"Die Hard" is one of those films, that is considered to be a perfect gem to movie goers and action fans alike. With one perfect film, two good ones, and one that was mediocre, you kind of expect what would become of the 5th movie. And let me say this, I have never been so disappointed in a film than this one. If you thought 2 or 4 were bad, take a look at THIS one!
So what's the plot of the film?...Boy is THAT the million dollar question here. Now let me say this, this is one of the first films in a long time that I had walked out on, and it wasn't just because I was tired, but that NOTHING WAS HAPPENING IN THIS FILM! All I could gather was that John McClane goes to visit his son Jack in Russia, but it turns out that Jack is a spy, who is in cahoots with a Russian terrorist, or something like that, and John gets dragged into the mix. That's all I could gather from it. So when I retried watching it online, I was still in the same mixed of confusion on this plot.
Let's discuss what's wrong with the movie, aside from its terrible plot (or lack of, I should say), and that's the action scenes. Not too long in, we're put into a car chase, that feels like something out of a "Transporter" movie, than it does a "Die Hard" film. It's just constant car chase, with hardly a shot that lasts three seconds, and physics that are so out of reality, that it's just insulting to this franchise. What made "Die Hard" so great and memorable was it's reality, and how you could picture yourself in the same situation, doing the same thing (if you were in good shape). In this film, it not only disregards that fact, it completely DESTROYS it! This isn't a "Die Hard" film, it's a generic action film that not even Steven Seagal would put on his resume. The dialogue in this film is pretty much most of the same thing over and over again, about Jai Courtney and Bruce Willis talking about father-son relations and how they didn't have those moments, etc. And I'm not exaggerating here, this is literally what goes on throughout the film. As for the villains, oh wait, WHAT villains? They're just Russian terrorists. Again, not exaggerating. Jai Courtney was also very boring as Jack, and I felt he could have done so much, if they had gotten a better script and director (we'll get to them shortly.)
Also, I'd like to ask one major question here: *ahem*...WHERE THE HELL IS JOHN MCCLANE?!? This is the number one thing I was asking myself every single minute of the film, and I didn't see him at all. I saw Bruce Willis playing John McClane, but I didn't see John McClane. You could have called him ANYTHING and you would have had the same exact film! There isn't even the slightest hint of John McClane's charm ANYWHERE in this film, aside from a slight one-liner, but that's it. That's not John McClane, that's John Matrix from "Commando," just played by someone else. I mean, give "Indiana Jones 4" SOME credit, at least it HAD Indiana Jones.
This film was directed by John Moore, the same guy who directed "Max Payne" and "The Omen (2006)," and I honestly would rather watch both those films than this ever again. It shocks me how the original director for this movie turned it down to work on the sequel for "300," should have been the first sign of this. The script was written by Skip Woods, who was the writer for "Hitman" and "X-Men Origins: Wolverine." How his script got green-lit is beyond me.
Overall, "A Good Day to Die Hard" is not only the worst of the "Die Hard" films AND one of the worst films that I have ever seen, it is the absolute WORST sequel I've had the misfortune of sitting through! This is so far the worst film that I have seen this year, and I hope there's not another that tops this.
Rating: 1/10
So what's the plot of the film?...Boy is THAT the million dollar question here. Now let me say this, this is one of the first films in a long time that I had walked out on, and it wasn't just because I was tired, but that NOTHING WAS HAPPENING IN THIS FILM! All I could gather was that John McClane goes to visit his son Jack in Russia, but it turns out that Jack is a spy, who is in cahoots with a Russian terrorist, or something like that, and John gets dragged into the mix. That's all I could gather from it. So when I retried watching it online, I was still in the same mixed of confusion on this plot.
Let's discuss what's wrong with the movie, aside from its terrible plot (or lack of, I should say), and that's the action scenes. Not too long in, we're put into a car chase, that feels like something out of a "Transporter" movie, than it does a "Die Hard" film. It's just constant car chase, with hardly a shot that lasts three seconds, and physics that are so out of reality, that it's just insulting to this franchise. What made "Die Hard" so great and memorable was it's reality, and how you could picture yourself in the same situation, doing the same thing (if you were in good shape). In this film, it not only disregards that fact, it completely DESTROYS it! This isn't a "Die Hard" film, it's a generic action film that not even Steven Seagal would put on his resume. The dialogue in this film is pretty much most of the same thing over and over again, about Jai Courtney and Bruce Willis talking about father-son relations and how they didn't have those moments, etc. And I'm not exaggerating here, this is literally what goes on throughout the film. As for the villains, oh wait, WHAT villains? They're just Russian terrorists. Again, not exaggerating. Jai Courtney was also very boring as Jack, and I felt he could have done so much, if they had gotten a better script and director (we'll get to them shortly.)
Also, I'd like to ask one major question here: *ahem*...WHERE THE HELL IS JOHN MCCLANE?!? This is the number one thing I was asking myself every single minute of the film, and I didn't see him at all. I saw Bruce Willis playing John McClane, but I didn't see John McClane. You could have called him ANYTHING and you would have had the same exact film! There isn't even the slightest hint of John McClane's charm ANYWHERE in this film, aside from a slight one-liner, but that's it. That's not John McClane, that's John Matrix from "Commando," just played by someone else. I mean, give "Indiana Jones 4" SOME credit, at least it HAD Indiana Jones.
This film was directed by John Moore, the same guy who directed "Max Payne" and "The Omen (2006)," and I honestly would rather watch both those films than this ever again. It shocks me how the original director for this movie turned it down to work on the sequel for "300," should have been the first sign of this. The script was written by Skip Woods, who was the writer for "Hitman" and "X-Men Origins: Wolverine." How his script got green-lit is beyond me.
Overall, "A Good Day to Die Hard" is not only the worst of the "Die Hard" films AND one of the worst films that I have ever seen, it is the absolute WORST sequel I've had the misfortune of sitting through! This is so far the worst film that I have seen this year, and I hope there's not another that tops this.
Rating: 1/10
Tell Your Friends