets me everytime.
Facts, their banter throughout the movie makes it so entertaining lmao
Die Hard With a Vengange Had a better Riddler than that year's Batman Forever. And then he went on to play Alfred. Go figure.
@generic generic Seems pretty narcissistic.
Looks as though the forthcoming The Batman will have a good Riddler
Usually going through YT comments is a trawl through hell, but this....this is beautiful.
Riddler was amazing, wasted though in the movie. Utterly wasted.
This is as good as the First Die Hard in my honest opinion , Underrated Action Masterpiece.
hardly anybody thinks Die Hard 3 is underrated.
Josh McIver ......saw this at the cinema, it’s everything I wanted from a Die Hard sequel.
Josh McIver
I’ve seen a few people pan this movie. I don’t get it. It’s a great movie
Ronin Kraut It is a great movie. Some just think their opinions value most over others. Which I feel it’s absolutely inconsiderate.
I honestly thought this was a little better than the original, but both are still great movies
Even 27 years later, this movie is still one hell of a thrill ride. The chemistry between Willis and Jackson is perfect, the script doesn't have a single ounce of fat on it, the delivery by Willis, Jackson and especially Jeremy Irons as Simon Gruber is phenomenal.
Why can't they make these kind of movies today?
Because they don't have the dedication and zeal to put in the effort to create something of value.
People like the original Die Hard, but I'm kind of caught in between it and this film.
+Ragitsu I feel the opposite to that claim. Mostly because I think the second one had a cool villain. In part 3 Samuel kind of annoyed me. But I do see the value on what each Die Hard has.
Ragitsu I liked how part 2 came out. I do see the over the top nature but I liked it. Plus, John was still at odds against his enemies since it relates more to part 1. In the terms of his possible mortal peril.
I didn't like 3 because of how simple Samuel's character was written. Also, he didn't get to be involved much besides the first half of the movie. He became sort of irrelevant. I wanted to like Simon but he was pretty clever to plot a plan with McClaine. His strained relationship with his wife was pretty apparent in part 2. In part 3, it felt dragged out and I didn't feel invested into it anymore. If anything, part 3 could have involved one of John's children and could have been pretty interesting if a new dynamic was introduced to John's character. I know part 5 did so, but the writing in that one was terrible. It had the chance to make an interesting villain but missed the mark completely...
Both 2 and 3 Sequels were campy in their own ways.
I still love Die Hard.
Agreed. I love that this movie makes you feels more grounded and more effective than the first film, while still being exciting and badass.
I think it depends on which Die Hard you saw 1st
I completely agree. They are the best two in the series, by far.
You are good at arranging clips for trailers. You should do it professionally.
I was thinking the exact same thing!!
Unfortunately they wouldn't get hired. Studios only seem to want to hire editors that spoil the movie.
Agreed! I love how he starts and ends with a trailer.
"are you aiming for these people"
"NO!!... Maybe that mime!" lol
Thank you, I wasn't sure what he said!
😂
the first 3 movies made a pretty perfect trilogy. Then they went and pissed all over it
***** I hated it
I thought it was absolute dog shit.
And took a giant shit while doing it
The fourth movie was decent, it's just not Die Hard anymore. McClane always was that everyday hero type...
The fourth movie has been the worst.
I think I know way John McClane is such a superhero in 4&5 he's a reverse Samson he's gets stronger the less hair he has
Lmao
Ol’ Boy didn’t lie...JM was definitely a superhero in DH 4&5. Lol! He was basically the T-800 & Wolverine all in one body.
Die Hard 4 for me is a good fun movie, sure it's over the top and outrageous in parts, but it could of been so much worse. The cast all worked well together.
Let's never mention the 5th entry yeah
His sidekick also works and it's not just a buddy cop thing. Cause we've seen even from #2 that John's always behind the times. In #4 he's nowhere near the times, so he needs a link between him and the cyber terrorists. 4 gets a pass. You can see some cracks appearing, as you said, but it's good enough.
Die hard 4 was pretty well directed and shot beautifully. It got ridiculous at moments But I still prefer it over the 2nd. John McTiernans 1st and 3rd are incredible. The 5 th is pure dogshit.
