Die Hard

My 100 Worst Movies of All-Time (100-51)

~ Barloq ~ Leave a comment

Rounding out this new series of favourite and least favourite media, we have my list of the one hundred worst movies of all-time. Films here have earned their placement based on how badly-made they are, if I’d ever want to watch it again, and how much I personally despise the film in question. There are actually quite a few movies on here that I think are extremely entertaining, and I will mention this when it’s relevant, but I have put more weight on their general quality than how enjoyable they are. And, again, these are all very subjective opinions and can only really be based on the movies I personally have seen. Got it? Let’s get into it.

100. Big, Bad Wolf (2006)

Werewolves are my favourite movie monsters, so I will admit that some of my distaste for this film stems from how they handled the central monster. There are two really big negatives here. First of all, the werewolf talks a lot. He is a joker who gives Freddy Krueger a run for his money in terms of all the bad jokes he spouts. Secondly, this werewolf likes to rape women. This film’s pretty notorious for being the one where the werewolf rapes people, and you know that they lean into the exploitation aspect of that. There are a couple pretty prominent scenes of rape and sexual assault, which just makes the film all that more unpleasant to watch, especially when it’s also trying to be comedic.

99. Star Wars: Episode IX – The Rise of Skywalker (2019)

I don’t think there’s ever been a movie I watched more out of obligation than The Rise of Skywalker. By the time it released, I was already sick of Star Wars due to the fanboy discourse around The Last Jedi. Then, when I found out that The Rise of Skywalker was undoing all the “unpopular” elements of The Last Jedi, it made me even more hostile going in. The main thing that I liked about The Last Jedi was that it was setting up a future for Star Wars to tell new stories, instead of just rehashing the greatest hits, so it seemed like The Rise of Skywalker was just going to be more half-assed original trilogy homages. I walked into that theater, but I didn’t do so with any excitement – it was Star Wars, so I had to see it. I could have been watching Knives Out, Jumanji, or goddamn Cats instead!

While this obviously coloured my opinion on the film, there were plenty of other things that really fell flat: an insultingly-dumb narrative, breaking the rules of the Star Wars universe constantly, twists that feel completely unearned, emotionally manipulative attempts to tug at your nostalgia strings… the list goes on.

This movie just makes me feel empty. It’s by far the worst Star Wars movie ever made. I don’t even consider it canon, I’ve basically deleted it from my mind, to the point where I get genuinely surprised when I’m reminded of its existence.

98. The Babysitter: Killer Queen (2020)

I had extremely low expectations for the original Babysitter film, but the premise sounded funny enough that I gave it a shot. I was actually pleasantly surprised by how fun it was, largely thanks to the fantastic lead performance by Samara Weaving. When I found out that they were going to make a sequel without her, I was hesitant, but figured I’d give it a shot again. Unfortunately, Killer Queen is a half-baked, self-referencing rehash of the original. I’ll give Emily Alyn Lind credit for trying to be a fierce villain, but she’s no Samara Weaving.

97. Battlefield Earth (2000)

One of the most notoriously bad movies ever made, Battlefield Earth is largely remembered for being terrible due to its ties to Scientology. If you’ve actually seen the film, you will know that it is extremely campy. It also just looks and feels weird, being shot near-entirely in Dutch angles. That said, I feel like Battlefield Earth‘s notoriety is more due to its prominence and political leanings than its actual qualities. The movie is pretty terrible (hence its placement on the list), but it is also bad in an entertaining, expensive, professionally-made way. You could certainly do a whole lot worse, as you will soon see…

96. An American Werewolf in Paris (1997)

An American Werewolf in London‘s most hailed aspect was its amazing practical effects, so why the fuck did they think that a fully-CGI werewolf would be acceptable for its sequel? Bear in mind that this was done using 1997 CGI (that is to say, it looks worse than most modern made-for-TV movies). The film also seems to have misunderstood the comedic elements of its predecessor, attempting to go for a much more over-the-top tone, which is just grating.

95. Atlas Shrugged: Part 1 (2011)

This first Atlas Shrugged adaptation fails, not so much due to its deluded politics (the most offensive of which are toned down quite a bit), but due to being incredibly boring, cheap, and poorly-made. The film is all “tell, don’t show” and my God does it want nothing more than to go on didactic rants. There’s not even a payoff, since this is very much a “part one” movie, making it an even more inessential watch if you’re not prepared to strap in and watch its even worse sequels…

94. Ouija (2014)

Few horror movies are as limp as Ouija. It features dull characters, terrible attempts at scaring the audience, a toothless PG-13 rating, and is just plain boring to top it off. It’s a bad movie, and not even in a fun way, which makes it all the more shocking how good its prequel turned out (and makes this movie’s quality all the more offensive).

93. The Happytime Murders (2018)

I wanted to like The Happytime Murders. A goofy, raunchy, puppet-based cop comedy sounds like a good time. Furthermore, Melissa McCarthy gets too much hate; this seems like the sort of project she could do well in. Unfortunately, The Happytime Murders is just… stupid. It’s the most cliched cop movie premise you could ask for, with the only original thing being its puppet gimmick that it assumes will let it get by. Instead, it quickly turns into a one-note joke in a film which is direly short on laughs (we get it, it’s another puppet having sex and doing drugs, do you have any other jokes?). Hell, Melissa McCarthy barely even makes an impression, good or bad. She’s just “here” filling a role literally anyone else could have. Like a puppet without a master, the film is nowhere near good enough to hold itself up when its only gimmick is running this thin.

92. A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010)

A Nightmare on Elm Street seems like it should be a decent remake. Jackie Earl Haley is great casting for the new Freddy, it’s got an early performance from Rooney Mara, and it explores new ground with sleep deprivation and how that could bring nightmares into the waking realm, making Freddy even more unavoidable. Unfortunately, A Nightmare on Elm Street does one of my least favourite 80s tropes: “what if Satanic Panic, but real?” Considering that the Satanic Panic ruined several lives over a moral panic that was entirely fictional (not to mention that it made nerds and metalheads social pariahs for more than a decade), I hate seeing this concept get legitimized… and that’s not even getting into how they explicitly made Freddy a pedophile here. It works for the character, but my God, when they make it an overt part of the plot, it does not make him enjoyable to watch. Really though, the worst part of A Nightmare on Elm Street is how dull and formulaic it is, which is a real shame, because the original films are some of the most creative slashers in the entire industry.

91. Resident Evil: Apocalypse (2004)

I often hear people saying that the only good Resident Evil movies are the first one and Apocalypse. These people are dead wrong. I can only imagine that they watched them once when they were young and haven’t seen them in at least fifteen years, because Apocalypse suuuuuucks (and so does the first Resident Evil movie, but it’s good enough at least to not end up on this list). This was the start of the “Alice is a Mary Sue” trope in these movies, and every other character ends up being upstaged by her, or they are just worthless to the narrative. The action isn’t even all that good either, thanks to the weak direction.

90. Friday the 13th: Part III (1982)

Friday the 13th: Part III is close to being enjoyable thanks to its cast of memorable weirdos (Shelly, the biker gang, the annoying hillbillies, fuckin’ Chili), some gnarly kills, and Chris is probably my favourite final girl in the entire franchise. However, the film really falls flat due to being a really dull rehash of the previous two films (which also weren’t that great for that matter). The directors of these films seem to think that tension is built by having characters dick around for several minutes until something happens, but in this movie they forgot that they probably should have these characters, y’know, actually do something. Instead, we get scenes like the bikers frolicking aimlessly in a barn for minutes on end when they’re supposed to be prepping for a vengeful arson. The film also was shot in 80s 3D, so it looks pretty embarrassing today. This is the sort of film that’s more enjoyable as a series of highlight clips on Youtube than it is as an actual viewing experience.

89. Fantastic 4 (2015)

Josh Trank’s much-maligned superhero reboot feels like it has executive meddling all over it. It’s interesting, with ambitions to be a gritty, morally grey, body-horror-inspired take on the material. Unfortunately, what we get here is half-baked, messy, and fails to capitalize on any potential in the premise, ultimately making the whole affair feel pointless.

88. Pride and Prejudice and Zombies (2016)

Pride and Prejudice and Zombies should have been so simple: take the, er, skeleton of Pride and Prejudice and then add some over-the-top zombie action between the romantic drama. Instead, the film opts for an excessively-serious take on Pride and Prejudice with some scenes and lines changed to add in zombies, which makes them feel perfunctory rather than a key part of the story (imagine that). Oh and then add in that this is a wannabe-gory zombie film that’s being neutered by a PG-13 rating, so you can’t even get any visceral thrills to stave off the boredom. Add it all up and you’ve got a boring, one-note slog that it should have been a slam-dunk fun time at the movies.

87. Assassin’s Creed (2016)

Assassin’s Creed had all of the potential in the world, from its cast, to its production values, to the unusually strong narrative of its video game source material. Unfortunately, it’s all completely wasted on a script which strips out all of the mystery and intrigue of the games, spends 90% of its dialogue reiterating the exact same dialogue about free will over and over again, and is just plain dull. I would love to find out where exactly this project was screwed up, because there was so much potential for a great movie here that the fact that they missed by so much is a crying shame.

86. A Good Day to Die Hard (2013)

A Good Day to Die Hard is, frankly, a really sad end for this storied franchise. Say what you will about some of the other Die Hard sequels, but this is the only one that is outright bad, with weak action sequences, a script by Skip Woods (that is to say: full of complicated political intrigue that does not translate well to a fast-paced action movie, making the whole thing seem dumb as all hell), and poor chemistry between Bruce Willis and Jai Courtney. Hell, even John McClane is annoying in this movie, which is a sentence that should never have to be written, but here we are.

85. Hellraiser: Hellseeker (2002)

I’ve been watching the Hellraiser sequels this year and, thus far, they haven’t been nearly as bad as I had heard. I legitimately kind of like the wild ambition of Bloodlines, and Inferno and Deader are way better and more interesting than they have any right to be. However, that cannot be said of Hellseeker, which is an absolute slog of a film. The film commits multiple deadly cinematic sins, most notably that it brings back original final girl Kirsty Cotton, only to kill her off in the opening minutes. Instead, we spend the rest of the runtime with her boring-ass husband, Trevor, who just looks constantly confused. The next hour and a half are spent in explicit dream logic, with no way to tell what is really happening and what is not, or when scenes shift from reality to fiction. This might sound like it could be spooky or leaves the film up for interpretation, but it’s not that deep. Instead, it just gets fucking annoying, causing me to stop caring about what is happening, because the film sure as hell doesn’t want me to invest in any of it. It doesn’t help that this movie came after the much better-executed Inferno and is clearly drawing inspiration from it, meaning that the reason for all this dream logic is pretty obvious if you had seen that film already.

84. Hellraiser: Hell on Earth (1992)

As bad as Hellseeker is, Hell on Earth definitely takes the cake as the worst Hellraiser I’ve seen (so far). You can feel the Weinsteins’ fingers all over this movie, forcing bigger body counts for Pinhead and the Cenobites to turn them into more traditional slasher villains. Those Cenobites, by the way, are just embarrassing this time around, with some of the ugliest designs in the entire franchise. All this results in a film which just does not work. The characters suck, the attempts to expand the mythology suck, the script sucks… everything just sucks here.

83. Wrath of the Titans (2012)

Despite its success, the Clash of the Titans remake was pretty bad, getting by from Liam Neeson saying “Release the kraken!” and being the first big 3D movie released after Avatar. I figured they’d try harder to justify a sequel, but somehow they managed to make a film which was even dumber and more generic than its predecessor (which is a feat in itself).

82. Resident Evil: Retribution (2012)

Retribution is by far the dumbest Resident Evil movie. There’s shockingly little plot here: Alice is trapped in an Umbrella facility and needs to escape… that’s it. Meanwhile, a bunch of characters from the games (who are terribly brought to life on the big screen) are trying to break her out. Oh, and Milla Jovovich had just had kids, so now Alice is a mother, despite it never being an aspect of her character until now. How do they force this in? Well, she meets a kid who thinks she’s her mom, because Alice is stuck in a real-life simulation where Alice clones have been trying to survive a zombie apocalypse… life I said, it’s fucking dumb. We then get a bunch of admittedly decent action scenes, but there’s basically no substance to grab onto here. You can do better, trust me.

Oh, and that kid? Dead by the time the credits roll. Boy, being a mom sure was important to Alice!

81. Hitman (2007)

It’s bad when you’re watching a story that is so convoluted and nonsensical that you think “this must be a Skip Woods film”, and then check IMDb to confirm your suspicious are correct. I dunno if the guy just writes elaborate scripts which then get butchered on their way to screen, but he legitimately is one of the worst screenwriters in all of Hollywood.

80. Saw 3D (2010)

Saw 3D opens with a trap which has two guys strapped to a table saw. A woman, who is cheating on them both, is suspended above them. They are instructed by Jigsaw to take a life in order to free themselves. Oh, and this trap takes place in a public storefront, so they quickly draw a crowd of onlookers who just stand there and gawk rather than, y’know, trying to stop this attempted murder. It’s so bonkers that I legitimately thought that this was supposed to be a public theater satire of the Jigsaw killings, but no… it’s a real Jigsaw trap and they actually want us to take this whole thing seriously. It was at this point that I realized that Saw 3D was going to suck.

Saw 3D is a cartoonish embarrassment, easily the worst Saw film ever made. There are some pretty nasty traps here, but they’re undermined by significantly more traps which are just idiotic> The colour grading is awful due to being shot in 3D, which makes the copious amounts of blood look hot pink. It also features an infuriating finale, with perhaps the most unjustified death of the entire franchise. It’s absolutely no wonder the franchise took a seven year hiatus to try to wash the stink of this movie off.

