‘A Good Day to Die Hard’ is one of those films that actually made me angry after I finished watching it (and during for that matter). The fifth installment of the Die Hard action film franchise that made Bruce Willis a movie Star in the 1980s, this film captures none of the magic, thrills, or wittiness that made the original film a classic. It didn’t even capture a nostalgic tone that made films like Rocky Balboa watchable. In fact, Bruce Willis’s character John McClain was so irrelevant to this story that he wouldn’t have been missed if they had left him out of the movie.
This time around John McClain’s adventures take him to Moscow. The premise is that his estranged son has gotten involved in a sticky situation in Russia where he faces life imprison. McClain goes over there to attend his trial. McClain’s son, also named John (or Jack for distinguishing purposes), is played by Jai Courtney. It comes as a shock to John when he learns that his delinquent son is actually a CIA operative. He is in the middle of a war between a Russian billionaire and a high ranking Russian politician. This is where the movie initially loses me. Every good action film needs an epic villain. Throughout the film, I was never sure who the bad guy was or why they were doing what they were doing. Even when they did reveal the mysterious ‘file’ that everyone seemed to be after, it left more questions than it answered. I can’t explain further than that without giving away plot points, but it was a very garbled and tangled story line that made no sense after it was unraveled.
So lets be honest, we go to the Die Hard films for the action and not the plots. We want to see John McClain wade into a situation like a cowboy and blow everything up whilst smirking and delivering ironic quips. As he does this he endlessly frustrates sophisticated European villains with his blue collar American ways of thwarting ingenious plans. This film tries to do that, but it just comes off flat. McClain’s catch phrase in this movie; ‘I’m supposed to be on vacation’ (which technically isn’t true because he’s there for his son’s trial) is uttered so many times and inappropriately that it becomes tedious. His police instincts kick in randomly and at odd times. And the film is so determined to top the action scenes from previous Die Hards (which strained credulity to begin with) that it became eye rolling cartoonish as opposed to holding your breath exciting. What gave the first Die Hard it’s level of greatness was it’s ability to have us suspend our disbelief during the mass chaos moments.
As I stated earlier, Bruce Willis was almost superfluous to this movie. It felt like he was trying to insert himself into the storyline. His trademark quips fell flat and seemed out of place. The chemistry between McClain and his son is nonexistent. Not sure what casting director thought they would be a good pairing. The true story was so obsessed with having one plot twist after another that it became lost in it’s own complexity and at the end, we did not understand the motivations of anyone. Good guys included. This was an awful film made 25 yrs after the original. It should have never been made and it just felt like Bruce Willis collecting a paycheck.
I give this film * star and that’s being generous.
I’m a little angry at having wasted two hours of my life.
No comments:
Post a Comment