I enjoy the Die hard 4. For me, I understand why his behavior in die hard 4. He is a flawed man but still respectable in doing his job, going above and beyond to stop the bad guy and also show his fatherly side when his daughter was kidnapped and show how he do anything to save his daughter. Anyway, I still think Die hard with the vengeance still the best of the bunch, just behind the original.
Die Hard 4 or Live Free or Die Hard is a good movie in its own right, that being a fun, guilty pleasure action movie with great action stupid as hell humour and a decent Bruce Willis performance. Whereas Die Hard 5 or A good day to Die Hard went to far with the direction that was used in the 4th movie and pretty destroyed the die hard name. With the movie suffering from a weak plot, far too much of the stupid dialogue and humour from the previous films only worse than ever and also the movie littered with looney toons esk action, which not at all impressive. Sadly this movie also abused the whole part of it feeling like a die hard movie and the partnership- bromance between John and his son in this movie doesn’t work, and there is no chemistry between the two actors. I think that Samuel L. Jackson had amazing chemistry with Bruce Willis in Die Hard with A Vengeance and Justin Long had at least something chemistry with Willis in Live Free or Die Hard but here in this film Jai Courtney and Bruce Willis have no chemistry, I also think they both provide wooden as hell performances. Willis himself just acts like a stubborn old man, rather than McClane, making his character less likeable and also less interesting. Now yes the same can be said about Live Free but at least that film Willis tried with his performance and actually recaptured some of the magic he had in the original trilogy but A good day to Die Hard they go to far, as does Willis.
I think, by far, my favourite line in that movie, probably just for delivery alone, is when Simon calls the police station after McClane and Zeus show up, and he asks to speak to Zeus, to tell him he interfered with his well-laid plan, to which Zeus responds with "Yeah? Well you can stick your well-laid plan up your well-laid ass."
Too bad John McTiernan couldn't do Die Hard 5, because he was in jail, probably for making Rollerball.
It was actually for lying to the FBI about wiretapping the Rollerball producers phone, as he suspected he was trying to sabotage the film
Whaaat? No!? (Mark Wahlberg face).
Mindd kidzag I havent even seen rollerbsll
The best line is actually after "Yippee Ki Yay..." when McClane asks Zeus if they should call the fire department to put out the chopper and Zeus says "Fuck 'em. Let 'em cook."
My big issue with this film is that I wish there was a little more focus on why McClaine and his wife separated again, because they seemed pretty happy at the end of Die Hard 2. It just says they had a big fight. Over what, might I ask?
But it only took place in a day. I thought that was understandable....especially when he's finally going to call her at the end
ANTMAN some people just don’t work out.
Disagree. Their romance was one of the weakest parts of the first films for me. The reluctant bromance is far better and more entertaining.
McClane’s true love was Hans Gruber
You never spent over 5-10 years with the same woman have you? 💁♂️😅
When John McClane still was John McClane. The new die hard movies are absolute carbage. Die Hard 4 was watchable but had really nothing to do with the originals. Edited my message 4 years later: DH3 is my favorite DH movie after DH1. I actually prefer Die Hard 4 to better than Die Hard 2. I have seen DH5 and to me that movie does not exist.
I still think this is the best sequel of the trilogy. The so called fourth and fifth films aren't Die Hard films, but shameless cash grabs using the name for profit. This film is miles better than the second. Not knocking part 2 just saying it's more of its own thing verses the second film, which apes the first film too closely.
The fourth movie wasn't too bad. I enjoyed it. I thought it was a decent sequel.
The villain was generic, his daughter was just a damsel in distress. Lot of the action sequences were bit over the top. But I liked the chemistry between McClane and Justin Long's character.
Bruce Willis gave a good performance. It seemed like John McClane in the wrong movie, kinda thing. It was entertaining to see the McClane we grew up with in the 90s in the modern day computer age, and how he is unfamiliar with it. It works better than Indiana Jones 4.
Die Hard 2 was great, hokey when compared to the original, but still great. This is better but it drags at the end.
Montgomery Jackson die hard 4 is actually a die hard film, especially when you look at die hard 5 which was a disgrace to the franchise, and now they’re making a new film that’s half prequel half sequel, it has len wiseman as the director again so it could be good
DH4 is much better than 2, IMO. And we won't even talk about that last PoS..
