Official die hard 5 Thread

Just watched it (early moring show = no chavs!) and Oh Dear :(

In the 1st film he started as the plucky cop in a situation that was relatively plausible and has slowly ended up saving the world by 3 & 4 so it was no surprise where 5 was going with it's "big twist". Bruce is sadly too old for the physical scenes leaving it to a Michael Bay-style attack of never-ending massive explosions, gunfire and rapid editing over a decent storyline (hmmm run out of script, lets explode things Hurr Durr).

It's not all negative though. If you like ridiculous action then you'll love it and I'm sure if hadn't been a Die Hard film it would have rated better but sadly, for me, it's the poorest but most visually exciting member of the Die Hard franchise :(
 
Last edited:
ianh said:
Just watched it (early moring show = no chavs!) and Oh Dear :(

In the 1st film he started as the plucky cop in a situation that was relatively plausible and has slowly ended up saving the world by 3 & 4 so it was no surprise where 5 was going with it's "big twist". Bruce is sadly too old for the physical scenes leaving it to a Michael Bay-style attack of never-ending massive explosions, gunfire and rapid editing over a decent storyline (hmmm run out of script, lets explode things Hurr Durr).

It's not all negative though. If you like ridiculous action then you'll love it and I'm sure if hadn't been a Die Hard film it would have rated better but sadly, for me, it's the poorest but most visually exciting member of the Die Hard franchise :(
Click to expand...

Thats the problem though, the fact that they have forgotten that all it takes is a missing pair of shoes and some glass to make it work. It's the story and the idea that was Die Hard, not the effects. Bruce didn't need to be physical, I loved 3, and all that needed in the sense of car chases was a cab hurtling the wrong way round NY.
Who ever wrote it, is an idiot. I mean who blindly dives out of a 20th story window and hopes for the best.
 
Last edited:
One of the worst films I have seen in a very, very long time. And I seen The Last Stand a couple of weeks ago, which was certainly more enjoyable than this.
 
they seemed to have missed the point that people dont go to see a die hard film for in's'ane action pieces.

they go bc of a well thought through story of against all odds, that's tied together with some simple but impressive action pieces and puzzle sections.

all this cgi ******** is completely against the grain of what makes these films good, how could they not see that?

No wonder Bruce couldnt be bothered in recent interviews, he even sounds like he hates it.
 
It also has one of the most boring car chases I've ever seen. I had to laugh at a lot of the action scenes too, because they're just beyond the usual realms of action film improbability.
 
assalino said:
Someone needs to stop Bruce Willis
Click to expand...

My wife heard him on the radio or something talking about the film and he wasn't being kind to it. He was being pretty derisory, and the best he could say about it was that it's a "good bad film".

I don't think Bruce Willis is driving this franchise, but I think he's happy enough to take a paycheque to be a part of it. So someone else needs to stop the train - he's not to blame.
 
So so poor - Im sure at every decision they asked 'Is this Die Hard?' and ensured that they went with the opposite of normal logic. Its been a long long while since Ive seen a film, where theres not a single redeemable factor to cling on to.

Told my mate I didnt want to watch it, did anyway, ultimately it was gonna be 'was it that bad' if I didnt watch it - hopefully I can miss the next!

ps3ud0 :cool:
 
Well I liked it.

It was entertainment. It was loud, brash and had lots of explosions

Yes it wasn't realistic, but where in the previous Die Hard's were there any realistic scenes?? Bruce jumping off the top of the sky scraper in DH1 using a fire hose as a rope?

I liked the little twist at the end and I enjoyed it

Then again I enjoyed The Expendables (1&2) and Machete cause they are daft
 
It was half decent as far as generic storylines go, but for a Die Hard film it was utterly disappointing. There was absolutely no bad guy characterisation so I couldn't care less about them. The story took ages to get going, and when it did the film ended. The whole lot just seemed soul-less and didn't have any of the Die Hard "essence" about it.

I liked the fourth a lot more - it wasn't perfect but got closer to the winning formula than this.

Either get the original team back writing, shooting, producing and directing or don't bother, because it's clear that these guys don't really understand the franchise.

I'm erring around a 5-6/10, but only because the set pieces were quite well done.
 
I'm still annoyed at this, they didn't even have any extra characters that help fill out the movie, like the reporter bloke in 1&2 or the bald bomb expert in 3
 
Phoenix211 said:
tried to but the screen at the stevenage cineworld was out of focus. management couldn't even see the problem despite it looking like a DVD! walked out but will try again on Saturday in a different screen. that place makes my blood boil sometimes.
Click to expand...

This is the problem with Digital cinema's. You used to have a skilled projectionist in the booth who would spot stuff like that pretty rapidly - they'd also make sure the framing is correct and the correct lens is fitted.

Stevenage is pretty poor overall though. Once watched a film there that had an entire reel of film missing from the middle of it. The film made no sense and finished 15 minutes early and they couldn't see a problem with that. *sigh*

To go back to DH5 - I'll wait for Bluray and watch the uncut version.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom