I watched Die Hard for the first time today

[frajer]

They could have maybe put more work into the tagline:
"It will blow you through the back wall of the theater!"

If a film promises me a gloryhole suckjob it's got my money.

[Johnny Textface]

Die Hard 2: Die Harder

Was that really the title? Fuck that's awful. Films OK but not a patch on the original.

[Gulftastic]

They may have had more than one ambulance. I think they arrive in them don't they?

They could have maybe put more work into the tagline:
"It will blow you through the back wall of the theater!"

The ambulance is a plot hole. It's in the removal van they all arrive in, but when we see first see them it's no where in sight as they emerge from the back of said van.

[Claude the Racecar Driving Rockstar Super Sleuth]

Die Harder does at least have a similar feel to the first. With a Vengeance may be the better film but it's never really felt of a piece with the original. Maybe it's the city spanning scope of the plot, the lack of '80s sheen, or maybe just the age I was when it was released. It doesn't even have Reginald Veljohnson, for god's sake.

Obligatory mention of all the sequels starting out as unrelated scripts that were rewritten.

[Lord Mandrake]

Gruber's fall is such a great shot, apparently Alan Rickman was shitting himself so the stunt coordinator had him dropped on the 2 of a count of 5 thus getting that iconic expression.

[Blumf]

You know, I'm not convinced these films are an accurate portrayal of the life of Di Harding. Except, maybe, 5.

[El Unicornio, mang]

Accurate portrayal of motor battery sales though, surely canon

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W7kFGGFI9Xo&feature=emb_logo&ab_channel=AdvanceAutoParts

I think each of the films (bar 5) is based on a completely unrelated novel?

[notjosh]

Accurate portrayal of motor battery sales though, surely canon

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W7kFGGFI9Xo&feature=emb_logo&ab_channel=AdvanceAutoParts

I think each of the films (bar 5) is based on a completely unrelated novel?

The first was based on Roderick Thorpe's Nothing Lasts Forever, a sequel to The Detective, which was filmed with Frank Sinatra. The protagonist is Joe Leland, who is much older than McClane and even less heroic. The 'Holly' character is his daughter. The screenplay itself was still being written as the movie was shot, hence the ambulance plothole mentioned above.

The second is based on 58 Minutes by Walter Wager, a very average potboiler of which I remember very little. The protagonist is Frank Malone.

The third started out as an unrelated screenplay by Jonathan Hensleigh called "Simon Says" which I haven't read, but given that there's only one scene in the film which properly links it to the first film it may not have needed a lot of adaptation.

I think the fourth was based on a magazine article about how hackers could bring down a country if they really tried. Fuck knows about the fifth, I think it was based on the time I did a shit in a plastic bag because my housemate was having a bath and all the pubs were shut.

[Gulftastic]

I get annoyed by the cliche of a blue collar guys with only the fighting skills he learned on the streets being able to batter guys who have clearly trained to a decent level in martial arts.

Particularly bad in 4 when Willis chins Maggie Q. She'd have kicked his wrinkly arse in real ife.

[dissolute ocelot]

Something about all the sequels is that they generally start well and then get shit. Die Hard 3 is great with Samuel L Jackson being peeved, but turns into a boring chase. Die Hard 4 is good when Brucie's saving Justin Long and being the grumpy father (and I defend the scene where he takes down a helicopter as not totally ridiculous) but despite decent Olyphant is a bit forgettable. Die Hard 5 does a nice job of destroying Budapest (pretending to be Moscow) but is utterly shit after that. Die Hard 2 has turned into total nonsense by the end, but at least has decent set-pieces all the way through.

Being set in one place means that Die Hard 1 really has to ratchet up the tension rather than having everybody run around different places, which means the writers actually had to think (is anything worse than a plot where someone suddenly goes "We need to get to X", then "We need to get to Y"). Hans Gruber's criminal scheme is the only one that makes sense. The first one has lots of clever little twists ("You ask for miracles, I give you the F.B.I."), while all the others seem to be competing to be as stupid as possible.

What about the best Die Hard rip-off/Die Hard On An X? It's an excellent blueprint for a film (confined space, criminals, lone hero), and the likes of Passenger 57, Air Force One, Cliffhanger, Speed, Under Siege, Executive Decision, and even the hilarious Olympus Has Fallen are all watchable in one way or another. On the other hand, the Dwayne Johnson Skyscraper is probably the worst Die Hard rip-off ever. I've not seen any of the half-dozen ones set in a sports stadium though.

[Gulftastic]

There was an episode of Star Trek: Next Gen that did a Die Hard with Picard in the McLaine role.

[crankshaft]

There was an episode of Star Trek: Next Gen that did a Die Hard with Picard in the McLaine role.

"Starship Mine"

What about the best Die Hard rip-off/Die Hard On An X? It's an excellent blueprint for a film (confined space, criminals, lone hero), and the likes of Passenger 57, Air Force One, Cliffhanger, Speed, Under Siege, Executive Decision, and even the hilarious Olympus Has Fallen are all watchable in one way or another. On the other hand, the Dwayne Johnson Skyscraper is probably the worst Die Hard rip-off ever. I've not seen any of the half-dozen ones set in a sports stadium though.

