IMDb user comments for
Live Free or Die Hard (2007)

advertisement

Filter:

Best Chronological Prolific Authors Loved It Hated It Hide Spoilers:

Page 1 of 67:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11]

Index

666 comments in total

---

366 out of 484 people found the following comment useful :-
McClane returns, 27 June 2007

Author: AdnanZ from Canada

This was a recipe for disaster. A PG-13 rating, Justin Long, a 52 year old Bruce Willis, a plot about cyber-terrorism and an inexperienced director who had only done Matrix-like action films before. I was one of many who didn't even remotely like the concept or the people working on the film. Apprehensive isn't the word to use here, as the Die Hard fan base prepared for the absolute worst. So, does it work?

I'll concede that the plot is a bit silly, but the villain played by Timothy Olyphant manages to be quite fearsome, and a worthy nemesis for our beloved McClane. The biggest fear for most fans prior to the release of this film was whether this would be a true Die Hard film. The trailers and the few released clips made it look very, very stylized, but rest assured that "Live Free or Die Hard" is probably the 'hardest' PG-13 anyone's seen in a long time; it's shocking how much violence they got away with here, and though McClane doesn't swear nearly as much as in the previous installments he is no different here than he was in the last three films: a sarcastic, brutal anti-hero who really doesn't want to be doing what he's doing. Bruce Willis gives an energetic, astoundingly physical performance for a 52 year old man and pulls no punches with one wisecracking line after another. Surprisingly, Justin Long really isn't at all as annoying as expected, and does a fairly good job.

Wiseman's direction is the big surprise here, though. He succeeds against all odds, an MTV-generation, heavily stylistic director hired to helm a Die Hard film? It's a ridiculous idea, but surprise, surprise, he creates the exact same attitude and feel of the last three films and plays it straight, no stylized, "Transporter"-like violence or stunts here. It's about damn time we got some real (and damn good) stunt-work in a modern day action flick. The only bit that is obviously CGI is a scene involving a jet which admittedly does go on a bit too long, but it's not a bad scene and doesn't take away from the film's quality. And to answer the question that is on everyone's mind: yes, he does say it, in full. There is a gunshot but it only partially muffles the end. The score's fairly good too, surprisingly, considering this is a Marco Beltrami score we're talking about.

If you really are a Die Hard fan you don't want to miss this on the big screen. One thing's for sure, it kicks the hell out of "Die Hard 2". Willis' John McClane is one of the greatest action heroes of all time and this is no blemish on his record at all. Against all odds, "Live Free or Die Hard" is definitely a worthy addition to the series and without a doubt one of the best action films in many years. It's a return to old-school action films and most certainly is no stylized action film ala "The Matrix" or even the Bourne series. This is a killer, old-school action film. Who would've thought?!

4/5

---

504 out of 768 people found the following comment useful :-
This movie is not only "Die Hard" x 4..., 23 June 2007

Author: dv909 from NY, NY

...but literally a quadruple serving of awesome "Die Hard" action.

My girlfriend and I saw "Live Free Or Die Hard" at a premiere screening last night at Radio City Music Hall. The place holds about 5,000 seats and it was packed.

With an 8:30 start, we got to our seats by 7:30. The movie didn't begin until 9:30!!! Guess who was late?

Julie and I are not particularly big 'Die Hard' fans. And having to catch a train home from Grand Central station at a certain time, we both agreed that if the movie was sub-par, we would split early to get home earlier.

So finally the lights go down around 9:20 and out comes Bruce Willis. He respectfully apologized and then started jazzing up the audience for the film. The excitement was palpable as the crowded theater whooped it up with Bruce shouting "Are you ready!!!"

Well, Julie and I were, as we got swept up in the excitement and cheered aloud as if we were at the ball game. Even the couple next to us, I'd say they were about in their late sixties, dressed very 'proper', were just as energized.

The movie starts and a mere few minutes in, the action explodes. By twenty minutes into the film, Julie and I were sold. Who cares what time we're gonna get home!?

I have not had this much fun at the movies since I can't remember when. I have always loved summer movies, but only the ones that deliver the goods. The action sequences are top shelf, 21st century movie making brilliance. These explosive scenes are a seamless composite of fantastic, real world stunt work, and exceptional CGI. Hands down, they make the film. And for an action movie with 'die hard' in the title, I'd say that was the point.

