Die Hard 6

[Eddie Dean]

tldr

 

[The Shape]

My God, this guy keeps going on the same rants. This is like his "anti-slasher icon reboots" rant, but with blockbusters instead.

 

[Deck Rickard]

It's his Tiananmen Square moment.

 

[RockSP]

I have come to the sobering reality that in essence the audiences going to movies today are to blame for the chain of unoriginality being unbroken. For the countless streams of sequels, reboots, and remakes. As well as the Niagara falls of films based on comics, based on books, based on plays, based on video games, based on tv shows, based on board games, based on toys, based on emoticons...

Quite sure Hollywood has always done that.

 

[RetrogradeOrbit]

Not sure of their logic here...
Some of the best films made have been based on a novel or a play.
I’d give a few examples, but I cannot be arsed.

 

[KillerMcQueen]

Wait I though Hordak got banned for trolling the horror and Halloween threads?

 

[The Shape]

He was just banished from the Halloween thread. Sadly, he is free to rant and rave elsewhere.

 

[Marvolo]

I'm more honest and smarter than anyone here as i'm passionate about film/cinema and know what i want and i'm being an honest man who cannot lie.

It's true, this franchise is dead and the last one killed the franchise for good! i just don't want a stupid prequel you know, Die Hard IS the prequel afterall and don't need to see some young John McClane movie which is the stupidest idea ever. Just let this franchise go and rest in peace, your just gonna get diminishing returns you know.

I just want something new and fresh like John Wick as it's something different and i embrace, welcome that franchise as the first one is my favorite movie of 2014 and the second film is one of my fave movies of 2017, so it's something different and trying to create it's own icon and franchise.

I doubt that.

You're ranting about something that's been going on for thousands of years in written stories, play houses and cinemas. Most human mythologies and religions are retellings, ripoffs, remakes etc. There is the "Hero with a thousand faces" story that's existed and been retold over and over long before cinema was even idea. There is Shakespeare's material which has been adapted and remade countless times in various languages, genres, and media forms. Some of cinemas most well known greats are remakes:

Ben Hur
The Thing
The Fly
Little Shop of Horrors
Invasion of the Body Snatchers
Scarface
The Man who Knew too Much
A Fistful of Dollars
His Girl Friday
Heat
The Ten Commandments

The list goes on.

 

[flickchick85]

Come on Fox aka 20th century f uckface, stop beating this dead horse of a franchise, the last one killed the franchise and we don't need any ****ty prequel to the franchise.

I have come to the sobering reality that in essence the audiences going to movies today are to blame for the chain of unoriginality being unbroken. For the countless streams of sequels, reboots, and remakes. As well as the Niagara falls of films based on comics, based on books, based on plays, based on video games, based on tv shows, based on board games, based on toys, based on emoticons...

We have only ourselves to blame for Hollywood studios greenlighting one sequel, reboot and remake after another. We made Michael Bay's 4th Transformer film a hit at the box office while the 5th film was a flop, goodness for that. We made Jumanji Welcome to the Jungle aka Welcome to the bungle (in my view) so huge that now studios are trying to recapture that success with reboots/sequels, same for Halloween or Creed films which i disliked those.

No. They are rolling in your cash. They have no reason to stop rehashing the same plotlines and using the same formula over and over again. And is that really what you want? You can't keep doing the same thing again, and again, and again, and keep expecting the same result. Eventually the returns are going to diminish and when they do? We have no one to blame but ourselves.

I see so many people talking about how hollywood is so unoriginal now, how it isn't what it used to be. "Why can't films be as good as they were in the 80's and 90's" and I say the same things trust me. But a lot of these people still pay to see the next focus group created blockbuster and stuff Disney's pockets with the next Star Wars film. If it has Star Wars on it? A good amount of people will compulsively buy a ticket like it's smack on a street corner. Luckily Solo bombed and i disliked that movie.

All this does is lead to Hollywood thinking you want more blockbusters not less. That you want more sequels, and reboots or remakes. Not less. That you want spin offs like a young han solo movie. And this ultimately leads to the franchises you love getting ridden into the ****ing ground. And then tossed in the garbage heap until 10 or twenty years roll by and they take it out of the trash and give it a new coat of paint.

All we are doing by making these reboots, sequels, remakes, prequels and based on movies hits? Is sending a message to the studios that this is what we want. And is it really? Do we really want a Top Gun way 2 many years 2 late sequel? Do we really want a remake of Flatliners? Do we really want to see another Saw movie? Does anyone really want to see that Baywatch movie that came out that just bombed? Or another Friday The 13th reboot? I know I don't.