79. Friday the 13th Part VIII: Jason Takes Manhattan (1989)

Most of the Friday the 13th movies are consistently mediocre, rarely deviating from a pretty simple formula. However, around the time of Part VII, the producers started feeling like they needed to bring in some gimmicks, and Jason Takes Manhattan seemed like it could be the most exciting of these. The promise of having Jason head into the big city to carve up teens sounded like it could shake up the formula just enough to be a big, blockbuster event. Unfortunately, Jason Takes Manhattan is notorious for being one of the most disappointing films in the entire franchise. Pretty much everyone knows that the New York section of the film only last about twenty minutes and the rest of the film is spent on a cruise ship, where Jason somehow manages to go unnoticed as he kills tons of irritating kids who give us no reason to actually care about them. The film also introduces an idiotic “kid Jason” subplot which is one of the most embarrassing ideas in the entire franchise (which is saying something, considering some of the bullshit they added in the latter-day sequels).

78. Survival of the Dead (2009)

I’ll give George A. Romero credit for continuing to make films and try to push the zombie genre forward as he was approaching his seventieth year. Unfortunately, Survival of the Dead was an embarrassing note to end that career on. You can see glimmers of the social commentary which helped make his original Dead trilogy so good. The film takes place on an island where a bunch of ranchers are attempting to cure their undead relatives. Cowboy and Hatfield/McCoy shenanigans ensue from there. Unfortunately, the film is just fucking stupid, cheap, and poorly-shot, with dull characters. About the only thing that actually stood out to me was that the film answers the question “What happens if you bite a zombie?” That’s… pretty dire if it’s the only thing that really stands out about the film (the answer is “You become a zombie”, by the way).

77. Resident Evil: The Final Chapter (2016)

I fucking hate this movie. Paul W.S. Anderson pulls a bunch of shit from his ass to try to make sense of this franchise he’s cobbled together and try to give it some sort of satisfying send-off. As you’d probably expect, the results are really dumb and not satisfying in the least. What you may not expect is that the actions scenes kind of suck here as well, negating the one defense that people will try to use to justify liking these movies. Worst of all though is that a man died and a stuntwoman got maimed making this piece of shit movie, all because Paul W.S. Anderson and the other producers cheaped out on the production and put their crew at risk. Imagine dying or having to get your arm amputated, all for goddamn Resident Evil: The Final Chapter. Fuck this movie, it deserves to rot in hell.

76. Superman III (1983)

This movie is just so embarrassing. Superman becomes a secondary character in his own film, while Richard Pryor performs a bunch of cartoon antics that take up way too much screen time. The plot is incredibly dumb, full of the childish jokes that people complained about in the theatrical cut of Superman II since Richard Lester has taken over full directing duties this time around. It’s kind of a shame too, because the cast are generally great. There’s also a cool subplot where Superman is turned evil, but then Clark Kent splits from him and the two sides of Superman have to fight for control. It’s a genuinely good concept, which is entirely out of place in a film where a woman gets pushed into a computer and is instantly turned into an android…

75. Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen (2009)

Michael Bay’s original Transformers film was actually pretty well-regarded when it released. It wasn’t until this movie, Revenge of the Fallen, that people really came to realize that these movies were not good. The action was incoherent, the narrative was dumb, and the film was incredibly lowbrow (to the point of having two racist caricature robots and a transformer with a set of testicles), and the film was overloaded with CGI.

74. Transformers: Age of Extinction (2014)

Honestly though, I think Age of Extinction is even worse than its more notorious older sibling. This is the Transformers film with a character who carries a card on him to justify statutory rape. We’ve got Mark Wahlberg taking over as the leading man… which I guess is an upgrade? He’s incredibly dull, but at least he doesn’t annoy me like Shia LaBeouf’s Sam did. We also get a healthy dose of Stanley Tucci, which is a highlight, but even watching him doing cartoonish antics gets grating the longer it goes on. For the most part, Age of Extinction is every bit as loud and dumb as any other Transformers movie, but what puts it over the edge for me is my experience when I watched it in theaters. The movie had dragged on to what felt like a climactic action sequence and the story seemed to be wrapping up. I legitimately thought the movie was about to end, and if it did, then this wouldn’t have been my least-favourite Transformers movie. But no, then suddenly the film goes to China, and I check my watch: we’re only halfway through this movie, what the fuck!? Suffice to say, the back half of this movie was worse than the front, making this drawn out experience feel even more torturous.

73. The Wicker Man (2006)

The quintessential “Youtube highlight reel” movie, The Wicker Man isn’t really worth watching. The clips you see online are weird, but in-context they do make some sense. However, this movie is a pure, bad 2000s horror remake (glossy production, big budget, weak horror elements). It’s only differentiator is that Cage’s performance is absolutely bonkers, but you really should just stick with the highlight reels.

72. Death Note (2017)

I have the perhaps notorious opinion that the Death Note anime is kind of trash. In what world is a show, where 70% of its episodes are bad and then 30% are great, “one of the greatest anime of all-time”? So, believe me, I was not coming into this Death Note adaptation expecting it to suck. Hell, I was actually kind of excited, because I already liked Adam Wingard for You’re Next and Willem Dafoe as Ryuk was awesome. I love the premise of Death Note, so I was eager to see if a different interpretation could do better. Unfortunately, this Death Note movie squanders basically everything that actually was good about the manga and anime in favour of a by-the-numbers supernatural crime drama. Gone are all the philosophical musings about morality and justice which were the main reason the series was so compelling to begin with. Instead, it’s just generic cop plots and high school killer clichés.

71. The Twilight Saga: New Moon (2009)

In high school, my friends and I would do these really amateur rifftrax of movies we didn’t like. We got through most of the Twilight movies, but I feel like we gave them a fair shake (we all felt that Eclipse was not bad). I get that these movies are not for me, and I don’t want to yuck anyone’s yum… but, my God, this movie was a torturous experience. It is so slow and dull, stretching a thin plot over more than two hours of runtime. The main characters make this feel even worse, because I didn’t give a shit about any of them (I will say that the background characters have much more interesting personalities though).

70. Independence Day: Resurgence (2016)

When I was ordering this list, Transformers: Age of Extinction became a bit of a barometer for me. I’d think of bad blockbusters and ask “Is this movie worse than Age of Extinction?” to help rank them. For Independence Day: Resurgence, that was a very quick and definitive “YES”, which should give you an idea of how bad it is. This long-belated sequel is even louder and dumber than the worst Transformers film. For a movie that was in development for twenty years, it’s almost shocking how half-baked Resurgence feels. There are lots of pointless subplots, the “escalated” threat feels no where near as potent as it did in the original, and the characters have basically no development and give us no reason to actually care about them. In fact, the only characters I felt anything for were the gay scientist couple, but that was mainly because of their charming performances rather than the script. If you want mindless action, then the movie will deliver that, but it’s not even particularly noteworthy in that regard. Just rewatch the original if you need some stupid fun, it did that far more competently.

69. The Purge (2013)

The Purge was the biggest disappointment I have had in theaters. The premise is incredible: crime becomes legal for twelve hours once a year! However, they clearly had no budget to work with, so they set the entire film inside a single house. The entire premise just gets used as an excuse for why their home is getting invaded, why their power has been cut, and why they can’t just leave. Making matters worse, most of the film revolves around the Sandin family somehow managing to get lost in their own goddamn house as they try to find a homeless veteran who snuck in to try to escape the purgers. I didn’t expect The Purge to be anywhere near amazing, but it failed to be even entertaining.

68. The Angry Birds Movie (2016)

If you are, like, the youngest of kids, then Angry Birds probably passes for you, but just barely… Unless you are amongst the most easily entertained of people, Angry Birds is just a collection of dull “comedy” scenes stitched together haphazardly, which are anchored by a bunch of irritating pastiche characters, all in an effort to try to turn this shitty mobile game into a proper multi-media franchise. Yeah… good luck with that, Rovio.

67. Don’t Breathe 2 (2021)

Don’t Breathe 2 is one of those sequels that is fundamentally flawed in its conception and therefore doomed to failure, no matter how it was handled. The Blind Man is a relentless monster and trying to humanize him for this sequel is an idiotic move. This would just be a boring, run-of-the-mill father revenge movie, but it’s a sequel to Don’t Breathe. There’s certain expectations that come with that, and this film does not meet them! There’s barely any tension to be had. Worse though, the film doesn’t even acknowledge that The Blind Man is a psycho rapist, we’re just supposed to accept his own justification that he “technically didn’t rape anyone”, forget about it, and accept that he’s changed. It’s so fundamentally stupid that it brings the rest of the film down around it.

66. Red Dawn (2012)

I will never forget how hard I laughed when I was watching Red Dawn, and then it suddenly turned into an ad for Subway. I’m not even joking, it was the most blatant product placement I had ever seen in my life. Josh Hutcherson even called the employee a sandwich artist and made sure they used his favourite warm and flaky bread!

I thought that the original Red Dawn was kind of crappy, so I wasn’t even going into this expecting it to not live up to the original. However, this film can’t even reach those modest heights. The film gets let down by its characters (who, if they aren’t just bland, are straight-up unlikeable), mediocre action sequences, and a script which is insulting to the audience’s intelligence at times. Also, the fact that North Korea are the ones conquering America is fucking hilarious (and then it’s frustrating when you realize this is because they shot the film to be about a Chinese invasion, but then edited it so that they could try to sell the film in China… like, have some integrity to something other than the almighty dollar).

65. The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn – Part 1 (2011)

Look, as bad as New Moon was, it doesn’t hold a candle to Breaking Dawn – Part 1. The previous Twilight films barely had enough plot to fill one movie. The thought that you could get two movies out of Breaking Dawn is laughable, and the film suffers due to Lionsgate’s desire to double-dip their audience. The film is every bit as boring as New Moon and is just as long as the other movies, but there’s less plot to work with than ever before, making this an even more torturous viewing.

64. Resident Evil: Welcome to Raccoon City (2021)

I have so much I want to complain about with this movie, but I’ll keep it relatively brief. An adaptation that’s more faithful to the source material makes sense for Resident Evil, but there are so many bone-headed decisions made here and half-baked ideas. The film is loaded with Easter eggs and callbacks to the games, but these end up serving no purpose to the actual narrative, which makes them feel cheap and insulting to the audience’s intelligence. This movie’s girl-boss version of Claire is somehow less interesting than than her “she’s just a normal tomboy” persona from the games. Leon being portrayed as a washed-up failure of a cop is an interesting idea, but he is given absolutely nothing to do in the entire movie, so it just feels like someone had a personal vendetta against his character. The idea of having Raccoon City as a ghost town feels like it was done to make filming during COVID restrictions easier, but it ruins the entire premise of a mass outbreak that makes the games’ version of these events so compelling. Resident Evil games don’t exactly have great stories, but the first and second games have very different tones and plot structures. You don’t have to be a fucking genius to realize that, if you mash the plots of the first two games together, it doesn’t make any sense and ends up creating a narrative that is so much worse than either by itself. Oh, and don’t even get me started on what are the stealthiest zombies I’ve ever seen in a movie, dear God. The one positive I can say is that the cast are all really good, I just wish they had been given some proper material to work with. As is, Welcome to Raccoon City is as bad as the worst Paul W.S. Anderson Resident Evil movies, which is something I never expected to have to say.

63. Taken 3 (2014)

Look, we were already burnt out on the Liam Neeson action movie after Taken 2, but Taken 3 still felt like one of Bryan Mills’ signature nut punches. The film has two major issues which leave it hamstrung. First of all, the action just plain sucks, due in large part to the haphazard, rapid-fire editing (not to mention that there is a distinct lack of actual action this time around during basically the entire second act). Secondly, the writing is abysmal. Idiotic plot conveniences abound. I literally slapped myself in the face at least five times during the movie in frustration at how stupid everyone was for the sake of the plot. Not to go on a tangent, but I noticed the freaking bagels the second he found Lenore dead: he had an ironclad alibi and could have been released in a couple hours if the police just checked a fucking security camera. Instead, Bryan Mills decides to get into gun fights and car chases with the police every five minutes, presumably because he’s an idiot. Beyond even that though, I’m kind of insulted that they fridged Lenore to begin with. For one thing, it is such an overused and sexist trope that it demonstrates just how lazy the writers are. For another, it retroactively makes Taken 2 even worse by making its third act pointless, since we now know she’s going to die anyway.

62. R.I.P.D. (2013)

R.I.P.D. is what happens when a movie exec decides to cater to all the things that people like. It combines Men in Black, Ghostbusters, Jeff Bridges’ Rooster Cogburn, and Ryan Reynolds (before people were getting annoyed with him). However, the resulting movie ends up feeling way too juvenile for its own good.

The film has some funny moments, but more often than not you’re left groaning at the bafflingly stupid, juvenile jokes which were thrown in for no good reason. Like… there’s a scene where they’re chasing the bad guys, and these bad guys are just farting constantly as they run away… it’s so funny that I forgot to laugh. The plot was very formulaic as well, which could have been fine if the rest of the film was enjoyable, but seeing that it wasn’t, it just ends up making the whole thing feel worse.

61. Catwoman (2004)

Catwoman is one of those films where I cannot believe that they actually released this in theaters. It is such a baffling movie, with unhinged performances from Sharon Stone and Halle Berry. I’d love to say that this movie is a misunderstood masterpiece, as it does have a great look for Berry and some style, it’s just so, so dumb. We got a lot of really bad comic book movies in the 2000s, and Catwoman is undoubtedly the worst of them.

60. Terminator Genisys (2015)

The only nice thing I can say about Terminator Genisys is that it retroactively made people fonder of Salvation. The entire premise of having John Connor turn evil feels downright blasphemous to the series’ legacy. Emilia Clarke and Jai Courtney are about the two worst actors you could have picked to lead a major film like this, which is even worse when you compare them to Linda Hamilton and Michael Biehn. The film is also basically a “greatest hits”, remixing scenes from significantly better Terminator movies to lesser effect. Predictably, this makes the film feel like it has no identity of its own, other than being really fucking dumb.