It was awesome watching this film with so many people because it was like riding a gigantic roller coaster, with everybody having a shared, hair raising experience. People were cheering like when Luke blew up the Death Star. The humor throughout was just right. By the end of the film, our senses were stunned as we dizzily made our way out of the theater, thoroughly entertained.

Excellent summer movie! Well done Bruno and crew!

---

265 out of 425 people found the following comment useful :-
Best Action Film Of 2007, 27 June 2007

Author: Devon from United States

When a criminal plot is in place to take down the entire computer and technological structure that supports the economy of the United States (and the world), it's up to a decidedly "old school" hero, police detective John McClane, to take down the conspiracy, aided by a young hacker.

Well, I can't believe I'm saying this but the newest edition to the Die Hard series may rank with the first. It's superb direction, fantastic acting, groundbreaking special effects and clever quirps will leave you with (almost) nothing to complain about. Die Hard may very well be the best action flick of 2007. It can be beat, but I doubt by a sequel.

I am proud to say that Bruce Willis still has some John McClane left in him. Bruce gets to say one of most famous lines in action film history, "Yippy Ki-ya Motha ******!", without cuts, he even gets to talk to himself, a scene that is almost identical to the scene in the air vent of the first film. (C'mon, it'll be fun, come out to the coast, have a few laughs.)

About all the controversy for the MPAA rating...it was all useless. Die Hard acts just like a rated R film, just because it says PG-13 doesn't mean its not as violent as the others. No, he doesn't say the F word, but it's not as bad as you think. It's more of a character to character type of thing then anything else. John McClane learns to bond with a young hacker. (Justin Long) It's more...I don't know..."cute" then the other movies, it doesn't need the F word.

I don't think there is much else to say. Die Hard is one of my best movie experiences to date. The crowd laughed and screamed and then cheered at the end. The only slightest problem I had with this film was the fact that the realism was quite low. Then again, as I have said before, if everything were realistic we wouldn't have action movies.

Live Free or Die Hard is a must-see IN THE THEATRE.

9.0/10.0

A

---

171 out of 251 people found the following comment useful :-
Rock solid!, 26 June 2007

Author: nisdahm-1 from Denmark

Just went to the world premiere of Die Hard 4.0, and I was positively surprised. It delivers action in abundance, and the movie has a great visceral feel to it thanks to great stunt work, and the fact that Willis really steps up in the fight scenes. The movie keeps up its pace throughout, and the script works quite well, though the tech-talk gets a little heavy at times. I was particularly worried about Wiseman directing, since both underworld movies were a complete mess in my opinion, but he really keeps it tight and disciplined this time around. Is Die Hard 4.0 the second or third best of the series? I don't know, but it is certainly a worthy successor, and all the other blockbusters should look this way to see how its done efficiently, crisp and above all entertaining.

---

98 out of 124 people found the following comment useful :-
Just didn't fit..., 29 June 2007

Author: Rick Billman (Rick_Bman) from United States

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

The first Die Hard was probably the best modern action film ever made. The second Die Hard works because the movie has a major sense of humor about how ridiculous it is to put John McClane through such a similar situation again; it practically makes fun of itself for a lot of the movie. The third one works because you have a bad guy that is out for revenge against John McClane. The fourth one though, it just felt like McClane's character was dropped in as an after thought. I don't think you can just drop John McClane into any story and call it Die Hard and this movie felt more like a Tom Clancy political thriller than a Die Hard movie.

While watching this I at least thought I would let it pass as a generic action movie, because I was having fun. However, then I started thinking about it and I'm sorry I need even my action movies to at least make a little bit of sense. There was just too much stuff in this one that didn't work for me. The first problem I had was that the bad guys created a giant traffic jam in DC causing congestion everywhere… except of course for the streets they need for the major car chase scene. Also during the part of that car chase that took place in the tunnel, how come when the bad guy started turning the lights off in the tunnel not a single person though to turn their head lights on? However the biggest action scene that bugged me was the scene where John McClane is driving the big rig truck and being chased by the fighter plane. This scene was so laughably over the top that it had no place in a Die Hard movie. I know Die Hard movies are known for their over the top action at some points but I just could not stop laughing at how completely ridiculous this scene was. Oh and seriously, since when does the 695 beltway around Baltimore have palm trees? OK, that is a bit too nitpicky, but it was kind of funny.

