A Good Day to Die Hard

Plot synopsis:
In Moscow, Viktor Chagarin, a high-ranking, but corrupt, Russian official plans to incriminate former billionaire and government whistleblower Yuri Komarov in an imminent rigged trial unless Komarov hands over a secret file believed to contain evidence incriminating Chagarin. Separately, Jack McClane, who has been arrested after an assassination attempt, negotiates for a shorter sentence by offering to testify against Komarov. Meanwhile, Jack's father, NYPD Detective John McClane, who has not been in touch with his son for several years, has learned his son is in trouble and travels to Russia to help. As John arrives and approaches the courthouse where Komarov is on trial, a bomb explosion, orchestrated by Chagarin's henchman Alik, occurs in the courthouse and Jack breaks free with Komarov. Seeing his son, John confronts him, but their dispute is cut short as Alik and his men chase them in a US Cougar MRAP through the streets of Moscow. John, Jack, and Komarov manage to escape.
Hiding in a safe house, John finds out that his son is a CIA officer and has been on an undercover operation for the past three years. Jack's partner, Collins, demands the file's location from Komarov so that the CIA can bring Chagarin down. Komarov eventually agrees on condition that he and his daughter are given safe passage out of Russia. Collins is eventually shot and killed while the McClanes and Komarov come under heavy gunfire from Chagarin's men, but they escape. They make their way to a hotel in the city to fetch the key to the vault containing the file. There they meet up with Komarov's daughter, Irina, as earlier planned. John grows suspicious of her shifty behavior, and is proven correct when Alik and his men burst in and tie John and Jack up, while Komarov is taken as a hostage, and Irina confesses to informing on them for the "millions of dollars" to be gained. Jack breaks free of his ties and kills the nearest guards using a Russian gun-knife, allowing the two to kill most of the men. Alik and Irina, with Komarov still their hostage, return in a Mil Mi-24 helicopter and try to kill them, but the two escape a second time.
That night, the two steal a car full of firearms and drive to Pripyat, Ukraine, where the vault with the file is located. However, Komarov, Irina, and Alik have preceded them. In a twist, the file is revealed never to have existed: the drawer with the file supposedly inside is in fact a secret passage to a Chernobyl vault containing €1 billion worth of weapons-grade uranium. Once inside the vault, Komarov kills Alik and calls Chagarin to gloat and to listen as Chagarin is killed by a henchman of Komarov's.
At this point, John and Jack enter the vault, discover Komarov's true plot, and capture him. Irina, with another henchman, comes to her father's aid. As they attempt to escape, Jack follows Komarov, while John goes after Irina, who is escaping on a Mil Mi-26 helicopter. Irina tries to protect her father by firing the helicopter's guns at Jack. John is able to bring the helicopter out of balance by driving a truck out of the hangar section, still shackled by a chain, via the open rear ramp; he is later thrown off into the building. Komarov remarks that Jack will get to watch his father die, prompting Jack to hurl him off the rooftop into the path of the spinning helicopter rotors, killing him. As Jack and John reunite inside the building, Irina tries to avenge her father by ramming the helicopter, now out of ammunition, into the building in a suicide attack. Father and son survive by leaping off the building into a large pool of water, as the helicopter crashes and explodes, killing Irina. In the end, the McClanes return to New York and reunite with Lucy McClane on the tarmac.

Tags: revenge, humor, action, murder

Review:
The fifth instalment in the beloved "Die Hard" saga ends up as the worst of the series so far; it falters thanks to a weak characterization, even weaker screen writing, lack of worthy villains, absurd action sequences and incoherent direction.
Not even the R-rating and the return of the famous "Yippie ki yay" line in full can save this one.As much as I love action movies, I like mine with a side of plot and character, of which this film fails at.
His son Jack (Jai Courtney), filling in for McClane's sidekick, has certain charisma and shows a few glimpses of character development in McClane but it is cut short by the merciless and absurd action sequences.A good action movie has to have a good villain.
But like all Die Hard movies, there has to be at least one sensational action sequence, and that is at the film's beginning.
If you think the F-35 scene in "Die Hard 4" was absurd, hoo boy, wait until you get a load of this one.At the very least, there's some competent cinematography from Jonathan Sela and a good, riveting music score from Marco Beltrami, who really knows his stuff when it comes to action, as well as incorporating Michael Kamen's themes into this one.