59. Alien: Resurrection (1997)

God I hate this movie. I get that they wanted to go for a different tone, but… guys, it sucks so bad. The Whedon-isms are grating and clash with the off-beat style of Jean-Pierre Jeunet. The aliens also stop being the real threat about two thirds of the way through, leaving us with an abomination of a replacement. Oh, and Ripley fucking suuuuucks in this film.

58. Jurassic World: Dominion (2022)

I HATED Fallen Kingdom, so when I find myself thinking back on it with some fondness after watching Dominion, you know that Trevorrow has screwed up big-time. There are so many things I could complain about in this movie, but here’s just a handful of them:

  • The legacy characters are blatantly shoehorned into this movie. You could cut them out of the film entirely with basically no effect to the main plot.
  • The movie has stripped out the horror elements of the series entirely. It’s now just straight-up action, which is far less interesting.
  • The bad guys are all a bunch of unthreatening weenies. I don’t even mean just the human characters either: Giganotosaurus, which is only in this movie to give the T-rex something to fight, has absolutely no bearing on the greater plot and can barely muster a threat to our characters (compare that to the Spinosaur in Jurassic Park III to really understand how dire this film is at everything).
  • The film is incredibly bloated. At one point it felt like it was going to end and then I realized there were (somehow) still fourty-five more minutes left.
  • The film commits to some incredibly stupid retcons. These retcons obviously were put in place to try to respond to criticism of Fallen Kingdom, but in their cowardice, they just made it worse.
  • The stupidest thing about this movie though is that it ends with the message “hey, genetic manipulation is cool actually and will solve all our problems with it!” How much further from Jurassic Park could you get than that?

Dominion is just further evidence that Jurassic Park should never have had sequels, or at the very least, the franchise should have not been brought back from extinction after Crichton’s death. I’m probably going to do another round of Retrospective catch-ups eventually, so expect more expanded thoughts on this movie in the future.

57. Left Behind: Rise of the Antichrist (2023)

GOD, this movie is just fucking exhausting. It’s like spending all your time on Twitter reading what the grifters and outrage merchants are saying; it makes you want to scratch your face off in frustration. That said, complain all you want about the in-your-face politics: the real, crippling issue it faces is that it is criminally dull. For reference, the original Left Behind adapted all the material in this movie into a fairly brisk hour. This movie stretches that out to two hours and it absolutely drags as a result. Add in some very lethargic performances (especially from ol’ Sorbo himself) and the aforementioned ham-fisted politics, and this is a film that struggles to maintain interest.

56. Street Fighter: The Legend of Chun-Li (2009)

Oh good, finally we get a movie that is just really badly made rather than one that actively pisses me off just thinking about it. Put simply, The Legend of Chun-Li is crap on basically every level. It’s pretty embarrassing when you make a Street Fighter film which gets completely outclassed in all regards by the notorious Jean Claude van Damme film, but they somehow managed that here. The Legend of Chun-Li is not even all that entertaining either, with some very limp fight scenes. It also features a couple shockingly violent (for PG-13) scenes which are jarring against the overall light tone, further making you wonder what the hell anyone was thinking while making this movie.

55. The Escape Plan 2: Hades (2018)

I legitimately really enjoyed the original Escape Plan movie, it was a good 80s throwback film with a fun cast and premise. I didn’t expect much from a sequel, but if it could capture even a fraction of the previous film’s quality, it would still be decent. Unbelievably, Escape Plan 2: Hades is so ineptly put together that I can’t believe that Stallone and Dave Bautista signed on to be in it. There might have been a decent movie in here somewhere, but it’s totally wasted on a poorly shot and horrendous, incoherently edited film.

54. Halloween 5: The Revenge of Michael Meyers (1989)

Halloween 5 is a pretty terrible film, even by slasher sequel standards. The film was shot without a completed script, and it totally shows, because there is no way that someone could sit down and intentionally write out the events of this film before it was filmed. The film throws in a bunch of dumb mythology about ill-defined bloodlines and curses, and Tina is one of the dumbest final girls in slasher history, making for a movie where you can feel your brain cells dying as you watch it.

53. Halloween Kills (2021)

My God, Halloween truly is the worst major horror franchise, because so many of its entries fucking suck. Halloween Kills is the most recent of these abominations (I… mostly liked Halloween Ends?). In a lot of ways, it’s a high-production value version of an 80s slasher sequel: a terrible plot and characters, but lots of brutal, gory kills. However, this feels so much worse for two reasons: 1) Halloween (2018) was so good and Kills comes nowhere close to it, and 2) The movie drags like mad. It feels positively aimless, wasting lengthy scenes on mostly-dull characters and half-baked plots with unearned resolutions. The ending also just straight-up pisses me off. About the only thing this movie does right is making Michael Meyers a terrifying, unstoppable monster, so I can understand why some hardcore Halloween fans would enjoy this. For my part, I was bored from start to finish of this wheel-spinning, poorly-edited, frustrating mess.

52. Jason Goes to Hell: The Final Friday (1993)

I have to give Jason Goes to Hell some credit for at least attempting to do something completely different with the Friday the 13th formula, but they absolutely failed and the results are baffling to witness. Suddenly adding a bunch of mystical lore nine movies in to try to explain some of the weirder aspects of the previous films was a fool’s errand, and having Jason be this body-hopping spirit is way less interesting than if he’s just an unstoppable, undead killing machine. This fundamental issue makes the film borderline unwatchable, even if it does have some fun characters and really gnarly kills that get lost in the shuffle. Oh, and do I need to mention that the movie ends with Jason climbing up a dead woman’s vagina so that he can be reborn from her corpse? Yeah… this is quite the film.

51. Howling III (1987)

Howling III is one of the most unhinged movies I’ve ever seen. I’ll give them some credit, they were swinging for the fences with this movie: it is brimming with ambition and a sincerity; you can tell that this was a passion project for Philippe Mora. Unfortunately, this film is absolutely deranged, featuring terrible werewolf designs, awful special effects (the scenes with the werewolf baby puppet make me want to pour bleach in my eyes), some of the worst acting I’ve ever seen, and a certifiably insane script with too many superfluous characters. This is a film which packs a whole five or six acts into an hour and a half runtime (for reference, your average movie tells its story over three acts in the same timeframe), meaning that it has no time to actually linger on any ideas, but also just wastes a bunch of time on pointless bullshit. Criminally, it’s not even all that entertaining either.

And that’s it for part one. If you’re reading this the day it comes out, then part two will be out tomorrow!

If you liked this article…

I hate ads. You hate ads. In order to stop polluting my site with obtrusive and annoying ads, I’ve elected to turn them off on IC2S. That said, writing still takes time and effort. If you enjoyed what you read here today and want to give a token of appreciation, I’ve set up a tip jar. Feel free to donate if you feel compelled to and I hope you enjoyed the article! 🙂

My Top 100 Movies of All-Time (25-1)

~ Barloq ~ Leave a comment

25. Heat (1995)

“Epic” is one of those terms that can get thrown around willy-nilly, but Michael Mann’s crime drama really earns the moniker. We get both the cops and the criminals’ perspective on this heist, so when their storylines converge, it is truly explosive and tense. The film goes to great lengths to fill out the details of its world, even down to the getaway driver who only shows up for a couple scenes. We get a whole backstory and motivation for him, only for him to suddenly get gunned down in the climactic shootout after the heist goes wrong. In any other movie, he’d be cannon fodder, but because Mann bothered to give him a real characterization, it’s actually pretty tragic seeing him get killed.

That shootout, by the way, is one of the most insane gun battles ever put to film. The gunfire is loud as shots echo throughout the open streets of Los Angeles. The sheer number of bullets fired and the carnage that erupts is comparable to the infamous jungle shootout in Predator, but with actual people involved on both sides of the exchange, and you’re on the edge of your seat waiting to see what happens to these characters that we’ve come to sympathize with on either side. Oh, and it’s a Michael Mann film, so everything is stylish as fuck.

Also, this is the movie where Al Pacino’s eyes bug out and he yells “SHE HAD A GREAT ASS”, and I’ve never quite recovered from the laughing fit it put me through.

24. Reservoir Dogs (1992)

Quentin Tarantino’s debut film is still one of my all-time favourites. It almost feels like a stage play, as most of the film is confined to a single warehouse, where a group of criminals try to figure out which one of them is a police informant after a heist gone wrong. The drama and paranoia which plays out is intense, as you are left constantly guessing and as events escalate in some unexpected ways. It helps that the cast are masterful here, from Harvey Keitel’s professional Mr. White, to Steve Buscemi’s weaselly Mr. Pink, to Michael Madsen’s quietly psychotic Mr. Blonde.

Oh, and I said it when I first watched the film, but it has held true all these years later: I will never be able to hear “Stuck in the Middle With You” by Stealers Wheel the same way again after watching this movie.

23. Inglourious Basterds (2009)

As much as I love Reservoir Dogs, I do have to agree with Aldo Raine that Inglourious Basterds is Tarantino’s masterpiece. This alternate history World War II film largely earns those accolades thanks to a scene-stealing performance from the (at the time) basically-unknown Christoph Waltz as Hans Landa. He is a terrifying villain, one who is calculating and sadistic, who loves toying with his victims. His introduction (one of the best character introductions in all of cinema) makes all this very clear, and makes every subsequent scene he’s in nail-bitingly tense, as you cannot tell if he knows or suspects more than he is letting on, or how he may press his knowledge for his advantage.

Of course, it’s not all about Hans Landa, as Inglourious Basterds is chocked full of great performances. Michael Fassbender is only really in one scene, but my God, what a scene that is; “intense” and “unforgettable” only scratch the surface of how good it is. Brad Pitt’s Aldo Raine and the titular Basterds are also great: a bunch of meat-headed Americans who, despite blundering their way across Nazi-occupied France, manage to win the day with some good ol’ fashioned American stubbornness. The real highlight though is Mélanie Laurent’s Shosanna, a hidden and hunted Jew who finds herself in a position to destroy the Third Reich once and for all, if not for one pesky Nazi who has an infatuation with her…

Inglourious Basterds is a great film, one that has some interesting commentary on topics ranging from America’s unilateral relations with other countries, to the danger of cultural ignorance, to the power of film, to the nature of evil, to toxic masculinity. I loved it when I first saw it, and I’ve only grown more affectionate over time.

22. The Texas Chain Saw Massacre (1974)

As I said back when I did a retrospective on this series, The Texas Chain Saw Massacre is one of my all-time favourite horror movies, and easily the best slasher film ever made. There are several reasons for this, but perhaps most important is the film’s documentary-like cinematography, which lends the film a very grimy and unsettlingly realistic feel. As a result of this, the relatively tame violence feels so much more disturbing and intense. Hell, the scariest parts of the film aren’t even the acts of violence, it’s the scenes of Sally going mad as she sees the disturbing sights at the Sawyer’s dinner table. The screams, lingering shots on the macabre objects, and the camera getting uncomfortably close to her terrified eyes are so much more unsettling than even the infamous meat hook scene. There’s so much more you can say about The Texas Chain Saw Massacre, but I’d really recommend reading my retrospective on the film: it says so much more than I can really cover here.

21. Die Hard (1988)

Die Hard is one of the most perfect screenplays ever written. Everything is so efficiently presented and the pay-offs are setup so well. Outmanned and out-gunned, hard-luck New York cop John McClane needs to use his wits to survive and rescue his estranged wife, Holly. The odds are stacked against him, but seeing him slowly even them as the film goes on is thrilling, and the more grounded take on an action hero was such a breath of fresh air at the end of the 80s. I also just love how the world of the film slowly opens up, with this claustrophobic siege in an office plaza eventually expanding to provide the perspectives of the police, FBI, and the media as well. Alan Rickman’s Hans Gruber steals the show, of course, but you really can’t understate just how good Bruce Willis is here as John McClane, especially considering he was known as a comedic actor at the time. That said, Die Hard is also one of the funniest movies I’ve ever seen, so perhaps he was putting those talents to good use.

20. Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (2004)

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind is a quintessential Charlie Kaufman screenplay. He’s the guy who also wrote Adaptation and Being John Malkovich, so the guy has some pretty wild ideas in his head. The film sees Jim Carrey (in a great dramatic role) playing Joel, who discovers that his ex-girlfriend, Kate Winslet’s Clementine, has undergone a procedure to erase all her memories of him. Hurt by this revelation, Joel does the same to her in retribution. However, in the middle of the process, he regrets undergoing the procedure and he falls back in love with her, only to have these memories torn away from him one-by-one. It is such a beautiful and tragic way to present love and the cycles of pain and joy it can put us through over the course of a relationship.

19. Up (2009)

As I said before, Pixar have some of the stupidest premises in the history of cinema. “A man uses a bunch of helium balloons to lift his house so he can fly to South America” is the sort of insanity you overhear in the dementia ward, not the premise of one of the greatest films of all time. The balloons that I laughed at end up being a delightful kaleidoscope of colour to liven up the film. Everyone knows just how devastating the opening sequence of this film is: it’s a masterful piece of wordless storytelling which conveys a lifetime of hopes, dreams, and tragedy in a scant four minutes, and it absolutely gets you on-board with Carl’s curmudgeonly antics for the rest of the film. Seeing Carl slowly open up and grow over the course of the adventure is delightful. I also love how this is contrasted against his childhood hero, Charles Muntz, who is incapable of letting go of the past, to the point where it turns him into a monster.