The film seemed to me to also be extremely inconsistent about whether or not cell phones were working. The cell phones weren't working, so he reprogrammed the phone to use the old "satcomm" satellites instead. Then that stopped working and then a little bit later that is working again. Also I'm still amazed at how Kevin Smith's character is still able to hack into so much stuff even after all the power on the entire eastern seaboard has been shut off. I mean seriously there are a lot of servers out there that have battery backups and stuff, but a lot of the servers he would need to go through to have a good enough connection to do any of the hacking he was doing would have been shut down after the power outage. OK, maybe I am picking at too much of the film, but all this bugged me while watching the film and I wasn't able to just sit back and get sucked in like I would in any other Die Hard film.

The acting in the film for the most part was pretty good, except of course for the main bad guy. He had one facial expression for the entire movie and the tone of his voice never changed. His only way of showing anger was to throw something off his desk. His performance was so wooden; it just paled in comparison to Alan Rickman, William Sadler and Jeremy Irons, who all three just played wonderful bad guys.

The look and feel of the movie didn't feel at all like a Die Hard movie to me either. Sure, John McClane takes a good beating like he does in all the films but all the action seemed to crisp and clean. It didn't feel nearly as gritty as the previous Die Hard films. Also one of the things I noticed was the film seemed to have this predominantly blue color scheme going on. It just felt like there was this blue hue through out the film, where in the previous Die Hard films the predominant colors are very earthy and red. I don't know if anyone else even knows what I am talking about, but that is just something that I noticed that took away from the gritty Die Hard feeling.

---

267 out of 474 people found the following comment useful :-
Die Hard 4.0, 15 June 2007

Author: pellonpah from Finland

Just saw it at the press screening here in Finland. It works and delivers. Thanks to Bruce, who is pretty charismatic and special thanks, surprise, to Justin Long who proves to be very sympathetic young actor. And of course, Timothy Olyphants black steering eyes are still full of rage and anger, as they was in Deadwood.

Action is fast and violent and whats most important, almost entirely hand made. Good old stunt work and explosions, thank God. The movie is called here (in Europe) Die Hard 4.0 but you guys in America will see it Live Free or Die Hard. Its not the best of the Die Hard series (it goes like first, 3rd, 2nd and this) but it is a real thing. Worth for your money, absolutely.

---

90 out of 121 people found the following comment useful :-
Really Bad., 30 June 2007

Author: zyphex from Ohio

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

I went to see this movie with very high hopes. I loved the first three in the series - they are among my favorite action movies of all time. When I first heard they were making a fourth Die Hard movie I thought - Awesome, what a great way to introduce Die Hard to a whole new generation of fans.

What I saw was a laughable mockery of a Die Hard movie. Let me start by saying the first problem was the rating. Turning a series of R rated gory action flicks into A PG-13 imitation does not work. It was as if Fox was trying to pass it off as some type of family friendly movie. This resulted in the film being minimal in bloody action violence, minimal in language use, and the use of McClane's staple line - "Yippee Ki Yay Mo ******" was made to be slightly distorted so the last word (all Die Hard fans know what it is) was more implied than spoken. The rating also had another effect. Since the aspects listed above were downplayed so much, the movie's style didn't come anywhere close to matching the style of the first three. It didn't Feel like Die Hard.

(This is off topic, but it reminds me of another time the same company took two GREAT! R rated series - Alien - and Predator - and combined them to make the PG-13 mockery we now know as AVP)

I didn't like the villain. The whole movie it didn't seem like he himself really did anything. He didn't really torture or shoot or even severely harm McClane's daughter. He was never really a threat. It was always a henchmen up until the end of the movie. (Unless you count the Tunnel-Helicopter sequence) Which bugs me, where did all the henchmen come from? In the first and third movies they were German militants, and the second movie they were military extremists supportive of General Esperanza. It this movie - they were just kind of there. I mean, Gabriel was suppose to be a DoD government employee - and he just pulled a crap load of henchmen out of no where. Were they terrorists? Wow, nice background check on a government employee with links to terrorist organizations if they were.

The use of technology was just awful. Specifically what you saw on the computer screens was unrealistic and felt like some sort of hi tech fairy tale to me (being a networking professional). I mean, I had no idea hacking was so graphical and straightforward.

To close - if the characters weren't making some cheesy quip or not dying after smashing through multiple plains of glass and being hit with SUV at one point - they most defiantly were contributing to what should go down in history as a sorry day indeed for the Die Hard series.

