Year: 2013
Director: John Moore
Screenplay: Skip Woods
Starring: Bruce Willis, Jai Courtney
Synopsis is
Pointless
Certain friends of mine will know
of my abnormal anger towards The Omen 666 (2006), in which I labelled at the
time: "the worst film I've ever seen". I was so incensed
that I launched into a torrid tirade of abuse about the film, it's sleepwalking characters,
subpar scares and lack of any drama before storming out of the cinema fit of
rage. Looking back, I overreacted for dramatic effect and looked like a
bellend. If I had acted now as I did then, I reckon some clever dick would
have filmed it on their phone, and I could have gone viral.
Seven years have passed, and I've
become older, wiser and slightly mellower (Although my podcast co-host may say otherwise).
Over these years of further film viewing and reflection, I released that while
John Moore's version of The Omen may not be the worst film in
the entirety of cinema, that screening marked a point in where
Hollywood's crass, cynical view on us as "consumers of product" hit a
peak within me. I had seen through the looking glass and found a film
with absolutely no heart behind it's conception. This was my Alien 3.
A film only made because of a date (released on the 6th of June 2006), rather
out of any shed of artistic value or integrity. There are many that will not
agree with my opinion on the film, while there are others that will be quick to
inform me of other such contemptuous cinematic products before or since. That's
fine, but I'm sure every film viewer has their "moments" and this was
one of mine.
Such an act
of competent yet soulless filmmaking has forever marred my view of
the movies director. I have avoided John Moore movies for the simple fact that
much like how many see the Len Wiseman's and Brett Ratners of the world, I see
Moore as simply a "jobber" director. A man who can handle a crew, set
and cast well enough to bring in whatever script is shoved in
front of him. So what you get is an action film with Bruce Willis as lead
and Die Hard in the title, but not a Die Hard film.
You see, time is of the essence and
the studio need something with Die Hard in the title to make money over the
Valentine's Day weekend. Valentines Day? For Die Hard? Yes, for you see it
looks clear to me that one or two people didn't have as much faith in this
fifth entry as the original, which was of course a summer blockbuster. Like The
Last Stand and Bullet to the Head, it seems that the golden oldies may not rake
in what they used to when compared to the superhero kings of the present box
office. If I'm correct, then it's very easy to see why this Die Hard film has
been release in the cold harsh dead zone of February as opposed to
challenging for the title of king of summer.
A Good Day to Die Hard is a mess of
an action movie. A barrage of near pointless, unintelligible set-pieces
melded together with little more of a dental floss thin amount of plot holding
it together. Skip Wood's mangled screenplay has little to no care as
to what makes it's lead character so appealing in the first place. We remember
not only the action beats of the original film, but the affability of John
McClane himself. A workaday cop in the wrong place at the wrong time,
his intimate chats with fellow cop Al, and his strained but affectionate
relationship with his wife displayed his vulnerability. The original film
further highlighted this with its simple moment of having McClane walk
barefooted on cracked glass. Much like Spielberg and Lucas' Indy, this man was
just like us, we wanted him to get through this. That wasn't just
"80's sensibilities" or the like; it was just decent building of
character.
Now we have a John McClane who is
more like a high street bank than your average Joe. This guy is simply too big
fail. Watching Willis going through the motions, with no
emotion, surviving everything like a bald Terminator is
heartbreaking. There's little risk and the stakes are incredibly low this
time round as the screenplay pathetically tries to tie everything together
in a gabbled plot that cares just as much about it's ludicrous (and blatantly
obvious) double crosses and dullard villains than making John McClane the
unfortunate hero his once was.
So we come back to Moore, a hired
gun who directs to do a job. In football terms he is a utility player of film
maker. Here he works with the sketchy template give to him and does little to
inject the same verve found in other action films let alone Die Hard movies. We
are quickly shoved into a incomprehensible car chase sequence and the film
never lets up. The crashes and bangs rapidly begin to bore because neither the
film’s director nor screenplay care about any nuance towards its story or
character, it merely wants us to see Willis survive near
death experiences repeatedly while referencing unearned homage’s to not
only Die Hard films, but other films in Willis body of work.
But this is the issue
with film-makers who don't seem to regard history with any
importance. Standing on the shoulders of giants with disregard to the
foundation, frequent hark backs to wittier films is one thing, but it's
annoyingly inane handing of Russia also shows that Americas old enemy
deserves more than this, even in films. This even lacks the camp get up found
in the likes of Salt and Hanna. Then again despite how one may feel of those
films, Directors Phillip Noyce and Joe Wright respect us enough to try and tell
a story. John Moore's Die Hard has been created merely to show up on time. It's
Alien 3 and The Omen 666 all over again.
I decided to watch
this instead of watching my football team (Arsenal) lose yet again against
formidable opponents (Bayern Munich). This could be consider sacrilege, but as
a fan, you know when your beat. You also know when you need a utility player,
an ugly piece of work to is only there to fill a hold and do a job.
They don't belong in this franchise. Die Hard started off as a star
striker. Relegation may beckon.
