One of the worst sequels in the history of film

Rating: 1/10 (12 October 2007)

die hard 4 is a PG rated kiddie movie with a bored, middle aged superhero sleepwalking through uninspired vignettes while tackling an internet hacker with all the charisma of pancake batter. Its plot was seemingly written by a grade schooler with a box of crayons. The CGI "action" sequences were uninspired and badly staged, to the point of almost being slapstick or satirical, the only scene that had even a modicum of excitement to it was the opening shootout in Long's apartment. The real Die Hard trilogy may have one or two scenes in each movie which pushed credibility, but they were well directed and photographed and had a musical score to add to the tension, and the earlier stories were so strong that we could overlook a couple of lapses in logic. This movie was so outlandish, and the plot was so badly written it was insulting. We're actually expected to believe that McClane can drive an 18 wheeler and outrun a fighter plane, jump out of the 18 wheeler as it rolls over and fall 20 feet onto the wing of a jet, then hang onto the wing of this spinning out of control fighter plane, jump off the jet and survive a 40 foot drop onto a concrete embankment and survive sliding on his back down another 30 feet or so. ARE YOU SERIOUS?!
There were several lengthy scenes of Willis and Long driving and talking endlessly- attempts at "human drama" which amounted to nothing more than Bruce Willis' character complaining about how his life had turned out. The character of his daughter is seemingly about four different characters throughout the movie: she's a bitch for no reason in the first scene, but then when she gets into a jam (in the elevator) the first thing she does is ask to talk to daddy so that he can help her out, then later she wants to kick the bad guy's ass herself, then at the end she wants McClane to set her up with Long's computer hacker character like a schoolgirl. Apparently the writers couldn't make up their minds over her. The dialogue is uninspired and blandly delivered: it's clichés about McClane not being able to understand computers (already done better in Die Hard 2) and Long's character being unable to deal with McClane's being out of date and not being able to understand computers; none of the other characters were memorable, they just seemed to drift in and out of their scenes.
The entire movie (except for the insultingly stupid jet fighter sequence) was filmed through a horrible blue/ grey filter, trying to give the movie a "sleek" look, but only making it look drab and dull. For the first time in the series they did not film this movie in widescreen format, this was another attempt to cut corners and lowering the cost of the movie- and lowering the amount of money this movie would have to make to be commercially successful. The elevator shaft sequence, the falling down the stairs bit, McClane's family not using his own last name, were all done in the first three- but the producers claim that they're "referencing" the earlier films, not ripping them off and copying them. Riiight. The reference to the two Agents Johnson from the first Die Hard makes no sense, seeing as McClane never met or spoke to either of them in the first movie, so how the hell would he remember them after 20 years? Let's go back to the elevator sequence: in DHWaV, the elevator sequence had the same claustrophobic feeling of the first movie. It was just as well photographed as the original movie, had a convincing and memorable score to it, full, rich, vivid colours, and was violent without being too over the top, and it was short- less than 60 seconds. Short but memorable. But the elevator scene in dh4 is a silly vignette, badly photographed through that obnoxious blue/ grey filter, and it just lumbers about for the entire lengthy sequence. And the music score? What score? I remember absolutely NOTHING about the musical score in any scene in this crapfest.
You can NOT tell me that McClane would remember that catchphrase after 20 years and would think of it to say it at the end of this movie, and even if he did, it would mean NOTHING to the villain in this movie. What made the line amusing in the first movie was the terrorists' reaction to the line, NOT the line itself. (And the people who made such a big deal about "Does he say his catchphrase or doesn't he?" are genuinely pathetic, are you *that* desperate to hear profanity?) And we even got to see that moronic catchphrase used in an Arby's commercial- or at least as much of it as they could say on television. It's almost like this movie was just an excuse to say that moronic catchphrase yet again. Then, in one of the most anti climactic endings ever: McClane shoots through his own shoulder and hits the bad guy in *his* shoulder and kills him instantly? Again, ARE YOU SERIOUS?! This movie was an insult to the real Die Hard series, as well as the fans. In one hundred years people will look back on Die Hard as being one of the best action movies ever made. die hard 4/ live free or die hard is one of the worst sequels in the history of film, it took a dump on one of the best action film trilogies ever made. It's the only "Die Hard" movie (notice the quotation marks) that I'll never watch again. If it was meant to be a straight sequel, they failed. If it was intended to be a satire, they failed.
Die Hard is a trilogy. There never was a fourth Die Hard movie.
Die Hard ended With A Vengeance.