A sequel, in both good and bad ways, but still entertaining

Rating: 7/10 (10 January 2008)

The pitch for this film would've been easy: "It's Die Hard, in an airport!" And that's almost essentially what it is. This sequel follows the rules of sequels true to form. Increases the madness, increases the mayhem, increases the body count and does more spectacular explosions. Returning are most of the main players from Die Hard (some in minor roles), the "yippy-kay-yay" catchphrase and the surprisingly regular presence of black Americans (something I like).
First of all, I have to say that Die Hard 2 is not a thinking person's movie. Think too much about what's going on and it will fall apart. The characterizations and decisions made by characters in the course of the film are not all that realistic and the sequence of events of the film doesn't hold up to much logical scrutiny. But despite this, Die Hard 2 has a surprisingly high entertainment factor and if studying film hadn't permanently turned on my ever present analytical side, I'm pretty sure I would've been able to fully ignore these issues and enjoy myself.
You see, Die Hard 2 is, in some ways, like a really enthusiastic, but not too bright person. While, if you really listen to what the guy is saying, it's not going to come across as sensible or rational, his overall glee and rampant eagerness provides a kind of charm that might just win you over anyway. Die Hard 2 works really really really hard to make all those leaps in logic and giant plot holes palatable and works really really really hard to win you over with good natured entertainment.
But this is not Die Hard one. The villains in this film don't have anyone as potent as Alan Rickman's Hans Gruber. There is no real solid supporting character like Reginald VelJohnson's Al Powell. On the plus side, although the bureaucrats in this film are a little ridiculous, they don't approach the total silliness of the FBI agents in Die Hard. Bruce Willis does manage to carry Die Hard 2, but without a worthy antagonist or strong supporting characters, it just seems emptier. Furthermore, the previous film had some notable personal issues that needed to be dealt with, this one really only has the issue of the terrorists, so it doesn't really have any real growth for the characters either, which further waters down the soup of Die Hard 2.
Nonetheless, despite all these things counting against Die Hard 2, it still remains entertaining enough to not be a total waste of time. But this film is more lightweight than the last and certainly not mandatory watching. It holds together because John McClane is so much fun to watch (and the slight bits of reflexive humor thrown in do help to lighten the tone, making the silliness a little more acceptable). And so if all you're looking for is a night of good entertainment, watch the original Die Hard. If, afterwords, you want more of the explosions, ridiculous scenarios and the bad-ass John McClane, this is the next logical place to go. 7/10.