I gave it a C. I thought it was pretty weak. It had a story that didn't quite come into focus and as Captain Craig
said, the bad guys were pretty bland and poorly fleshed out. Its main highlight, aside from the action, is that it furthers the adventures of the iconic John McClane and gives us some decent father/son drama woven into the action. Die Hard has always been about family issues and they did okay in advancing that here, as much as 5th installment in a 25 year old action movie franchise could anyway. Jai Courtney was pretty good as Jr. and played well against Willis but I don't think I'd want to see him carry the franchise if that's what they were suggesting at the end. As for the action itself, some of it was pretty generic, but some of it was fun, elevated only by Willis' brand of badassery. A few scenes were as over the top as what we got in Die Hard 4 and those were pretty fun too. Watching Bruce Willis go through the ringer hasn't gotten old yet.
Another highlight I want to point out is Yuila Snigir. She wasn't Maggie Q's supermodel mercenary with graceful yet brutal fighting skills but she was pretty easy on the eyes and carried herself well enough as the hardened villainess with sex appeal. Here are her various looks from the movie…
And after all defending of it, 97 minute runtime and all...
I was satisfied with the runtime. This wasn't the kind of movie I could have sat though for over 2 hours.
You have to wonder how relevant rottentomatoes
think they are, since the critics give it 14% and the nearly 27.5 thousand bum-on-seat reviews give it 82%.
Yeah, looks like the critics hated it because the plot was too thin even for an action movie and it was a weak installment in the franchise. And it looks like the public likes it because it's Die Hard and they probably enjoyed the ride at least a little, but mainly, it's Die Hard. I don't think it stands on its own as a good action film in its own right.