18. Nightcrawler (2014)

Nightcrawler is a disturbing film, one which reveals the seedy underbelly of America that we try to keep hidden. The film is a scathing indictment of how late-stage capitalism corrupts everything (especially the American media) and the sort of psychopathy and moral bankruptcy it requires from you in order to get ahead when you’re starting with nothing. The film works so well thanks to the confident writing and direction of Dan Gilroy, and an unforgettably slimy performance from Jake Gyllenhaal as Lou Bloom. Honestly, I don’t want to say too much more than that: it’s a film that demands to be seen, and I don’t want to spoil that experience for you.

17. Star Wars: Episode IV – A New Hope (1977)

It’s Star Wars, what else can I say? Of the original trilogy, A New Hope is my least-favourite, but considering it’s still this high up, that really says a lot about how good these movies are. A New Hope is the most efficient of the original trilogy, introducing this universe, its concepts, and some of the most iconic characters of all-time in a fairly lean two hour runtime. The special effects still look incredible (depending on which version of the film you watch), putting most modern films to shame, and the action sequences are all-time classics of the genre.

16. The Silence of the Lambs (1991)

I will never get over how overtly feminist The Silence of the Lambs is. The entire plot revolves around Clarice Starling trying to prove herself as an FBI agent, but she is constantly underestimated, objectified, and harassed due to being a woman. Meanwhile, the villain is obsessed with the idea of being a woman, but simultaneously does not view women as people, enabling their horrific acts of violence against them. It’s one of those movies that would absolutely be decried as “woke” if it released today, but, because it pre-dates that discourse, is grandfathered in as the “right” way to write a female character by those chuds.

And then, of course, there’s Anthony Hopkins’ spellbinding take on Hannibal Lector. He’s hamming it up a little bit for dramatic effect, but the character is at his peak here, a calculating predator who is toying with Clarice and the FBI to achieve his own ends. He works best here as a supporting character, before subsequent sequels would force him into the narrative as much as possible. Lector is electrifying, but Clarice Starling is the real emotional core of the film, and The Silence of the Lambs really keeps that in perspective, to great success.

15. The Raid 2 (2014)

I liked The Raid, but I couldn’t help but be a bit underwhelmed by its very rudimentary narrative. However, The Raid 2 takes all the balls-to-the-wall, visceral action choreography of the first film, and then transplants it into an undercover cop movie which is already solid in its own right. This is largely thanks to a great performance by Arifin Putra as Uco, the son of a mob boss who is frustrated by his father’s conservative approach to business. This frustration is preyed upon and causes Uco to perform a coup to take power for himself. Of course, the action sequences are the real draw for a Raid film, and The Raid 2 does not skimp on the mind-boggling, over-the-top fights and colourful villains (including one guy who executes people using literal baseballs). While they are more spaced out than they were in the first film, the additional narrative weight makes these fights even more effective, and you’d be hard-pressed to find a more impressive collection of action sequences.

14. Whiplash (2014)

Of course, it’s one thing for a movie with elaborate and visceral fight choreography to get your heart pumping fast. It’s a whole other thing when one of the most intense films you’ve ever seen is a goddamn drama film about a student musician, but Whiplash really needs to be seen to understand just how stressful this film is. J.K. Simmons is terrifying as Terence Fletcher, a musical professor with a short fuse who attempts to break his students in order to see if they can transcend to something truly great. The film is somewhat controversial for arguably justifying physical and emotional abuse in order to create art, but I do not feel like it is necessarily saying that Fletcher’s actions are right. Fletcher’s abuse of Andrew causes the two to absolutely despise each other. Andrew’s obsession with becoming a great drummer is clearly keeping him from having any sort of happiness, and the film implies that achieving his goal means that he’s probably going to die young, unsatisfied, and unappreciated. The film asks if that is all worth it, and the answer there is much more unclear and personal. Whichever side you fall on, Whiplash is an enthralling film, one you will struggle to look away from. I have never seen another film where, even to the very last second, you are absolutely glued to your seat, waiting to see what happens next.

13. Jurassic Park (1993)

When I was a kid, I loved Jurassic Park. I loved the tense dinosaur attack sequences, and it created an obsession over dinosaurs in me for several years. Then, around the time The Lost World came out, I suddenly started to get scared of this movie I had been fine with for years, so I avoided it for a while. It wasn’t until around the release of Jurassic Park III that I got over this and started indulging in my love of Jurassic Park again and really got to appreciate what a masterful film this is. It’s insane that the CGI has held up as well as it has after thirty years, but people don’t really appreciate how good the practical effects are and how the CGI supplements them. It also helps that this is a Michael Crichton adaptation, so it’s got that great mixture of heady sci-fi ideas, grounded explanations, and rip-roaring action spectacle.

12. Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981)

Like I said earlier, The Last Crusade used to be my favourite Indiana Jones movie, but the more time passes, the more I appreciate the straight-forward, action-packed, pulp adventure approach of Raiders of the Lost Ark. The action sequences are exquisitely crafted and choreographed by Steven Spielberg, allowing for some of the most creative, death-defying, and exciting stunt work of all-time.

Then there’s the characters. I’d argue that Indiana Jones is Harrison Ford’s greatest character: scrappy, smart, quick-thinking, and cultured, Indiana Jones lights up the screen and I cannot imagine anyone else playing him. Karen Allen’s Marion Ravenwood is also fantastic, an extremely fierce and independent companion for Dr. Jones, who puts the rest of the series’ stable of love interests to shame (and, again, someone who would definitely be accused of being “woke” if this movie came out today).

11. Star Wars: Episode V – The Empire Strikes Back (1980)

When I was a kid, I found The Empire Strikes Back to be a bit boring. Sure, the opening battle was cool, but all the stuff on Dagobah and the asteroid field kind of dragged out for me. Having gotten older and more mature, I appreciate these moments of downtime a lot more, as these are the source of some much-needed character development. Mark Hammill is given a lot more to chew on, as he finds himself desperately trying to become accepted as a Jedi, but constantly falls short in his lessons as he puts the lives of his friends first. Meanwhile, Han and Leia’s relationship suddenly heats up, and makes things take a turn for the tragic when fate starts to tear them apart again.

Plus, y’know, that Battle of Hoth is one of the greatest sci-fi spectacles in all of cinema, really setting the bleak and tragic tone this film is going for. The lightsaber battle towards the end of the film really cannot be underestimated either. It is one of the most emotionally-charged battles in the entire franchise, as Vader toys with his prey and Luke seems to be teetering on the edge of giving into his hatred for the man who killed his mentor. And, obviously, the film features one of the greatest twists in any piece of media, ever.

10. Mad Max: Fury Road (2015)

It’s not often that a pure action movie generates legitimate Oscar buzz, but it’s even more remarkable when it’s nominated for Best Picture and ends up winning the most awards of the entire year. Hell, it’s worth remembering that Fury Road is a sequel to The Road Warrior: at the time, The Road Warrior was one of those all-time great sequels that you compared to The Empire Strikes Back and Aliens as the way to do a sequel that’s better than its predecessor. Fury Road is so good that it has made people forget about The Road Warrior in that conversation. All that is to say that Fury Road is an adrenaline-fueled, hyper-focused, action thrill-ride which takes everything we loved about previous Mad Max movies, cranks it up to eleven, and then features one of the most efficient action movie narratives of all-time.

9. The Thing (1982)

The Thing is a remarkable horror film, one which earns its reputation as one of the best in the genre. The premise is just ripe for suspense and paranoia, as a shape-shifting alien infection works its way through a team of scientists in Antarctica and preys on the survivors one by one. It is a masterpiece of implementing the horror rule of leaving things up to the audience’s imagination. We never truly know who is a Thing and who is not, nor are we given clear answers about when certain characters become infected, leaving a lot of gaps to fill for the audience. However, that ends up being half the appeal, and there are fierce fan debates to this day about the fates of certain characters.

There’s also the film’s incredible practical effects, which bring the body horror to life in disturbing detail. While I think that the paranoia is the real draw for The Thing, the much-lauded effects are a close second, making the alien antagonist one of the most visually-arresting foes in horror cinema. The cast are also fantastic, especially Kurt Russell, and the film defies genre conventions by having its lead characters actually be quite smart and level-headed while dealing with this existential nightmare. There’s a reason why so many hardcore horror fans cite The Thing as their favourite of the genre and, while I can’t quite agree, it’s certainly one of the greatest horror films of all-time.

8. Aliens (1986)

James Cameron’s follow-up to Alien shakes-up the formula you’d usually expect from a sequel, especially at the time this movie released. Usually, a sequel will just do what worked before and retread the original, ultimately leading to a movie which is a lesser version of its predecessor. James Cameron says “fuck that” and takes a legitimate effort to expand this universe, build upon its characters, and try to tell a bigger, more explosive story using the original is a foundation. The result is a movie which adds a lot more action, but still has more than enough horror to feel like a satisfying follow-up to the original without lazily rehashing its plot structure. While it does actually have several of the same plot beats, so much has been added that you wouldn’t really notice unless you sat down and thought about it. You’ve already seen Alien, so why not see what happens when we get a whole bunch more aliens involved, and actually have them annihilating trained soldiers while they’re at it?

The expanded cast are great, from the all-business Hicks, to the insecure macho posturing of Hudson, to the slimy company man, Burke, to the unsettling, inhuman android, Bishop. Many of these characters don’t get a whole lot of time to make an impression, but they make the most of it, and it really sucks when they meet their fate at the hands and inner jaws of the xenomorphs. The special effects are also phenomenal, utilizing suits, animatronics, projection, and miniatures to flawless results. Aliens is so good that it is basically the template for how to make a sequel that stands on equal footing with its predecessor.

7. The Matrix (1999)

I remember around the time that Inception came out, there were debates about whether it was better than The Matrix. I scoffed at those comparisons, because there is no comparison to speak of: The Matrix is superior in every conceivable way. You really cannot understate what a monumental film this was at the turn of the millennium. On top of being one of the most kick-ass action movies ever made, The Matrix also deals with real-world philosophy and theology in a way that is digestible to general audiences. It’s also just got such a distinctive style, aping 80s and 90s anime in a way that we hadn’t really seen before in the West. The film’s action sequences would go on to inspire countless imitators in film and (especially) video games. Sure, its sequels could never match the brilliance of the original film, but does that really matter when The Matrix is such a good, stand-alone film in its own right (and, for that matter, the sequels are all pretty decent, they just aren’t this good)?

6. Alien (1979)

When I first went through the Alien franchise, I liked the action-packed bombast of Aliens the most. However, as the years have passed, I find myself loving the original Alien more and more with each rewatch. This industrial, corporatized, analog vision of the future is still fascinating and not explored nearly enough nowadays. I like how the cast are all a bunch of normal people whose choices throughout the film are fairly sensible (even Kane sticking his head in the alien egg – there’s no way he could have expected something to be able to get at him from in there). It’s also pretty cool that the “main” character is not revealed until very late in the film, as everyone has pretty equal billing until they get offed one-by-one. Of course, this is also the debut of one of the most iconic monsters in all of cinema, and the xenomorph has never been scarier than it is here. HR Giger’s design is fascinating and disturbing, capturing his unique art style to create something unforgettable. I’m still in awe of how they were able to bring this thing to life in 1979 so flawlessly.

5. The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (2001)

The Fellowship of the Ring has a daunting task in front of it: faithfully condense the first part of JRR Tolkien’s fantasy epic into a three hour film. This had long been considered impossible to pull off, but Peter Jackson brings Middle-earth to life so flawlessly that he makes it look easy. The mythological opening sequence gives a taste of the epic scale to come, but the sleepy opening sequence in the Shire does a great job of establishing the home that is in danger of getting swept up in this conflict. We are introduced to our colourful cast of hobbits, wizards, and rogues as they try to escape the menacing Ringwraiths, who feel like they’re ripped straight from a horror story.

Then the film does something really special – halfway through, it basically becomes a second movie, introducing a new quest, several more characters, and escalating the stakes and danger far beyond the mortal peril we had already endured up to that point. This second half is every bit as strong as the first, utilizing the diverse New Zealand biomes to make Middle-earth feel like this breath-taking world full of ancient history that we barely get to scratch the surface of.

I find it really hard writing about these sorts of really famous, highly-lauded films. For one thing, you’ve probably already seen them, so I’m just telling you what you already know. However, if you have not seen them, then I don’t really want to spoil it for you either. The Fellowship of the Ring is a must-see film, the sort of movie that comes around once in a generation, which really is the most important thing I can convey about it.

4. Star Wars: Episode VI – Return of the Jedi (1983)

Look, I get that A New Hope and The Empire Strikes Back are generally considered more even experiences overall than Return of the Jedi. Frankly, I do not care. I am a sucker for an epic, satisfying conclusion, and Return of the Jedi is about as good as you could ask for (and, to all the Star Wars fans who say that Return of the Jedi is not even a good movie: fuck you). I’ve commented on the structures of some of the greatest sequels of all-time while making this list, and I love how unique Return of the Jedi‘s take on this is. The first half is basically spent reuniting the cast and cleaning up the messes left from the previous film, introducing its own self-contained antagonist, unique locales and exciting action set pieces.

The second half is then spent concluding the trilogy’s overarching storyline. Again, we’ll get people complaining about the Ewoks here, but they’re completely fine. They fit in with the series’ themes of plucky, outgunned and underestimated people winning the day against the evil empire. The best parts about this portion of the film are the climactic lightsaber battle (which, in my opinion, is maybe the best in the entire franchise), and the epic space battle. The amount of work that must have gone into bringing this battle to life in 80s technology is mind-boggling to consider. Taken all together, the finale is easily the best epic sci-fi battle sequence in cinema, and makes for a great conclusion to the original Star Wars trilogy.

3. Terminator 2: Judgment Day (1991)

Terminator 2: Judgment Day is perfect. I can scarcely imagine what you could do to make a better sequel than this. This largely comes down to the big twist: the Terminator from the last film is the good guy this time. Right away, this turns the entire premise on its head and keeps T2 from being a lazy rehash (even though it’s still basically the same premise, only with a more dangerous Terminator variant). This story adds much more depth compared to its predecessor by making Arnold’s Terminator slowly learn what it means to be human and the importance of being a hero. Linda Hamilton has also gone from being a helpless damsel to one of the most kickass action heroines of all-time (again… this movie would be “WOKE!!!” if it came out today).

