Almost good

Rating: 5/10 (22 January 2001)

I heard someone say Die Hard "blew up the mold!" True enough. Die Hard 2 was so highly anticipated that the theaters actually started showing it a day or two (can't remember) early. To me, that one lived up to its predecessor's legacy. It maintained the claustrophobic feel while mixing up the formula. (And that airplane crash scene gave me chills!)
Die Hard with a Vengeance completely abandons the claustrophobia that made the DH films unique. Instead of a hero with geographical limitations, we get a hero with chronological limitations. (Most of his Herculean labors must be accomplished within a certain time frame or something bad will happen.) So what's different about that? At least half the thrillers of all time involve some sort of time limit. So in abandoning its heritage, DH3 loses its identity.
Despite that, DH3 almost succeeds in creating a new identity of its own. In a rarity for action thrillers, we actually watch each heroic effort wondering if John McClane will succeed, as he doesn't succeed every time. However, the movie abruptly stops these challenges about halfway through, and the rest of the movie is just generic, stunt-filled cat-and-mouse fare.
The other level on which this movie fails is in showing us bleak futures for characters we love. The McClanes were having marital difficulty in the first movie, but they got back together, and John changed as a result of his experiences in that office building. Now, John is virtually psychotic since his wife left him. What happened? For that alone I wish I hadn't seen this movie. The last time I saw them they were happy if a bit cursed when Christmas rolled around.
So, what's the score now? Three severe blows to the head? That's more than enough since the movie never actually recovers from the first one. It's a shame, too. All through this movie you can see the wasted potential.