An explosion filled action movie, yes. A "Die Hard" movie, not quite.

Rating: 4/10 (25 August 2009)

Lets get this first out of the way. Die Hard 1, 2 and 3 were all awesome. They were really great in their own way. 2 is seen by many as the lesser film, but I think was also good, at least it still had that rawness that part 1 had. It just had a lot to live up to, since part 1 is considered one of the best action movies of all time. Part 3 was radically different, but it was executed in such a great way that it just worked. I haven't seen a movie yet where the way they used New York City as the theater for the action is done so well. It was still the same guy, getting his ass kicked and kicking the bad guys asses in the end. It had me on the edge of my seat from the beginning. Probably the best intro (music) I saw ever for a movie, by the way.
But part 4, not so much. The reason why fans of the first movies don't like it, is because it just goes too far with everything. The thing that made the first 3 Die Hard movies so good was like it (at least remotely) felt it could actually happen for real. Part 1 did this the best. You saw a normal guy in the wrong place and the wrong time. He got hurt and at times he felt like he wouldn't make it. He was vulnerable had had to struggle to bring things to a good end.
Part 4 is like most action movies today. Tons of explosions and a million computer generated effects. No more realism. Especially part with the jet fighter ruined it for me. McClane escapes from one of the most technologically advanced war machines man has created while driving a big, slow truck. The way the jet fighter is defeated is also just stupid and really unrealistic. In real life the jet could destroy that truck from 30 miles away.
Actually, they already had lost me during the car crash scene in the tunnel. The car that flies through the air where they duck under two other cars. It just all happens thanks to luck. But the main problem is that there is too much bull**** going on. The bad guys jumping from a helicopter and surviving it. They also survived getting hit by a car that did at least 40 miles an hour. If that doesn't kill you, it sends you at least to the hospital. After the first few action scenes I had that feeling a lot of mediocre action movies give me. The feeling that the main guy is just indestructible. And having that feeling, it takes the suspense away.
Another thing in this movie, the bad guy is a p**sy. He was just not evil enough for a Die Hard movie. I would expect nothing less from a Die Hard movie for Mc Clanes daughter to get a knee-cap for giving the guy s***. In part 1, 2 and 3 we saw cold-blooded murder of innocent people. In part two we even saw a whole jumbo jet full of people crashing and some guy's throat getting slit. In this last part, well, he offs his own personnel, but we don't really care about them because they're the bad guys anyway.
The movie industry really ruined this one. It could had been so great. They had the budget and the main actor. I can't believe they hired someone like Len Wiseman to do this movie. They had the budget... Hell if they had left out all the useless CGI that the first 3 films also didn't need, they could had gotten maybe Micheal Mann or Martin Scorsese to do it.
The thing that pisses me off the most though, is that they actually made a PG13 version. I couldn't believe it when I first saw it. A Die Hard movie... PG13... It was a true "face-palm" moment for me. "No." I wasn't mad, I was just confused. It messed with my reality because my brain knew it wasn't possible, yet my eyes saw it.
Good job Hollywood, you turned one of the most awesome, respected and loved movie series into another one-hit-wonder. Don't worry though, it will be forgotten as soon as the next explosion-filled, mediocre action movie comes out.
Die Hard 4=FAIL.
Note: I do like explosion filled action movies, as long as they are ridiculously over the top and turn into comedies. Like the old Arnie movies and Steven Seagal. Or recently, Crank 1 and 2.