The people at Fox must be idiots because John Moore has not made one good film, so to trust him with the Die Hard franchise seemed a bad idea.
As a fan of the Die Hard series I feel the need to warn others - Don't waste 97 minutes of your life on this movie!
As much as I wanted to like this movie, I just couldn't; not even as a die hard fan of the franchise.First, let's look at the selling point.
The story was no fun and the action was all messy This movie does absolutely nothing to resemble the Die Hard films and as such, one of the most anticipated movies of 2013 has fallen down a drain with overuse of CGI, lame characters and plot, uninteresting villain with no real intention and another excuse to make more money out of it.A Good day to Die Hard is a movie that makes you think that this day is a good day for you to die hard.
First off, I am a huge fan of the three first films, the fourth film was alright, but it didn't feel like a Die Hard movie, sadly, this one doesn't either.
The only thing that this movie benefited the franchise is that John's son at the end actually mentions the fact that his name is actually John McClane Jr. not Jake ( in Die Hard (1988) his kids are named Lucy and John Jr.), But not actually explain the name change in the first place.Much like when they took Oceans 12 to Europe and twisted Indiana Jones into confusing whirlwind that involved aliens, they should have just stayed in America where John McClane belongs.
And for that aspect alone, they did a commendable job.So now I look at A Good Day to Die Hard, with all the trappings that action films are known for and ostentatious hijinks that scream Michael Bay-esque action that reeks of his earlier films to date.Bruce Willis plays McClane to a hilt, but that's all there is.
It like they forced the franchise before Bruce Willis ages even more.I would rather have sat through Barney.Cherry on the top: When they fighting bad guys in Chernobyl ....they fall in water sputter about with no concern with the radioactivity of the water...only to dismiss it as rain water.....ha ha ha haSigh..."It's a good day" to avoid this movie.
As if they just threw Bruce Willis in this over- the-top, not-thought-out action movie and slapped Die Hard 5 as the title.
(Or rather, a film ago!) John McClanes Terrorist attack number 5 was already pushing it, but when the trailers showed him "tagging along" on an adventure following his son, I think the movie was already doomed before I'd even seen it.
Short, fast paced films always feel like less effort has been put into them, but maybe that's just me.Outside off having some hot chick in it, and the most destructive car chase ever (which only happens in the movie so that they can say they broke some record or something) I cant actually think off any reason why you should watch this.
Really Disappointing Sequel Should End It. A Good Day to Die Hard (2013)** (out of 4)The fifth film in the series finds John McClane (Bruce Willis) going to Russia after learning that his son Jack (Jai Courtney) is in prison for murder.
A GOOD DAY TO DIE HARD is a pretty bad movie but the only thing that keeps my rating from being lower is the disappointment of how bad it is.
I say the disappointment is rather heartbreaking because the first four films in the series were actually very good and intelligent action movies but this one here is just a loud mess.
(who is for reasons unknown called Jack for most of the movie.) That's also probably what the makers of this film were thinking while shooting this latest addition to the beloved Die Hard franchise.
If this film wouldn't have Die Hard in name, it would have been actually good action flick.
Die Hard characters, especially the villains, usually share some charisma with John McClane but here they are just a bunch of idiots causing a lot of damage because they had to so it can be interesting, but they end up being annoying instead.
Another great thing is it's short so we may not linger to this terribly told storyline unless it spends more of the time developing the plot and the characters, but it's too late for that.A Good Day To Die Hard is a gigantic mediocre mess.
This is by far the worst one of the Die Hard series and one of the worst action movies I've ever seen.For the first half an hour I had no clue what the plot was, let alone who the bad guys were supposed to be.
All the Die Hard movies have one bad guy with an evil plan and John Mclane comes out of nowhere to ruin those plans.
Die Hard 2 was a cheeky repeat of the original, fun but lacking substance and originality, and as a result was always the weakest of the series for me - only passable compared to the third and fourth, each successfully breaking free of the 'man trapped in a confined location' premise and trying to do something fresh (the script for DH3 was based off the original screenplay for Lethal Weapon 4, and I thought the cop-buddy-esque dynamic of Willis and Jackson made up for any flaws in the movie; it also gained back a lot of the hard-boiled style of the original thanks to McTiernan returning.