@ANTMAN THANK YOU!!!! I could not agree more!
how do you not have more viewers? Your videos are so well made. they rival big production tv shows. love your work and you highlight the films you cover so well. you immortalize them, and your writing, editing and narration is the best I've seen.
Die Hard With A Vengeance is one of the greatest action sequels and action films ever by far! Who would ever think that McTiernan could capture the same tone, feel and realistic level of suspense that made the first film so great? Also, Jeremy Irons was a fantastic choice for Hans Gruber! He made a standard hoaky action film cliche, in this case, the brother seeking revenge for his sibling's death believable! The only thing that might have worked for III is if Franka Potente would have played Hans daughter looking for revenge and got to Lucy McClane to get to John! Orrr maybe not! But I have always felt part three and even more so then that absolute atrocity A Good Day To Die Hard, at least one more great sequel could have been made to this franchise! Let's hope a great writer is working on Die Hard: Year One! If that's still happening!
Run Gruber Run
isn’t Hans Gruber from Die Hard? Irons character was named Peter/Simon
"I don't like you because your going to get me killed!" LOL classic Jackson
My kids got me the Die Hard movies on Blu Ray for fathers day last year. Love the first one. The third (this one) was underrated, I forgot how great it was
Fantastic review as always Ollie. Really in depth and thorough. I can always count on you to provide some info that i haven't heard despite watching this movie like 50 times!! Keep up the good work buddy, great job
Thanks a lot Stuart!.
“That’s a white man with white problems!”
I swear I laugh harder every time I hear that line!
The racial tension in the film provides a really good real world relatable backdrop for the 2 main characters. On 1 hand they don't want to have anything to do with 1 another, but they somehow manage to co-operate so much so that by the end of the film they like each other despite their obvious differences and backgrounds.
It says a lot without making any major political statements. Which is something that today's world can't comprehend without getting the Twittersphere in knots.
For me this is the best film in the series because of Samuel L Jackson and Bruce Willis. Both shining through, but not outshining each other.
@@gav240z it's amazing that Zeus manages to be both ultra woke and extremely based at the same time 😁
The reason the cops were portrayed to be bubbling idiots wasn't to drag the film's pace (buzzword) nor for cheap comic relief. It was to show how incompetence and callousness of government authorities. The FBI especially were portrayed to be blase and cruel, causing more harm than good.
Well I wasn't commenting on the cops effecting the pace of the movie. It was more an issue with how they're written. Its an obvious knock at authority the writers are throwing in but I felt they could've been better written. I thought it was great they weren't played for dumb asses in DH3. :)
Oliver Harper It's done to compliment Conservative subtext of the film, which was popular for action films during the Reagan presidency. It was bold move to take a stab at the FBI, whom are often portrayed to be virtuous in film and television.
Oliver Harper An alternative explanation could be that the writers were picking on stereotypes of various law enforcement agencies, perhaps based on their individual reputations. The LAPD was depicted as simultaneously overconfident and incompetent, the FBI was depicted as so "by the book" the criminals could exploit their predictability, and the Dulles International Airport Police were depicted as glorified security guards. Thematically, it makes sense for the NYPD to be shown in a favorable light because they had a good reputation in the 90's and they were John McClane's department. It would be nonsensical for the NYPD to look like idiots, yet produce the clever and stalwart hero of the franchise.
I agree because police and agencies in some form or another make things worse or become an annoyance for the hero e.g Agents Johnson turn the power off which is what the terrorists required to get the money.
I love your intros. They're perfectly edited and set the tone for the review Ollie. Like always, well done.
Jeremy Irons who plays Simon voiced Scar in The LIon King in 1994
A fun way to rewatch this is when you realize it's a retelling of how the Olympians defeated the Titan Cronos who is the Titan of time. McClain is Poseidon always in water. Zeus is obvious, also he is an electrician. Simon is Hades Lord of the underworld. McClain and Zeus are constantly sent on missions where they have to beat a time limit aka Cronos. Simon is also trying to beat the clock. Back to the future is the same retelling.
Great retrospective. I enjoy all your reviews. Keep up the good work.
This is my favorite sequel to a Christmas movie.
