Discussion in 'TV & Media' started by Captaindemotion, Sep 1, 2011.
I wonder is it meant to read '7-8 days'?
I'm sure that they filmed other scenes during that 78 day period; it just took that long to complete that particular sequence.
(Unless it's a typo for 7-8).
John Moore sounds like someone who's never watched Die-Hard. Why do they keep hiring these hacks?
^ It's Fox. They like cheap hacks who'll do what they told (paging Brett Ratner...).
I found his comments about one-liners and wisecracks bizarre. One of the appealing things about McClane right from the first movie was his readiness to crack wise about the situation he found himself in. I liked how he was always complaining, talking to himself, spluttering and swearing.
Really, Bruce Willis' recent less-is-more acting style, while well suited to some of his more offbeat roles, doesn't lend itself to McClane. And 4.0 suffered from its unwillingness to place the odd profanity in/ out of his mouth. Ned Flanders as McClane?
Definitely a contributing factor. With the shit John usually finds himself in, political correctness is probably the last thing on his mind.
More swearing than what's in the actual film I bet.
Damn you (and Willis and Letterman)! I thought that was going to be for real for a minute!
I thought it was funny
The first official photo has been released:
Hmm, it doesn't tell us a lot does it...except that there might be gunplay in this film of course, but we knew that...
Oh, it's Varro from Spartacus. I guess I can buy him as John McClane's son in that pic. He's a big dude, though. He might end up dwarfing Willis onscreen a bit.
I liked this quote from the article:
Making things even more complicated, father and son don’t necessarily get along. “The relationship isn’t always functional. These are two guys who have been estranged for some time. John likes to wing it, see what happens. Jack’s more of a strategist.”
What relationship does John McClane have that is functional? I think he gets along better with Argyle or Al than most of his own family --at least until each one of them is inevitably involved in a terrorist incident that allows for them to spend some quality time together between all the killing.
The teaser trailer...
Seriously...why call it Die Hard? That does not look like Die Hard. It looks like generic Bruce Willis giant action movie cookie cutter #3.
I know, I know...branding, money, blah, blah, blah.
I don't know, I thought it looked okay. I liked the '007 of ...New Jersey' kiss-off line.
Perhaps it's because my expectations were low but I did enjoy it, generic as it looked. Maybe time to change the thread title to 'This Might Not Suck After All?'
As a generic action movie, sure it looks like possibly above average escapism.
But since when was Die Hard about helicopter attack ships and babes in tight vinyl?
See Part One for the helicopter attack ship. As for the babes in vinyl, I'll live with that. Since Willis is no longer a 30-something sex symbol, they're substituting by pandering.
I like what I saw of the trailer. I think complaining that the FIFTH movie in the franchise is not exactly like the first few entries from 2 decades ago is a bit much now. The tone and action in the Bond series changed after two decades. Star Trek films as well. Anything that lasts this long isn't going to be the same. It's a hollow complaint imo.
I liked the anamorphic lens flares in the beginning, like in Die Hard and Die Hard 3. I liked Willis' line and that Addison smile he made in that other shot. He wears a white shirt again. And of course Beethoven's 9th. A much better trailer than any of the trailers for Live Free or Die Hard.
But it still doesn't look like Die Hard to me. Die Hard is about people who almost piss their pants trying to survive against powerful bad guys. This, just like Die Hard 4, looks like superheroes walking through goons. And this time not only McClane is a superhero, his son is one as well. I'm fine with helicopters and tanks and armored cars and a huge setting, but it's almost only the characters that make it a Die Hard or not.
And the score. But since Michael Kamen is dead, we'll be getting some dull shit like in the last one anyway.
(@T'Baio)^Well, there were helicopters in the first movie, to be fair, when the FBI launched their abortive attack.
I do take your point though. I'd prefer a more localised and small-scale movie in the vein of the first one. This one, like 4.0, seems to be taking its cue from With a Vengeance more than the original movie. I love WAV and when it came out, it was a necessary break from the confined-space setting of the first two - but now it seems like each movie has to be bigger and more spectacular than the last.
The babes in leather do look a bit like a leftover from the Wiseman movie (though you could equally have argued that the blonde babe with the scar in WAV was just as misplaced).
I'll forgive it a lot of sins, though, if McClane is more like the spluttering, swearing, out-of-his-depth-but-won't-give-up cop of the first movie and less of the silent superman of the last one. From the look of this one, they might just have given him back some of his original traits. Here's hoping.
There has been someone shooting from a helicopter in literally every Die Hard film, and in the first movie there were Huey gunships. Die Hard 2 was the only one without a helicopter with a machine gun in it, and that still had McClane shooting a handgun from one. Plus, though probably not the best comparison, the last movie had an F-35 jet take out a freeway. As far as babes in tight outfits, Maggie Q certainly fit that bill in the last one, but I don't recall if she wore vinyl or not.
I get your point that this looks more like a war movie than a traditional Die Hard film, but to be fair, the lack of dialogue (except the quip at the end) could be a big part of that. If the theatrical trailer features the usual dry wit and sarcasm of McClane, I think that will go a long way. And the amusing "007 of Plainview, New Jersey" line leads me to believe there's more of that to come.
Separate names with a comma.