Skyscraper is great fun if you're in the mood but objectively it's in no way a good film. I think Speed is the best of the copycats - it's ludicrous but it's fantastically tense and fun, and Sandra Bullock is wonderful in it. Even if it does have one ending too many (although it's worth it for the final shot).

[beanheadmcginty]

When he first arrives at Nakatomi Plaza, Bruce is directed to a touchscreen computer where he searches for his wife under the name McClane. She's not there, so he searches for her maiden name Gennaro, which when he presses on it CLEARLY CHANGES SPELLING ON SCREEN TO "GENNERO". Plain as day. It drives me made that such a clear error made it to the final film.

[lipsink]

Die Harder does at least have a similar feel to the first. With a Vengeance may be the better film but it's never really felt of a piece with the original. Maybe it's the city spanning scope of the plot, the lack of '80s sheen, or maybe just the age I was when it was released. It doesn't even have Reginald Veljohnson, for god's sake.

To me, Vengeance seems more cut from the same cloth as the first. The sense of being trapped that McClaine has in the first film isn't really there with no 2. Plus, both 1 and 3 feel a little like Lumet films with various threads happening over one day in  a city. The escaping the school sequence in no. 3 is one of the most exciting sequences in the entire franchise.

[greenman]

To me, Vengeance seems more cut from the same cloth as the first. The sense of being trapped that McClaine has in the first film isn't really there with no 2. Plus, both 1 and 3 feel a little like Lumet films with various threads happening over one day in  a city. The escaping the school sequence in no. 3 is one of the most exciting sequences in the entire franchise.

The difference you could argue I spose is that the original McClain isn't just physically confined but also strongly caught up in the villain's scheme. The second film does I think manage to get across a scene of physical isolation quite well but the villain's scheme is much less ingenious with only one big twist to it, the films more McClain proactively going after them.

[Lemming]

Never really got on with Die Hard 3 - the scope is too big and he's not physically trapped anywhere, plus the addition of Samuel L Jackson's character didn't sit well with me either, it only really works if McClane is fighting more or less alone against the odds. In Die Hard 2 he could technically leave the airport (at least at first), but if he does, Holly and several hundred other people on the planes are likely doomed. Plus the scope still feels suitably small - he's mostly just running around the airport (which, like Nakatomi Plaza, has turned into a deathtrap).

[phantom_power]

Was that really the title? Fuck that's awful. Films OK but not a patch on the original.

It isn't the title on the actual film. I watched it yesterday and it is just Die Hard 2. Smashing onto the screen with Harlinesque brashness.

It is a fun action film but nothing on the first. It is very much an early 90s action film with gratuitous slo-mo squib shots and incredibly loud gunfire. It also has that queasy orange haze that a lot of action films around that time have. The original film is a bona fide classic on a par with Close Encounters, The Godfather or anything else in the canon of greatest films of their type whereas the sequel is just a good action film. It is quite messy and it really ramps up the spectacle at the expense of everything else that made the first one so great. It has some truly shit one-liners as well - "Which sets off the metal detectors first, the lead in your ass or the shit in your brains". Doesn't even make sense.

I think an indicator of how inferior it is to the first one is that I remember we had it on pirate video back in the day so I watched it countless times and yet on a rewatch the only thing I remembered were the big set pieces. The original is full of memorable bits

[lipsink]

I think the airport setting on Die Hard 2 rubs me up the wrong way as it just reminds me a little of all those slightly silly disaster movie tropes from the 1960s/1970s. It feels a little more TV movie than 1 and 3.

[phantom_power]

Watching Die Hard now and never realised Huey Lewis was in it (not really)

Also, that prick on the front desk who lets McClane piss about trying to find his wife only to be told that the only people left in the building were all at the party on the same floor. Why not open with that, dipshit

Argyle is waiting to see if John is going to go home with Holly or needs somewhere to stay. He checks up and it is all still up in the air before it all kicks off and then he is just enjoying chilling in his sweet ride listening to one Run DMC song over and over again while probably smoking crank

[notjosh]

Also, that prick on the front desk who lets McClane piss about trying to find his wife only to be told that the only people left in the building were all at the party on the same floor. Why not open with that, dipshit

"The party. They're the only people left in the building." That line always gets a laugh whenever I've seen it in the cinema.

Argyle is waiting to see if John is going to go home with Holly or needs somewhere to stay. He checks up and it is all still up in the air before it all kicks off and then he is just enjoying chilling in his sweet ride listening to one Run DMC song over and over again while probably smoking crank

Stevie Wonder - Skeletons isn't it?

[phantom_power]

I had a disagreement with a pal recently as I always thought during that scene when Hans says "Clay, Bill Clay" the sign was behind Hans and McClaine was looking at it and figured out Hans had just taken a quick look at it. But I think now it was meant to be from Hans' point of view.