Whenever I hear the argument about the guy in the end coming 'back to life' in the end of the first film, I feel like I should say that the scenario for someone actually survives a hanging and perceiving to 'revive' themselves is completely plausible. Do a little reading, and you'll find it happened quite a bit back when they would hang criminals. Some would actually survive the hanging (appear deceased) and come 'back to life' even sometimes in their coffins being prepared for burial (sometimes a day later).
Long story short, that kind of thing is actually within the realm of possibility!
Brilliant review Oliver I love this film I've waited so long for this review cheers.
Glad you enjoyed it Leon!
Totally addicted to your Retrospective videos! been watching a ton of them since I found your channel! This movie is one of my fav's for sure! :D I guess you had to mention the 5th movie... which I don't even associate with the franchise myself, I mean it's like Bruce Willis was like "Oh another one? hmm okay easy money" and he just phoned it in really... got his paycheck ;D To me, i think he still had his John Mcclane character and personality in the 4th movie (despite the new bald look) And in the 5th movie, he just does insane stunts in public not caring about collateral damage... nothing... feels like a totally different person :\
The more hair Willis lost the more I lost interest in the sequels. But the more hair he lost the more money he made.
"Im not a monster. I just sometimes work for Monsters." How I feel as an IT guy in the enterprise space.
Oh man, I thought you were going to place the Michael Scott Die Hard 4 monologue from the office there for a minute, it's very similar to what you are saying (almost verbatim!).
Awesome retrospective as always.
Better than 2. First is still best.
The explosion in the opening scene looks so good, its one of the best explosions in movie history. Also Die Hard with a Vengeance is my favorite Die Hard Movie, its so tense and fast paced
+MovieNerd_EP If that scene was filmed today it would be full of all kinds of cgi shit and look very fake.
Yeah, i'd love Hollywood to move back to practical effects
This is the Best Die Hard ever what the hell are you talking about?
The first one was slightly better tho
I actually think McClane feels more realistic in Die Hard with A Vengeance.
I like die hard 2 the most.. blasphemy!
Nahhh the original is the best, as in most cases.
I have the first and third neck and neck. I really like the first one because Willis does it on his own. But I like the chemistry between him and Jackson in the third film as well.
This was the first Die Hard film I watched and got me into an action adventure series and I love the score and the action sequences
Great work on all your retrospects. I am about the same age as you, born in 83 and I love that you nail most of the films that I as well grew up on.. Keep up the great work
love the quote ''like watching your mate piss around on grand theft auto'' i am that mate that used to piss around on that game... pavement rampage...aka 5 star madness
In my mind this and the first DieHard are the only ones to exist. I felt the second simply just fell flat, it's astonishing to discover that Diehard 3 was a mashup of ideas, when it turned out to be a very slick and well done plot.
Another spot on review Oliver, im currently binge watching your reviews lol, always a lot of fun
My points:
-I saw the original Die Hard for the first time last October and loved it so much it put me in an action movie phase which still hasn't dissipated - in the months since I've seen The Rock, Kill Bill Vol. 2, Face/Off, Aliens, Enter the Dragon, Death Wish, Terminator 1-3, First Blood, The Hunt for Red October, The Crow, this film, The Matrix, Predator 2, Lethal Weapon, and Top Gun. Planning on watching Die Hard 2 today. The original Die Hard is my favorite non-sci-fi action movie (and 4th overall behind Aliens and Terminator 1/2).
-I saw With A Vengeance for the first time last January and thought it was a fun ride, if nothing too special. Like, the first Die Hard is 10/10 and this is 7/10 (as far as other McTiernan films, I'd say Predator and Red October are also 9/10). Would not work without Samuel L. Jackson (one of my favorite actors, big surprise there, IMO Kingsman and even Pulp Fiction would probably be substantially worse without him - also a huge indictment on George Lucas for wasting him completely in the Star Wars prequels). It was also cool to see Jeremy Irons again after The Lion King.
-There's no way an action movie like this would be made today, all the heinous terrorist acts in New York are just that much more wince-worthy in a post-9/11 world.
there is no Die Hard Trilogy movies, this is one whole movie, same with Indiana Jones.
