Live Free or DIE HARD.....

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Did the cursing and blood really make that much of a difference to you? Oh well, if it did it did, who am i to argue.

The amount of dubbing in the movie still pisses me off though.

 

[Wolverini]

It didnt make THAT much of a difference but I watched 1,2 and 3 before I went to 4 so pretty much everything was fresh in my head again.

Cursing and blood became part of Die Hard and DH4.0 felt weird... just because of that. I'm glad that unrated version fixed that. I havent noticed dubbing in the Unrated version though ...

 

[Nightmare]

I saw the Unrated DVD version so i cant really compare it to the lame pg-13 theatre version, but still it was kick ass!

 

[Cagefighterkip]

unrated owns all your asses, not to mention said ass of DIE HARD 2

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

It didnt make THAT much of a difference but I watched 1,2 and 3 before I went to 4 so pretty much everything was fresh in my head again.

Cursing and blood became part of Die Hard and DH4.0 felt weird... just because of that. I'm glad that unrated version fixed that. I havent noticed dubbing in the Unrated version though ...

Watch it a few more times you will notice it, sometimes its dubbing, others its the character's mouth's not moving correctly with the lines. It comes close to ruining the movie for me as i think its really shoddy film-making.

Luckily the movie has enough good points for me to still thoroughly enjoy it.

 

[Jick]

I gave it a 10.
most entertaining movie I ever saw.

 

[KenK]

"I'm gonna kill this mother-f***er, and get my daughter back.
Or I'm gonna get my daughter back, and kill this mother-f***er."

 

[Kevin Roegele]

Live Free or Die Hard is technically impressive but completely uninvolving.

Typically for Len Wiseman, there is little humour and little genuine emotion.

Bruce Willis played Bruce Willis, not John McClane.

And the script had McClane as some kind of ultra-confident superhero, not the panicky, pissed-off, why-the-hell-did-this-happen-to-me, improvise-at-the-last-second character we all know and love.

If the movie had a different name, no-one would even think to compare it to the previous Die Hard movies.

 

[Sebastos]

I just watched the unedited and Mature version. Much better, than the original.

 

[TNC9852002]

Damn...I'm gonna have to check that out!

-TNC

 

[Sebastos]

Do so. I ordered it on my "Movies on Demand" feature. You wouldn't believe all the movies I can watch already.

 

[batgirl2119]

Live Free or Die Hard is technically impressive but completely uninvolving.

Typically for Len Wiseman, there is little humour and little genuine emotion.

.

its only what, his 3rd movie? hey he already has a typical movie, not bad for a new comer. i think he'll get better as he goes, still young. not bad so far. i personally loved the underworld movies.

 

[Sebastos]

I only liked the first Underworld.

 

[Cagefighterkip]

I only liked the first Underworld.

ditto

 

[WorthyStevens]

Live Free or Die Hard is technically impressive but completely uninvolving.

Typically for Len Wiseman, there is little humour and little genuine emotion.

Bruce Willis played Bruce Willis, not John McClane.

If the movie had a different name, no-one would even think to compare it to the previous Die Hard movies.

He's older and more mature; his character change was bound to happen. Not to mention this type of situation's become same old, same old for him after having faced so many terrorists already.

McClane's still McClane, just older and wiser.

And the script had McClane as some kind of ultra-confident superhero, not the panicky, pissed-off, why-the-hell-did-this-happen-to-me, improvise-at-the-last-second character we all know and love.

Did you completely miss the tunnel scene, which had all of what you listed and more?

 

[Figs]

Live Free or Die Hard is technically impressive but completely uninvolving.

Typically for Len Wiseman, there is little humour and little genuine emotion.

Bruce Willis played Bruce Willis, not John McClane.

And the script had McClane as some kind of ultra-confident superhero, not the panicky, pissed-off, why-the-hell-did-this-happen-to-me, improvise-at-the-last-second character we all know and love.

If the movie had a different name, no-one would even think to compare it to the previous Die Hard movies.

While I loved LFDH, I have to agree with you a bit. When he says that line in the tunnel scene about "Yeah John, just pick up the kid and bring him here" that was supposed to be like the line in the first film "Come to the party John, have a good time"(I know those aren't direct quotes, I can't remember them word for word). Those lines where he is mocking them because what was supposed to be something simple turned into a **** storm.

In LFDH, when he gave that line it did feel kind of dialed in. Like he didn't put the same emotion and wise cracking attitude of John McClane into it.

He's older and more mature; his character change was bound to happen. Not to mention this type of situation's become same old, same old for him after having faced so many terrorists already.

