A Good Day to Die Hard (Die Hard 5)

[Jack Nevada]

The same way you justify some old fart in a pit that fixes spine damage by hanging you on a rope and just popping your spinal disc in place. It was a similar type of McGuffin-esqe quality needed to move the plot along and allow the characters to work in and around the uranium vault where radiation had been "pooling". It also doesn't hurt that a line of dialogue is included with the character to acknowledge she was prepared for this event, thus not caught off guard. Meaning they were prepared and didn't just "magically" fix the radiation situation in a McGyver type way. 

 

Of all the complaints that's hardly one worthy of complaint. 

It was just one of the more stupid little things in the script. 

[Captain Craig]

I don't agree, as at least dialogue is given to the preparedness of that situation.

Rallax had a much better gripe that I agreed with regarding the use of the drone and language of TOT was jaring. The CIA had a plan but due to either poor writing for that portion or editing just what the full use of the drone was in that situation was fuzzy regarding extraction. 

[Jack Nevada]

Its overall just a really shitty and stupid movie, and I really didn't like it. Fuck this movie

[Captain Craig]

Thanks for the insight. 

[Jack Nevada]

Thanks for the insight. 

You're welcome.

[Jack Nevada]

Honestly, the movie doesn't deserve much more insight than I have offered. It would be a waste of time

[Michael Gary Scott]

And the movie totally wasted Mary Elisabeth winstead.

[Deep Wang]

I don't agree, as at least dialogue is given to the preparedness of that situation.

Rallax had a much better gripe that I agreed with regarding the use of the drone and language of TOT was jaring. The CIA had a plan but due to either poor writing for that portion or editing just what the full use of the drone was in that situation was fuzzy regarding extraction. 

 

Oh, I hated the magical device too, we just never got that far.

[MagnetMan]

I so badly wanted to like this movie.  Unbelievable but entertaining car chase at the opening... good.  And... that's about it.  A lot of the dialogue sounded like it was written by a 10-year old boy.

 

"We gonna kill sum bad guys! Pew pew pew."

 

The only good line of the movie was McClane's grenade line... but I might be blowing that out of proportion because by the time we got to that line, I was so desperate for anything to like.  Not an absolutely horrible movie, but not even close to being a "Die Hard" movie.

[acab]

By far the worst Die Hard film. It was just a bad ugly dumb picture. And i don't mean that because it was called Die Hard. As a DH film it was an embarrassement. But even as an ordinary action film it was awful.

There isn't much to say that it isn't already covered. I 'll just say that the writer and the director of this film have never seen a Die Hard film in their lives and they are clueless of what makes a decent action film. John Moore probably saw the Bourne series a bit too much but of course he didn't get it. He didn't understand that there was a reason those movies were shot the way they were. He didn't understand the context of those films and he doesn't have the talent to do something similar. Of course he had a braindead script to work with and his leading star being incredibly sleepy and bored. I honestly thought that Bruce would fall asleep right before the first car chase.

A car chase that it was so badly shot and edited that i didn't know where McLane was. I didn't know which vehicle he was driving and i wasn't sure if he was chasing someone or he was being chased. Thankfully it only took half the chase to really figure it out. It was a bit more than figuring out the twist.

But i honestly have years to see a worst cinematography for a big budget Hollywood film. It felt as if we were watching a bootleg version of the film. As if they shot a sceen projecting the film.

A huge disappointment.

[Phil in the Blank]

This movie is kinda enjoyable in its badness....But this is a Die Hard movies, and Die Hard movies are meant to be enjoyable by being good. Not so bad you laugh at it.

 

Epic Fail

[Squaremaster316]

Terrible dialogue, flat action scenes, dumb supporting characters, generic plot, and a toneless, uninspired performances by Willis.  Worst film of the franchise and the worst action film since Abduction.

 

A failure all around.

 

* out of *****

[TheMovieman]

What. A. Piece. Of. Crap.

 

That is all.