Also, and this needs to be emphasized: the action sequences in this film are incredible. The motorcycle chase. Arnie going ham with a minigun on the police (zero casualties). The helicopter chase. The steel mill finale. Any other action movie would be jealous to have even one of these sequences, but T2 is stuffed with exhilarating sequences which are all the better due to their practical stunt work. In the annals of unnecessary sequels, T2 is just the best, making the case that every other unnecessary sequel is just doing it wrong.

2. Planet of the Apes (1968)

If there’s one good thing that came out of Tim Burton’s Planet of the Apes remake, it’s that it caused the 1968 original to start getting broadcast on TV at the time… which is how I ended up watching it. I wasn’t really expecting much of it at the time: what is it, some dumb, hokey sci-fi movie about evil monkeys? I wasn’t planning on sitting around and watching the whole thing through.

However, as soon as the hunting sequence began, I found myself getting drawn hard into Planet of the Apes. Seeing Taylor get captured, wondering what happened to his companions, and seeing this ape society unfold before us, you’re left with so many questions that you need to find the answers to. The film just sucks you in to its satirical reflection of the worst of human society. The satire touches on all sorts of topics, ranging from animal experimentation, to the separation of church and state, to nuclear war, and class conflict. The ape makeup holds up a lot better than you’d expect, still allowing the actors to emote and display the personalities of their characters. I also think that Charlton Heston is an absolute legend for his performance as George Taylor: he goes from misanthropic dick, to extremely sympathetic, then back to a selfish prick for the finale, all while hamming it up deliciously. As much as I like most of this movie’s follow-ups, nothing will ever top the original for me. It is such a special film in my heart, and I will treasure it until the day that they put me in the grave.

1. The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (2003)

Confession: I was actually a bit underwhelmed when I first saw The Return of the King. I remember writing a class project in eighth grade that I thought that the video game adaptation was better. However, as soon as I had rewatched it once, I already had no idea what that stupid little child was saying: The Return of the King is a singular experience, one which defines and even transcends beyond the bounds of “epic”. Like I said, I’m a sucker for a satisfying, epic finale, and The Return of the King is about as grand a spectacle as you could ask for. The Siege of Minas Tirith and the Battle of the Pelennor Fields are shot and directed on a scale that I have never seen replicated (and, trust me, I have been looking desperately for twenty years for anything to come close). The battle is a roller-coaster of emotions, seeing the hopelessness of the defenders as they get battered by Sauron’s armies, only for the Riders of Rohan to show up and turn the tide… only for the Mumakil to show up and throw everything into disarray again. And then it just keeps going and building from there. This battle literally makes me cry, it is so epic and unrivalled that I cannot contain myself.

Of course, The Return of the King isn’t the king just for its epic battles. Frodo, Sam, and Gollum’s storylines really hit a crescendo here, and this is the point where the unassuming Samwise Gamgee becomes one of the greatest heroes in all of cinema. I cry just thinking about “I can’t carry it for you, but I can carry you! Come on!”, it’s one of the most beautiful expressions of loyalty and friendship ever put to film (note: yeah, I literally just had to wipe the tears out of my eyes while writing this… that is the power of The Return of the King)*. This is a once in a lifetime film, culminating more than nine hours of story in such a satisfying way. This has been my favourite film for more than half my life at this point, and I do not expect that any film will ever hold a more special place in my heart. I cannot wait to share this movie with my own family when they are old enough, and I can only hope that they experience the same magic that I did.

*Okay, this is just getting ridiculous… while going through this article for a final pass-over before publishing, just reading that line made me start tearing up again.

If you liked this article…

I hate ads. You hate ads. In order to stop polluting my site with obtrusive and annoying ads, I’ve elected to turn them off on IC2S. That said, writing still takes time and effort. If you enjoyed what you read here today and want to give a token of appreciation, I’ve set up a tip jar. Feel free to donate if you feel compelled to and I hope you enjoyed the article! 🙂

Retrospective: A Good Day to Die Hard (2013)

~ Barloq ~ Leave a comment

Merry Christmas good readers, and welcome back to the Die Hard retrospective! In this entry, we’re going to cover the fifth film in the franchise, A Good Day to Die Hard (ugh, stupid title). Just as a note, since the Die Hard franchise started out as a “Christmas movie” of sorts, I’ve intentionally lined up this retrospective to coincide with the holiday. I’m sure plenty of us will be watching the original tonight… I’d also like to mention that this blog is over a year old now! It actually hit that mark on December 4th, but I thought it was a little later than that. In any case, I’m glad I’ve been able to keep this thing going at a regular pace, and hopefully we can continue to do so well into 2014! Oh and thanks for reading and supporting I Choose to Stand! Anyway, I missed A Good Day to Die Hard in theaters and so went into this retrospective with a fresh view on the film. Does it live up to previous films in the franchise? Read on to find out…

Again, same template for the poster design. Not particularly innovative, although it highlights the characters and setting (via the humorously photoshopped Kremlin in the background).

Despite the financial and critical success of Live Free or Die Hard, production didn’t begin on a fifth Die Hard film until 2010. Initially, the project was known as Die Hard 24/7, leading to significant speculation that the film was to be a crossover between Die Hard and 24. Supposedly, the film would have been pretty similar, with Jack McClane being replaced with Jack Bauer. Maybe John McClane would have been on vacation in Russia, which would make some of the film we got make a bit more sense… but anyway, this was never confirmed and the film was eventually retitled to “A Good Day to Die Hard“. In any case, A Good Day is the first Die Hard film to start production as a part of the Die Hard franchise instead of another source.

Scriptwriting duties were given to Skip Woods… and his CV is a doozy. X-Men Origins: Wolverine? Hitman? Swordfish? The A-Team? His screenwriting credits read like a history of major failed blockbusters. The film was directed by John Moore, notable for such films as Max Payne, the Flight of the Phoenix and The Omen remakes and Behind Enemy Lines. While I haven’t really watched any of his films, I am told that they tend to not be very good. That said, the trailers for Max Payne had a really strong, interesting visual element, so if nothing else then hopefully he could make the film look very nice. As for the cast, Bruce Willis returns (obviously), and Mary Elizabeth Winstead has a small cameo as well. Playing Jack McClane, John’s estranged son, is Jai Courtney, known for Jack Reacher and Spartacus: Blood and Sand. Sebastian Koch plays Komarov, an imprisoned billionare who Jack has to defend. The film also features of few villains, although only a couple are notable. Radivoje Bukvic plays Alik, the main villain though most of the film. Yuliya Snigr plays Irina, the skanky chick from the trailer who acts as Alik’s main henchwoman.

Moving on to the plot, A Good Day to Die Hard follows John McClane trying to reconnect with his son, Jack. He discovers that Jack has been imprisoned and is on trial in Moscow for attempted assassination. Travelling to Moscow to bail Jack out, he gets caught up in a terrorist plot to assassinate billionare Komarov who Jack has been assigned to protect – it turns out that Jack’s actually a CIA agent and Komarov holds information which is vital to international security. As a result, John and Jack take the fight to the terrorists and bond in the process.

If it sounds like A Good Day to Die Hard has a pretty typical set-up for the Die Hard series, you’d be dead wrong. From the opening credit sequence, A Good Day feels very “off” from how a Die Hard film’s tone usually feels. The opening sets up a self-serious political action-thriller story about how Komarov and Russian defence minister Chagarin had a falling out, and now want each other dead. Considering that this is the first film intentionally written for the franchise, it’s very odd that they didn’t nail the Die Hard tone at all. I should also mention that I honestly didn’t really understand the plot all that much. It’s not very well elaborated on or particularly interesting. Say what you will about previous Die Hard films, but at least they always kept their plots engaging and left the audience invested in what was happening – we may not always know what the villains are planning, but we have a basic grasp of what their current objectives are. A Good Day just doesn’t really seem to care all that much about plot, just stringing together action sequences willy-nilly. Funnily enough, it feels like the sort of stupid action movie I would have filmed as a kid with my brothers, only with a $92 million budget (and no, that’s not a complement).

Speaking of student filmmaking, the script really comes across as an amateur production. “Emotional” scenes are hamfisted and handled with no subtly whatsoever. Oh looky, McClane and Komarov are talking about how they wasted their time at work instead of spending it with their kids, and Jack happens to be listening in on them! How touching! Oh, or the scene where John tells Jack that he loves him, but sounds really bored while saying it. Then there’s just tons and tons of action movie tropes, such as “the bad guy wants to destroy the world just because” and the generic “trapped heroes laugh with the bad guy while they hatch an escape” trope. Actually, they pretty much ripped that last one off of Die Hard itself. In fact, I noticed quite a few moments which were clear ripoffs of the original Die Hard, such as Jack and John defeating bad guys by “shooting the glass”, one of the villains getting caught with his (metaphorical) pants down and pretending to be a good guy and the same villain looking in fear as he gets thrown off a rooftop.

On top of all of this, there are lots of just plain illogical and overly-convenient moments in the film. If you’re getting shot at by a helicopter, is your first idea to run across the room and jump out the 20th story window? Luckily for John and Jack there was something to catch their fall, or they could have done their bonding… to the pavement. Why didn’t they just head to the damn staircase? Or what about the fact that John and Jack seem to have unlimited ammunition? They obviously don’t have spare magazines/clips, since they’re picking their weapons up off of dead bad guys half the time. And then there’s the moment where John sets off an incendiary grenade which (somehow) engulfs an entire lobby, and yet because Jack hides behind a skinny pole he gets through completely unscathed. I’d also be remiss to not mention the absolutely baffling moment where Irina gets her slightly damaged helicopter back under control and then decides to ram John and Jack with it in a display of helicopter suicide. The co-pilot screams “WHAT ARE YOU DOING!?!”… at least I think it was the co-pilot, and not God himself every time that scene is played. Could they not have landed and then, I dunno, shot at the McClanes instead? This just reeks to me of a studio afraid to have their all-American hero kill a woman. In any case, this movie just feels like a video game… in fact, it would have been much better served as one, since the plot’s about as good as the campaign in Battlefield 4 (read: horrible, but with gameplay it could be negated).

Oh looky, someone has seen a Tarantino movie before.

As for the acting, the movie colossally screws this department up as well. Bruce Willis looks and sounds bored throughout the entire movie. Gone is the wit and humour of John McClane of old – in this film, John actually manages to be annoying. Seriously. He does all sorts of quips like he used to in previous Die Hard movies, but they fall flat and I end up yelling “Shut up John, no one can hear you and you’re not being funny”. Most grating of all of these is the “I’m on vacation!” line which McClane throws about as a mini-catchphrase. I think it’s supposed to be hilarious, but it’s just stupid because dammit John you’re not on vacation. Who considers “picking up my son (who has been accused of attempted assassination) from a foreign prison” a vacation?! How the hell do you screw up a Die Hard movie so badly that John McClane, a hero whose longevity has stemmed from his charisma and smart ass attitude, ends up being one of the most irritating aspects of it? In fact, I’d only say a couple of characters were passable. Jai Courtney’s Jack McClane is okay, but he has absolutely no material to work with, so I can’t really fault him. Irina’s also alright, although she ends up as little more than eye candy (funnily enough, that stripping scene from the trailer doesn’t even show up in the movie).

As for the villains, they’re easily the worst in the entire franchise. The main bad guy is Chagarin, the Russian defence minister. He basically does nothing the whole film, seemingly orchestrating an assassination on Komarov by being a political dickhead. There’s one part where I literally burst out laughing when they show him walking in a crowd in slow motion as he takes off his sunglasses and grins. The actual main bad guy is Alik, a villain who they barely even bother to give any sort of personality. He’s “supposed” to be eccentric. He “intimidates” the main characters by eating carrots and… uh… dancing in front of them. Yeah, I’m not kidding, it’s as goofy as it sounds. Plus he literally says that he “hates all the Americans”… what is this, a Cold War propaganda film? Suffice to say, Alik sucks, and is nowhere near to the villainous standard set by previous films. I just didn’t give a half a shit about him at all.

Oh wait, it turns out that the actual actual villain was Komarov all along! He was orchestrating everything that happened to break himself out of jail and then get to Chernobyl so he could steal weapons-grade uranium and sell it on the black market to terrorists! Who saw that coming!?

Oh wait, that doesn’t make a lick of sense. Remember when I said that plot conveniences just riddle this movie? Everything revolving around Komarov is basically a plot convenience. For one thing, wasn’t there an easier way to pull this sort of thing off? It seems like everyone except Alik and Chagarin were in on it, so why not just get the bad guys to break Komarov out straight away and then head to Chernobyl by yourself? Why did he have to involve the CIA and his sworn enemy in the deal (not to mention putting his daughter at risk)? Doesn’t that just complicate things, like, a lot? Didn’t he think things were getting really bad when he was getting shot at, or blazed through incoming Moscow traffic at high speeds, or when he got freaking shot? Apparently that was all part of the plan. Seriously, the whole Joker-izing of villains is just stupid and has only ever worked in The Dark Knight. Hollywood hacks and Academy Award-winning screenwriters alike – stop using the Joker as inspiration, thank you. Komarov isn’t nearly as bad as Alik, he’s just bland and the unfortunate subject of most of the scenes which rip-off the original Die Hard – which just go to illustrate how woefully he measures up to Alan Rickman’s Hans Gruber. In fact, the only good thing about him in the movie is his death, where he’s thrown from the roof in an uninspired, rip-off manner… until he gets sucked into a helicopter’s tail rotor and evicerated. Holy crap, that was an epic, brutal death and a good send off to damn near any villain in my books.

