A Good Day To Die Hard Page 8

  • Page

    of 10 First / Last

  • Scurrminator 17 Feb 2013 16:45:45 8,470 posts
    Seen 7 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Meh I enjoyed it. It was daft sure but it was alright.
    Would like to see the non neutered version though.

    You dare to strike Scurrcules!?

  • Whizzo 17 Feb 2013 16:51:55 43,370 posts
    Seen 7 hours ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    I enjoyed it as well, it's very silly, John McClane and his indestructible genes have been passed onto his son, things explode, cars are wrecked, bad guys get shot.

    Is it a thoughtful, deconstruction of machismo in the 21st century? No it's a popcorn flick that's about as intelligent as you'd expect a film called "A Good Day to Die Hard."

    Edited by Whizzo at 16:52:27 17-02-2013

    This space left intentionally blank.

  • captainrentboy 17 Feb 2013 18:12:39 1,107 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    I like as much 'brain dead' action shite as the next guy. But if you're going to go that route, and make a 90 min film with fuck all plot and loads of action scenes, then make sure your action is top notch.
    But annoyingly in this even the action was crud, either over edited hyper shaky cam shit, or a load of CG bollocks. (Bruce's CG double was like half the size of real Bruce)
    Awful film, even if you ignore the Die Hard in the title.
  • GiarcYekrub 17 Feb 2013 18:28:16 3,894 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    I wish he'd swear more, but I liked it, that said I saw Django straight after and can't help but wish they'd get Tarantino to do the next one. I mean he already worked with Willis on Pulp Fiction
  • nickthegun 17 Feb 2013 19:10:57 61,348 posts
    Seen 6 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    I do find it hilarious that you will watch this cynical cash in that looks like it will kill the franchise but you won't watch star trek.

    ---------------------------------------------------------
    My man gives real loving that's why I call him Killer
    He's not a wham-bam-thank-you-ma'am, he's a thriller

  • beastmaster 17 Feb 2013 19:25:17 12,008 posts
    Seen 58 minutes ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    It may not kill the franchise. It could be the most successful yet (but it's too early to say)

    http://www.joblo.com/movie-news/weekend-box-office-report-february-15-17-2013

    The Resident Evil films. I'm one of the reasons they keep making them.

  • GiarcYekrub 17 Feb 2013 23:38:29 3,894 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    nickthegun wrote:
    I do find it hilarious that you will watch this cynical cash in that looks like it will kill the franchise but you won't watch star trek.
    Even a bad Die Hard is still Die Hard
  • Scurrminator 17 Feb 2013 23:46:47 8,470 posts
    Seen 7 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    So is abad Star Trek not still a Star Trek?
    Ps it's not bad; it's the best trek.

    You dare to strike Scurrcules!?

  • Deleted user 17 February 2013 23:51:11
    GiarcYekrub wrote:
    nickthegun wrote:
    I do find it hilarious that you will watch this cynical cash in that looks like it will kill the franchise but you won't watch star trek.
    Even a bad Die Hard is still Die Hard
    Which is a weird statement to make, given 2, 3 and 4 were not actually originally written as Die Hard films.
  • Lukus 17 Feb 2013 23:51:43 19,477 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    How can you have a valid opinion on something you haven't watched? It's incredibly ignorant. What if Diana Vickers was in it?

    Paintings & Photographs

  • Scurrminator 17 Feb 2013 23:56:13 8,470 posts
    Seen 7 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    meme wrote:
    GiarcYekrub wrote:
    nickthegun wrote:
    I do find it hilarious that you will watch this cynical cash in that looks like it will kill the franchise but you won't watch star trek.
    Even a bad Die Hard is still Die Hard
    Which is a weird statement to make, given 2, 3 and 4 were not actually originally written as Die Hard films.
    None of them were bar this one.
    So maybe they need to go back to that!

    You dare to strike Scurrcules!?

  • Deleted user 18 February 2013 00:02:15
    Yeah, the first was a Frank Sinatra project and then a Commando sequel before becoming Die Hard. But it's certainly the film that established the formula for the rest to (vaguely) follow. Weirdly, Die Hard 2 was also originally pitched as a Commando sequel too, hence the references to the fictional country I forget the name of.

