Live Free or Die Hard (2007) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
894 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
7/10
Bruce Willis is doing what he does best...
paul_haakonsen11 December 2020
Well, I must admit that I am rather impressed that the "Die Hard" franchise can remain this exciting and entertaining four movies into the franchise.

Initially I found the plot of the 2007 movie "Live Free or Die Hard" from writers Mark Bomback and David Marconi a bit off-putting, given the thematic cyberterrorism that the movie revolved around. But it grew on me and I came to like it as director Len Wiseman managed to put out a movie that was every bit up to speed with the previous three movies.

There is as much action and excitement in "Live Free or Die Hard" as there was in every previous installment in the franchise, so if you enjoyed any of the previous movies, you will also enjoy this 2007 movie.

"Live Free or Die Hard" had a pretty impressive cast. Of course you have action star Bruce Willis returning to the John McClane character. But the movie also have talents such as Justin Long, Maggie Q, Cliff Curtis and Timothy Olyphant on the cast list. I was thrilled to see that they cast Timothy Olyphant for the villain in "Live Free or Die Hard", however he just wasn't given as much material to work with as the previous villains did in the previous 3 movies, so his character came off as being less detailed and interesting actually, which was a shame, because Olyphant is a good actor.

The storyline in "Live Free or Die Hard" deviates somewhat from the formula used on the previous three movies, for better or worse. I guess this gamble from writers Mark Bomback and David Marconi is something that you either like or dislike. Personally, I enjoyed it, as it brought some freshness to the franchise, while it kept the essence of the franchise at heart.

My rating of "Live Free or Die Hard" lands on a 7 out of 10 stars, once the dust has settled.
23 out of 26 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Just didn't fit...
Rick_Bman29 June 2007
Warning: 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.
206 out of 270 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Live Free Or Stop Hating On This Movie
shalabodov-3299714 June 2018
The fourth installment of the infamous Die Hard franchise caused quite a split between the fans in terms of opinion. Many liked it, others loathed it. Here's why Live Free or Die Hard is actually a good action flick -

1. It's shot and edited very well. The man behind the camera did a great job and the film is entertaining as hell to watch because it's relentless. 2. The action. Now, many complained heavily that this movie turns John McLane into a superhero. Even though the degree of realism gets close to crossing the line sometimes, it's nothing short of pure entertainment. Every Die Hard movie broke certain conventionalities for the purpose of making a fun scene. All Die Hard movies twisted reality a little bit to spice up the action a bit. This one does have more of it, but at least for me it was awesome. Also, the stunts are amazing! Very impressive stuff! 3. Plot. Everyone runs out of ideas. Eventually, even the die hard audience of Die Hard would get tired of John McLane trying to stop baddies from breaking into a vault and stealing money. I like the idea of an old McLane being surrounded by all the technology that he doesn't understand. It also creates another difference between him and the bad guy, which adds more meaning to their rivalry. 4. The character of John McLane. Just as always, Bruce Willis is great as John McLane, it's obviously a signature role. He is just as great in this one as he was in the previous three. His witty remarks about the current situation always make you chuckle and his sarcastic attitude is always relevant.

The only thing that makes this an 8, not a 10, is the continuity errors that were painfully noticeable and lack of the bad guy on screen. Otherwise, this is the definition of an action movie done right. To me, it's not as good as 1 or 3 but better than 2.
33 out of 40 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Fun
jack_o_hasanov_imdb25 August 2021
As a matter of fact, it was a better movie than I expected, it was a fun action movie.
16 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Live Free or Die Hard is the best Action film of 2007 and it works for me
ivo-cobra816 October 2015
Live Free or Die Hard (2007) is the last good Action film of 2007 in the Die Hard franchise. An old-fashioned cop emerges to foil a high-tech attack on the country's computer infrastructure as Bruce Willis brings back one of the biggest action franchises in screen history. It is one of my personal favorite action movies, it is a sequel I love to death.

