BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Underground > Film, TV & Theatre >

Live Free or Die Hard

  
 
Jack Denfeld
12:48 / 29.06.07
Has anyone seen this yet? Is it kickass? I might see it over the weekend and wanted some input. The only thing I've heard so far is that he fights some ultraterrorists and John McClane fights a jet plane.
 
 
Jack Denfeld
13:15 / 29.06.07
I'm getting psyched up by watching this Die Hard music video which pretty much covers the entire franchise, and has a cool catchy chorus. McClane reminds me of Millar Cap mixed with some 616 Hawkeye. If you're a fan of Die Hard watch this video and you will smile.
Amazing Die Hard song
 
 
Elijah, Freelance Rabbi
13:42 / 29.06.07
Jack, that video is amazing.

Some co-workers saw it and they said it was pretty much what they expected, a Die Hard movie. That is enough for me and I will try to catch it this weekend.
 
 
sleazenation
15:10 / 29.06.07
In the UK the title is Die Hard 4.0.

No, I'm not sure why either.
 
 
Mug Chum
15:19 / 29.06.07
Must have something to do with some role the internet or something like that has in the plot.

I love that video. Every time he reaches parts like "(...)with the best car chases and explosions, they sure look sweet man!" and "we dont know but we're pretty sure that John Mclane... KICKS ASS" and some other inflections, my soul pees in it's pants.

I'm still baffled by the fact that someone actually thought "I'm a Mac" guy could be a good partner after Sam Jackson.

Took people a long time to realize "yipie-kay-yay, motherfucker" was the perfect chorus.
 
 
Mug Chum
15:26 / 29.06.07
oh, and it should be sung in every church on Christmas.
 
 
Jack Denfeld
16:51 / 29.06.07
Buy Guyznite
Remember when we first met John McClane?
Argyle picked him up from the plane,
And took him down to Nakatomi Tower...
To meet with Holly.

He came to get her back and to be her man,
But Hans and his buddies fucked up the plan,
And that's about when everything went sour
At the Christmas party.

And the terrorists were over-zealous,
But it was sweet when they killed Ellis!
And, with a little help from Allen,
John McClane kicked ass!

We're gonna die, die, die, die hard!
We're gonna die, die, die, die hard!
We're gonna die, die, die, die hard!
We're gonna die, die, die as hard as we can!

No one dies harder than John McClane,
Even when his wife's stuck on a plane
About to crash into the Potomac River...
On the eve of Christmas.

And airport security kicked him out,
But John McClane is just too damn proud,
And nothing could have made him not deliver...
'Cause that's his business!

And with a lot of fights and gunplay
He blew that plane up on the runway.
And, with a little help from Allen,
Holly's plane could land!

We're gonna die, die, die, die hard!
We're gonna die, die, die, die hard!
We're gonna die, die, die, die hard!
We're gonna die, die, die as hard as we can!

Yippee-ki-yay, motherfucker!

No one dies harder than John McClane,
Saving all the passengers on the train.
But Simon wasn't clear with his intentions:
It was just a distraction!

And there was no way McClane could know
That Hans Gruber was Simon's bro.
And that's what made it "Die Hard: With A Vengeance"
With Samuel Jackson!

And the good cop wouldn't miss this,
Even though it wasn't Christmas.
He didn't get any help from Allen...
But only in part three!

We're gonna die, die, die, die hard!
We're gonna die, die, die, die hard!
We're gonna die, die, die, die hard!
We're gonna die, die, die as hard as we can!

Finally we're back with John McClane
Now we got a choice, and the choice is plain:
We can live free or we can die hard,
As hard as we can.

From taking on a terrorist he's never met,
To taking on an F-35 jet,
With the greatest car explosions by far...
This sure looks sweet, man!

And we know what the basic gist is:
There ain't no Allen, and it's not Christmas.
We don't know but we're pretty sure that
John McClane kicks ass!

We're gonna die, die, die, die hard!
We're gonna die, die, die, die hard!
We're gonna die, die, die, die hard!
We're gonna die, die, die as hard as we can!

