Two decades of dying hard
December 12th 2009 06:19 pm
The 80’s was the decade of action. Schwarzenegger and Stallone were kings of the roost and had successfully dominated the genre. Then, near the end of the 80’s someone else cropped up that nobody expected. An actor had had only previously played romantic roles. And he hit the screen with such force it turned everybody’s head.
The man was Bruce Willis.
He was not a super strong action hero who could throw his enemies through walls, instead he seemed to be just a normal cop “in the wrong place at the wrong time” and caused havoc for bad guys.
The original Die Hard film is superb. It still stands out as one of the best action films ever made. I remember being up with friends on New Years Day at 2am really wanting to go to sleep but at the same time wanting to watch a film. Die Hard was the film of choice and it kept us all gripped and wide awake. Not many films can do that!
The acting is great, the characters are entertaining and the plot is excellent. As solid an action film that you can hope for – 9/10
But with any successful action film there is always the threat that someone is going to come along and try and make a sequel to cash in on it. Most of the time this is a bad mistake but occasionally it pays off.
So, upping the stakes from a skyscraper to an entire airport came Die Hard 2 (1990). While it was never going to be as good as the original it still managed to keep some of the things that made the first one so good (great characters and explosive action) – 7/10
And of course, where there is a successful sequel the logical next step is to make it into a trilogy, which they did by moving from an airport to an entire city with Die Hard with a Vengeance (1995).
With most trilogies, the third film is the worst. It’s just how trilogies work. Most of the good plot and action ideas have been used up and while it may be fun it is essentially a waste of time.
The third Die Hard film is not entirely that bad but it is the worst Die Hard film. Bringing in Samuel L Jackson to partner up with Bruce Willis was a nice touch but it couldn’t help the film from feeling a little by-the-numbers.
Action was good, characters were still fun but it was lacking that something the original two had – 6/10
And that was where John McClane rested. For over ten years the character was put to bed, never to be brought back again. That was until in the late part of the 2000’s Hollywood started bringing back old characters for new adventures: Indiana Jones, The Terminator and a rather aged John McClane.
So we were given Live Free or Die Hard (2007), nearly 20 years after Nakatomi Plaza Hotel when BANG! Bruce is sporting a new bald haircut but he is still as action packed and unstoppable as ever. Last time is was a city so of course the next logical step is for terrorists to take hold of an entire country!
What should have been a cringeworthy to watch OAP action film (Indy 4 anyone?) turned out to be surprisingly good. Yes it was a little far fetched in places and it had one action sequence too many but it was incredibly entertaining. Bruce Willis still has the charisma and charm to captivate an audience. It was a return to form and a welcome addition to the franchise – 7/10
So what next for John McClane? Well, to keep with tradition the terrorists would have to take over the whole world. So the logical option would have to be an alien invasion! Only I hope for their sake that they have done their research and make sure John McClane is retired before they start. But even then he’ll kick their butts from his wheelchair!