I want to be done complaining, I really do, but there’s just so much to bitch about in this film. For one thing, John Moore decided to film the movie in shaky cam style. Now I’ll admit, he actually has some justification for using this style: “McClane is in a strange world, with little or no initial control over his environment. He’s unable to anticipate things as he normally might. He’s caught off guard, and we want the camera to mimic that surprise and confusion.” Unfortunately, it just doesn’t work. Action scenes get the shit shaken out of them, and even dialogue exchanges get bobbed back and forth, especially evident in close-ups. The fact that we don’t really relate to McClane in this film either just exacerbate the problem. Now I’ll admit I don’t hate shaky cam – I think it’s well-used in the Bourne films – but A Good Day to Die Hard is a bad example of the process in action. It also features slap-dash editing, mashing together images at rapid-fire rates. Hell, there’s even a conversation between Jack and John in a car where everytime one of them goes to speak, the camera angle shifts… every… single… time… one… of… them… speaks. It’s noticeably distracting. All-in-all, the movie feels outdated, like it was supposed to be released five years ago on the coattails of the successes of Bourne.

Poor editing also takes a toll on the action scenes. Early on there’s a car chase that is actually pretty good in spite of the filmmakers’ efforts to make it as incomprehensible as possible – the camera shakes like hell, the editing is full of garbled quick cuts and the shots never really cohere into a proper string of events. What happened to epic, well-choreographed sequences like the amazing car chase in Raiders of the Lost Ark? There’s also a couple moments with some misjudged editing choices in my opinion – during a couple scenes, the audio is cut out entirely. This is supposed to be a stylistic choice to make the scene more “epic” or “cool”, but it doesn’t really work… and in one instance, it actually derives the film of a chance to get the audience up to speed on what’s actually happening. There’s just a distinct lack of ambition permeating throughout the film – it’s just content to ease back and let a hundred years of action movie cliches play out on screen for 95 minutes without adding any new ideas or mining its settings for anything beyond the conventional.

It should also be noted that while it is not as over-the-top as Live Free, A Good Day is still pretty ridiculous and nowhere near realistic. If anything, John McClane is knowingly indestructible, charging in headlong without even a worry about dying. He spins out and then flips a transport truck a dozen times without sustaining a scratch and falls from great heights on a couple occasions with Jack without being killed. Hell, I don’t think John or Jack get shot once this whole movie either. Also, while this film is rated R, it’s easily the tamest film in the entire franchise. There’s barely any swearing (even less than Live Free) and the violence is pretty tame as well (well… except for the helicopter blade death I suppose, but that could probably still get by on a PG-13).

All-in-all, I can count the things I liked in A Good Day to Die Hard on one hand – the Moscow car chase was cool at times (if badly shot), the bad guy getting thrown in a propeller blade was awesome and the slo-mo exploding helicopter jump was ridiculous, but cool… and that’s it. A Good Day to Die Hard is a dull, generic B-movie… which, if you’ll remember waaaaay back to the first entry in this retrospective, is exactly what Die Hard was created to not be. A Good Day to Die Hard is a total shame worth of the scorn placed upon it.

3/10

With the shit stain that is A Good Day to Die Hard now inked on the franchise, is there any real future for John McClane? Well, yes actually. Bruce Willis wants to give the character a final send-off… and I’m hesitant at this point, but I think this actually makes sense. Look at it this way – Live Free or Die Hard began a new trilogy that I dub “The Redemption of John McClane”. The first three movies saw John’s life more or less fall apart as he constantly screws up. Since Live Free, John has been reconnecting with his estranged children and rebuilding his life. If there is another Die Hard, John has to reconnect with Holly and finally live in long-deserved peace. It looks like this is the direction the series is headed in. Remember Ben Trebilcook, who I mentioned wrote two scripts for Die Hard 4, both titled Die Hardest? Well idiotic title aside, these seem to be the basis for the sixth film in the franchise, which will see the return of Zeus Carver as well. Bruce Willis seems pretty adamant that Die Hardest (sigh…) will be the final movie for John McClane, but of course that leaves the door open for Jack and Lucy McClane to take the reins. I had the feeling that they were testing this approach during A Good Day to Die Hard, but I can’t really see it taking off – people love John McClane, they don’t really have any reason as of yet to care about Jack or Lucy on their own adventures. In any case, A Good Day to Die Hard has shaken many peoples’ faith in the franchise, so if Die Hardest were to be cancelled right now, I wouldn’t be too torn up about it.

This is how I would rank the series from best to worst:
1. Die Hard
2. Live Free or Die Hard
3. Die Hard with a Vengeance
4. Die Hard 2
5. A Good Day to Die Hard

Thanks for getting through this retrospective series and as always feel free to comment and give suggestions for future franchises for me to review! Oh and have a Merry Christmas!

Retrospective: Live Free or Die Hard (2007)

~ Barloq ~ 2 Comments

Welcome back to the Die Hard retrospective! In this entry we’re going to cover the fourth film in the franchise, Live Free or Die Hard (aka Die Hard 4.0 as it is known internationally). This was actually the first Die Hard movie I saw, and as of right now, it’s the newest entry in the franchise that I’ve watched (of course, that’ll change next week when I finally see A Good Day to Die Hard). After a 12 year absence, audiences thought that Die Hard was a thing of the past – could a fourth Die Hard movie give the franchise a second life? Read on to find out…

Basically the traditional Die Hard poster design. Not one of the more interesting uses of the design, but decent enough.

Live Free or Die Hard started life as an article called “A Farewell to Arms” in Wired, a theoretical piece on how modern day America’s entire infrastructure could be crippled by cyber terrorists. The article was adapted into a movie called WW3.com and was supposed to be released in the late 90s to capitalize on all the paranoia surrounding computers and the Internet in the new millennium. However, the movie ended up getting delayed and then was shelved all-together following 9/11. There were a couple of attempts to get the movie off the ground again, but it wasn’t until the movie was picked up as a Die Hard sequel that it finally gained traction. The modified script went through quite a few rewrites, with writers such as Doug Richardson (who did Die Hard 2), Mark Bomback, Kevin Smith (celebrity geek who appeared in the film itself) and William Wisher. At the same time, two other Die Hard sequels were being optioned, both written by Ben Trebilcook and both titled Die Hardest (remember this, it’ll be important later), but they were passed in favour of the WW3.com script. Eventually the script was retitled “Live Free or Die Hard” as a play on the state motto of New Hampshire, although it was decided that it should be titled Die Hard 4.0 in international markets since they wouldn’t “get it” (that said, as a Canadian, I didn’t “get” it, but there’s no denying that Live Free or Die Hard is a bad ass title… even if the movie doesn’t take place anywhere near New Hampshire).

The film was directed by Len Wiseman, who at the time was a pretty big name in Hollywood, having directed the very successful Underworld (although he had just come off of the major disappointment, Underworld: Evolution). Of course, now adays Len Wiseman is largely considered to be a reboot of Paul W.S. Anderson, since they are both known for making crappy films and the fact that their love lives are damn-near identical. Bruce Willis makes his return, obviously, although considerably more… bald than in previous Die Hard films. The villain, Thomas Gabriel, was played by perpetual up-and-comer Timothy Olyphant (seriously, outside of TV he just can’t seem to get that major break). Playing the role of McClane’s tag-along/”buddy” in the film is Justin Long as Matt Farrell, a computer hacker tied into the terrist attack crippling America. Probably best known at the time as “The Mac Guy”, which actually helps sell him in the role better. Also making an appearance is Retrospectives favourite Mary Elizabeth Winstead as Lucy McClane. She has a relatively small role (basically little more than a plot device) but it’s actually considered her most famous performance. In any case, she does a good job convincing us she’s the utter bad ass daughter of John McClane, despite the limited screen time. Also worth noting is Maggie Q as Gabriel’s lead henchwoman, Mai Linh, who is pretty kick ass, if robotic.

The film takes place in the aftermath of a cyber attack on the FBI. The director of the FBI decides to track down the top hackers in the country who could have pulled this off, but it is discovered that all but one of them have been systematically murdered. John McClane is sent to pick up the last one, Matt Farrell, but a shootout ensues. McClane is forced to protect Farrell as cyber terrorist Thomas Gabriel launches a “fire sale” attack, crippling American society with coordinated, systematic hacks on key parts of the nation’s infrastructure. Of course, it’s up to John McClane to stop the bad guys and save the day…

Based on the above synopsis, it’s pretty easy to see that Live Free or Die Hard has some pretty big problems. For one thing, John McClane has pretty much been transformed from a vulnerable, realistic man thrown into a bad situtation to a T-800. McClane jumps from speeding cars, jumps from a freaking exploding F-35, jumps from an exploding power plant… okay, he does a lot of jumping, but that’s besides the point. McClane gets run through a gauntlet of death and just walks away from it all with a bit of blood and maybe a minor bullet wound to show for it. It carries on the legacy of With a Vengeance, but then takes it to the next degree of ridiculousness with plenty of unbelievable scenes. McClane himself has lost a lot of his character from previous films as well. While he’s still highly invested in his family, his character has basically been boiled down to “smart ass old guy with a gun”. No longer does McClane run from danger, he drives from Washington DC to West Virginia to find it. McClane doesn’t worry about getting hurt anymore, he’ll actively shoot himself to kill a bad guy. On one hand it makes sense for McClane to be somewhat transformed considering how much crap he’s been through over the years, but Live Free could easily be a stand-alone action movie if they just changed McClane’s name and no one would notice.

The film’s plot should also be mentioned for being pretty ridiculous. Many, many articles have been written about how Live Free is basically the apex of Hollywood treating hackers like basement-dwelling Level 99 wizards. In fact, everything with computers in the film is basically just Hollywood cliche – everyone has a dozen monitors for each computer, laptops capable of magically hacking into US government databases instantly, hacking all of the US television networks simultaneously, sexed-up/impractical futuristic work stations for government security workers and instantly finding Farrell because of software analyzing all the voices on radio broadcasts… It’s pretty clear that very little actual research was put up on screen – well, except for when Gabriel manages to remote access Kevin Smith’s webcam, although at this rate that was probably just a lucky fluke (and yes, your webcam can be used to spy on you… sleep tight).

I’d also be making a mistake if I didn’t mention the MASSIVE controversy which was Live Free or Die Hard‘s PG-13 rating. Hollywood wanted to maximize profits on the film, which was fairly highly-budgeted at $110 million, and so cut out all of the f-bombs to avoid an R-rating (since PG-13 films tend to make more money than R-rated ones). Fans spewed vitrol over this decision, since bad language is considered a hallmark of the series, and the fact that John McClane’s own catchphrase is “yippee-ki-yay motherf–ker”… it’s just not something that you can do in a PG-13 movie. For that matter, Die Hard just isn’t really PG-13 material, although the fact that they managed to easily secure the rating by simply cutting out all instances of “f–k” (simply replacing them with more “minor” swear words which actually accumulate to a level equivalent of the first Die Hard) and removing a tiny bit of CGI blood says more about the MPAA’s standards than anything I suppose (the film easily has R-rating levels of violence fully intact, it’s just not bloody/gory). That said, this review is based on the Unrated version, which restores all of the cut language (maybe around 20 f-bombs) and blood, although the differences are really negligible – if you’re a hardcore fan who froths at the mouth at the thought of a Die Hard movie without at least one f-bomb, or hates any sort of compromise, then the Unrated version should sate your appetite in that department.

I’ve been intentionally front-loading all of the complaining in this review, and that’s because Live Free or Die Hard is a hell of a lot of fun. I know I’m probably going to get a lot of shit for this from Die Hard fans if any bother to read this review, but I really like Live Free or Die Hard. Len Wiseman isn’t a good director by any means, but this is probably the second best thing he’s ever done (really only rivaled by Underworld and surpassed by his coup to marry Kate Beckinsale). While the film is totally ridiculous and over the top, literally every single action scene is just plain kick ass. Seriously, I was listing all of the awesome scenes in this movie  for the review until I realized that I had written down every single action scene to that point. The movie is ridiculous and fun that it puts movies which are supposed to be over-the-top action fests, like RED, to shame (without dipping into parody for that matter too!). There are so many awesome moments throughout the film that it’s hard to pick a true standout moment (although the car killing a helicopter is certainly the most iconic moment from the film). This is in part due to the fact that barely any CGI was used in the film (in fact, nearly everything that looks like CGI was either composited, such as the scene where McClane and Farrell are nearly crushed by a flying car, or used miniatures, such as the F-35 chase). It is also due to Len Wiseman, er, wisely deciding not to shake the shit out of the camera during action sequences. Bourne was becoming very popular at this time, and so studios were jumping on the bandwagon by trying to emulate its shaky-cam style… but they did a horrible job at it, making many movies just plain incomprehensible (see Quantum of Solace and Battle: Los Angeles). There is a tiny bit of shaky cam present in Live Free, but it is not distracting and plays second fiddle to steady, well-shot footage which presents epic action moments to us in all their glory.

Adding to the fun are the assortment of “talented” bad guys who shake up the action at times. The first of these is the random parkour villain (dubbed “Hamster” by McClane) who flips, shoots and does all sorts of crazy shit, which is a joy to watch in spite of its ridiculousness (even if he’s basically a rip-off of the parkour bad guy in Casino Royale). Maggie Q also shakes things up by kicking McClane’s ass with martial arts in a rather entertaining fight sequence which culminates with McClane deciding to fight kung fu with an SUV (although McClane’s misogynist taunting is a bit off-putting, but I suppose it can be justified in the context of the film). Sure, these characters are pretty flat and make the film all that more ridiculous, but at least they’re far more visually interesting that the faceless goons McClane wipes out in the previous two films in the franchise.