Yippee-ki-yay, motherfucker!
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
17:42 / 29.06.07
So, in a probably doomed attempt to get some value out of this thread: why is it that, although I very much doubt that I will see "Live Free or Die Hard" - a title which, incidentally, makes no sense - I feel generally more kindly towards the Die Hard movies than, for example, the bloated and big-haired Lethal Weapon tetralogy, and of course the cocking awful Under Siege duo, and indeed generally all buddy movies (apart from Bad Boys, of course, which is of course without equal).

While we wait for this film actually to be seen, discuss: what is it about the Die Hard movies that makes them, if you believe they are, successful? Did number three doom the franchise? Are special effects extendiing the lives of action hero stars to an unhealthy extent?

Personally, I think it is, ultimately, down to Willis. His one basic act - a sort of suffering masculinity mixed with utter incredulity - seems perfectly pitched. Whereas Mel Gibson, say, always seemed to be directly interacting with the absurd, high-volume explosion, and to be basically delighted by it (also, with shit hair), Willis expresses profound irritation through his every mannerism at every new privation placed between himself and his usually quite modest goal.

There's something about the way sex functions, as well. Although his wife may as well be Princess Mushroom - she has very little agency - there's something commendable, I think, about the failure to kill her off to provide a bit of narrative oomph - see Patsy Kensit in LW2, and tragic drugs lady in LW1, although she functions a little differently.

So, assuming for a moment that this the set of people with interesting insights and the set of people who watch Die Hard movies overlap, which may well not be the case, why is anyone excited about this movie excited about this movie? Considerations of the all-round personable aura of Bruce Willis valid.
 
 
Feverfew
18:22 / 29.06.07
Personally, I think it is, ultimately, down to Willis. His one basic act - a sort of suffering masculinity mixed with utter incredulity - seems perfectly pitched.

I think you have it, there. Die Hard, although I'm going on memory rather than recent viewing, remains relatively credulous right up until the fire-hose-abseiling moment. Die Hard 2 I'm not going to comment on as I haven't seen it yet, but Die Hard 3 pushed all the right buttons when I first saw it, and I'd have to re-view much to comment on it, but... It is Willis's show, obviously, but I'd be greatly interested in what other people think differentiates DH from the wider canon of action films.

Also; I'm going to put on my credulous hat for:

In the UK the title is Die Hard 4.0.

No, I'm not sure why either.

I would say it's because "Live Free or Die" might not be seen as such a well known phrase in Britain. Unless you want an entire audience quasi-alienated by historically sloganizing back to the American Revolutionary Way.

"Die Hard 4.0", however, is supposed to tie in with the hackers, software, modern-times-modern-crimes idea. It's bland, it's generic, it's inoffensive...
 
 
My Mom Thinks I'm Cool
18:30 / 29.06.07
Hmm!

John McClane seems like he's supposed to be kind of a scuzzbag. He's unshaven, he's hungover, he can't keep any kind of functional marriage going. He kind of seems like he's only tough because New York City pounded the shit out of him and he's all scar tissue and callous, not because he was trained to be a super karate killer (see the end of 2 where he gets his ass whipped on the wing of an airplane for ten minutes). he's also sort of the voice of reason in a setting full of bumbling arrogant cops and reporters in a way that's supposed to appeal to the audience. I think he's (a little) more easy to identify with.

Mel Gibson's zany, suicidal yet badass Vietnam Vet CIA assassin...or whatever he was supposed to be, was kind of going in too many directions at once and slowly departed into something else I still couldn't identify with as the series progressed. He kind of lost everything but the zany, really. Bleah.

I guess they both have the idea going that they're really good at kicking ass and not much of anything else, Riggs (?) because he was trained to be a human weapon, McClane because he's just kind of a fuckup. But that sense gets stronger as the Die Hard series goes on and weaker with Lethal Weapon sequels which just sort of degrade into generic cop movies.

re: 3 and 4 - I think John McClane works best as a loner. He interacted with people but didn't have a Partner in the first two, really, which makes them less of a buddy movie for me, and I think those two felt like they had a lot in common. The third movie was almost its own idea, despite trying to tie it in with the brother of the guy you killed thing. Having a Buddy was only part of it...I don't know. Running around solving riddles was just weird.