And while fans rip on the fourth one because of its PG-13 rating and over-the-top action, I think it's a solid film in its own right, surprisingly well-made and staged, and the action really isn't that much crazier than blowing up a plane with a Zippo or jumping off a building attached to a fire hose -- the stakes simply get raised every decade thanks to advances in technology).Anyway, that long-winded introduction aside, I will say this: "A Good Day to Die Hard" feels palpably like an attempt to bring the series back to its roots.
It is subpar by action film standards, and wholly mind-boggling to see in a Die Hard movie, especially one that otherwise attempts so consciously to revert to the grittier, basic approach of the original trilogy.
He's just not memorable, and in a Die Hard film, I feel like the strength of the villains make up a lot of the movie's overall quality.
"A Good Day to Die Hard" feels as though John Moore acquired a ton of money to shoot a handful of eye popping action scenes, and then string them together with painfully contrived dialogued scenes to fit his film into the franchise.
The last 4 die hard films have all been quite clear on plot and well laid out for the viewer to digest but this is shocking in every aspect.Slight Spoiler below (nothing to give away a plot as there isn't one!)In 97 minutes (UK Version) Bruce Willis tells us 4 times he is on Vacation, I hope after this one he is!!
With all the digital technology the cinemas use now it wouldn't be hard to have 2 cuts of the movie downloaded on to a digital projector.I love the first 3 Die Hard films and if not for taking in the Die Hard Trilogy at the Price Charles Cinema in Leicester Square straight after Seeing A Good Day To Die Hard at the Imax I think my day would've been spent in disgust at what had become of such a great action series of films.This film should never of been released, John Moore should never be allowed to direct again and Skip Woods should have all his pens, computers, iPad (anything he can write with) confiscated.1 out of 10 - truly awful..
Do not get me wrong, I have the time for "Vengeance", but this process of throwing action at the screen and hoping that doing nothing with a lot will compensate for your inability to do a lot with very little, is waning.Indeed, it is unfortunate that "A Good Day to Die Hard" is as bad as it is – a throwaway film with nothing to really mark it out amongst any other action thriller; a terrifically grey film, cold and metallic and arid in character; a film lacking a villain and any sort of real tension.
"A Good Day to Die Hard," the 5th - and least - installment in the series that began in 1988, finds John McClane (Bruce Willis) in Russia trying to rescue his son (not Edward Snowden, in case you were wondering) from prison.
Turns out, unbeknownst to the elder McClane, Junior (Jai Courtney), who's apparently more of a chip off the old block than dad ever imagined, is actually an undercover agent for the C.I.A., foiling terrorist plots seemingly on a daily basis.Papa McClane isn't there five minutes before he's turned the streets of Moscow into a veritable demolition derby - honestly, Godzilla didn't wreak this kind of havoc on Tokyo even on his worst day - and the movie itself into a smoldering ruin.In the screenplay by Skip Woods, nothing less than the fate of the free world hangs in the balance, while Junior works out his daddy issues amid a hail of bullets and a fusillade of explosions.
Well, 20th Century Fox must have discovered my complaintsand hate my gutsbecause the fifth movie in the series, A GOOD DAY TO DIE HARD, is officially unrecognizable as a McClane film with the exception of star Bruce Willis.
In this movie, John McClane continues developing the super powers he discovered in LIVE FREE OR DIE HARD.
Bad dudes show up now and he grabs the biggest gun he can find, stands tall in the middle of the room, and lets loose.A GOOD DAY TO DIE HARD is a blatant attempt at establishing a new McClane for when Willis grows tired (or too old) to continue the cash cow franchise.
I liked the three 'original' Die Hard Movies and I found the fourth one to be a pretty much successful modernization.But this one, the fifth, is just boring and therefore not worth watching.The main problems are in my opinion: - There is really not much humor in it.
However, unlike Liver Free or Die Hard, A Good Day to Die Hard biggest problem wasn't it's director, it was it's script writer, Skip Woods.Despite the fact that, pretty much like the last movie, McClane is now a bald James Bond instead of an everyday man in extraordinary situations (which is truly what McClane is all about, not "a rebel who defies authority", like Bruce Willis thinks) the R rating does wonders for the character and it's surroundings.
please bring back John McTiernan OR don't release another die hard at all!its a good action movie but thats about it.
