Okay... let me try to say this as politely as possible.
I...really...LOVED... Die Hard 5.
Die Hard 5 is in my opinion the best Die Hard that has come out since the first one. I thought Die Hard 4 was GOD AWFUL. Die Hard 3 isn't even worth talking about. Die Hard 2 is probably my second least favorite.
Here's the way the movies go in order of how much I like em.
#1 Die Hard
Let's face it, the first one was the best one. Alan Rickman made that movie awesome, otherwise it was a boring environment, in an enclosed scenario that gets old very quickly (the movie is like watching Alan Rickman and Bruce Willis play a game of chess for 2 hours, surprisingly entertaining).
#2 Die Hard 5
I had a blast with Die Hard 5, the one liners were some of the best, the amount of cars that he destroyed made the movie hilarious. The unrealistic scenario of going to Chernobyl was hilarious in itself, fighting at the nuclear plant itself WITHOUT RADIATION SUITS never fails to make me laugh every time I watch it. The movie was pricelessly hilarious and the father son conflict was much more enjoyable than it was in die hard 4. Using multiple environments kept the movie fresh rather than making it feel congested like the other Die Hard Sequels, not to mention the fact that each environment was unique and memorable. This is easily the best SEQUEL of all the die hard movies.
#3 Die Hard 3.
I put this right here because from what I've seen of this one, it certainly looks better than the other sequels. Visually this one was very appealing, it took a crisp camera and filmed good action, not a bad sequel, not a great one either.
#4 Die Hard 2
Fuck this movie. The airport environment got old within the first 10 minutes of the god damn movie. The villains weren't memorable, and Bruce Willis went from clever cop going through airshafts to immortal being fighting on top of a jet liner. This movie was painful to sit through, and it's even more painful to watch a second time. This is seriously one of the most overrated movie's I've ever watched, and it's also one of my least favorite movies of all time. I did not have fun at all with this claustrophobic, unoriginal, god awful movie. The only thing that this movie has to excuse it's nature, is that it's at least better than Die Hard 4.
#5 Die Hard 4 "Live Free Die Hard"
This is honestly my least favorite Bruce Willis film. I love Bruce Willis, and this... THIS just redefines the word "awful". This movie is a stereotypical "Terrorists using cyber attack on united states" movie, combined with the worst Father Son conflict ever put on screen. This movie was crappy in a different way than Die Hard 2. Die Hard 2 was bad because it was constantly congested in a single, uninteresting environment with an terrible conflict with unthreatening villains. Die Hard 4 is bad because it makes the entire world look uninteresting. To add to the movie's shitty appearance, it also comes free with a shitty premise, shitty acting, and lazy writing, easily making it the worst of all the Die Hard Movies.
Die Hard 4 was a cash in, Die Hard 5 was the apology for Die Hard 4.
I recommend the shit out of Die Hard 5, support this movie, give it your money, it's easily an instant classic in my books. I don't care if the critics shit all over it for being unrealistic, the unrealistic nature makes it funny, and thus makes it entertaining. Just thank god you didn't get a cash in like Die Hard 4 was, or a flat out copy of the first film like Die Hard 2 was.
As for you, Brad, all I have to say is that if you hated this movie, all I can do is recommend that you watch Casino Royale 1967, it will give you a headache for the next 2 years like it has done with me, but it will also cure you of your hatred for movies like Die Hard 5.
I mean I’ve listened to this review for quite a bit, but I STILL can’t understand your point of view, it makes absolutely zero sense.
I have 3 questions, each with their own preset rebuttals.
1. How is this worse than Die Hard 2, or any of the Die Hard sequels for that manner?
Die Hard 2 did nothing but copy off of the original movie, and thus create useless, and unappealing patterns that YOU expect the later films to follow, despite the fact that all they do is make you want to watch the original one. Die Hard 4’s problem wasn’t that it changed the formula, it’s just that it wasn’t entertaining because it was just a shitty movie altogether.
2. How does Die Hard 5 misrepresent John McClain?
It simply doesn’t, the quote of “I’m on FUCKING vacation!” sounds like something John McClain would say if he had to go through crazy shit for the fifth time in his entire life. The one liners are very well written, not to mention memorable “This is what you’re into now?... spy shit?” Come one dude, Bruce Willis brought on a great performance in this movie, and his character was at least relatable in this, unlike Die Hard 4, where you sort of hate him throughout the entire movie because he acts like such an ignorant (not to mention out of character) jackass, especially towards his son WHO HE RESPECTS IN THIS MOVIE!
3. How is this movie not entertaining?
Come on, there’s always that moment in our lives where we sit down, watch new episodes of power rangers, and make fun of it for how goofy it is. We all have that moment where we sit back and watch GI Joe Retaliation and have a blast with it. There is no difference between the likability of GI Joe Retaliation, and the likability of Die Hard 5. No difference, they’re practically the same genre of movies, along with Red 2 (another hilarious action flick with Bruce Willis).
Answer me those 3 questions and I might understand a little more on where you’re coming from with all this ranting.
Dude, his son is not even in the 4th one, what the hell are you on about there? I really don't understand how anyone could like the cliched ridden conflict between John and his son in this, hell nothing about their "conflict" felt natural to the story and instead felt like the writer was just trying to lead us into the next setup. John McClane was suppose to be the every man, but here he is invincible like a Arnie or Sly character and what made John McClane relatable was that he could not take over the top amount of damage like he does here, but instead when something happened to him it felt like a reaction we would have if we were in his position. The action here is a poorly directed mess that confuses over the top action sequences with fun not to mention with the hectic editing it becomes hard to follow the action and know where everyone is in relation to each other. Even if this wasn't a Die Hard movie, I still wouldn't like it that much and just consider it a generic action movie that would be forgotten by most in years to come.