I'm surprised they made a 4th movie, I felt the 3rd derailed everything a bit and was less of a success (could have no idea what I'm talking about there). Plus how goddamn old is this guy? Isn't there anyone under the age of 50 that can fight terrorists in America at this point?
 
 
Mug Chum
21:24 / 29.06.07
Well, John always starts as a dry piece of shit and ends up as a disgusting wet fresh one. He's always on the edge of collapse, a hung over undersirable and thick-scarred Joe Schmoe. So he has some vulnerability (his feet in 1 as the biggest illustration) in his overall demeanor and profile. It reaches a point of comedic value even, regardless of his witty commentaries (that becomes sometimes a pain in the ass since all films afterwards went for that). He's bald, not that much in shape, cranky (but not "pissed at crime and the world that's going to hell" Dirty Harry and Bronsom style, just "aw for fuck sake God, again?!"), so there's a specific clownish joy in his particular misery and from the people around him.

Nowadays he's the Chuck Norris jokes I can sort of relate to and go "fuck yeah!" for a laugh, 'cause I loved these films as a little kid (where as Norris, since I didn't watched his films, just sort of comes off as a cheap laugh -- good outloud ones, but you know, I can't actually follow his characters around for a entire film).

LW I used to like 'cause it wasn't so much the superficial "buddy" that came afterwards (like "The Last Boyscout") as was "friends" really. As a kid I loved the suicidal reaching fucked-upness of Riggs in LW1 (some shared qualities with McLane, but too... well, LETHAL WEAPON! and too tragic -- even if the banters were there) and how it related with Rog (the coolest guy in the world), and as a teen I loved LW4 to see how different and how pretty much the same continues, even if I couldn't identify with that whole "traditional family in the forties" (but again, kinda cool seeing Riggs looking at his baby and remembering at the same time the gun-in-mouth scene -- or even Joe Pesci's froggy monologue).

They're absolutely "shitty" movies (although I wouldn't be one bit sure on that about Die Hard 1 and 3), but I can get a rise of fun out of them, if not only for nostalgia's sake and tap into a familiar taste that I don't feed nowadays anymore. So when in the preview McLane throws a car into a helicopter and avoid that other car, even if there wasn't anything quite exagerated to that degree in the previous movies, I laughed and went "fuck yeah McLane!" 'cause I'd remember the absurdities like John being ejected from the exploding plane in 2 -- but you pretty much knows that the script, like the 3rd, was supposed to be any other film (the 3rd was just "Simon Says") and they just added McLane afterwards and changed some bits, but you permit yourself to believe that's all McLane's bullshit and shennanigans.

Although his wife may as well be Princess Mushroom - she has very little agency - there's something commendable, I think, about the failure to kill her off to provide a bit of narrative oomph

I don't know, Haus. From what I remember from the 1st, Molly was pretty important in the overall plot (and even if not, she wasn't just a lady in the refrigerator to give McLane his cheap motivation. It was, from a character and emotional criteria (even more so for a action movie of this sort) quite well-constructed and preocupied with her. There was a sort of a more genuine concern for her, and wanting to know how she's doing, who is she, what she's up to, and an awareness that she was the smart one in the couple and who had right ground in their relationship, and not so much just a cheap kick off.

(wasn't her who knocked out the reporter in 2?)
 
 
Jack Denfeld
01:24 / 30.06.07
Yeah, I was reading some posts at aintitcoolnews and Millarworld where people were doing the comic book "they're gonna mess it up, they're not doing it right" posts, and I was thinking, "It's just a cop/action movie guys." The only thing that really makes it different is that Bruce Willis as John McClane is very likable. He always looks beatdown, and he's always crackin' bad jokes with that Moonlighting grin. I've read that none of the Die Hard films were even originally written as Die Hard movies, the first one was some Delta Force rehash, and this one was some internet terrorist movie originally. It's basically all Willis as McClane.
 
 
buttergun
03:30 / 30.06.07
Funny thing about the Die Hard/Lethal Weapon comparisons above...

