If a better threequel to the 2nd is something normally not possible in film franchize law where does that leave Die Hard 4.0???

 

Do you think enough time has gone since the last one that it will be seen more as a re-boot of the franchize like the Batman and Bond properties or do you think that this film will be a shameless continuation and cash in???

 

Do you think it will be any good?

I've seen the trailer.... Definitely looks like being the latter option Alex....

Just watched the movie and I have to say it was fukkin brilliant ^_^

 

Not quite as good as Die Hard but definitely better than Die Hard 2 and Die Hard 3, non stop action

 

Would highly recommend it

I can't find the Die Hard thread but it is true the latest Die Hard movie has 1 swear word in it?!! Is it Yippy-ka-yay-mother-f*****!!!! I don't really like swearing but it's funny when John Mclane swears.

 

Anyway this movie is in cinema's from today! I'm going to watch it tomorrow maybe in the Trafford Center!! :dance: can't wait!

Edited July 4, 200718 yr by La La Land

It's been getting good reviews, most saying that it's up there with the first film. Bruce himself even said he does'nt like 2 & 3, so I am looking forward to seeing it even though I really liked the 2nd and though the 3rd was'nt bad :lol:

It's been getting good reviews, most saying that it's up there with the first film. Bruce himself even said he does'nt like 2 & 3, so I am looking forward to seeing it even though I really liked the 2nd and though the 3rd was'nt bad :lol:

The 3rd one was a great movie! I loved it!

Going watching it tomorrow.

 

I expect BIG THINGS.

but does he wear a vest?? :kink:

He wears a dirty white tshirt this time but at the start of the movie he is in a black leather jacket and he looks hot. :wub:

 

I enjoyed the movie but some of the action seems impossible and how he stays alive. It does have an updated plot but John Mclane must have improved on his swearing. He says his quote but you can hardly hear it!!!! It's not that bloody as well even though the film is a 15. I'm sure the others are an 18. They may have well made stuck the violence and swearing and made it an 18. There hasn't been a good action movie out in a while thats an 18! Overall I give it 4/5. Worth a look.

 

PS I don't like swearing but I think it's funny when John Mclanc swears.

Decent film. Best one since the original imo.

 

Although I do agree that some of the action seems far too unrealistic. The scene where they're hanging from the SUV being the pick of the bunch.

I can't find the Die Hard thread

 

it want that far behind this one. now merged

I REALLY enjoyed this. I mean some of the action scenes were very unrealistic but still. :lol: Was very enjoyable.

He wears a dirty white tshirt this time but at the start of the movie he is in a black leather jacket and he looks hot. :wub:

 

I enjoyed the movie but some of the action seems impossible and how he stays alive. It does have an updated plot but John Mclane must have improved on his swearing. He says his quote but you can hardly hear it!!!! It's not that bloody as well even though the film is a 15. I'm sure the others are an 18. They may have well made stuck the violence and swearing and made it an 18. There hasn't been a good action movie out in a while thats an 18! Overall I give it 4/5. Worth a look.

 

PS I don't like swearing but I think it's funny when John Mclanc swears.

 

First "Die Hard" was an 18, second one was a 15 when it was on at cinemas, but curiously was "upgraded" to 18 status when out on widescreen video and DVD.... <_< "Die Hard With A Vengeance" was a 15 both at cinema and video, because some of the more violent scenes were very obviously edited to give it a lower certification..

 

And I dont see what the issue is with the swearing to be honest... "Boyz N The Hood" was a 15 cert and every second word is "muthafukker" this or "muthafukker" that.... -_-

 

It sound good I'll go watch it.

Really looking forward to seeing this. I have'nt heard a single bad review for it yet, it had recieved the best reviews out of any of this summers big prequels so far by miles, with most saying how raw it is with Bruce doing most stunts himself, without all the CGI etc. ^_^

It was ok, lots of action but maybe a little too long. Twenty minutes shorter would have been enough. I don't think there were any f-words or anything like that this time since they made a PG-13 film (and to get that rating in the US there certainly cannot be any f***s in it - a kiddie film with one f-word would get R-rating just because of that one word, that is how strict it is in the US). I think they kinda sold-out the old fans to get younger people to pay the ticket with the rating, too bad, maybe the makers didn't have enough faith that the consept would sell enough as a R-rated after 12 years from the last part.

It was ok, lots of action but maybe a little too long. Twenty minutes shorter would have been enough. I don't think there were any f-words or anything like that this time since they made a PG-13 film (and to get that rating in the US there certainly cannot be any f***s in it - a kiddie film with one f-word would get R-rating just because of that one word, that is how strict it is in the US). I think they kinda sold-out the old fans to get younger people to pay the ticket with the rating, too bad, maybe the makers didn't have enough faith that the consept would sell enough as a R-rated after 12 years from the last part.