My heart melts when I hear a Michael Kamen score. I've never heard anyone else produce a score that sounds at all like the sophisticated compositions he created. Even check out what he did on Cronenberg's The Dead Zone.
I watched Die Hard With A Vengeance again a few months ago, and it's an okay sequel. It does feel more akin to a Lethal Weapon movie than a Die Hard one, in my view, due to the brighter visuals, less intense style, and the buddy cop dynamic. However, my main issue in why it feels weaker to me is that the supporting characters are very forgettable. The first two movies had a lot of characters that were charismatic, distinct, and colorful. They stood out and made a strong impression. Die Hard With A Vengeance really only has McClaine, Zeus, and Simon to hinge itself on. Despite the NYPD being portrayed as very capable, I couldn't tell you one memorable thing they said or did. They're just cogs in the plot instead of being vibrant personalities meant to either entertain you or emotionally invest you in the story. And I do agree that the ending is a bit lacking. It could use a more personal pay-off. It is a good movie, but it's just never done much for me as a Die Hard movie. However, I've only seen the first three, and have no plans to see the other two.
Die Hard with A Vengeance is my favorite Die Hard movie!
One of my best experiences in cinema as a child.
1, 3, 4, 2. there is no 5
I would like this comment more than once if I could.
1, 3, 2. There is no 4 nor 5.
1, 3 , 2 , 4
@@prltqdf9 Let's be honest here, the only thing the fourth film gets wrong is the cartoonish invulnerability of John. It hits every other beat: a dynamic between John and the villain, a villain with a personality (both things most missing from the second film), the motive ultimately being money despite appearances (just about the only thing five gets right), mostly practical effects, John's increasingly deteriorating social life and mental state, a competent partner (imo, though it's debatable I admit).
But what makes four a worthy addition imo is its commentary on John himself. What every other film was missing was this sense of self reflection: who or what is John McClane? As much as John was supposed to be the "every man", after 3+ films (depending upon what you like to consider existing) it's not possible to portray him in such a way when he continuously finds himself in these situations. Probably my favorite scene in the film, and possibly a contender in the series, is the scene between hacker stereotype and John in the car where John laments his misfortune. His response is simply"well maybe that's what makes you that guy." It's the perfect way to sum up his character: the thankless hero.
The film doesn't attempt to give him the hollywood blockbuster happy ending either (unlike the fifth film). That isn't who John is, that isn't what he represents. Instead he does get a bittersweet moment with his daughter (for fucks sake he deserves something) but you aren't given definitive proof their relationship has changed in the long term (just like the endings of the previous films where all seems well... then the next movie happens), though you hope it has, that isn't the point. It gives you the sense through its final acts that he's accepted his role as the thankless hero no matter the consequences, that he is genuinely happy for the first time in a long time.
Underrated comment
David Thewlis as Simon would have been quite good, just because they could have pulled off a relation to Hans way better. Just look at Thewlis at 5:26 and then at a pic of Alan Rickman as Hans... totally believable.
one of the greatest action movies ever made
"Terrorist scavenger hunt across the landscape of NYC" is such a thrilling concept which is what makes this work so well. As well as amazingly well written and likable supporting characters, and the great performances of Bruce Willis and Samuel Jackson. I like it just as much as the original, it's just different in some ways
The Federal Reserve deserves to be stolen from. It was hard not to root for Simon in that aspect.
Interesting note, the finale with the helicopter was filmed at a truck stop in Jessup, Maryland off of Route 1, I got to go see the filming as a young man. Good memories.
One of the best action movies ever made. I love the first half, such a great game of cat and mouse with a raging tempo and fun dialogue.
My favourite in order Die Hard, Die Hard (with a vengence), Die Hard 2, Die Hard 4, DH 5 A Good Day to Die Die Hard.
To me with a vengence was the last one because the last two were just so bad.
I agree
I pretty much love Die Hard and Die Hard 2 equally. In fact, I still sometimes question myself into thinking Die Hard 2 is my favorite...
This is one of my favorite action movies ever.. the score, the way the film felt so huge, and the story telling.
I actually really like Live Free or Die Hard, I really don't understand why so many people have a problem with it.
Alex Rodriguez It's mostly due to the PG-13 rating. The R-rated version is better simply because there's swearing in it. Without the profanity, it just doesn't feel like a Die Hard movie.
