A Good Day To Die Hard

Comments

• roganjosh

  Agreed. A very disappointing addition to this franchise. Should have left it as a trilogy. Vengeance was a great way to end it.

  Posted 16:43 | Thu 14th Feb 2013

• Monty

  That's such a pity, that was one I was looking forward too. Guess you guys saved me a few quid. Will wait till it's on the telly now, Ta :)

  Posted 19:16 | Thu 14th Feb 2013

• Tyler Durden

  Ah, feck!

  Posted 20:54 | Fri 15th Feb 2013

• Thomas

  1st time ever walking out of the cinema during a film. After 40minutes I still didn't know what was going on. It's as if they shot a terrible film and then photoshopped Bruce Willis into the scenes..absolutely horrendous!! Die Hard 1 & 3 are the best but I wudnt even class this as a Die Hard film let alone a good action film,wouldn't even download it :-)

  Posted 07:08 | Sat 16th Feb 2013

• FilmBuff76

  I just found out today that A Good Day To Die Hard has been cut to get a lower cert here and in the UK. It's no surprise to find that this film comes from the same studio as Taken 2, which was also cut. 20th Century Fox seem hellbent on cutting their films to ribbons. These films aren't made for children in the first place, so why pander to them? It may be a commercial reason - the studio knows these films are complete turkeys, so they cut them to get more people into the cinema. The film suffers as a result. Dumb.

  Posted 14:07 | Sat 16th Feb 2013

• FilmBuff76

  Spot-on review. As a die-hard Die Hard fan, I'm dismayed at the change in tone for this series. It's not about John McClane anymore. It's about his children and hence a family-friendly rating. McClane can't even say his famous catchphrase anymore. Willis is apparently up for a sixth film, but A Good Day To Die Hard is a franchise-killer. No more please.

  Posted 08:23 | Fri 15th Feb 2013

• DoubleLetter

  Worse than dire. Should never have seen the light of day.

  Posted 12:09 | Sun 24th Feb 2013

• mikecoughlan

  This is quite a lavish production really. I am sure there must be some CGI in there, but I could not spot the difference myself. The film itself opens with Bruce heading to Russia to reconcile with his son and very quickly getting involved in a car chase that must set a record for the number of cars smashed in any ten minute period. When he does catch up with his son he has'nt a clue what is going on and is a bit like Krusty the Clown stuck in the middle of a James Bond movie. After that the movie picks up a lot, as the father and son come together to kill the bad guys, and would you believe it, save the world as well. I think they did a good job on this film, as the Die Hard franchise which started off as a once off, and which, I image, was easy enough to keep going for the next two, needed to be much more inventive after that to keep the story and character of John McClane. It is a bit over the top the whole thing, as he careers through one action scene after another without breaking any bones, but it is all worth while just to see that famous McClane wince, and for him to say " I am getting too old for this". You are not really Bruce, I will pay to see you do it all again next time.

  Posted 13:45 | Sun 24th Feb 2013

• hungover

  My only question about this review is where did the one star come from. Not only is this the worst Die Hard it's one of the worst movies I've ever seen. It's so completely brain dead I don't really have the words to express how awful it is. Just think of the ridiculously embarrassing over the top figher jet scene from Die Hard 4; well this addition to the franchise is like that scene drawn out into an entire movie. You know a franchise is ruined when you kind of want the leading character to die a little bit. Even the stupid running joke about him being on vacation doesn't make any sense unless McClanes idea of a vacation is visiting his son in prision. Oh how the mighty have fallen and I'd just like to say (for what it's worth) that Die Hard, in my opion, is one of the if not the, greatest action movies ever made. 2 was, and still is very enjoyable as it simply stuck to the template that made the first one so great and just reintroduced us to characters we wanted to see again. The third one, while not without its good points, I believe is overrated and gets way too much praise and is where the series started to buckle. The forth one saw it flat line and now this one has declared it legally dead. Can you believe there's talk of a sixth.....

  Posted 14:25 | Sat 23rd Feb 2013

• Jamie McGowan

  A truly dreadful film tbh. no back story, two dimensional generic ruissian politicians, a totally unbelievable (and not in a good way) car chase, and, to top it all off, a magic water spray that removes 30 years worth of radiation in one easy squirt. I would struggle to give this no stars and this from a confirmed die hard fan. total turkey

  Posted 12:44 | Mon 25th Feb 2013

• Jamie McGowan

  A truly dreadful film tbh. no back story, two dimensional generic ruissian politicians, a totally unbelievable (and not in a good way) car chase, and, to top it all off, a magic water spray that removes 30 years worth of radiation in one easy squirt. I would struggle to give this no stars and this from a confirmed die hard fan. total turkey

  Posted 12:44 | Mon 25th Feb 2013

• paudie

  Not even a Die Hard film!

  Posted 20:22 | Sun 10th Mar 2013

Log in to leave a comment