Agent Richard07 wrote:
Die Hard 3 ONLY worked because it was a revenge plot by a Gruber brother. There was an actual reason why the hell he was involved again.
That answers my question. I've been wondering why Die Hard 3 was so highly regarded. Like 4 and 5, I've always seen it as a generic action movie with Bruce Willis and the "Die Hard" name slapped on.
Oh its way better than 4 or 5, and in fact better than 2, and not only because there's a logical reason why McClane's involved. There's also Samual L Jackson before he started just playing the same bad ass mother fucker in everything (until Django) there's the fact McClane is in over his head and is mortal (come on the guy spends the entire film hung over). Simon's plan is overly complicated but it is well thought out, and the riddles are clever, and Jeremy Irons is only a smidgen away from being as cool as Alan Rickman was.
Plus it's use of 'The animals go in two by two' is inspired.
Only the ending lets it down really.
Almost forgot, it's an action film comfortable enough to let McClane's fellow cops be competant and heroic too, how refreshing is that!