In my country (UK) Die Hard 4.0 is rated 15
I thought it was good not great
Unrated is better
I can barely describe how much I love this film. It's as good as the original in my eyes! Excellent breakdown and review as always Olly!
this will always be the "new" Die Hard for me even after 25 years, makes me feel old
A great review Oliver. I have to say that this is probably the one I watch the most from the series. I love the original and I really like the second one but I guess I like the third mostly because like you said the supporting characters are really likeable but also because I find the movie really quotable. Die hard 4 and 5 just never really clicked with me, 5 especially as while I didn't think it was all that bad as an action movie it just didn't feel like a Die Hard movie.
The fifth film was indeed a disappointment. It just became a generic action film that could have been interpreted by any characters outside of the Die Hard universe. It also had too many silly moments like McClane falling quite lengthy distances and barely getting so much as a scratch on him.
I didn’t mind the fourth one, especially as there were some great comedy moments caused by his ever-present technophobia (it also helps that I saw the “Ultimate Action Edition” of the film, which has the original uncut version that the MPAA originally rejected because they wanted a PG-13 and not an R, so had more of an edge to its action as well as a certain catchphrase not having the strong language partially obscured by out-of-place gunfire!).
die hard 4 is horrible
2 is just average
1 is still the best by far
3 is 2nd best
I concur.
My two cents:
#2. 9/10
#1. 8.8/10
#3. 8.5/10 (9.5 without the ending)
#4. 7.5/10
#5. Fuck off/10
Fantastic video! TBH I think 3 is the best Die Hard for all the reasons you outlined in the video. I still love the first movie and the second as well, but the issues you've highlighted and how they aren't issues in 3 is what tips it over the edge for me.
I love this film so much. It's without a doubt the best Die Hard film. I loved the alternate ending too although in the end, the big fire fight chopper ending was best for this one.
This is my favorite of ALL Die Hard films. I think some people shit on this in comparison to the first just cuz it isn't the first one. This is the most brilliantly written and done of the entire series IMO.
As a New Yorker, I had a blast watching them run around the city
10/10 Pal
I really liked your comments
It was a genius idea to make the villain the brother of the villain in the first movie; you get to effectively recycle a character without all the critics accusing you ripping off a character from the original!
Great review full of interesting insights. I think i would have preferred Thewlis to Irons, i never saw the connection between him and his supposed brother. Also i feel it would make more sense to have a vengeful younger brother rather than an older one.
Yeah I think Thewlis would've been a good choice. He looks more like Rickman than Irons.
Interesting because Thewlis and Rickman were both in Harry Potter too!
yes!!!! i remember seeing this in the movie theater, i believe it was the first time i heard real surround sound in the cinema ... and the sound was fantastic, you could swear that real bullets were wizzzing by your ears... it was a really great time at the theatre, definatly one of my best cinema experiences
Excellent review. You justly praised the score, perhaps the composer's best, but forgot to mention the neat interweaving of a Civil War hymn "When Johnny Comes Marching Home". And home for John McClain is NYC, and where he is at, finally, after different locales the first two times.
[... Not sure what airport he was at in no. 2 -- and it may even have been conceivably Kennedy (old Ildewild), in NYC -- but it is sort of irrelevant, as all action takes place at, or adjacent to that, airport.... So therefore he could have been almost anywhere, U.S.A. And action commences in no. 3 "Vengeance" at his old police station in Manhattan. .... But No. 2 was at Reagan (Washington)? ... ]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
This does turn into a police buddy film to a degree, but why not...? And the police and minor characters here are all very believable, and the script is intelligent as it is witty. How about the scene prior to the finale, where McClain and the good Samaritan are tied to a huge bomb? They cannot think of anything better to do, than to swear at each other for 2 minutes, lol.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Three is my favorite of the first four, but I did like it in 2 where they introduced that Commando Squad at the end... That was an interesting turn, and the (black) actor playing lead there was great. It really beefed up the film, and provides a sort of platform and transitioning to the third movie, if only accidental.
McClain: "Maybe your not such an asshole after all...?"