If it is entertaining to you, as they say here on the site, that is good for you and no one is going to take that away from you. Hell I am glad you can remember lines from this movie even though I found the one-liners lazy.
Also as a big Bond fan I am sure Brad has seen that lovely piece of shit.
PS. If you haven't seen Die Hard with a Vengeance in its entirety, do so if you want to consider yourself a hardcore Die Hard fan.
Oh that's right, it was just some hacker named "Ferrell , wasn't even his son. Dammit. My apologies, I haven't seen the damn thing in it's entirety for about 2 years. All I remember is that he was followed around by some young guy, I assumed it was his son because of their unnecessary and terrible chemistry.
Ok. I had a good laugh with A Good Day To Die Hard, my point is that I found it to have a good deal of entertainment value in it, I enjoyed it the same way I enjoyed Sharknado 2, it's just hilarious, it's not bad, it's just a little silly, but it's silly in a good way.
Look, I tend to judge movies based off of how entertaining they are, not on realism.
This movie fails to be realistic, it fails to offer continuity to a series that doesn't deserve to have any continuity (again, doing what the original did is only going to make people want to watch the original one, it's not going to be entertaining, it's just going to seem repetitive, and boring). I'm actually glad that this one just tried to be an action movie, rather than a crappy sequel, it tried to just do something original, without doing something stupid like die hard 4 did with the whole cyber assault plot.
Yeah, but you're right, there was nothing that made it "Super Good", but just the same I wouldn't call it a bad movie, and if I had a show where I reviewed movies I certainly wouldn't bring it up in every other god damn video. Seriously as much as I respect Brad, he pisses on this movie WAY more than this movie deserved.
Ok, I'm sorry I got so pissed off about all this. I wouldn't have been pissed if he didn't shit on this movie so often in his other videos.
Also, thank you, I think I just might watch "Die Hard With A Vengeance", if it's anything like the second one, I'll probably hate it. If it's anything like Lethal Weapon, then I'll probably love it.
Also thanks for taking the time to reply to my comment, I really do appreciate your opinion, and pointing out the flaws in my argument (there are many I'm sure). If there's anything else that I've said that's been bugging you, feel free to tell me.
Ok now I realize that I've made a complete ass out of myself here, I just want to say was this basically
All I meant to say with all this, is that I loved Die Hard 5, and I don't have a problem with Brad hating it, but I do have a problem with him bringing it up every other midnight screening. It's always something like "Well at least it's not as bad as Die Hard 5, there's nothing as bad as Die Hard 5." and shit like that.
I mean the first time I heard that, I let it slide, I was like "Ok we all have our opinions, I guess I should leave a comment asking him what the deal is with that."
The second time I heard it, I got a bit annoyed and asked to myself,
"My god, what the hell does he have against Die Hard 5? He doesn't ever make accurate complaints about it, what rubbed him so wrongly about that movie? Last time I checked that was one of my favorite movies of 2013, my favorite being Escape Plan."
The THIRD time I heard it, I was like
"Ok now he's acting like it's fucking Birdemic Shock and Terror."
The fourth time I heard it
"...... I am now getting pissed. I'm going to leave a long, long comment about why I liked Die Hard 5."
The fifth time
"........... I don't understand, you have seen movies where people eat shit out of each other's buttholes. You have seen Child Bride. You have seen some of the most God Awful shit in the world of cinema. Yet you complain about GOD DAMN DIE HARD 5?! I've had enough, I am going to go watch the midnight screening for Die Hard 5, and I'm going to see what all the fucking fuss is all about."
And that's how I ended up here. My nerves brought me here, and I have made a complete ass out of myself.
I love everything this guy has ever posted on his site, as I'm typing this I am currently listening to one of his podcasts. I just don't agree with him on Die Hard 5, and I wish to sweet Jesus Christ that he'd just shut up about it. I'm sorry if I have come off as rude, and I'm sorry if I've annoyed anyone.
It is not that is not realistic that bothers me, hell I love it when films throw it out, but to change the rules the universe has already set up, that is what irks me. You can still do something new and original while being true to the original. Look at Aliens and Terminator 2 for some easy to understand examples, both very different from the previous movie, but still feel like they belong in the same universe. You can still be original and respect the source at the same time. For me it is hard to dislike Die Hard 2 because that was my first Die Hard film, so it holds nostalgic value for me, but I can perfectly understand all the criticisms against and be hard press to disagree.
Brad tends to bring up stuff like that often enough, hell Nukie is a recurring movie he also bashes (not saying GDTDH is on the same level as that movie that should burn in hell). When a new movie comes along to piss him off to that degree again, then I am sure he would stop mentioning it so often, for the anger is not for quality wise, but more emotional for him given Die Hard I believe was one of his first if not first rated R movie (think he said that in one of his videos). Also, yeah Die Hard With a Vengeance is more similar to Lethal Weapon than 2 and felt like the direction the series should take. Hopefully now that the director is out of prison, he can return to helm the series he created.
I definitely see you are new to the site and I hope to see you around the comments some more. Trust me mate, your comments are nothing compared to the all out hate he got for not liking Man of Steel (so many replies the background more or less broke) or Tree of Life.
And yes, I do understand that "The Terminal" was a movie that took place almost entirely inside of an airport, it's easy to say however that "The Terminal" was a much better movie than Die Hard 2, mostly because it used an original concept, had a kick ass soundtrack, and most importantly it had Tom Hanks at his best.
"The Terminal" also had several heart warming scenes that stay memorable after years of having not seen it. The movie also makes me really hungry for Burger King...