Die Hard 3 was originally supposed to be a Lethal Weapon sequel. That's how it was pitched and written. Then through some byzantine Hollywood maneuver it became Die Hard 3.

Anyone remember immediately post-September 11th when Willis claimed he wasn't going to make anymore action movies?

What irked me the most about this latest Die Hard movie is how they kept stringing along the rating..."This film is not yet rated," two weeks before it's released? Yeah, right. The three previous films were R, so I guess they were worried they'd lose older fans with the PG-13 rating the 4th installment's been given.

Another interesting Die Hard trivia mention...movie critic Roger Ebert rated part 2 highest, an ultra-strange move when most people consider that one the weakest.

There's a script out there for a Die Hard IV which almost got made, titled "Tears of the Sun" (a title which Willis liked and ended up using for another, unrelated film). It took place underwater and featured the bizarre (yet pretty damn cool) concept of freaking NINJAS attacking the underwater base which McClane had been hired to run security for. It wasn't made for a variety of reasons.

I've always thought "The Last Boyscout" was the best Die Hard sequel, even though of course it's not part of the franchise. But Willis pretty much plays the same downtrodden/downfallen character, and I think the movie's more entertaining than Die Hard 2 and 3 put together.
 
 
Jack Denfeld
03:52 / 30.06.07
I've always thought "The Last Boyscout" was the best Die Hard sequel, even though of course it's not part of the franchise. But Willis pretty much plays the same downtrodden/downfallen character, and I think the movie's more entertaining than Die Hard 2 and 3 put together.
Yeah, that could've easily fit. He even explains his bad vs the villian jokes to Damon Wayans at the end, "Let's say you hit a guy with a surfboard. You gotta say something like 'Surf's up!'".
 
 
Benny the Ball
15:58 / 30.06.07
The first Die Hard film was originally intended to be a Commando sequel for Arnuld, fact fans...
 
 
Jawsus-son Starship
11:31 / 06.07.07
So for 200 minutes John McLean ran out of bullets and just ran things over - the first time this happened was stupid, but by the 5th I was in love. In the end there was no need for my brain to suspend disbelief as ability to think in any logical way had been burnt out of me by the fantastic nonsense on the screen. It was, if anything, the best film I've ever seen.
 
 
This Sunday
11:38 / 06.07.07
I will feel mildly vindicated if I can confirm the second film was the only one originally intended to be a Die Hard/McClane movie. Because, despite actually liking the director, character, and set-up, it was just plain weak compared to the one before and right after. And posts involving running out of bullets and running over things as a way to defeat l337 haxxor terrorists? Going a long way to convincing me Die Harder isn't losing it's number lowest spot just yet.
 
 
deja_vroom
15:23 / 06.07.07
As for the likeable John McLane persona and the way Bruce Willis brought it off in the first movie:

To me, it seems indicative that something changed and not for good when I see in the trailer for the new movie that John McLane doesn't look in the least frightened, annoyed, surprised or exasperated at the things that keep happening to him, and instead appears as your regular cocky bad-ass figure spouting one-liners.

Now, of course the first Die Hard had its share of one-liners, but to me it always seemed that in the first movie they were more integrated to actual dialogue, coming out in the end as something that looked pretty close to - gasp - witty banter; more "organic", in a way, more like impromptu quips rather than mouldy, empty bragging - and they seemed to come from a more... human place, for instance, even the "Yipie-Kyay, motherfucker" type of lines, though coming out in the end as pretty standard macho bravado, could be traced back in its origins more to fear and the ultimate, desperate refusal to give in as a cop and a blockhead no matter what happened. Instead of you know trying to look cool in front of the Mac guy.
 
 
CameronStewart
15:37 / 06.07.07
>>>The first Die Hard film was originally intended to be a Commando sequel for Arnuld, fact fans...<<<

But Die Hard is based on a novel, "Nothing Lasts Forever" by Roderick Thorp. I've actually read it. How can it have been a retooled Commando 2 script?
 
