Die Hard 4 : Retour en enfer

"Live Free or Die Hard" is quite a refreshing piece of entertainment this summer in the wake of so many effects-driven computer simulated action/fantasy films. With its silly title, smart-alleck lead character (Bruce Willis as Bruce Willis doing John McClane), and loads of old fashioned stunts involving cars, SUV's, elevator shafts, big rigs, helicopters, fighter jets, and collapsing highway bridges, this flick is a great piece of shattered-glass entertainment--a throwback to the late 1980's and early 1990's when movies like the original "Die Hard" changed the face of movie action.

There is some frustration to be had when you start to realize how much they toned down to achieve the friendly PG-13 rating. There's far less profanity flying, and while the body count is astronomically high (the collateral damage in this film in terms of human life and damaged property is tres magnifique), there's little blood and guts to be found. Still, die hard "Die Hard" action fans should rest assured knowing there will be plenty of funny one-liners, hot chicks (a wonderful Maggie Q as the bad-ass female villain and the scorchingly feisty and cute Mary Elizabeth Winstead as Lucy McClane), super smart bad guys (a very good Timothy Olyphant), and jaw-dropping death-defying stunts.

Director Len Wiseman orchestrates the complicated stunts very well like a masterful puppeteer, which is a shock considering how god-awful his "Underworld" films were. The hand-to-hand human match-ups still bear some of his annoying hallmarks, but he's learned how to blow things up really well and has learned a thing or two about scope and editing in big action set-pieces. The excellent pacing and preposterousness of the stunts (especially the climax involving the fighter jet and the big rig) certainly put a smile on my face.

There's a whole lot of computer hacking related mumbo-jumbo involved in the story, and there's a lot of downtime for male bonding and "explanation" of the finer plot points that slows the film down some but is actually nice to see in a world now ruled by Michael Bay-style non-stop action. Plenty dumb, plenty thrilling, and plenty of fun, "Live Free or Die Hard" is a pleasant surprise considering how unnecessary this sequel seemed from conception.

Just went to the world premiere of Die Hard 4.0, and I was positively surprised. It delivers action in abundance, and the movie has a great visceral feel to it thanks to great stunt work, and the fact that Willis really steps up in the fight scenes. The movie keeps up its pace throughout, and the script works quite well, though the tech-talk gets a little heavy at times. I was particularly worried about Wiseman directing, since both underworld movies were a complete mess in my opinion, but he really keeps it tight and disciplined this time around. Is Die Hard 4.0 the second or third best of the series? I don't know, but it is certainly a worthy successor, and all the other blockbusters should look this way to see how its done efficiently, crisp and above all entertaining.

The fourth installment of the infamous Die Hard franchise caused quite a split between the fans in terms of opinion. Many liked it, others loathed it. Here's why Live Free or Die Hard is actually a good action flick -

1. It's shot and edited very well. The man behind the camera did a great job and the film is entertaining as hell to watch because it's relentless. 2. The action. Now, many complained heavily that this movie turns John McLane into a superhero. Even though the degree of realism gets close to crossing the line sometimes, it's nothing short of pure entertainment. Every Die Hard movie broke certain conventionalities for the purpose of making a fun scene. All Die Hard movies twisted reality a little bit to spice up the action a bit. This one does have more of it, but at least for me it was awesome. Also, the stunts are amazing! Very impressive stuff! 3. Plot. Everyone runs out of ideas. Eventually, even the die hard audience of Die Hard would get tired of John McLane trying to stop baddies from breaking into a vault and stealing money. I like the idea of an old McLane being surrounded by all the technology that he doesn't understand. It also creates another difference between him and the bad guy, which adds more meaning to their rivalry. 4. The character of John McLane. Just as always, Bruce Willis is great as John McLane, it's obviously a signature role. He is just as great in this one as he was in the previous three. His witty remarks about the current situation always make you chuckle and his sarcastic attitude is always relevant.

The only thing that makes this an 8, not a 10, is the continuity errors that were painfully noticeable and lack of the bad guy on screen. Otherwise, this is the definition of an action movie done right. To me, it's not as good as 1 or 3 but better than 2.

The casting of the charismatic Tim Olyphant and the hot and sexy Maggie Q. Was a good choice! The surprise appearance in the middle of the film was fun too and John McClane and his new partner do well together! The action is also top notch stuff, I think it's probably one of the best action movies of the 2000s!

Die Hard 4.0 (2007)-

In some ways it feels that there has been too much time since the last film and as a result I didn't quite feel as connected to the character, like I needed a catch up of what he had been doing in the mean time.

It does have similarities to the third instalment though. As with that one, John has a civilian tagging along and I have to say I enjoyed the way that they bounced off of each other. Farrell gives John the knowledge to complete the task and John keeps Farrell alive to save the world.

There is also another team of experts back in an office trying to keep a grip on the situation and failing, so once again it does come across a bit like an episode of '24' (2002-10).

I did have to wonder if I was reading the map wrong though? How did McClane, a New York cop end up in Washington DC and then get to West Virginia and back to Baltimore and then DC again so quickly? It seems like it would take a lot longer than the time they had.

There's also a lot going on and if you're a bit technophobic, it's very easy to get lost. My advice would be to try and forget the jargon and just enjoy the action. I got completely set adrift, but still enjoyed the journey, despite some of the stunts being quite hard to believe, but that's the style of the film at the end of the day. However, it's also getting harder still to believe that McClane is the only one that can save the day.

With all of that said, I totally wasn't expecting it to be as good as it was, what with the 12 year interlude and it being a third sequel. I thought that I would be playing solitaire or sudoku half way through out of boredom due to repetition and a lack of interest. It's still got the fast pace though and you can't help but like the hero, despite and somewhat because of his faults.

The threat has been brought up to date even if John is still "Old School", but yet it still feels like something the character would react to.

If it wasn't for the technology, you could easily believe that the film was made more recently, as it hasn't really aged, but I suppose that could be said for the other 3 as well.

I really liked it. It's just what you want from an action film and with an established character that you know will win the day.

665.69/1000.