Die already - useless.

Rating: 1/10 (11 August 2007)

No respect. That's the problem with Hollywood these days. It's imagination has completely fizzled out. In the eighties, in the heyday of classic action movies such as Die Hard, a director had the opportunity to really make the film he wanted to make. Nowadays, we have a business production line, unconcerned with anything except the speed of the turnover.
Let me be blunt: Die Hard 4 is not a Die Hard movie. It's a retarded excuse for the movie it should have been. When the lights fell I waited in anticipation for the hallmark slamming title, the hype-builder that rockets onto the screen as it had done in all previous iterations. But blink and you'll miss it folks - Die Hard 4 introduces itself like a wet paper bag. And from this point on, I knew Len Wisemen didn't have the goods. He's just not a good enough director. So what happens when you dumb-down Die Hard from being an 18 rated action movie for adults, and turn into a 12 rated movie for kids? You get the worst enemy of all time. A bad guy so weak (in character and in performance) he doesn't actually kill a single person in the entire film...except himself. There's no trace of the venom left behind by Alan Rickman or Jeremy Irons - this bad-guy is a 'high-tech' nerdy bad-guy, one with the acting calibur of a grape. He can't deliver a line to save his life. John McClane suffers equally, losing his identity as a put-upon cop. He spends the movie tromping about from location to location, putting people out like the terminator, and all with such dismissable ease. Gone are the days when he was holed up, covered in blood and bruises and looking like he might not make it. This time, he manages to whoop and holler through all the gaps where the one-liners were supposed to be (because the script writer couldn't be bothered to think of any)and behave like a total idiot. Yes, Len Wiseman's McClane has gone from being street smart, and having cop logic, to being a total techno-moron. The joke wears thin quick. McClane's irritating cyber-geek sidekick spends the entire movie reminding the audience of just how out-of-date our beloved hero is. He's so out of touch with modern music and, god-forbid, 'technology' - that most of the jokes revolve around John McClane not being able to get to grips with a webcam. Great. I wonder if the same hero, who single-handedly foiled three terrorist threats, who landed planes, who wrapped some C4 to a PC monitor and pushed it down a lift shaft to blow up the basement of the Nakatomi Plaza, could actually operate an electric tin-opener in his old age? Why is his age even a factor - he still looks fighting fit. Did the script writers really think this angle was a great idea? Making the Macho man a complete ditz? Obviously, yes - only to serve as a dampener on the film as a whole. To make matters worse, Wiseman has given the audience a generic 'save-the-daughter' plot line, in which the kidnapped girl ridiculously dodges being shot dead by the worlds wettest super villain (despite spitting in his face and generally antagonising the situation). Why, when McClane is putting down his forces like bowling pins, does he feel the need to never pull the trigger? Because, as he states, he needs a 'bargaining chip.' It's at this point (if you haven't already) you really begin to wonder who writes this garbage. The film is blue. Not 'blue' like sexually explicit, but blue like someone forgot to take the lens filter off. Yes, in Wisemans classic Underworld tinting style, we're treated to a slick blue cityscape for the duration of the flick. Modern like a music video. Was waiting for a rapper who couldn't act to turn up, but thankfully the kiddies could go without the cameo this time. Obviously watching films in colour just isn't cool anymore. If only John McTeirnan had made Vengeance in green, we would have been able to see New York City without the heat, without the sweat, and without the emotion. Die Hard is about urgency - a tight situation. If any of the previous films took three days to resolve a situation, would they have been as fun? In Live Free or Die Hard, it takes three days. The sun goes up, it goes down, it comes up again. Why? Because there's no actual plot line. The movement of the characters feels forced, each action scenario an excuse to 'get one in' rather than a result of the environment.
What really gets my goat is this:
I knew it was going to be rubbish before I went in. Yes, I'm a child of the eighties, and yes, I have an affinity with the era. But I'm not so old I can't tell when there's a remarkable lack of effort in Hollywood these days. The film is as half-baked as Aliens vs Predator - there is not enough respect for the franchise to do it any justice, and that really ticks me off.
Willis should have said no, and he should say no to the next one. Don't buy the four disc box set, run out and buy the three disc one now - and do it quick, because this isn't a Die Hard movie at all. It's a poor action movie starring Bruce Wills - and who really cares about another one of those?
Skykid