Commando leader: "Oh, I'm an asshole alright; just your type of asshole..."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All the cursing and rude language is not to be taking literally, is obvious, as anyone who has survived public schools in the last 45 odd years. Merely it is to be scene as colorful exclamation points.
I loved the "When Johnny Comes Marching Home" song.
The alternate ending was significantly better in my opinion. There was an intimacy between him the the big bad that just wasn't there with the whole helicopter thing, and I like how it kept the whole Christmas theme running between the movies. The canonical ending just doesn't have that prescence the way Die Hard did with Hans, and making it just between McClane and his foe, cutting Holly and everybody else out of the equation, made it work so much better because things were already personal between them before McClane's name and career was ruined, and it gives both of them a reason to not just oppose but *hate* each other,and thats some much needed tension. He also didn't just stumble into victory like the theatrical ending either, and the little bit about him getting the patrons to leave the building still shows that he's still a good guy at heart.
It would've also forced the still inevitible Die Hard 4 to do something more than "cop in over his head" thing again so that hopefully that it would've been forced to innovate the way Die Hard 3 did. Die Hard 4 did do some things right, but did even more wrong, and honestly the fact that he was a cop is more or less irrelevant since he wasn't really beholden to any authorities like he was in the first three anyways, so there's not even a real point in keeping that link.
Larry Bryggman who played Inspector Cobb in Die Hard With A Vengeance, was on the CBS daytime soap, As The World Turns as Dr. John Dixon.
Like the first two Die Hards which take place the day before Christmas, this movie, Die Hard with a Vengeance took place in the hot and sticky summer in New York City and concludes on aCold night in Eastern Canada.
Will there ever be a Retrospective of the first and second Die Hards?
I like all the Die Hard films, except the fifth that was horrendous. The first is my favorite, the 2nd is more of the same, but still fun, and the third with easily the best supporting characters, and story, just lacks for me, mainly in the second half. The fourth Die Hard I really enjoyed, as a one last hurrah film like it should've been. Yes McClane is different, as is the visual style, but considering the time between it, and the third, I feel it mostly worked. I do agree that they made him too indestructible, but the previous films had over the top stuff too. The only difference is that it doesn't seem to affect him as much, which it should given his age. I also thought Timothy Olyphant was good villain, probably the third best of the series. The PG-13 rating was unfortunate, but the unrated version restores some of that language, and violence even if the blood splatter was done digitally. Die Hard 5 is where the series really crapped the bed, and that was rated R which shows rating has little to do with the quality of a film.
An R rating can help the quality of a film, and give the creators more room to create more gritty believable action. It was just not well implemented in A Crap Day to Eat Shit and Die. Still I agree with your sentiments.
no hassle No doubt, I've always felt that if a franchise started with an R, or PG 13 rating, it's subsequent films should follow suit, I was only mentioning that a rating doesn't make a film good, or bad. I personally feel like a lot of people bash the fourth Die Hard, because of it's PG 13 rating, and it's a much better film than the shitty fifth movie. I hated the PG 13 rating of Die Hard 4, but I still enjoyed it, something I can't say when it comes to the fifth pile of shit.
deraj nitram
I know what you're saying. Yeah, the fifth Die Hard was very insulting to the fans of the the series. I mean Bruce Willis does not give a flying fuck about John McClane anymore. His performance was utterly lazy and his involvement with those hacks Director John Moore and writer Skip Woods was stupid beyond belief. It made a ton of money too no doubt because of the Die Hard brand, but it is one of the worst films I have ever seen.
no hassle Couldn't agree more, bad directing, along with bad writing will result in a bad film every time.
This is my second favorite Die Hard film in the trilogy. I enjoy all 3 films and they're 3 of my favorite Fox films of all time. The fourth film is mediocre, while the fifth film is garbage.
Saw pt 3 in theaters, and legit freaked out when the water is coming for McClaine. Loved it.
The slit throat in the vault and the elevator scene is enough to warrant a R rating, not PG-13. In the UK they usually edit out things for both the theatrical releases and dvd releases, though this isn't the case with every movie, but specifically common with the Die Hard trilogy. I bought the uncut Die Hard box set way back in the UK, and it was still edited down from the U.S. version.
The reason the end train carriage flipped near Zeus was because the rest of the train carriages were still moving forward. Kind of an odd edit though.