 
This Sunday
15:22 / 07.07.07
How can it have been a retooled Commando 2 script?

The book was a follow-up to a book made into a movie with Sinatra. The second film was, apparently, based on an unconnected novel by a different author.

At least one of the Richard Stark 'Parker' books was optioned to be rewritten as a Dirty Harry flick. Didn't happen, but somebody wanted it to enough to put money down on it.
 
 
TroyJ15
03:59 / 08.07.07
Hey, hey. what's with all the Lethal Weapon bashing? Lethal Weapon 1 and 2 are great action films. 3 and 4 do go off into a weird place that seems slightly unrelated to first two.
 
 
Benny the Ball
08:51 / 08.07.07
>>>The first Die Hard film was originally intended to be a Commando sequel for Arnuld, fact fans...<<<

>>But Die Hard is based on a novel, "Nothing Lasts Forever" by Roderick Thorp. I've actually read it. How can it have been a retooled Commando 2 script?<<

The book was optioned, turned into a script with the intention of using it to make it into a Commando sequel - Arnie said no, probably Sly said no, and so on down until they landed on the least muscle-bound Mr Willis, who said yes - and there you go.

The current film is based on an article.
 
 
matthew.
22:53 / 09.07.07
So I just saw this movie. To be honest right from the get-go, I love brainless dumb action movies with huge setpieces and gigantic explosions. The third Die Hard ranks as one of my favourite movies of all time.

Without any spoilers, the fourth Die Hard is fantastically staged, but dreary in terms of plot and dialogue.



Spoilers





Now this one. The pros? The action scenes are well filmed and staged. Near the beginning, the parkour guy from District 13 jumps off of an apartment building. That's not the cool part, it's how the camera stays with him, not parallel, and not in a straight line, but how it zigzags through the urban jungle in a different direction than the parkour guy.

The tunnel scene so prominent in the trailer is also incredibly well staged. McClane drives a car up a ramp and into a helicopter, and again, the parkour guy jumps out of the helicopter, but the camera doesn't necessarily follow his path.

The best scene, I would have to say, is the fight scene between McClane in a semi (Terminator 2) versus a F-35 (True Lies). It's a derivative action scene, like ones we've seen and imagined before, but it's just so well filmed. As if the guy who directed this also directed the Underworld movies! Unbelievable. Anyway, in this scene, the F-35 blows apart the freeway, making it crumple and tumble while the semi tries desperately to avoid being crushed. It's quite gripping.

So how was Willis as McClane? Some critics are complaining that this new McClane is nothing like the one of old. I sort of agree. He's cranky, but not as cranky. He still gets a cheap thrill out of amazing stunts, like a "What am I doing here" kind of awe after every explosion. He's an asshole, still, which is nice. But he seems too... heroic? In fact, heroism plays a part in the plot. In an awful interlude while Justin Long (sarcastic sidekick) and Willis drive to... some power facility, they have a discussion on heroism, and how Willis is just that guy cause he's in the right place at the right time and how Long is so unheroic. If you know your Chekov, then you know Long will prove his heroism and blah blah blah.

The villain, Tim Olyphant is incredible. He's not quite up to the Hans Gruber or the Philip Seymour Hoffman of Mission Impossible 3, but he's better than all the villains of Die Hard 2 combined. He's more interesting because he's annoyed. There's almost a glint of tears in his eyes when McClane refuses to die.

The plot...? About cyber-terrorists shutting down the States is okay. When the shit hits the fan, it's interesting and it's mayhem and it's enough to propel the plot, but then the fact that the world is shut down seems strangely forgotten after Kevin Smith is introduced. Oy. Who told him he could act?

Oh yeah, and Tuvok is in the movie for about three minutes.

If you like dumb action movies with scarce plot, but awesome set-pieces, this is your film. I would have loved if Mamet or Sorkin could do a quick re-write, to polish up the horrendous disease of plodding exposition, but what can you do? What can you expect?
 
  
Add Your Reply