• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Die Hard V - Not Looking Good...

Why do people say "officially" like that anyway? It's not as if they've filed a memo to the effect.

My big objection is the cunty son addition. It sunk Indiana Jones (or helped anyway). People don't want or need it.
 
^ The cunty son did exist in the original movie and the daughter didn't harm 4.0. A part of the McClane family being in trouble or danger has always been part of the series (apart from Vengeance), so I don't really view this as being akin to The Kingdom of the Numb Skulls. Nor do I have any problem with the set-up/ plot for the movie.

My main gripe is with the completely uninspiring choice of ultra-bland director and writer, a typically safe pair of Fox hands. However, if they prove me wrong and give us a truly great Die Hard movie, no-one will be happier to eat his words than yours truly.
 
Pingfah said:
Dunno what all the whining is about, seems like a perfectly reasonable setup for an action movie.

Its success or failure will be in the execution, not the studio's ability to write a one paragraph synopsis.
Click to expand...

Yeah it seems like a reasonable setup for an action film, just not neccesarily a Die Hard film, unless Russia's gonna be under siege from terrorists....
 
He can still kick ass without them belonging to terrorists, I don't see that it matters really. The specific inclusion of terrorists has no bearing on whether the film will be enjoyable or not.
 
Starkers said:
Pingfah said:
Dunno what all the whining is about, seems like a perfectly reasonable setup for an action movie.

Its success or failure will be in the execution, not the studio's ability to write a one paragraph synopsis.
Click to expand...

Yeah it seems like a reasonable setup for an action film, just not neccesarily a Die Hard film, unless Russia's gonna be under siege from terrorists....
Click to expand...

It would be really interesting and daring if he was fighting off American Terrorists in Russia.
 
It's all about the execution, really. I mean, Die Hard and Under Siege have the same premise, but the Seagal movie is no match for Bruce's finest hour or two.

@ Aldo, technically, McClane has fought American terrorists in two of the movies to date.
 
Yeah, I realized that after I hit submit, was just too lazy to edit it :p

Although fighting American terrorists on foreign soil could be a potentially new twist to the series. But judging from the brief plot summary we have, that doesn't appear to be the case.
 
^Actually maybe even in three of the films since several of Hans' team are American.

Of course to destroy my own argument, as Hans says "Who says we're terrorists?"

I guess we haven't learned much about the actual plot beyond McClane and son fight Russians (maybe) but as different as they all are the Die Hard films do share the same DNA, they're all about something being taken over/taken hostage. In the first it's an office block, in the second it's an airport, the third is New York and the 4th is America. Be interesting to see what the hook of the fifth one is...I have a horrible feeling it'll just be McClane and Son vs generic band of hoodlums.

Hopefully the change of location will see the return of John McClane being out of his depth, I think the 4th one made him too super human.
 
Can't wait to see John use a fridge to survive a nuclear explosion. And don't forget the CG animals!
 
http://www.empireonline.com/news/story.asp?NID=34715

Director John Moore talks DHV and he's
keen to downplay idea that the fifth Die Hard could be a light-hearted romp - this is a Die Hard movie, pure and simple. In other words, no glib jokes then? No "How can the same shit happen to the same guy five times..." lines?
"No, because that’s preposterous! I don’t know whether it’s post-financial crash or whatever, but I don’t think people are in the mood for that bollocks anymore. People are well savvy to the cynical reheating of any product, any franchise. Any shit won’t do. The bar’s a bit higher."
But what about the fish-out-of-water element, with McClane in Moscow?
"There are a couple of great gags and a couple of great McClanisms. It’s not like he this idiot, bumbling around Moscow making ‘America won the Cold War’ jokes. It’s not Carry On Die Hard, I can assure you…"
And what about the scale of the movie? So far, each Die Hard has been bigger than the one before…
"The scope along goes from New York to Moscow. It’s very, very international. There’s a car chase through Moscow that’s taking us 78 days to shoot. So… yeah. That should answer your question!"
Click to expand...
 
78 days to shoot one car chase? I understand that action sequences take a lot of time and coordination, but, jeez that had better be the best friggin' car chase anyone's ever put on film.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top