The sign is in front of McClaine and Hans is behind the sign so he wouldn't be able to see it. I think it is there to show that McClaine is checking if Hans is who he says he is and also that Hans has thought ahead by memorising a name

[Cuellar]

When he first arrives at Nakatomi Plaza, Bruce is directed to a touchscreen computer where he searches for his wife under the name McClane. She's not there, so he searches for her maiden name Gennaro, which when he presses on it CLEARLY CHANGES SPELLING ON SCREEN TO "GENNERO". Plain as day. It drives me made that such a clear error made it to the final film.

I noticed this when I watched it again the other day!!

My theory is it is representative of the big faceless corporation not actually appreciating her: she thinks she's striking out on her own, but the world she's in holds her in complete contempt. Best to go back to useless John and a life of quiet wifely servitude.

[MojoJojo]

The ambulance is a plot hole. It's in the removal van they all arrive in, but when we see first see them it's no where in sight as they emerge from the back of said van.

Yeah, OK. Inspired by this thread I watched it last night. It's not actually an ambulance - it's a van with fire department writing and logos painted on.

One thing that was more ambiguous than I remembered is when McClain chucks the body onto Al's car to get his attention. I thought John was the one who started shooting the car, but it's not explicitly shown who's shooting, and you can hear gunshots while John says "Welcome to the party, pal!" and he's clearly not shooting. But we don't see any of the baddies shooting, just gun flashes and it's not clear why they'd start shooting at that point.

The computer stuff is a bit weird. A lot of emphasis is placed on how computerised the building is, and there's a subtle implication that it actually tracks people when he goes to reception looking for Holly, but then it doesn't really go anywhere. It makes me wonder if there was some idea that John would have to fight the building as much as the terrorists or something. Maybe the computer stuff was just novel enough at the time to include it for it's own sake.

[Sonny_Jim]

Gruber's fall is such a great shot, apparently Alan Rickman was shitting himself so the stunt coordinator had him dropped on the 2 of a count of 5 thus getting that iconic expression.

Can't remember where I read it, but apparently Alan would visibly wince whenever a gun went off near him, so every shot of him shooting a gun is a wide.  hat fucked etc..

[dead-ced-dead]

Yeah, OK. Inspired by this thread I watched it last night. It's not actually an ambulance - it's a van with fire department writing and logos painted on.

One thing that was more ambiguous than I remembered is when McClain chucks the body onto Al's car to get his attention. I thought John was the one who started shooting the car, but it's not explicitly shown who's shooting, and you can hear gunshots while John says "Welcome to the party, pal!" and he's clearly not shooting. But we don't see any of the baddies shooting, just gun flashes and it's not clear why they'd start shooting at that point.

The computer stuff is a bit weird. A lot of emphasis is placed on how computerised the building is, and there's a subtle implication that it actually tracks people when he goes to reception looking for Holly, but then it doesn't really go anywhere. It makes me wonder if there was some idea that John would have to fight the building as much as the terrorists or something. Maybe the computer stuff was just novel enough at the time to include it for it's own sake.

I'm always curious about the idea of previous script drafts of films where subplots have been excised along the way and small remnants of those plot lines exist in the final draft. I've always felt the computerised building line at the start is the last remnant of a plot line that was later cut out that was only kept in because it helps John find out that Holly's using her maiden name.

[Sonny_Jim]

I always thought it was just to illustrate the high stakes.  This was a really classy corporation with the very latest hoo-hah, look even the building is a computer!

Just like the robot from Rocky 4.

[phantom_power]

And also to juxtapose the old-fashioned, awe-shucks McClaine against the shiny new mega-corp and techno-terrorists/robbers

[dead-ced-dead]

I always thought it was just to illustrate the high stakes.  This was a really classy corporation with the very latest hoo-hah, look even the building is a computer!

Just like the robot from Rocky 4.

I suppose in the context of the 1980s when the ideas of computers were SUPER DUPER HIGH TECH!

[lipsink]

The sign is in front of McClaine and Hans is behind the sign so he wouldn't be able to see it. I think it is there to show that McClaine is checking if Hans is who he says he is and also that Hans has thought ahead by memorising a name

Yeah that's what I always thought. My friend insisted that the sign was behind John and that Hans was looking at it. But we get a shot of McClain reacting after it zooms in on the Bill Clay name.

I also love the bit where Sgt Al Powell nearly shoots at Argyll cos he's become so fucking trigger happy again. My favourite line of the entire film that always made me laugh was "He could be a fucking bartender for all we know!"

Seeing Die Hard in the cinema around Xmas time is really good fun cos it's usually full of (not annoying) fans. The biggest cheers when I saw it were when Rickman first appears, Sgt Al Powell shooting Karl and Holly punching the news reporter.

[sevendaughters]

don't forget McClaine thwarts the FBI in the film, a historic anti-reds group, the case for Die Hard's communism grows, think of all the shots of McClaine bathed in red light, bleeding red blood for the cause.