And speaking of goons, Thomas Gabriel’s a pretty good villain. Sure a lot of his threat comes from his unrealistic hacking skills, but it makes him a legitimate threat in the film. In any case, Timothy Olyphant’s performance is quite menacing, even if he doesn’t live up to the same level as either of the Gruber brothers (mostly because the script makes Gabriel’s character somewhat boring). Meanwhile, Matt Farrell is the “ordinary guy”, sort of like Zeus Carver was in With a Vengeance. He’s the character the audience relates to, a sarcastic geek who can’t hope to be as badass as John McClane… actually, he basically embodies a modern day version of the whole “every man” aspect that defined the original Die Hard. Live Free would be much weaker (and far less funny) without Farrell and McClane’s dialogue playing off of each other, representing the past vs the present, a criminal vs a policeman, etc. Of course, Farrell himself isn’t just a foil, he actually gets to use his tech savvy to help McClane, who would be utterly lost without his expertise. Farrell sort of represents the bridge between the Die Hard films of the past and this film, since computers have become ubiquitous since then. There are also quite a few in-jokes in the film which also bridge the 12 year gap between this film and the last Die Hard, most of which are quite subtle. I wouldn’t be surprised if there were more, but I noticed that there was an FBI agent escorting McClane called “Agent Johnson”, McClane saying that he was afraid of flying until he took some piloting classes and an off-hand comment about “taking it under advisement”. For my money, this is how references to previous films in the franchise should be handled, rather than employing the Predators or Rise of the Planet of the Apes model where they basically pull you out of your seat and go “HEY! DID YOU SEE THAT? THAT WAS A REFERENCE TO ANOTHER MOVIE! AND WE WROTE THE WHOLE PLOT TO ACCOMMODATE IT!” These were very well-done, subtle references which can easily go over your head and make subsequent viewings more enjoyable.

Live Free is a bit of a conundrum. On the one hand, it isn’t a proper Die Hard movie at all, but it is a really kick ass action movie. However, if you watched it and would only be satisfied with a movie in the Die Hard mold, then that won’t matter to you. The movie is totally over the top, but it’s consistently and entertainingly over the top (whereas With a Vengeance became over the top halfway through after being relatively grounded in its first hour). The movie’s PG-13, but it’s still quite violent and has a lot of swearing – just no f-bombs in the theatrical version. “Yippee-ki-yay” gets cut off (in the theatrical version), but the moment it happens is easily the best usage of McClane’s catchphrase since the first film. You may not like where the Die Hard series has gone in this film, but this is what Die Hard is now (if my impressions of A Good Day to Die Hard are correct anyway). Hardcore fans seem to hate the movie, but it’s the highest praised film in the franchise since the original.

For my part, I really like Live Free or Die Hard. It doesn’t really fit the Die Hard franchise particularly well, but it’s a hell of a lot of fun and way more consistent than any of the previous sequels (including With a Vengeance, which many fans dub the “only good Die Hard sequel”). If you can get over the fact that it’s a new, different kind of movie with the title of “Die Hard” then I’m sure you’ll be very entertained. If not, then you’re entitled to that opinion, but I can’t say I agree with you or will step down from my own assessment.

7.5/10 (oh yeah, I’m definitely going to be receiving hate mail for that)

Be sure to come back soon for the fifth, and final, part of this retrospective series with A Good Day to Die Hard!

Retrospective: Die Hard with a Vengeance (1995)

~ Barloq ~ Leave a comment

Welcome back to the Die Hard retrospective! In this entry we’re going to cover the third film in the franchise, Die Hard with a Vengeance (which started the annoying trend of the franchises’ sequels shoehorning Die Hard into a phrase for the film’s title)! Die Hard 2 was a rather lazy rehash of a sequel, but the producers seemed keen to not make the same mistake. Could the third entry in the franchise bring back the series’ AAA reputation, “with a vengeance”? Read on to find out…

Again, a nice poster with the prominence going to both its star (at his most bad-ass looking, I might add) and its setting.

Production on a sequel to Die Hard 2 stalled a bit after the entire premise became the template for every action movie of the 90s. Die Hard 2 was lucky enough to have the turn-around time to beat out a rival “Die Hard in an airport” movie (although technically it’s really just a canonized “Die Hard in an airport”), but by the time the third movie went into production, the premise had already been significantly mined. How many interesting, confined locations could be used when rip-offs had already had to resort to having terrorists on a bus? Well Fox decided to go back to the old well of unproduced scripts to find one to adapt. One of the early scripts they were interested in was called Troubleshooter, and would have seen McClane fighting terrorists on a cruise ship in the Caribbean. If this sounds like the disastrous Speed 2: Cruise Control… well, that’s because the script was the basis for that movie. The Die Hard producers passed on Troubleshooter after hearing about a similar-sounding film called Under Siege (aka, Steven Seagal’s entire career), but the script would later be picked up as the basis of Speed 2.

Quite a few scripts were optioned, but the one which would become Die Hard with a Vengeance wasn’t even supposed to be a Die Hard movie. A script by Jonathan Hensleigh called Simon Says was originally intended to be the fourth entry in the Lethal Weapon series (it certainly would have been better than the Lethal Weapon 4 that we got anyway…). However, this did not come to pass, and so the script was reworked to fit into the Die Hard mold. That said, there are still obvious parallels between this film and the Lethal Weapon series – in a lot of ways, the film feels more like a Lethal Weapon and less like a traditional Die Hard. The film is also notable for having a heist scheme which was so clever that the FBI investigated Hensleigh to ensure that he wasn’t actually planning on pulling it off (because, y’know, turning your plan into a major motion picture is the perfect way to get away with it).

John McTiernan made his return to the director’s chair, taking the reins back from Renny Harlin. He had just come off of the rather infamous Last Action Hero with Arnold Schwarzenegger, and was looking to get into the studio and audiences’ good graces once more. Of course, Bruce Willis also returned as John McClane, although he is the only member of the original cast to return (aside from a very limited vocal cameo by Bonnie Bedelia… although I can’t even confirm that it’s actually her). Two major new faces were added to the franchise in this entry. The first is Samuel L. Jackson’s Zeus Carver, an electrician who becomes McClane’s unwilling sidekick throughout the film. The second is the film’s villain, Simon Gruber, played by Jeremy Irons. Simon is the brother of Hans Gruber, giving the villain’s motivations a personal vendetta as he matches wits with McClane. There are also a host of minor supporting characters, but they aren’t really worth noting – this film is held up by its major players.

The film opens with a literal bang, as a bomb unexpectedly goes off in the middle of downtown New York. It’s quite a surprising opening and certainly gets the audiences’ interest immediately without cheaply throwing us into the action. Anyway, it turns out that the bomber is threatening to detonate more explosives across the city if John McClane doesn’t obey his wishes. Along the way, McClane accidentally ropes electrician Zeus Carver to come along with him, and the pair are sent on races across the city to defuse bombs before they can detonate. However, McClane gets the sneaking suspicion that there’s more going on here than meets the eye…

As you can probably tell, With a Vengeance throws away the whole confined setting aspect of the series, as the film takes place all across the city of New York. It’s not necessarily a terrible decision, but it certainly makes the film feel extremely different than previous films in the franchise. I’m not sure why, but the film also looks very different than previous Die Hards… maybe it’s the lighting, the film stock or the lack of confined space… if I were a film student I could probably pin-point it, but the filming technique seems vastly different than any other film in the franchise to this point. I should also mention that I’m kind of annoyed that Holly has separated with McClane at the start of the film, but at least this makes McClane down on his luck again.

Anyway, beyond the intangibles, the realism of previous Die Hard movies is absent as well. At times the movie makes Die Hard 2 look totally plausible. Seriously, people crap on Live Free or Die Hard for being over the top, but that really just carried over from some of the ridiculous stuff on display in With a Vengeance. It starts out fairly innocently: McClane drives like a total nut, but somehow manages to avoid getting in an accident or killing anyone, he jumps onto a moving subway car, etc. This sort of thing is certainly straining believably, but it’s not exactly off the rails… no, that comes when McClane surfs a freaking dump truck to safety and then gets shot out of a water main right in front of Zeus (who just so happened to be passing by at the time). It’s such a ridiculous scene that it’s impossible to take the movie seriously beyond that point. It reminds me of a friend who said that he saw a movie called Escape from LA where a guy chases after one of the bad guys by catching a random tidal wave and surfing onto the guy’s vehicle. It’s the sort of scene that just sounds so implausible that you can’t believe it’s real, but it totally is. Anyway, the movie really jumps the shark at that point, culminating with McClane and Zeus surviving jumping from a ship just as it explodes into a giant mushroom cloud… yeah, so much for the grounded action franchise, With a Vengeance basically just moves into typical action movie territory.

Okay, I may be ragging on With a Vengeance for being over the top, but that’s not that big a deal in all honesty. To be fair, the film is a ton of fun. For one thing, it recaptures much of the humour of the first film. The whole situation where McClane is forced to go into Harlem with a racist sign is just a funny situation and shows that Simon Gruber is a troll. There’s also quite a few occasions where random douche bags in New York interact with the main characters, almost always provoking laughs. Of course, the interplay between McClane and Zeus also is a major source of humour – Bruce Willis and Samuel L. Jackson have a lot of chemistry and it shows on-screen.

Also contributing to the fun factor is the script – for most of the runtime, the plot is very tense, the villain is great and the main characters are a lot of fun. The whole “Simon Says game” aspect of the plot is a very clever way to drive the plot forward and keep it engaging, especially when you consider that about a third of the movie boils down to “John and Zeus drive around New York”. Before the “game” can get repetitive, the heist aspect of the story falls into place, and it really is ingenious. Seriously, the master plan of this film more than lives up to Hans’ heist in the original Die Hard. It should also be mentioned that Simon Gruber is a great villain in his own right, basically a “bigger and better” version of Hans (although he’s not quite as memorable). Seeing McClane trying to unravel Simon’s plans is a joy in itself as he kicks quite a bit of ass as can be expected.

That said, while the plot quite fun, it also has some rather gaping holes in it. For one thing, how the hell did Simon manage to get financial backing for his heist? It’s sort of implied that a foreign nation is funding it, but I don’t think the movie bothers to dwell on it. In any case, Simon’s packing some expensive hardware and probably is managing a hundred baddies. There’s just so many intricacies that it’s hard to think that the plan only ever gets messed up when McClane’s involved (eg, they leave briefcase bombs in the open in a busy park, how is it that no random bystanders came along and stole them?). There’s also the fact that everyone’s travelling all across the city in no time at all due to the magic of editing, much like in Die Hard 2.

While I may gripe about plot holes in the film, I’ll be honest – they’re all pretty minor. The major issue with With a Vengeance is that it starts to rapidly lose steam around the 40 minute mark. For one thing, you can tell that the film wasn’t really figured out at this point. The aforementioned scene where Zeus just so happens to come across McClane shooting out of a water main just reeks of slap-dash editing. There’s also the fact that Simon Gruber plants a bomb at the school Zeus’ kids attend. When Zeus discovers this, he says that Gruber was doing that to keep him involved in the game. However, this was clearly just thrown in there to try to justify adding some more tension, because it makes no sense whatsoever. How did Simon know Zeus had kids? Are you telling me he didn’t plant his bombs until after his plans were already being set in motion? How is secretly planting the bomb in Zeus’ kids’ school going to keep him in line? Hell, why does Simon even care if Zeus stays involved (he doesn’t have a vendetta against him after all)? Anyway, it’s contrived and cliched stuff like this which make the final 40 minutes far less compelling than the preceding hour and a half.

Of course, none of that compares to the abysmal ending. It turns out that the original ending wasn’t very well liked – originally, McClane’s life was going to be ruined by Gruber’s antics. As a result, McClane hunted down Gruber to play some Russian roulette… with a rocket launcher. It’s kind of a ridiculous scene, but it wasn’t liked for how it made McClane look un-heroic. As a result, we ended up with the dud of an ending which we have been cursed with: McClane and Zeus (for some reason) travel to Quebec and make a bunch of wisecracks until Simon shoots down their helicopter. Then McClane shoots a power line, destroying Simon’s helicopter. That’s it. Simon dies like a total bitch and the whole plan unravels in about 5 minutes. What a major letdown. There’s also a really awkward and completely random sex scene thrown in there for absolutely no other reason than they could, which doesn’t really help the ending any. Whatever the case though, this is supposed to be the climax of the film, but it’s nowhere near as thrilling as the climax of the previous two movies. Hell, pretty much every action set piece in this movie is better than its ending. It’s just completely half-assed, and it really shows.

Overall, I want to love Die Hard with a Vengeance. For much of the first two acts, it is absolutely the sequel that Die Hard deserves which lives up to its legacy. However, the final 40 minutes just kill it and the ending in particular leaves a sour taste in my mouth. Die Hard 2 may be a worse film overall, but at least it improves in the last half hour and leaves a better impression – With a Vengeance just makes me feel disappointed when all is said in done. Many fans of the franchise cite With a Vengeance as being the only good sequel to Die Hard, but I think they’re being too forgiving – it’s about 2/3rds of a good sequel. It really is a shame that they couldn’t have worked out a proper third act and ending before commencing filming, because there really isn’t all that much holding With a Vengeance back from being a great action movie. As it is, it has to settle with being the film that fumbled it in the third act.

6.5/10

Be sure to come back soon for part four of this retrospective series with Live Free or Die Hard.

