Is Die Hard (1988) overrated?

Tools    





If anyone has netflix would highly recommend the series, 'The Films That Made Us'.



One of the episodes is dedicated the Die Hard and well worth the watch.



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



His name is Robert Paulson, His name is Robert...
I try to judge movies in the context of when they were shown. I remember how I felt when I left the theater.

At the time it was shown, I don't think I had ever seen such an action movie before. Really a lot of fun, and I remember having that "wow" feeling walking out of the theater to our car.

Just as when I saw Terminator 2. That wow feeling.

And with Avatar. And jumping way back, with Star Wars.

And yet, with every one of these films, I see people looking back at it with a critical eye. I'm not saying that the OP is doing this, but I'm just saying that it seems to happen more and more and more.

Why is this?

The measure of a movie DOES. NOT. EXIST. outside of the time period in which it is made. The original context is everything.

People seem to forget just how powerful the magic was at the time. I'll never forget seeing Die Hard (the first one), and how I told everyone to see it.
__________________
Despite the hoopla, no, Wikipedia is not peer reviewed. Peer reviewed means reviewed by peers only, not peers and some drunk 19 y.o. in college with an axe to grind.



Oh sorry, was I judging the movie out of it's original context? How was I doing that exactly?



Movie Addict but only Bollywood
i don't think die hard is overrated. starting to ending everything is amazing. how can i forget this hard working man



His name is Robert Paulson, His name is Robert...
Oh sorry, was I judging the movie out of it's original context? How was I doing that exactly?
Did you read the part where I said "I'm not saying that the OP is doing this", or did you just gloss over that to the reply button?



A system of cells interlinked
If anyone has netflix would highly recommend the series, 'The Films That Made Us'.



One of the episodes is dedicated the Die Hard and well worth the watch.
I watched all the episodes fairly recently. I will second this recommendation.
__________________
"There’s absolutely no doubt you can be slightly better tomorrow than you are today." - JBP



Welcome to the human race...
I try to judge movies in the context of when they were shown. I remember how I felt when I left the theater.

At the time it was shown, I don't think I had ever seen such an action movie before. Really a lot of fun, and I remember having that "wow" feeling walking out of the theater to our car.

Just as when I saw Terminator 2. That wow feeling.

And with Avatar. And jumping way back, with Star Wars.

And yet, with every one of these films, I see people looking back at it with a critical eye. I'm not saying that the OP is doing this, but I'm just saying that it seems to happen more and more and more.

Why is this?

The measure of a movie DOES. NOT. EXIST. outside of the time period in which it is made. The original context is everything.

People seem to forget just how powerful the magic was at the time. I'll never forget seeing Die Hard (the first one), and how I told everyone to see it.
I'd say people look back with a critical eye because a better way to measure a film's worth (especially if it is considered a great or even classic film) is to assess how it endures the passage of time. Die Hard maintains its classic status precisely because it endures in the face of films that try to copy it or sequels that tarnish its name, but even then it's not a perfect film (there's no such thing) and it is not exempt from criticism. Not all of us were old enough (or even alive) to see Die Hard during its original theatrical run, but that doesn't mean we aren't capable of appreciating it anyway - just don't be surprised that people of all ages don't consider "you had to be there" to be the best defence for a film.

If anything, the real problem is how the term "overrated" centres the discourse around how the film is received by viewers than about the quality of the film itself and that just tends to complicate the discussion unnecessarily.
__________________
Way too much stupid talk on the forum. Iroquois, I’m thinking about you.



Did you read the part where I said "I'm not saying that the OP is doing this", or did you just gloss over that to the reply button?
Oh sorry, I misread it, my mistake.

I'd say people look back with a critical eye because a better way to measure a film's worth (especially if it is considered a great or even classic film) is to assess how it endures the passage of time. Die Hard maintains its classic status precisely because it endures in the face of films that try to copy it or sequels that tarnish its name, but even then it's not a perfect film (there's no such thing) and it is not exempt from criticism. Not all of us were old enough (or even alive) to see Die Hard during its original theatrical run, but that doesn't mean we aren't capable of appreciating it anyway - just don't be surprised that people of all ages don't consider "you had to be there" to be the best defence for a film.

If anything, the real problem is how the term "overrated" centres the discourse around how the film is received by viewers than about the quality of the film itself and that just tends to complicate the discussion unnecessarily.
Yeah I see what you mean. I guess watching it now, it feels like it's in more of an infancy compared to some of the movies that borrowed from it later perhaps? Not all of them, just some.