    Edited by meme at 00:02:28 18-02-2013
  • rudedudejude 18 Feb 2013 00:06:00 2,254 posts
    Seen 6 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    beastmaster wrote:
    It may not kill the franchise. It could be the most successful yet (but it's too early to say)

    http://www.joblo.com/movie-news/weekend-box-office-report-february-15-17-2013
    Success is a bit of a loose term though. Financial succes maybe, but then tickets are 4 times they were at the release of the last one, so it's easy to overtake them on box office takings.
  • GiarcYekrub 18 Feb 2013 01:18:42 3,894 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    Scurrminator wrote:
    So is abad Star Trek not still a Star Trek?
    Ps it's not bad; it's the best trek.
    I'm not saying its bad I'm saying its not Star Trek. JJTrek is to Star Trek as MK Dons are to Wimbledon until real Star Trek returns I will not acknolege the current imposter... Prime Trek or No Trek!

    How much you wanna moan about Die Hard 5 its still Willis blowing shit up and shooting bad guys in humourous set pieces and making wise cracks as he goes along.
  • Khanivor 18 Feb 2013 02:18:52 41,286 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    What a div.
  • Deleted user 18 February 2013 07:19:46
    You're kidding right? I'm a lover of Star Trek from the very first series (Yes, I am that old!), and I loved the new film. So many moments to make a true trekkie smile! Do yourself a favour and watch it!
  • GiarcYekrub 18 Feb 2013 08:44:45 3,894 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    Nipples wrote:
    You're kidding right? I'm a lover of Star Trek from the very first series (Yes, I am that old!), and I loved the new film. So many moments to make a true trekkie smile! Do yourself a favour and watch it!
    No.
  • Mola_Ram 18 Feb 2013 08:47:10 8,315 posts
    Seen 21 minutes ago
    Registered 2 years ago
    GiarcYekrub wrote:
    Nipples wrote:
    You're kidding right? I'm a lover of Star Trek from the very first series (Yes, I am that old!), and I loved the new film. So many moments to make a true trekkie smile! Do yourself a favour and watch it!
    No.
    Then any opinions you have on it are worthless, basically.
  • CosmicFuzz 18 Feb 2013 08:51:37 25,647 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    But new trek still has kirk wisecracking and the enterprise firing phasers and spock doing the nerve pinch and Scotty ejecting the warp core.

    If we're playing the 'boil it down' game.

    Edited by CosmicFuzz at 08:51:59 18-02-2013

    Come listen to us discuss the Playstation Experience in Episode 11 of Open Source. zoolophage writes in!

  • Scurrminator 18 Feb 2013 08:57:05 8,470 posts
    Seen 7 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Don't feed him; he's a bit of a pleb when it comes to star trek.

    You dare to strike Scurrcules!?

  • GiarcYekrub 18 Feb 2013 09:01:38 3,894 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    CosmicFuzz wrote:
    But new trek still has kirk wisecracking and the enterprise firing phasers and spock doing the nerve pinch and Scotty ejecting the warp core.

    If we're playing the 'boil it down' game.
    No.
    1.Thats not Kirk its an "alternative Kirk with a different backstory"
    2.Thats Not the Enterprise its some sort of wierd timey temporal fuck up
    3.Spock doing a nerve pinch isn't the essence of Star Trek and if you think it is, it shows the damage this film is doing.
    4.Really? When did Prime Scotty ever eject the warp core?

    You really think anything your list has anything to do with Star Trek?
  • GiarcYekrub 18 Feb 2013 09:14:05 3,894 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    Ultimately Die Hard is a fun action series that doesn't take itself too seriously, there is only 5 films in the series at the moment, their isn't too much to it other than McClane being in the wrong Place at the right time and hijinx ensue.
    Personally I think I like Die Hard 5 better than 4 but I think I wanna see it on DVD a few times before I make that decision
  • Lukus 18 Feb 2013 09:51:02 19,477 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    Seriously, you're an idiot.

    Paintings & Photographs

  • CosmicFuzz 18 Feb 2013 09:59:14 25,647 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    You don't understand Die Hard or Star Trek.