Or more importantly, do you? And if you don't want to see this? Then don't pay for it. Speak with your wallet. Wait to rent those films on blu ray or dvd. Don't just pay for a ticket just because of name recognition. That is exactly what leads to more reboots, remakes, prequels and sequels and the death of originality in mainstream cinema. Although Blade Runner 2045 was an excellent sequel done with care and passion and Mission Impossible is right on track with the new movie and i love it as MI Fallout is one of my faves of 2018. And A Quiet Place is the start of a fresh new horror franchise.

If you want to support a franchise or a sequel? Support a new one. Like John Wick for example being a fresh new franchise. To show the studios that you want new franchises, with new characters, new universes and new worlds. Instead of the same ones, refurbished and sold back to you as brand new. Otherwise this nostalgia train isn't going to stop until it rides your memories into the ground.

For the record, when you're put on probation for trolling, that's your cue to find a new song, not to repeat the same song for a different genre.

 

[MOVIELORD101]

He was just banished from the Halloween thread. Sadly, he is free to rant and rave elsewhere.

Don't worry, I reported his post.

Anyway, back on topic, this movie's not gonna happen. Plus, Fox seems to keep missing the point of John McClain in the first place. He's not invincible like the last 2 movies tried to make him into; the first 3 movies showed that, despite being a cop, he was an otherwise regular guy who got through situations by the skin of his teeth. He's not a Segal wannabe or some dumb crap like that!

 

[Deck Rickard]

Eh, I want to see a Die Hard Cinematic Universe full of prequels where we can find out who these characters are and how they came to be! Why stop at just McLane? Why not a Holly Gennero prequel where we learn about how she led corporate espionage schemes for Nakatomi? And a Gruber Brothers prequel where they plan their first heist together? And the story of how Al Powell shot a kid, got depressed, and started his all Twinkie diet? The possibilities are endless! Excuse me while I go pitch this idea to Disney (since they own Fox's film division now) for a cool $14.5 million.

 

[DarkKnight88]

The Argyle Story is what we need.

 

[Schlosser85]

I've always needed to know more about Karl's brother.......Dieter?

I'm not even certain of this character's name, that's how unexplored he is. A rich untapped vein of narrative possibilities.

Karl and Dieter (?) terrorist-ing their way across Europe in the '80s, oh the times they had.

The mid-credits stinger, Dieter comes home to find someone is sitting in the shadows waiting for him, despite his state-of-the-art security system not being tripped.

The figure slowly stands. A thin, elegant man. Impeccably dressed with a bangin' goatee.

Hans Gruber. The man. The myth. The legend.

(spared no expense on the creepy CGI 1988 Alan Rickman and voice double)

"Dieter? I'd like to speak to you about the Nakatomi Initiative."

 

[Spider-Fan]

I cannot wait for the prequel film about Simon Gruber. We can call it "Simon Says!"

 

[Deck Rickard]

All of these ideas are pure gold.

We also need to bring Jai Courtney and Mary Elizabeth Winstead back for a McLane Wonder Twins movie.

 

[samsnee]

In my head, the show Family Matters is a prequel to Die Hard for Al. The kid he shot was Urkel, so his family left him and he moved to LA and changed his name.

 

[Deck Rickard]

Nice. That's a great idea. I'm full behind any story where Urkel dies.

 

[Spider-Fan]

Wait, so we can have a Die Hard and Urkel shared universe?

Take my money!!!

 

[kguillou]

Well this was certainly better than Die Hard 5. Lol

Man, Willis though, idk if its old age but this guy just doesnt have the same charisma anymore.

 

[Schlosser85]

I think it's mostly he just ran out of ****s to give a long time ago.

 

[TheVileOne]

McClane: Sixth Die Hard Movie Gets a New Title - ComingSoon.net

20th Century Fox‘s latest installment in the Die Hard franchise has been referred to in the press as Die Hard: Year One for some time. Now producer Lorenzo di Bonaventura has told Empire that the Godfather Part II-style prequel/sequel will now go by the title McClane.

“You can tell our intention by the fact that the title page we handed in says ‘McClane,’” confirmed di Bonaventura. “We want you to get invested in John McClane more than ever before.”

The producer also put to rest the notion that Willis will only be bookending the film as the older McClane, and that his role will involve just as much screentime as his younger self.

“I don’t know how you do ‘Die Hard’ without Bruce,” he said. “The idea that he’s not very significant in this movie is not accurate at all. We are gonna explore John McClane in his twenties. But just as prominent is the 60-year-old version.”

How much more can we get invested in John McClane?

 

[Schlosser85]

We didn’t need a fourth Die Hard, let alone a sixth one.

 

[samsnee]

I just can’t accept a bald John McClane. I really can’t.

 

[Schlosser85]

It throws me off too. It just makes him look like every other Bruce Willis character.

 

[Gothamsknight]

The commercial was literally better than A Good Day To Die Hard.

I do think it's time to lay the franchise to rest though. I'd love another great sequel, but I don't see it happening. The perfect sequel was Die Hard With A Vengeance.