Great review. One fun fact that didn't make it in is that Jonathan Hensleigh, after he completed the script, was detained by the FBI because of the accuracy in how he describes the Federal Gold Reserve.
Great review. I love the Die Hard Trilogy. I not a fan of 4 and 5 as they feel like the A Team TV show with their action sequences.
This is as good as the first one for sure. People just say the first is the best to sound original. This film is very good. The ending is kind of goofy but besides that it’s a top tier action and Die Hard film.
Very nice... Also your Robocop review inspired me on one of my more recent videos.
oh nice, how did I inspire you?.
I thought that Jeremy Irons was great in this film until they revealed him. The Blofeld-like nature of an unseen villain pulling all the strings was great for the first half of the film, but once they freely showed him he basically turned into Rickman 2.0. He did an alright job of it, but there wasn't a whole lot new about him after that. They probably could have kept the reveal (not the ID in the truck, but showing him moving around) until later in the film, to give the final confrontation more of a boss-battle feel.
This is one of the most underrated action movies of all time!
Another great retrospective and totally agree with you on the Die Hards. I think the first half of Die Hard 3 is the tightest with the best dialogue and - like you say - best supporting roles but although I love the film, I do find it tends to fall a little flat once the dump trucks leave Manhattan. I shall have to get Kaman's score too. Thanks.
For me this sequel is by far the best Die Hard movie after the first one. it captures the feel of Die Hard perfectly
John McT magic
Hi,
I'm a great fan of your work. Just one thing ... volume of the sound at the beginning and the end is so different from the middle section it makes me jump out my headphones. every time. Please consider to level the sound volume across whole video.
Unfortunately I can't adjust the audio levels once its uploaded.
In that case I'll keep jumping :D Once more Thank You for great film recommendations.
Love the third one too and the ending is the only weak part where he dosent face off with Irons. The intelligence of the film is really good with the scenes having to solve a riddle; water jugs and Jackson was great and surely helped his career along.
This channel brings so much to rhe party!
It feels good to hear a critic with credibility voice the same opinion I've had since high school in preferring McTiernan's vision of Die Hard (films 1 & 3). Personally, I've never been a big fan of Renny Harkin movies to begin with. I do respect him for sure, but I think he does over-the-top, non-stop action type of movies the best and Die Hard 2 needed a director to put more thought in other areas. This franchise won me over by being so much more than just another action flick, a standard set by the first movie and further cemented in the third. It has always baffled me how they chose to move forward with parts 4 & 5 and feels disrespectful to the original vision...
What I like about the supporting cops in this, is even though this is the only time we see them, you kind of feel like you know them all. Like your watching an episode of a cop show
Oliver Harper How come your montages always feature something that sounds like really low bitrate sound quality?
you think the sound quality is bad?.Never ever had a complaint. What part of the montage did you have an issue with?
Thanks for the reply Oliver. Well yes, for some reason, Dialogue sounds very tinny in most of your videos, including this. While music and soundtrack sounds perfect. So it's not the final encoding of sound. Which audiotrack do you select for your montages, is it a mixdown from 5.1?
I really need an Under Siege retrospective on here
Interesting history. I personally would have loved to see this as a Lethal Weapon chapter, but what we got was a great film.
In this order: Die Hard 1, 3, 4 (unrated version), 2 then 5 is dead last. 1 and 3 are the best, you can't change my mind.
The cops and the final terrorist trying to shoot the hero at the end of Die Hard are in the original book - they weren't added in for cinematic licence.
Jeremy Irons is probably my favorite movie villain in this movie.
This movie is a Classic Summer Block Buster.
The Warmthy Film feeling of a 80’s/90’s Movie
Masterclass Action and Tension.
Awesome character chemistry.
And iconic Villain, not too comical, not too Admirable.
It is rare for a 3rd entry, to be as good as the 1st movie.
Also good that you mention and recognize, the thing with the issue of the last 2 sequels looking too cold and saturated.
I think the cause might be that they chose, a more sharper more reminiscent of modern digital looking aesthetic. They loose their warmness and grit and texture. That mostly came from the Film era. A lot of movie sequels in the 2000’s and 2010’s did and still do that.
Hurry up with the Die Hard review Olli!!