I liked Die Hard 4 too, but I don't think it surpassed the first Die Hard. I thought some of it was cliche, but most of the best action movies have some cliches in them. Did you like it better than the other Die Hard movies? I think it kind of flattened John McClane a little bit. He was so expressive in the first movie. Watch his face if you don't believe me. He seemed to be a little bit more of a generic action hero here.
Die Hard 1 is the best, 2 sucks balls the size of Antarctica. But I do think DH3 and 4.0 are at the same level. Quite an achievement if you ask me. I'd have settled for a Last Crusade type of Indy 4 and be quite happy about it.
But mind you, Die Hard was also a bit silly. A bit over the top. It had that from te beginning. The silly story of a traumatised cop after shooting someone and then killing one of the bad guys at teh end... that was so over the top it was funny. Die Hard had that over the toppishness as comic relief. DH 4.0 had that as well. Nothing to do with flattening the character: McClane was always flat. That was the fun of it.
Originally posted by queeq
Die Hard 1 is the best, 2 sucks balls the size of Antarctica. But I do think DH3 and 4.0 are at the same level. Quite an achievement if you ask me. I'd have settled for a Last Crusade type of Indy 4 and be quite happy about it.But mind you, Die Hard was also a bit silly. A bit over the top. It had that from te beginning. The silly story of a traumatised cop after shooting someone and then killing one of the bad guys at teh end... that was so over the top it was funny. Die Hard had that over the toppishness as comic relief. DH 4.0 had that as well. Nothing to do with flattening the character: McClane was always flat. That was the fun of it.
I'm not saying McClane was Hamlet, but he had a lot more character in the first one than in the last one.