Is Die Hard (1988) overrated?

Tools    





"Money won is twice as sweet as money earned."



Kinda late to the party, but here is how I rank the Die Hard flicks.

Die Hard
Die Hard with a Vengeance
Live Free or Die Hard (unrated version on DVD)
Die Hard 2
Live Free or Die Hard (the PG-13 theatrical version)
Colon Cancer
A Good Day to Die Hard
Colon cancer, Gracie?
__________________
"You seem a decent fellow. I hate to kill you."
"You seem a decent fellow. I hate to die."







Good of you to give us the full scope of your opinion!
Even broke down the two cuts of Live Free or Die Hard. Because sadly that was and still is a thing. PG-13 for the kiddies in the theater then come out with the uncut version that it should have been for the DVD.



For real -- it's a truly sad day when McClane survives and kicks ass through a whole movie, just to have his tagline drowned out!
Hence why that cut sits underneath Die Hard 2. I still liked it, but why watch it now when I have the unrated version on DVD.



The most loathsome of all goblins
Die Hard 2 is really great and is probably better than the 3rd one even though i've not seen it.
You should give the third film a watch, I think it's the best of the series or at least on par with the original

It was originally written as a standalone action film with no relation to the Die Hard series, but John McClane was written in to ensure box office success. It's actually a pretty awesome action/thriller that stands on its own



The movies that were not originally written to be Die Hard movies (Die Hard, Die Hard with a Vengeance) are generally seen to be better then the movies that were (Die Hard 2, A Good Day to Die Hard).

Then again I like all of the Die Hard movies save for A Good Day to Die Hard.



With a vengeance was much better, apparently
Your avatar makes everything better. Again please don't ever change it, it's the best on the site and makes me happy every time i see it.



I actually think that Die Hard with a Vengeance is the best, in the series, and tops the original even.

Even broke down the two cuts of Live Free or Die Hard. Because sadly that was and still is a thing. PG-13 for the kiddies in the theater then come out with the uncut version that it should have been for the DVD.
I think I like the theatrical but better, because in the unrated DVD, the extra violence that is put in, looks fake. When people get shot, you can tell that it's all superimposed CGI blood splatter, compared to using squibs, while shooting the movie.

It feels like the special effects were forced in after, to try to make an R rated cut, but as a result, the movie looks forcibly tweaked in post, and it shows. So what good is it having an R cut, when the R rated violence, put in later, all looks fake and unconvincing? I think for this reason the PG-13 version is considerably better perhaps.



Your avatar makes everything better. Again please don't ever change it, it's the best on the site and makes me happy every time i see it.
__________________
"A movie is called upon to provoke a spiritual jolt and not to cultivate idolaters"



Welcome to the human race...
Die Hard 2 was based on a separate book as well. It is pretty telling how the one wholly original Die Hard movie is the worst - almost like its own kind of franchise curse like the one about odd-numbered Star Trek movies being worse than even ones.

Also, how about this alternate ending to With a Vengeance?

__________________
Way too much stupid talk on the forum. Iroquois, I’m thinking about you.



The most loathsome of all goblins
The final film will be about McClane being an action hero in the bedroom. "Die Hard with a Hard-On".
Just another American who saw too many pornos as a teenager? Another orphan of a bankrupt culture who thinks he's John Holmes?



Just another American who saw too many pornos as a teenager? Another orphan of a bankrupt culture who thinks he's John Holmes?
Who will be the next John McClane, and what package must he smuggle to the queen in his trousers before it explodes?