Great fun as a noisy summer blockbuster but perhaps too limited to stand the test of time outside of home court advantage

Rating: Null/10 (12 July 2007)

Halfway through the summer of 2007 and I had still to see a blockbuster I really enjoyed. Fantastic Four 2, Ocean's 13, Shrek 3, Spiderman 3, Pirates of the Caribbean 3 and others were OK at best and rubbish at worst and I had high hopes that Die Hard 4.0 (as it was called in the UK) would be the film that just remembered the fun and action that a solid summer blockbuster can deliver. Mostly, I'm happy to report, this is just what it delivers. Although it gets a bit bogged down as it moves forward, the narrative throws up loads of action and excitement, with noise and spectacle being the name of the game. Praising the film for being "old school" perhaps ignores the amount of CGI that it uses but it is true to say that the action feels remarkably "real" with stuntmen and real objects used to good effect.
The delivery is mixed but the first half of the film has some great moments of action that gets the blend of action, comedy and tension just right  the highpoint for me being the build-up and execution of the traffic being sent into the tunnel (the lights going out being a great trigger). After this (particularly from the scene in the powerplant onwards) the action remains overblown but it tends to lose a certain amount of tension due to the overblown nature of the action and narrative. This was to be expected because we are not given the control surroundings of the first two films or the focused action of the third but it is still a little disappointing to be sitting back watching the scale of the action, rather than really being into it.
For this reason I do feel that the film is unlikely to be viewed as kindly as it is being at present (time of release) and that the flaws across it will be exposed when it moved out of the summer period and into the homes of the audience. The narrative is one of the problems and I do agree with those that ask if this couldn't have been improved in the decade since the third film. The concept is good but it isn't really as smart as in other films where the robbery is a clever twist  here it doesn't quite work and really we are left with a chase movie. This is also why the first half of the film was more enjoyable for me, because McClane was the hunted  just like he was in the other films, albeit the hunted turning the tables. However in the second half he becomes the Terminator  an unstoppable pursuer. Yes, he hurts himself like McClane and spits blood, but it is hard to avoid the fact that he is the hunter and that he is essentially swatting aside anything that is put in his path to stop him. In this regard McClane becomes less relevant within his own film and I think it is understandable that some fans of the series are a bit let down by this.
The move away from this part of the series is minor though and is minor compared to the more obvious shift which saw Fox chasing a bigger audience and sacrificing content for it. With a PG-13 we are treated to a swear-free experience that even sees the catchphrase essentially dropped. Swearing itself is not something I miss but when it is replaced by bad lip-synching then it is annoying and it does make the whole film feel cheap. Again I am totally with the fans who wonder why the series they love was cheapened in an attempt to be marketable for the kiddie audience. Gabriel is not a great villain  he is a bit too one-dimensional and he is more Colonel Sanders than he is Hans Gruber.
Wiseman directs the action pretty well even if he loses it a little as the film goes on. The use of the score to link with the first film is always appreciated by me and the odd injoke was amusing even they were a bit clunky at times (we got the Agent Johnson bit  we didn't need it emphasised). Willis needed more material to work with because at times he does seem like he is asleep. I enjoyed his McClane performance with all that I expected from it, but he cannot find the urgency that he brought to the other films, perhaps because of his role as hunter. Long is a nice sidekick  he's no Jackson but he is enjoyable. Olyphant does his menacing stare well enough but offers little else. Q is a physical presence but she cannot bring much to the party beyond this. Winstead is an unwelcome addition to the film in my opinion. Her introduction makes for a slow start and her involvement in the action is unnecessary  McClane was already going after Gabriel, the additional motivation was not needed by him or by the audience, making her weak performance a distraction more than a bonus.
I have been negative here but I am just trying to think beyond the summer. However not all of what I applies at this time because, in the context of a summer of overly serious threequels and misfiring superheroes, Die Hard delivered just what I was looking for  noisy, enjoyable action spectacle. Yes, I found it disappointing in some regards but for what it does, it is noisy summer fun that should be seen for what it is.