Die Hard Film Review

Initial Thoughts

                Said to be one of the greatest action movies of all time, and by far the most famous Bruce Willis film to date, the first Die Hard movie adds fun one liner, with intense action senses to create one very thrilling “man against the world” film.

                What does “man against the world” mean? Well it refers to when someone impossibly attacks an army of well-trained men and comes out without a scratch. This plot device is mainly used by action stars (Bruce Willis, Arnold Schwarzenegger, and Sylvester Stallone), But we will get into all of that good stuff in just a little bit.

                Does Die Hard really live up to its high reputation? Or is it just another terrible action film such as Red Dawn, Alien resurrection, and others? Let’s find out! This is Die Hard!

Story: 20 out of 25

                Okay let’s face it, we don’t watch these movies for the story, we watch it to see things blow up. And since this film came out in the 1980’s, it is pretty obvious that the story isn’t going to be anything special.

                The 1980’s was the time when the most famous action/thriller movies came out such as First Blood (Sylvester Stallone), The Terminator (Arnold Schwarzenegger), and Aliens (Riley Scott). And while all of these films are different, all of their storylines follow roughly the same pattern. One individual or a small group of individuals are put up against one or more extremely deadly enemies, and somehow manage to defeat them. The writing style is used a lot today so we don’t really think that it was coined in the 80’s. Before this point many films put equal characters against each other, as seen in the 1971 action film Dirt Harry.

                By today’s standards this films storyline and plot would be seen as extremely clichéd, in fact, that’s one of the major problems many critics had with A Good Day to Die Hard, that its techniques were clichéd, the story had been seen and heard before. In other words there was nothing new added to it.

                However at the time, this storyline would have been new and exciting, so I can’t really criticize it for keeping up with its times. And like I said, we don’t really watch these films for its storyline or plot devices anyway.

Characters: 17 out of 25

                One problem that most action movies is not developing their characters enough, in other words, focusing on the action and the story, and leaving the characters to rot. Thankfully, this film does not do this, it adds enough main characters to make things interesting, but not to many that things get confusing. Each character is given enough screen time in order to develop them nicely, even the minor characters change and see worthwhile development throughout the film, such as Ellis (I won’t give any spoilers).

                But just because they are well developed does not mean they are developed, the characters are overused in many other 80’s action films just like the storyline was. However at least the Bruce Willis’s character was relatable, given his marriage status and occupation, as in today’s world, many people do have problems with their marriage and given John McClain’s occupation, with all of the violence and blood and gore, he may be more susceptible to little issues. In other words little problems might push him over the edge easier, then other people. However I would have liked to learn more about their issues together more before all of the action, so I could feel a more emotional attachment to John McClain’s wife, instead of just jumping into all of the action and not really fully understanding their problems together.

Action/Villain/Special Effects: 50 out of 50

                Now we get into the juicy stuff, the reason why it was and still is such a widely loved film, it’s not because of the story, or the characters, or the plot, it’s because of the gripping suspense, amazingly deep and intimidating villain and the extremely well directed action scenes. The entire time it’s clear that John doesn’t really have a plan together, and is always getting ambushed and having people turn against him. This really makes him seem like the terrorists have the upper hand, thus making it seem like harm could come to John at any moment.

                Each action scene takes place in a new location in the building each room different than the other. Each new room feels fresh and the props and setting gives more different ways for John to dispatch his foes, each one in a different manner. The setting can sometimes be a problem such as in Red Dawn (2012) which makes it feel like every fight scene is happening in the same place, in other words every fight scene is boring and feels rather generic.

                The main villain is by far one of my favorite villains of all time, in fact, the actor Alan Rickman tends to play a lot of villains in the movies he does such as his role in Robin Hood and Harry Potter. And let’s be honest, that’s what he’s best at, his thick English accent really adds a lot of intimidation and cold heartedness to his character, and he plays the role so calmly, even when his men are being killed off one by one, he still keeps thinking that the plan can still work. And that makes him seem more psychotic and more determined.

                As for the Special Effects, they are done well, and in fact I think I like them more than some modern films, because they didn’t have the sophisticated CGI that we have today, directors back in the 1970’s and 80’s had to figure out ways that they could do the stunts they wanted, in real life, using real people, and that’s why everything seems more real in older films. Because they are real, CGI in modern films looks good, but you can still tell that they are fake, and that the characters could not take certain injuries, in older films the main characters needed to survive because it was real people doing the stunts.

                In short, the action is very intense and gripping, the villain is well written acted and directed, and the special effects even out do some modern films. Plus, who doesn’t like big explosions? 

Side Note

                I love this film, however there is one aspect of the film I must address (which I probably should have addressed in previous film reviews) this film is not for kids. This is defiantly a PG 13 film, there is lots of bad language (which we should expect from a Bruce Willis film) used all throughout the film, some of the terrorists are dispatched in rather gruesome ways (Hanging, falling many stories, RPG, etc.)

But it’s mostly the language that parents should be aware of as it is used A LOT.

And so the famous Bruce Willis film Die Hard earns a…

87/100

Fantastic

So does it live up to its reputation, well yes it does! It nails every aspect needed to make a great action film; gripping action and suspense, pulse pounding special effects, and an extremely intimidating antagonist. The story and characters are clichéd but who cares? We didn’t watch it for the marriage advice or to hear a fairy tale we watched it to see explosions and gun fire, and if that was what the film was trying to accomplish then it succeeded.

If you are a person who has a problem with bad language, and lots of violence, then maybe you should give it another think before you run out and buy a copy. But if you’re not, then I strongly suggest that you do!