Reviews: ‘A Good Day to Die Hard’ and ‘Beautiful Creatures’
A Good Day to Die Hard © Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation. All rights reserved. Not for sale or duplication
Hello readers! Hope everyone had a Happy Valentine’s Day. My “Weekend Movie Preview” column this week features reviews of the Bruce Willis action flick “A Good Day to Die Hard,” and the young-adult romance “Beautiful Creatures.”
Click here to read my thoughts on both movies.
-
-
Thanks for reading Dan. Your best bet is to steer clear of this Die Hard at least until you can rent it. The older actors get the more difficult it gets for them to reprise action-heavy roles they played in their younger years. It’s just not believable and it’s also not interesting. Just more of the same stuff we’ve already seen them do. Crystal Skull is an apt comparison because as you might know I’m an enormous Indiana Jones fan, but I despised that film for being equally unbelievable. Speaking of Harrison Ford, I’m nervous about him coming back as Han Solo for Star Wars Episode VII since that was recently confirmed. That also has the potential to play out terribly.
I would agree that something with more guile and intelligence would have been better suited to this Die Hard. Suspense might not have been exactly like the previous films in the franchise, although I think it would have been a welcome change of pace provided that the dialogue was witty and that the villain was strong. Those are really the two most critical elements needed for a Die Hard film. They were noticeably absent from this one, and you feel the pain watching it as a result.
-
-
-
- Comment Feed for this Post
I’ve heard too many bad things about the new Die Hard movie that I’ll wait for it to arrive on home video.
I’m getting the feeling that aging actors going back to their most famous characters doesn’t work. You mentioned Indiana Jones in your review – the new Die Hard makes me think of Crystal Skull. I love McClane and Bruce Willis in the role, just as I love Harrison Ford as Indiana Jones but it doesn’t work when they try to do the sames things they were doing 30 years ago.
More believable would have been a less explosion-heavy, action orientated film where a older McClane has to use the guile and intelligence he showed in the original film to stay alive and beat the bad guys. Clint Eastwood has shown how an older actor can play the conventional “cop” (or investigative) role – I suppose you couldn’t make a Die Hard movie more of a slow-burning suspense thriller because it doesn’t fit with the franchise but that would have been far more enjoyable (and believable) in my opinion.