All right, basically all you need to know about this latest "Die Hard" movie is that once again, Bruce Willis plays cop John McClane and he's now in Russia to rescue his grown son who he thinks is in trouble.
"A Good Day to Die Hard" brings Detective John McClane (Bruce Willis) from New York City to the mean streets of Moscow.
Like in previous Die Hard films, I was ready to accept the superhuman abilities of the McClanes in the action scenes.
The original Die Hard was so good because the action was leavened by character and some clever dialogue, but this one is just relentless action with little understanding of the people involved - sadly this is the way so many action movies are going these days.
A highly forgettable sequel that wasn't even needed in the first place, A Good Day to Die Hard is a superb example of terrible scriptwriting & direction and is a brilliant lesson in how to make a really bad film.
While many people slated DIE HARD 4.0, I enjoyed watching it the few times I've seen it since release; I felt like it was a moderately successful way to bring the Bruce Willis-starring franchise slap bang into the 21st century, although of course it wasn't as good as the original trilogy.
Inevitably, A GOOD DAY TO DIE HARD followed, but the bad news is that it makes the last instalment look like a masterpiece by comparison.This movie really is that bad, and it's all down to the people who made it.
As his son, Jai Courtney is given a one-dimensional character and displays none of the charm he brought to his role as Varro in SPARTACUS: BLOOD AND SAND.The film meanders from one pointless action scene to the next, and we never get a clear idea of who the bad guys are or what they want; Willis just kind of stumbles into their plans (whatever they are) and goes along with it.
it is a good action but not quality enough for a die hard movie.
it is a good action but not quality enough for a die hard movie.
Bruce Willis character was not the same person he was in the previous die hard films.
A Good Day to Die Hard on the other hand not only does it not live up to the franchise expectations, it kills it once and for all thanks to a terrible script and some senseless action scenes.
So far the 2013 releases have been pretty weak and A Good Day to Die Hard wasn't the exception.For the first time we get to follow our hero, John McClane (Bruce Willis) to a foreign territory as he decides to travel to Russia on vacations in search of his troubled son, Jack (Jai Courtney) with whom he hasn't been in contact with in over three years.
Now they are forced to work together in order to get Yuri to safety and find the file before Chagarin and his men do.Like in all other Die Hard films we have plenty of helicopter explosions and a lot of action, but we lack a true story.
"A Good Day to Die Hard" is a disappointment; the beginning of the films doesn't immediacy of the first three and is more like a Bourne, Mission Impossible or Daniel Craig Bond movie.
Bruce Willis became an action icon when the first Die Hard film burst onto the screen in 1988, giving rise to his John McClane character who was always at the wrong place, at the wrong time, and a trouble magnet.
With the Die HArd films, you know it's about the mayhem one, and now two, McClanes can inflict, from large scaled car chases involving a Unimog (brownie points here, since I've driven one for years), to pitch perfect shots blending CG and practical stunts especially those involving the McClanes' retreat to safer haven, done slow-motion style that's action poetry in motion.But what's more enjoyable in this guilt trip of a franchise that I've followed while growing up, is the little things that flies by unless you're paying close attention, such as little events happening in the background where John puts his street smarts to good use, and those cheeky instances that snuck in unexpectedly.
And this time he's On Vacation.Following reading a lot of reviews that dubbed Die Hard 5 as boring and subtitling it "A Bad Day To Die Hard" I wasn't expecting much from the fifth instalment in a series of films which I thought peaked with the third and fell away with an average fourth film.But I was pleasantly surprised by Willis' latest outing in the white vest.The story centres around McClane's son, Jack, who is working as an undercover CIA agent who is aiming to stop all out carnage between two men.
Anyone who has ever seen the previous actual Die Hard films know that this is a huge embarrassing step down from the over-the-top script with the crazy action that makes you want to scream out loud because the main character actually had something you liked even loved.
I liked it, but thought it was unoriginal and had characters that felt out of place.But Die Hard 5 (as I'll call it) made up for that easily, with a truck load of action and fun, leaving me with a feeling I haven't had in a very long time leaving the theater - wanting to see more.
The action sequences had some good moments, but John McClane is for sure a superhero in this film!
Good action, but not a Die Hard movie.
A Good Day to Die Hard must have been to the producers an idea that was going to be great, as anyone will think: what is better than McClane our lone hero going after bad guys?