 

Yep, that's correct... PG-13 in US... Kinda wondered why it all seemed a little watered down in comparison to the other films... I have to say, I dont like the idea of it, the "Die Hard" films aren't really meant for 12/13 year old kiddies, frankly I'm surprised it even got a 15 cert here, I've seen more violent 12 cert films tbh..... It was a good enough plot and everything, but I dunno, it's just not the full-on "Die Hard" experiences of the other films.... Definitely not in the same league as the first and third films, I would say that plot-wise it was better than the second one though.... I think it proves that really only John McTiernan can do "Die Hard" justice....

 

Yep, that's correct... PG-13 in US... Kinda wondered why it all seemed a little watered down in comparison to the other films... I have to say, I dont like the idea of it, the "Die Hard" films aren't really meant for 12/13 year old kiddies, frankly I'm surprised it even got a 15 cert here, I've seen more violent 12 cert films tbh..... It was a good enough plot and everything, but I dunno, it's just not the full-on "Die Hard" experiences of the other films.... Definitely not in the same league as the first and third films, I would say that plot-wise it was better than the second one though.... I think it proves that really only John McTiernan can do "Die Hard" justice....

 

I dissagree actually. I think the 2nd Die Hard was far better than the 3rd. Take Sam Jackson out of the 3rd, and it would'nt be anywhere near as good. I found the bad guys in it very poor, parts of it bored me. I thought the second one was brilliant and extremly entertaining from start to finish. I watched all three over the past week for the first time in years, and saw the 4th last night and thought it was brilliant.

 

Definatly one of the best action films I've seen in quite some time. There were so many excellent action scenes, and yes parts of very far fetched, but lets' face it, all four films are far-fetched, if they were'nt he would;ve died within the first 10 minutes in the first one. The plot of the new one was definalty the finest since the original, I loved the way it was all about the internet, it gave it a very modern feel, and like all the other films,. there were loads of funny moments. And he did swear quite a few times, which I was suprised at since I had heard he only did it once. But overall, I would definatly agree with many of the critics and Bruce himself that it is the most enjoyable and impressive since the original ^_^

 

I wonder if there will be a fifth now. I doubt they had expected that within only a few weeks it would become the second most successful Die Hard ever. :lol:

Definatly one of the best action films I've seen in quite some time. There were so many excellent action scenes, and yes parts of very far fetched, but lets' face it, all four films are far-fetched, if they were'nt he would;ve died within the first 10 minutes in the first one. The plot of the new one was definalty the finest since the original, I loved the way it was all about the internet, it gave it a very modern feel, and like all the other films,. there were loads of funny moments. And he did swear quite a few times, which I was suprised at since I had heard he only did it once. But overall, I would definatly agree with many of the critics and Bruce himself that it is the most enjoyable and impressive since the original ^_^

 

i thought it was alright, didnt move me as something special, on the same level with something like xXx rather than Casino Royale, and some v dodgy CGI in the end battle between truck and copter (wait a min this sounds like it could be transformers :lol: :lol: )

 

and even tho its good not to have a british bad dude, Timothy Olyphant's casting was like they tried to get someone like Kevin Bacon but couldnt, just need a bit more something (maybe a bit more mad psycho pervyness???)

 

and talking of Kevin's what was the point of a balding Kevin Smith's Warlock cameo in these new times of Seth Rogen. It probs would have been quite a cool cameo for geeks and fanboys if this film was made in say 1999 or 2001, but its 2007 post Gigli and Catch and Release. well i suppose his stock is now cheap :lol:

 

btw here's clerk anime ending from the animated series with the tranfomers joke in it!!!

 

i thought it was alright, didnt move me as something special, on the same level with something like xXx rather than Casino Royale, and some v dodgy CGI in the end battle between truck and copter (wait a min this sounds like it could be transformers :lol: :lol: )

 

and even tho its good not to have a british bad dude, Timothy Olyphant's casting was like they tried to get someone like Kevin Bacon but couldnt, just need a bit more something (maybe a bit more mad psycho pervyness???)

 

and talking of Kevin's what was the point of a balding Kevin Smith's Warlock cameo in these new times of Seth Rogen. It probs would have been quite a cool cameo for geeks and fanboys if this film was made in say 1999 or 2001, but its 2007 post Gigli and Catch and Release. well i suppose his stock is now cheap :lol:

 

btw here's clerk anime ending from the animated series with the tranfomers joke in it!!!

 

 

TBH, I thought Olyphant made a pretty lame "master villain"... He never really convinced me for a moment, Alan Rickman on the other hand..... , even Jeremy Irons in the third film (despite the rather hammy acting) was a better baddie.... Someone like Kevin Bacon sure would've been a much better choice... You're right about Kevin Smith as well, he's kinda yesterday's news now....

 

All in all, I dont rate the rather bloated "Die Hard 4" anywhere near as high as "MI3" which had a real sense of urgency about it, a pretty fantastic "Alias"-style plot structure (obviously, given the face that "Alias" creator JJ Abrams was directing....), and in Philip Seymour Hoffman, a genuinely villainous, nasty bad-guy.....