    John McLane is wrong place at wrong time. In 5 he goes to Russia to look for trouble. He also is suddenly some crazy action hero that can flip cars into helicopters etc. That's not Die Hard. If you're talking about wise cracking whilst shooting baddies you're just talking about any generic action film.

    And yes, New Trek takes place in an alternative universe. So why can't you watch it and accept they're not the same characters? You moan that too much has changed, yet by your own admission they are different people in a different time line / universe. Why would they be the same? Look at the mirror universe.

    And yes, obviously Trek is more than ejecting the warp core for fucks sake, and yes Scotty never did it in the old films. But what does that matter? Are we meant to see the same old thing over and over?

    How you can view Die Hard 5 as true to the franchise but not New Trek is seriously beyond me. Die Hard 5 is an awful movie where people act completely out of character and it is nothing like the earlier ones. New Trek at least creates a background and a reason for its changes.

    Edited by CosmicFuzz at 10:00:15 18-02-2013

    Come listen to us discuss the Playstation Experience in Episode 11 of Open Source. zoolophage writes in!

  • RichieTenenbaum 18 Feb 2013 10:09:25 2,228 posts
    Seen 8 hours ago
    Registered 4 years ago
    To settle this. 1. New Trek is absolutely awful and when put next to the originals represents everything wrong with modern film.

    2. New Die Hard is awful and when put next to the original represents everything wrong with modern film. In the first one, McClane bleeds. He cuts his foot on glass. Every movement is like he's having summoning up all his will to continue. In the new ones he shoots a helicopter and BOOM BOOM. The original is tight and focused. It feels real. These two new ones feel like video games. In the first one he audience went 'ouch' now they say 'cool' as they watch the mindnimbing 'action'. By throwing so muh at the screen, it diffuses all tension. The original managed to get more tension out of firing one shot than this does from a 20 minute car chase.
  • CosmicFuzz 18 Feb 2013 10:14:26 25,647 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    I despair. Please tell me how Trek represents everything wrong with modern film? That's such a sweeping statement and really just untrue.

    Come listen to us discuss the Playstation Experience in Episode 11 of Open Source. zoolophage writes in!

  • Scurrminator 18 Feb 2013 10:16:29 8,470 posts
    Seen 7 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    RichieTenenbaum is absolutely awful and when put next to the other forumites represents everything wrong with modern Internets.

    You dare to strike Scurrcules!?

  • Lukus 18 Feb 2013 10:24:56 19,477 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    Because it didn't smell of vinyl and make him cry.

    Paintings & Photographs

  • GiarcYekrub 18 Feb 2013 10:34:09 3,894 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    He goes to Russia because he's found out his Son is on trial for murder, thats why he's stood outside the court house when it all kicks off.


    I don't really wanna keep explaining Star Trek to you, esspecially here but I just don't care one bit about some random multiverse, such an unrealistic universe picked by the writers just because of its peculiar similarities to the Prime universe to the point that you could even start farting the word "destiny" arround
    The Mirror universe is different it is twinned with the Prime universe, they have a relationship.
    The Prime universe is what matters it is the persistance of Star Trek.
    I personally don't think Star Trek works very well at all as a movie franchise and would certainly perfer a return to TV.
    I don't think JJTrek is good for Trek at all, its not adding its taking away. Its as confusing as hell trying to explain to a non fan whats happened in it... Yes That Kirk but not real Kirk its Kirk from an apparent prime syncronous parallel dimention who's childhood was naffed up by a Timetravelling bad guy from the future for some reason, now personally I find explaining the Spock and Nero are not from the future of the JJVerse but the future Prime Universe shows just what a fuck up they've made of the story.

    Edited by GiarcYekrub at 10:36:21 18-02-2013
  • Lukus 18 Feb 2013 10:40:20 19,477 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    You can't have a proper opinion on something you haven't seen. That's the bottom line. See it, then whinge about it. Easy.

    Edited by Lukus at 10:40:37 18-02-2013

    Paintings & Photographs

  • Page

    of 10 First / Last

Log in or register to reply