My advice - pull a matrix and pretend the sequel doesn't exist.

---

91 out of 133 people found the following comment useful :-
Good Old-Fashioned Shattered Glass Action Flick, 6 July 2007

Author: David H. Schleicher from New Jersey, USA

"Live Free or Die Hard" is quite a refreshing piece of entertainment this summer in the wake of so many effects-driven computer simulated action/fantasy films. With its silly title, smart-alleck lead character (Bruce Willis as Bruce Willis doing John McClane), and loads of old fashioned stunts involving cars, SUV's, elevator shafts, big rigs, helicopters, fighter jets, and collapsing highway bridges, this flick is a great piece of shattered-glass entertainment--a throwback to the late 1980's and early 1990's when movies like the original "Die Hard" changed the face of movie action.

There is some frustration to be had when you start to realize how much they toned down to achieve the friendly PG-13 rating. There's far less profanity flying, and while the body count is astronomically high (the collateral damage in this film in terms of human life and damaged property is tres magnifique), there's little blood and guts to be found. Still, die hard "Die Hard" action fans should rest assured knowing there will be plenty of funny one-liners, hot chicks (a wonderful Maggie Q as the bad-ass female villain and the scorchingly feisty and cute Mary Elizabeth Winstead as Lucy McClane), super smart bad guys (a very good Timothy Olyphant), and jaw-dropping death-defying stunts.

Director Len Wiseman orchestrates the complicated stunts very well like a masterful puppeteer, which is a shock considering how god-awful his "Underworld" films were. The hand-to-hand human match-ups still bear some of his annoying hallmarks, but he's learned how to blow things up really well and has learned a thing or two about scope and editing in big action set-pieces. The excellent pacing and preposterousness of the stunts (especially the climax involving the fighter jet and the big rig) certainly put a smile on my face.

There's a whole lot of computer hacking related mumbo-jumbo involved in the story, and there's a lot of downtime for male bonding and "explanation" of the finer plot points that slows the film down some but is actually nice to see in a world now ruled by Michael Bay-style non-stop action. Plenty dumb, plenty thrilling, and plenty of fun, "Live Free or Die Hard" is a pleasant surprise considering how unnecessary this sequel seemed from conception.

---

113 out of 179 people found the following comment useful :-
Summer blockbuster with no overkill. Terrific action packed entertainment!, 27 June 2007

Author: BroadswordCallinDannyBoy from Boston, MA

John McClane back on duty and back in action.

This time around he is assigned to bring Matt Ferrell, a known hacker, to the FBI after some top security government mainframes are hacked. McClane and Ferrell barely get away with their lives and the US begins to crumble as a nationwide cyberspace takeover is engineered by some clever terrorists.

It has been 12 years and several weeks of controversy here on IMDb about this much anticipated release, but here it is, finally. And it doesn't disappoint. From the first scene to the last there is lightning fast pacing and many jaw droppingly spectacular stunt pieces. Much like the previous Die Hard entries logic isn't exactly a part of the game, but sheer adrenaline packed excitement sure is. John McClane is faced with many outrageous challenges and like before he doesn't back down even after seriously getting his ass whooped. But that's McClane you. Also, McClane isn't just as tough and resourceful as ever, he is a wise ass at the top of his game. Much of the "controversy" on the forums here was about the PG-13 rating's limited profanity (I know, I participated in the discussion), but guess what? There is profanity! But it is not really that that matters, it is John McClane's wise ass no fear attitude that fans want and that is just what they get. The profanity is obviously less than in the previous films but it still has plenty of funny moments and the famous 'yippy kah yay' quote is here in full glory.

Also, the stunt work is in full glory with several amazing set pieces, especially a dual with a super fighter jet near the end. Grade-A Hollywood mayhem and destruction and very little apparent CGI. As far as summer entertainment goes - forget Pirates 3 or Spider Man 3 - this is an action movie that knows when it is getting over the top ridiculous and spares the viewer overkill, but still manages to be ridiculous and entertaining. There are also subtle references to previous Die Hard movies that fans will undoubtedly smile at. --- 8/10

Rated PG-13 for violence/intense action and profanity. Ages 13+.

