A Not-So-Good Day To Die Hard

The reviews are coming in, and… I called it. I’m sorry, the team behind this was going to ruin it from the start. Hoping to get to see it soon, but I don’t have high hopes.

And to rub salt in the wound, rated 12A.

Guess I’ll find out tonight…


Just got back from seeing it. My verdict; watchable but not great. While I won’t be rushing out to see it again, it didn’t make me angry in the way Blade Trinity or Taken 2 did. I think it’s probably around the level of Die Hard 2.

Things I liked:
*]The action scenes are pretty good (if quite silly) and have a good bit of impact to them
*]Visually the film looks reasonably good (it had a similar colour palette to Live Free or Die Hard which I wasn’t a huge fan of but that seems quite popular these days and it was good apart from that)
*]Bruce Willis is always enjoyable as John McClaine

Things I didn’t like:
*]The bits between the action just don’t quite work as well as they should. It’s like the director (John Moore) has seen good films and is trying to make his film in the same way but just can’t quite get it to all fit together. I think it’s a problem with a lot of his films.
*]There are a couple of really suspect bits of geography (both international and local). That sort of stuff doesn’t normally bother me but even I noticed it here.
*]It could have done with being a bit longer to flesh out the characters.
*]The bad guys are probably the weakest in the franchise.
*]Using hand held cameras for normal dialogue (although not so much in the action) seemed really weird.

I hope it does well enough to get another entry into the franchise but next time I really hope they hire a decent director…

Hey, if Len Wiseman could make a decent Die Hard movie, I’d’ve thought anyone could.