Retrospective: Die Hard 2 (1990)

~ Barloq ~ Leave a comment

Welcome back to the Die Hard retrospective! In this entry we’re going to cover the second entry in the franchise, Die Hard 2 (aka Die Harder). When Die Hard revolutionized the action genre and made a hefty profit, a sequel was an inevitability. Could Fox make lightning strike twice? Read on to find out…

This poster’s much like the original Die Hard‘s, with a similar layout telling you pretty much everything you need to know. The whole “just like the original!” aspect is a bit of a trend though, as we’ll get into soon enough…

Soon after the success of Die Hard, production on a sequel began. Rather than write an original script, the producers decided once again to borrow from a pre-existing source. This time, the 1987 novel 58 Minutes by Walter Wager was selected, since it had a very Die Hard-esque premise. From what I understand, the novel and film are both fairly similar, with John McClane and a couple other characters being substituted or added in to please fans of the original film. Of course, Bruce Willis returns as John McClane. Bonnie Bedelia, William Atherton and Reginald VelJohnson also reprise their roles. Playing the leader of the terrorists was William Sadler (not a big name to us, although he has shown up in a variety of roles that you’ve probably seen him in, including The Shawshank Redemption, The Mist and Iron Man 3). Most of the rest of the cast are unnotable, although two of the minor terrorists would become known actors later: John Leguizamo (Sid in Ice Age) and Robert Patrick (T-1000 in Terminator 2… in fact, he’s badass enough in his 30 second screen time in this that it’s kind of distracting).

John McTiernan did not return to the director’s chair, going on to do The Hunt For Red October instead. Replacing McTiernan as director was Renny Harlin, who had achieved success with the well-received Nightmare on Elm Street 4: The Dream Master. The name sounded familiar to me, and that’s because Harlin was one of the many people who were brought in to direct Alien 3 – however, Fox passed on all of his ideas rather quickly, offering him Die Hard 2 instead.

Exactly two years after the original film, John McClane’s waiting at Dulles Airport in Washington D.C. for his wife to arrive for Christmas Eve. Coinciding with this is the arrival of extradited South American drug trafficking general, Ramon Esperanza. A team of terrorists, led by rogue US Army colonel, Stuart, seize control of the air traffic control system, effectively holding all the planes in the airspace hostage unless Esperanza is set free. Of course, John McClane isn’t going to let a bunch of pansy-ass terrorists put his wife’s life get in danger. Pretty conventional set-up for a Die Hard movie… of course, that’s because the movie is pretty conventional itself.

Die Hard 2‘s script can be pretty convoluted at times and just doesn’t make a lick of sense when you put thought to it. The script is definitely the biggest issue in Die Hard 2 for a number of reasons. First of all, how can you justify the exact same situation happening to the same guy on the same day of the year twice? The movie tries to lampshade this by having John acknowledge it, but it’s still clear that they don’t bother to chalk it up to anything other than coincidence. Credibility get stretched even further by the fact that Holly and scumbag reporter Thornburg happen to end up on the same flight by mere chance, despite the fact that Thornburg has a court-ordered restraining order against her. Then there’s also the question of how the hell everyone keeps getting into the damn air control tower, although that’s a smaller “JUST BECAUSE!!!” issue in the grand scheme of things…

Then there’s just the fact that the plot isn’t paced very well. The opening scene doesn’t ease you into the plot, it plops you right into John’s shitty day. I almost wonder if the editors cut out a longer opening, because the opening scene just feels so stilted. Die Hard had a good 20 minutes of set up to get you up to speed on the situation and characters. Die Hard 2 has 3 1/2 minutes before the villains show up and start doing dastardly things. The first gunfight is only around 10 minutes in. Yet, in spite of all this, literally the first 30 minutes are incredibly dull to watch. The next hour has moments of interest, but the movie lacks a lot of the tension that the original had in spades. I mean, sure, there’s only 90 minues left til airplanes begin falling from the sky, but we rarely feel the urgency of this fact, in part due to the fact that everyone just sits around until John McClane decides to do something. Seriously, John McClane is apparently the only competent person in the whole airport – he must have run a few marathons over the course of the movie with all the footslogging he does while everyone else shoves their thumbs up their arses. It’s not until the last half hour that the movie finally starts to get legitimately fun, kicking off with a rather surprising (if cliche) twist and ending with an exciting, explosive climax.

Then there’s the fact that the characters in this film just aren’t anywhere near as good as they were in Die Hard. John McClane stands head and shoulders above everyone else. Colonel Stuart’s not a bad villain, but he doesn’t hold a candle to Alan Rickman… plus he really doesn’t get all that much to do anyway. Bonnie Bedelia’s given a leading role in the film, but her contribution is minimal and it makes her role feel like little more than an over-glorified cameo. Then there’s airport security captain Lorenzo, whose only real job is to antagonize McClane incessantly, which gets grating quickly. Whereas the terrorists in Die Hard were all pretty distinguishable, the terrorists in this film all blend together (except for the aforementioned Robert Patrick, although that’s because he had an iconic role later in his career). Other than that, supporting characters such as Sam Colman (played by Sheila McCarthy, who fellow Canadians might recognize from Little Mosque on the Prairie) are basically useless and contribute practically nothing to the plot. The lines they get to spout aren’t that great either – Die Hard had some fantastic one-liners, but nearly every attempt at a one-liner in this film falls flat. For example:

McClane: Hey, Carmine, let me ask you something. What sets off the metal detectors first? The lead in your ass or the shit in your brains?

Umm, what? Does anyone know how that’s supposed to make any sense? I mean sure, it’s kind of insulting, but usually you want your insults to actually make sense…

Oh and I think I’d be remiss if I didn’t mention the incredibly random and awkward scene early in the movie where Colonel Stuart practices martial arts in his hotel room… in the buff. The whole point of the scene is to provide an exposition dump from a news reporter on the hotel TV, but it’s completely distracted by the fact that there’s a naked guy practicing punching people the whole time. If there was ever a movie scene that made me feel like a closeted homosexual, it’d probably be this one. Anyway, this scene also makes me wonder if Die Hard 2 beat Game of Thrones to the punch with the whole “sexposition” thing…

Sure I’ve beat up the plot quite a bit, but there is one legitimately surprising and ballsy moment in the movie when the terrorists decide to bring down one of the circling planes. It’s pretty disturbing to watch the people on board unwittingly head to their deaths while the air traffic controllers are helpless to stop them. The crash itself is pretty spectacular, although the size of the fireball’s probably excessive considering that the plane was “running on fumes”… but whatever, I can let a minor detail like that slide.

Then there’s the campy tone of the film. The original film was a lot of fun, but it tried to have a generally realistic tone. This film seems to play up the campy angle with a bunch of silly moments. For example, when a bad guy goes running away across the tarmac, McClane grabs a kiddy bike and chases after him. Then there’s the above screen grab, where McClane escapes the bad guys by firing an ejector seat just before the plane blows up. Just from the way it’s shot, it comes across as being an extremely silly moment. Everyone has an infinity bandana too, because the number of shots that come out of the characters’ single clips is just ridiculous.

Overall, I’ve been ragging on Die Hard 2 quite a bit, because it really does have a lot of problems and is clearly inferior to the original film. However, it is a fairly fun movie, which exonerates it to a point. That said, it’s basically just a generic, mindless action movie hardly befitting a sequel to one of the greatest action movies of all time.

5/10

Be sure to come back soon for part 3 of this retrospective series with Die Hard with a Vengeance.

Retrospective: Die Hard (1988)

~ Barloq ~ Leave a comment

Welcome back good readers to the beginning of a new retrospectives series! If you need to get caught up on the last series, then you can read about the Planet of the Apes franchise by clicking on the link. The series that we’re going to be focusing on for the next few weeks is the venerable Die Hard franchise. Since this is the first entry in this retrospective, we’re going to examine the one that started it all: 1988’s Die Hard.

A bit of a mish-mash of design, but I like it. Classic.

Die Hard had a bit of a convoluted inception. In 1966, Roderick Thorp published a novel called The Detective, which was adapted to film in 1968 starring Frank Sinatra as detective Joseph Leland. Thorp’s novel attempted to pursue a more “adult” outlook on police work, depicting topics such as homosexuality, police politics and moral ambiguity. In 1979, Thorp wrote a sequel titled Nothing Lasts Forever, which saw the retired Leland trying to rescue his daughter from German terrorists who have seized control of the American Klaxon Oil Corporation building. The novel maintained the moral ambiguity and mature politics which had punctuated The Detective, but injected them with a good ol’ dose of ass kicking as well. When work started on adapting Nothing Lasts Forever to film, Frank Sinatra was contractually obligated to be offered the role (despite now being 73 years old). He turned it down, and so the producers attempted to retool the novel as the basis for another story.

After the success of Arnold Schwarzenegger’s Commando (the quintessential generic 80’s action movie), the retooled Nothing Lasts Forever was put forth as a potential sequel written by Steven de Souza and Frank Darabont. However, Schwarzenegger was uninterested in reprising his role and so the script was retooled yet again by de Souza, this time as a stand-alone movie called Die Hard. In spite of all the changes it had undergone, much of the details of Thorp’s original novel remain, including a number of the supporting characters’ names and the plot basics, as well as most of the key action sequences. However, by the time Die Hard was underway, most of the politics and moral ambiguity had been excised in favour of a fun actioner (in part because Fox saw the script as the basis of a summer blockbuster).

Many actors were approached to play the film’s lead, John McClane, including Sylvester Stallone, Harrison Ford, Don Johnson, Richard Gere, Clint Eastwood and Burt Reynolds, but they all turned it down. Apparently desperate to find someone to fill the role, Fox signed Bruce Willis for $5 million, a figure which was considered extremely high for a (at the time) low profile actor. Willis only had a single moderately successful film and TV show to his name at the time, and was seen as a comedic actor rather than an action star (oh the irony). Villain Hans Gruber was played by Alan Rickman, his first major film appearance. Also cast was McClane’s wife, Holly, played by Bonnie Bedelia. John McTiernan was brought on to direct, after having just completed Predator with producer Joel Silver. However, the script wasn’t entirely finished when things got underway, with entire scenes being added on after shooting started. Also surprisingly, McClane’s character wasn’t even figured out until half way through shooting, so reshoots of previous scenes had to be done to make him fit coherently. Fox rushing a major blockbuster through production to meet a release date? Never!

Luckily, Die Hard ended up being an extremely badass, financial and critical success of epic proportions. Seriously, who doesn’t like this movie? It’s one of my mother’s favourites, and she’s not exactly the sort who’s into uber-violent action movies. The film follows down on his luck NYPD cop, John McClane, who travels down to Los Angeles on Christmas Eve to try to reconcile with his estranged wife who has taken on an important job in the Nakatomi Corporation. During the Christmas party at Nakatomi Plaza, terrorists led by the evil genius, Hans Gruber, seize control of the building and set about orchestrating an elaborate heist. However, McClane slips away and then begins taking down the terrorists one at a time to try to save his wife and the hostages. If you haven’t seen the movie yet for some reason, suffice to say that the story is thrilling and revolutionary. The film is nothing like the typical 80’s Commando/Rambo-model where a single man marches into a military base and somehow manages to kill an entire private army with his machine gun. Instead, we get a single, desperate, ordinary man, a confined location, a finite number of villains and extremely high stakes which just keep mounting until the explosive climax. McClane spends half the movie in hiding, runs away in nearly every fight he gets in, gets badly wounded and improvises his way through situations. As a result, when McClane does get into a fight or goes on the offensive, it makes the film far more exciting and tense, because we don’t know what’s going to happen.

Bruce Willis must have been a revelation as John McClane – he’s fantastic and it really feels like he is an unhinged every man who is capable of becoming an ass-kicker in a pinch. Alan Rickman is also fantastic as Hans Gruber, and is easily the standout performance in the film. He’s mostly cool and collected in his performance, but there’s a palpable menace as well, especially when he discovers that McClane has stolen the detonators he needs to make his plan work. Of course, Bonnie Bedelia is also a convincing Holly Gennaro, displaying both fear at the situation, but a sense of strength and leadership for the hostages. Even the supporting characters are memorable. Everyone loves (or loves to hate) Al Powell, Argyle, Karl, the FBI agents Johnson and Johnson, Dwayne Robinson and Richard Thornburg. Hell, even each terrorist is given at least a couple lines and some screen time, making their eventual deaths have a bit more resonance than the faceless mooks that get gunned down in your typical action movie. The only annoying character is Ellis, although he’s supposed to be a douche bag, so he gets a pass.

Also contributing to the movie’s success is its great sense of humour. Bruce Willis’ comedic past plays a part here, but there’s a lot of hilarious one-liners and sight gags which go a long way to making Die Hard a hell of a lot of fun. I’ve seen the movie at least a half dozen times now, but there’s still scenes which never fail to make me laugh out loud – the exasperated comment about ordering a pizza and the C4 down the elevator shaft especially…

Of course, the movie isn’t all just fun and games. There is actually quite a bit of social commentary present in the film. There’s the really overt messages about responsibility in news media, overbearing police and state authority interfering with saving lives and the government viewing its citizens as little more than statistics. However, there are less-obvious references which are there for people who want to look a little deeper. For one thing, Nakatomi Plaza itself represents the increasing globalization of industrialization which was occurring at the time of the film’s release. The film is also comments on second-wave feminism, embodied by Holly’s position in the Nakatomi Corporation and the cause of her estrangement from John. The only reason they had become separated was because she wanted to pursue her career, but John didn’t support her moving away to Los Angeles. During the course of the movie, John hates himself for being such an ass and wants to make amends. However, the status quo isn’t entirely rocked – at the conclusion, Holly reinforces that her name is “McClane”, not “Gennaro”, suggesting a level of macho backlash against feminism. That said, the film doesn’t become outright misogynistic or act as an anti-feminist parable, but there does seem to be a certain level of backlash present.

Anyway, there’s not all that much to say about it: Die Hard is an action classic. It revolutionized the genre, created its own sub-genre and started a franchise which continues to this day. If nothing else, it’s a kick-ass film in its own right. There’s a good chance you’ve already seen it, and if you haven’t then I heartily recommend that you do. Yippee ki yay indeed.

9/10

Be sure to come back soon for part 2 of this retrospective series with Die Hard 2: Die Harder!