The Die Hard Series

Anyone remember the good old days when John McClane didn't require a sidekick whom he'd fathered? The DIE HARD series (which I used to love as much as I love Bond) seems to be diving head-first into the sort of shittiness that George Lucas couldn't even dream of. And what are the odds that this one will be in 3D?

It's a kind of ageism. None of the studio execs have faith a franchise fronted by an old codger (except if you're Spielberg & Lucas).

They should just get Powell back. Urkel doesn't torment him these days.

Sharky wrote:

It's a kind of ageism. None of the studio execs have faith a franchise fronted by an old codger (except if you're Spielberg & Lucas).

But even Indy had to have Shia along for the ride, while only the first of the SW prequels was fronted by a middle-aged bloke (Neeson).

At least Stallone was able to do ROCKY VI and RAMBO IV without a younger sidekick.

In DIE HARD 5 we find out that McClane's kids were cloned from William Atherton's character, and he gets a robotic hand.

Gotta say, I wasn't too excited to see another Die Hard movie, but if the film is half as good as this trailer, we may have a winner!

Never hurts to throw in a James Bond reference. Last line of trailer: "The 007 of Plainfield, New Jersey!"

Seemed like a good idea, until I found out that DH5 is helmed by the guy who directed Max Payne and written by the writer of X-Men Origins: Wolverine.

I expect it to be thoroughly unenjoyable.

This is just getting silly.

Wikipedia wrote:

By contrast, critic Armond White has described Moore as "a Peckinpahesque, neo-Eisenstein stylist whose grade-B material (Behind Enemy Lines, Flight of the Phoenix, The Omen) has kept him from receiving the acclaim he deserves". In his review of Max Payne, White had stated that Moore "explores genuine, contemporary anxiety [and that] his images are richer than his plots".

I'm looking forward to this.

Largo's Shark wrote:

I'm looking forward to this.

It'll be interesting to see what situations and dialogue that were originally in Diehard 4.0 that they are now using for A Good Day To Die Hard. Originally, I believe, the script was going to have John and his son team up together, but for some reason they changed it to a female character. She was good, but I think the action may be more believable with John McClane Jr. in the co-starring role. Do I smell a spin-off in the works? Maybe passing on the franchise to Jr. like THE DARK KNIGHT RISES did with John Drake?

The colour palette is ugly and sterile, but some nice camera angles.

Better looking than the last one, though.

Haven't seen the last one. Should probably watch that before I watch this one.

Hmmm.... The first half of this trailer is excellent, absolutely excellent - it seems somehow to capture the spirit and feel of the original (which is, incidentally, one of the best films ever made), while obviously having a completely different storyline and setting.

After about the halfway mark, though, it just starts to look like THE EXPENDABLES 3 - cautiously-budgeted (remember when DIE HARD 2 was the most expensive film of all time?) thrills n' spills ladled with overly-generous helpings of cheesiness and campiness. But who knows? Such a concoction may well be entertaining.

Willis' quip has me reeling a bit, but then again McClane does mention Rambo and Schwarzenegger in the original film, so it's not the first time that our hero has made a fourth-wall-breaking reference to a rival action franchise. Still, I'm sure we'd all be extremely weirded out if, at some point in SKYFALL, Bond were to say: "I suppose I'm the British Jason Bourne", or: "M sees me as a bit of a Martin Riggs type."

Anyhoo, this does look fairly promising.

What's with the aspect ratio, BTW? Is this the first DIE HARD film not in 2.35:1? I hope so - it'd make a refreshing change.

There better be a decent villain.

Quote :

the original (which is, incidentally, one of the best films ever made)

It's not even one of the best films of 1988.

Loomis wrote:

What's with the aspect ratio, BTW? Is this the first DIE HARD film not in 2.35:1? I hope so - it'd make a refreshing change.

According to IMDB, DH5 was shot in Super35 with an intended ratio of 2.35:1. That's hardly definite, as not only does IMDB get it's info wrong sometimes, but trailers aren't indicative of aspect ratio either. WRATH OF THE TITANS comes to mind, with all the trailers show in 2.35, but the movie shown in 1.85.

That trailer doesn't do a lot or me. I mean, sure, it looks better than LIVE FREE OR DIE HARD, but that's not a great accomplishment.

I wish they'd go back to basics with this franchise.

This is made for TV, right? But with stock footage of cars blowing up from every other movie made in the past ten years?

Largo's Shark wrote:

There better be a decent villain.

DIE HARD works best when it sticks to a formula: an omnipotent villain in a controlled environment where the only means of escape is confrontation. But most importantly, the scale has to be limited to something localised. That's what made the original film so great - Hans Gruber controlled the Nakatomi Plaza and only the Nakatomi Plaza. LIVE FREE OR DIE HARD got it wrong because they had what's-his-name (I can't even remember his name; I can only recall it being something I'd find in fan fiction) holding the Eastern Seaboard hostage, and he never came into direct contact with McClane until the end of the film because he did everything remotely.

I think A GOOD DAY TO DIE HARD would work best if it went something like this:

John McClane goes to Russia when his son gets in trouble with the local authorities. While bailing his son out of prison, McClane Sr. and Jr. get caught up in an armed takeover of the prison. The terrorist leader then demands the release of one or more members of his unit ... who are not in the prison at all. McClane works out that the Russians have a network of informants inside the prison, who helped put away the original terrorists, and that the unit has shown up to kill them. The only problem is that neither McClane, the terrorists or the hostages themselves actually know who the hostages are.

A prison sounds depressing. Think about all the other options.

A hospital.

A mall/ shopping centre.

A theme park.

A huge gym/ leisure centre.

A film studio (my personal favourite).

Largo's Shark wrote:

A prison sounds depressing.

It depends on what themes the film is going for.

Also, I said prison because what little is known about the story is that McClane's son gets arrested in Russia, which is why McClane goes there in the first place. Having McClane bail his son out of prison and then go to a theme park sounds a little contrived.

A theme park could work, though. It just depends on the context. Although I would suggest a casino complex before a theme park, mostly because it offers up an avenue for the story to take: a casino heist by armed takeover.

Prisoner Monkeys wrote:

Largo's Shark wrote:

A prison sounds depressing.

It depends on what themes the film is going for.

Also, I said prison because what little is known about the story is that McClane's son gets arrested in Russia, which is why McClane goes there in the first place. Having McClane bail his son out of prison and then go to a theme park sounds a little contrived.

A theme park could work, though. It just depends on the context. Although I would suggest a casino complex before a theme park, mostly because it offers up an avenue for the story to take: a casino heist by armed takeover.

Could easily turn into OCEANS 11 with assault rifles. Would rather see the film studio idea, though no idea how it would work.