---

99 out of 158 people found the following comment useful :-
A film that delivers!, 4 July 2007

Author: ShiggyLucasWenger from United States

12 years on; McClane is bald, estranged from his family and feels increasingly like an anachronism. There is a strong 'post-9/11' vibe, a muted color scheme and a strangely sombre tone that permeates proceedings. The film covers more terrain (literally) than it's predecessors and the action is slightly episodic as a result of shoehorning a series of mini-showdowns into a plot about cyber-terrorists and an attempt to shut down the US infrastructure. It's handled more deftly and inventively than you might expect, but it's not an obvious marriage.

The authenticity of the 'hacking' that takes place is also suspect (webcam becomes spy-cam in the basement of a security obsessed computer nerd?) and there is a horribly misjudged piece of casting in Kevin Smith as a stereotypical basement-dwelling, uber-hacker.(he simply doesn't have the acting chops) Having said all of that, the action sequences are top-notch; brutal and old-school. (with a couple of nods to the 'new', in the form of the stoic but sizzling Maqqie Q and 'le parkour' madman Cyril Rafaelli, whose incredible dexterity is captured to dazzling effect by Wiseman and crew) The performances are mainly strong, especially Bruce who immediately reminds you that you're watching McClane despite the (slightly) sanitized language and vanishing hair. Justin Long is surprisingly engaging as McClane's assignment/sidekick in a role which could so easily have been irritating, and Olyphant, as the main bad guy, gives an intense and charismatic performance full of understated humor and implied menace. He makes for an interesting antagonist, reminiscent of Rickman's 'Hans Gruber' in the original; a little less verbose, but a similarly charming sociopath with a formidable, sub-zero stare. Even the inclusion of Mary Elizabeth Winstead as McClane's daughter, (another move which, on paper, seemed destined to annoy) works well. She has inherited some of her fathers personality traits to frequently amusing effect, but the film-makers (wisely) avoid the temptation to give her any 'Lara Croft' type abilities in order to appease a wider demographic, a move that would have potentially alienated the core audience - even more than the furore over the PG-13 rating.

Speaking of the rating, while the film is light on blood and one particular swear-word, the violence hasn't been toned down at all. If anything, McClane is actually more hardened and brutal than before. Enemies are often dispatched with an efficiency and a ruthlessness commensurate with a man who's done this before. There is also a calm resignation in Willis' body language at times. McClane is a man who has found no solace in being a hero; post-divorce and struggling to maintain a relationship with his daughter, (His son is barely mentioned) he feels he has lost the things that matter most to him. This is the single most notable change in the film. Gone is the wild-eyed, heavy-breathing, frantically pacing McClane of the original Die Hard; The man rapping on the windows, desperately trying to signal the fire brigade. Willis communicates this malaise subtly and effectively, prompting the Justin Long character to ask at one point; 'Why are you so calm? Have you done that kinda stuff before?' The direction is astonishingly controlled and confident from the man that bought the world 'Underworld' (He may be one to watch after all.) and, for my money, offers the best spectacle of any film this summer.

There is a weight and an impact to the stunts and the fight scenes that comes from using actual stunt-work; so often eschewed these days in favor of scenes built entirely on disk.

As mentioned, the tone is slightly subdued for a summer actioner (despite a good number of amusing lines and a healthy amount of self-awareness) which differentiates it from the others in the series. There is a world-weariness amongst the chaos. A meditation on being 'that guy' is one of the more inspired exchanges, and the greatest insight into McClane's journey through the missing years. As a result, the audience is not left to enjoy the sense of good triumphing over evil at the end without at least a little remorse about the meaning of it all (It reminded me of one of the great strengths of '24' in that regard.). As the credits roll, all may not be right with the world as would be more typical of the genre, but there are other, more personal triumphs to savor. This gives the film a little more depth than the previous sequels, though it takes some of the edge off the 'octane buzz' that the film injects you with.

Nevertheless, this remains significantly the best blockbuster of the Summer Season. It is the first to truly deliver on all it promised (and probably surpasses realistic expectations) It would require a second viewing to determine where it might rank in the series, but it is more than worthy of the name and Die Hard remains, for my money, the undisputed champ amongst action franchises. I humbly request one more installment in which Bruce et al pour heart and soul into creating a worthy send-off and then suggest that Bruce let's McClane retire undefeated. He'll have earned it.

---

---

Page 1 of 67:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11]

Add another comment

---

Related Links

Plot summary	Plot synopsis	Ratings
Awards	Newsgroup reviews	External reviews
Parents Guide	Official site	Plot keywords
Main details	Your user comments	Your vote history