McClane's still McClane, just older and wiser.



Did you completely miss the tunnel scene, which had all of what you listed and more?

I also agree that maybe it is because he is "older and wiser" but I didn't like the way he said that quote in the tunnel. I think Kevin is a bit right when he says he was more playing himself than "full on" McClane.

 

[블라스]

I guess characters are supposed to react exactly the same way for every situation they might encounter until the very day they die.

 

[ToddIsDead]

I guess characters are supposed to react exactly the same way for every situation they might encounter until the very day they die.

Yes.

 

[블라스]

Yes.

Change your sig, used tampon.

Edit: Hiiii *waves*

 

[WorthyStevens]

I also agree that maybe it is because he is "older and wiser" but I didn't like the way he said that quote in the tunnel. I think Kevin is a bit right when he says he was more playing himself than "full on" McClane.

Do you think he's going to act surprised and shocked, considering that he's been through countless terrorist situations?

 

[Figs]

Do you think he's going to act surprised and shocked, considering that he's been through countless terrorist situations?

I already said that maybe it is because he is "older and wiser" and was acting in accordance with the time that has gone by with the character.

As for countless terrorist situations...I only count 4.

 

[Warhammer]

I'd say the tunnel scene was the scene that made me go "Yep, this is McClane." I also missed the fact that he wasn't the same wisecracking, improvising guy, but I took it has John McClane mature and wiser. Especially after the scene when Farrell is like "You act like you've done this before" and the hero speech when they were going to West Virginia.

 

[Iceburgeruk]

1) The tunnel quote was a bit off. But i let it go considering they made some real nice subtle links to the previous films namely the Agent Johnson bit which was a nice left-field joke that i didn`t expect.

2) I kinda found the film`s begining a lil annoying. I liked the supporting cast from die hard with a vengeance. It was cool to see his buddies and comrades in arms. It felt annoying that none of them were in the opening, especially considering his boss wasn`t even the same guy anymore. If they make die hard 5 i want at least a couple of the police charcters from with a vengeance to reappear.

3) On the comentary it says about how they were gonna have mcLane`s son as the hacker. I think they should still keep the son idea in mind. Fox is prob gonna want to do die hard films until the company implodes so which would you prefer a) in die hard 5 they introduce john mclane jr. He and mclane sr have a father-son bonding experience vis-a-vis violent altercations and murders of evil terrorist thespians. John mclane jr becomes main charatcer in die hard 6 or 7. So the son of mclane (so bruce willis can still guest star) and thereby would be an original character. b) in die hard 5 ,6 or 7 they recast mclane when willis gets too old and so you have some lame-ass actor trying to do a better mclane that willis himself. and fail. miserably.

I would go for option a as it would be a well written new charatcer as opposed to some lame-ass doing a weak impersonation of bruce willis. I mean die hard 4.o was the most profitable of the series so fox are unlikley to stop so those seem to be the two options we got.

It also could mean that we could have the first action character lieneage. 5 to 6 films with John McLane. 6 films with Jack/John Mclane jr. 6 films with John Mclane`s grandson.

That would also mean that die hard would never suffer from the continuity problems bond does. If you go the bond route and constantly recast the character then somehow you have to try and have that the john Mclane in die hard 1 is still the same john mclane hoverboarding it up in die hard 20 in 2054. It wouldn`t work. Wheras if it is the sons and grandson and great grandsons then the films would make sense as it would mean that it was john mclane the first in die hard in 1989 and then it is mclane`s grandson or great grandson in die hard 20 in 2054.

I simply think that fox is gonna want to carry on making die hard films reguardless and so i would rather we saw progression with john mclane`s son taking over being the hero and maybe with john mclane reconciling with holly in time for a rocky retirement rather than seeing a regression with endless john mclane films but without wilis` take on the character and his wry humor and instead heavy doses of poorly delivered catchphrases and attempts to try and BE Bruce Willis` iconic character.

 

[Hellstormer]

^Bad idea. Bruce Willis IS McClane. They said 4 was the last film. McClane Jr. loves to suck d***.

 

[Iceburgeruk]

^Bad idea. Bruce Willis IS McClane. They said 4 was the last film. McClane Jr. loves to suck d***.

1) I`m pretty sure they`ve said they are gonna make more.

2) And i was simply saying if it comes to a stage where the only choice is...

A)Remake with some putz trying to play McLane.

or

B)Sequel with Junior taking over and McLane retiring to patch things up with Holly.

I would go with choice B.

That was all i was getting at.