TheRetroCritic

As Die Hard fans all over the world, me including, hang their heads in shame, it appears they've finally done it. They have finally run this franchise into the ground. So much so that I now see Die Hard 4.0 as the last GOOD Die Hard flick and I was no fan of that one, frankly... First up: the plot. Nonsense. You've got John McClane going all the way to Russia to try and help his son not get locked up for a bunch of crimes it turns out he only committed as part of a secret CIA mission set in motion to try and recover some file from some bearded dude, along the way McClane and son meet a carrot-eating, tapdancing villain and go to Tchernobyl. Like, what? That's the story they went with? Jeesh, I wonder what other plots they must have passed on before settling on this trainwreck. To give you an idea, the film opens and it looks and feels nothing like a Die Hard film: no charm, no wit, no brains, no creativity, no suspense, no hook, no concept. If anything, it fe

Christmas movies don't come any tougher than this. Bruce Willis is officer John McClane, an NYPD cop heading for the intimidating Nakatomi building where his wife (played by Bonnie Bedelia) works to try and patch things up marriage-wise. All goes according to plan until a group of bad guys led by Alan Rickman's cocky mastermind Hans Gruber waltz in and take over the skyscraper. McClane soon becomes the hostages' only hope as he tries to foil the big-time robbers' plans from within. What follows is an exciting and nail-biting one-man stealth sabotage mission complete with explosions, shoot-outs, punches and broken glass. It's weird watching the original Die Hard after the likes of Live Free Or Die Hard because the first film really is in a different league, a different genre even. The first film wasn't about John McClane being this superman who can outrun planes and stop by Kevin Smith's house for shits and giggles: it's actually much grittier