 

*/*****, (F, 2/10, 0.5/4)

[ladyevenstar22]

i'm watching this right now, still 20mn to go and i'm bored 

 

the actor playing the kid is boring , and even bruce willis is kinda blahh "i'm on vacation every other sec"

 

is it the file i'm watching or the russian spoken in the film didnt have any subtitles coz boring when you can't understand what's being said , i'm thinking the one before was better all things considered

 

so they decided to havoc destruction in moscow etc instead of the usa lol

 

and they left the country unharmed righhttt this is right up there with liam neeson "taken" except he was more badass about it than these two clowns

 

anyhoo give it a C for crime against moviegoers and movie-making, i was bored, it elicited no emotions  in me good or bad i agree with jack except i never got to a point where i could get worked up over the film to write such a passionate review, basically film was bland and so was my reaction to it

 

i have this vague sensation that the one before it was way better...then again this would make many other film look good in comparison

Edited July 5, 2013 by ladyevenstar22

[Crusader]

Right 

 

John Moore is in bottom 3 filmmakers right now so I had my expectations insanely low. He also made Behind Enemy Lines which offended me greatly but hey will Hollywood ever portray my country the right way ? of course not 

 

With that being said this is a Die Hard movie and even though the fourth one was bad and wasn't really what Die Hard's about I started watching wanting to like something ... anything ... 

 

Nonsensical action, terrible plotting, awful directing, piss poor editing, atrocious dialogue you name it its all there 

 

Van Damme makes 10 times better DTD movies 

 

And here's the kicker - I couldn't even stomach watching more than 30 minutes of this ... yep didn't even dignify this piece of shit a whole viewing 

 

1/10 

 

Shame on you Bruce shame on you ,,, its not like he's in a Nic Cage type of financial problems this is the character that started his movie career and the one he's most famous for and this is how you shit on your own legacy ??? 

[IndustriousAngel]

Wow what a piece of ... nothingness. Now what's wrong here?

1 - this isn't a Die Hard movie. Calling it "Die Hard" was like Ridley Scott misnaming his "Robin Hood" - if you're using a franchise or brand name, you should - if not adhere to - at least acknowledge the characteristics of said franchise. This was far more James Bond than Die Hard.

2 - acting was a-tro-cious. usually this is no big deal with an actioner, but if you include sentimental scenes among the McClanes, it definitely hurts if one of the actors has absolute zero charisma and the other is sleepwalking.

3 - the music. I only saw it on BD, so maybe the theatrical mix was better, but the music was grating and mixed so loud the dialogue was really hard to understand. Ok, when I understood it, it didn't make that much sense either so maybe that was a feature, not a bug.

4 - the editing. I thought we were done with these jumpy cuts and back to understandable action scenes but not so. Especially the car chase which filled about 15 minutes (without doing anything for the story) would have deserved the Cuaron-treatment.

5 - the camera. Half the time the movie looked like a shooter game with HDR effects.

6 - the humour. what humour? exactly.

7 - product placement. Don't get me wrong, I know many budgets get softened by it, but here it was just too obvious - it reminded me of the worst pb episodes in the James Bond franchise.

 

Anything positive? of course, it's the rare movie doesn't show at least as single strength, so:

1 - the running time is mercifully short.

[DAR]

Is it the worst Die Hard film? YesIs the movie as bad as its reputation? NoIs it kind of boring and uneventful? YesIs it time for John McClaine to ride off into the sunset? YesC

Edited January 11, 2014 by DAR

[RobinHood26]

Wow I can't believe I never explained my hatred for this movie. Top 3 worst movies of the year. Terrible Terrible movie, im not sure if there is one redeeming quality. Ok 1, I like the shot where the truck crashes. That's it. One shot in the whole movie.

 

D (64)

[Empire]

This movie is down right horrible. I really hate this movie. It makes Die Hard 4 look like a masterpiece. Bruce Willis seemed like he wasn't trying at all. Atleast I hope he wasn't as his acting was straight bad in it.

 

I give it a......

 

D(66)

[mattmav45]

I go on vacation for a week, and as luck would have it this is the film waiting for me upon my arrival back.

 

What we have here is yet another franchise film that stretches the material to the point of self-parody.  To simply label this film forgettable is an insult to all forgettable films.  In the end one is left wishing John Moore had taken the film's title to heart before he made the damn thing.

 

Laughable as fuck.