It's been over a decade since audiences last saw New York cop John McClane (Willis), but now, as the world's greatest criminal mastermind (Timothy Olyphant) attempts to cripple the entire country with an innovative act of technological terrorism, only one cop can insure that the integrity of the system stays intact. In this, the fourth installment of the long-running action series, Underworld director Len Wiseman picks up the torch formerly carried by directors John McTiernan and Renny Harlin to helm a script penned by Mark Bomback.

Best Action Film Of 2007. Even with ratings PG-13 this film works for me. Those four movies of the franchise are the ones I love. 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 scenes, 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 FOR DIE HARD FANS.

Live Free or Die Hard (also known as Die Hard 4: Live Free or Die Hard or simply Die Hard 4 and released as Die Hard 4.0 outside North America) is a 2007 American action film, and the fourth installment in the Die Hard film series. The film was directed by Len Wiseman and stars Bruce Willis as John McClane. The film's name was adapted from New Hampshire's state motto, "Live Free or Die".

I loved the fact it's still Die Hard especially in the Unrated cut. the PG-13 didn't bother me he still told jokes, put a smile on my face gave his tagline & killed the bad guy. But my favorite scene is the Car Chase with the Chooper if I had to pick one. An enjoyable pop projection of post-9/11 anxiety. That said, it also makes you nostalgic for the days when irresponsible action movies didn't have to deal with it. Bruce Willis should not be the victim of facile stereotyping. He brings more heart and humor to apocalyptic pulp fiction than any other actor I can think of offhand.

That film is great and the last good Die Hard film, A Good Day To Die Hard sucks horrible. Live Free or Die Hard is my favorite fourth film in the Die Hard franchise and this film, filmed in 2007 was great. 9/10 Score: A+
112 out of 144 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Watered down and less painful, but still rather entertaining throughout.
Pjtaylor-96-13804416 May 2018
'Die Hard 4.0 (2007)' is enjoyable in a different way to the prior titles in the series. It's a much more glossy action flick, still fun despite being heavily watered down and featuring a protagonist who's almost indestructible. Still, it essentially captures that 'Die Hard' spirit for most of its run-time and is rather entertaining throughout. 7/10
16 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
An enjoyable thrill ride
courtneyjjjjjjjj17 February 2021
I think the criticism this movie has received is a little unfair. Personally I think it's great.

Are there plot holes? Sure. Does everything seem to magically work out? Yes. Does that take away from the entertainment value? ABSOLUTELY NOT.

I love that you have low-tech, luddite, badass John McClane trying to solve a technology based terrorism plot. McClane and the tech whiz kid playing off each other is wonderfully hilarious.

Stop thinking too hard and just enjoy the sarcastic quips and pretty awesome action sequences.
12 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Good Old-Fashioned Shattered Glass Action Flick
WriterDave6 July 2007
"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.
140 out of 223 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
I STILL LOVE THIS MOVIE
dockerykelli20 August 2019
Live Free or Die Hard is such an incredible movie to enjoy. The overall cast made the movie even better in my opinion. The storyline was phenomenal as well. Tons of action throughout the movie, laughter, intense moments, & love! I WOULD HIGHLY RECOMMEND THIS MOVIE TO ANYONE ABOVE THE AGE 18+. A+++ Film.
18 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
A belated sequel that certainly doesn't disappoint!
The_Void9 July 2007
I have to say, I'm not usually a big fan of belated sequels to films made years ago - but I have to make an exception here as Die Hard 4 offers an amazingly good time and is surely the best of the sequels - possibly even the best Die Hard film period! The film is almost completely made up of relentless and heart pumping action sequences, and while it might not be life-affirming stuff, you wont care about much else while you're watching it - so it's safe to say that the third Die Hard sequel more than does it's job! As you would probably expect since this is the first Die Hard movie of this millennium, the plot this time round focuses on the internet. Most of the USA is controlled by computers, so naturally they find themselves with a big problem when someone hacks into the system and begins a 'fire sale' - in which all the essential elements of the USA (transport, communication, power etc) are systematically shut down to create confusion and chaos. Detective John McClane is dragged into this plot when he's sent to pick up a computer hacker wanted by the police.

One of the things I loved most about this film is the fact that it's just a straight action thriller and doesn't ever pretend to be anything that it isn't. There's no false patriotism or sentiment - it's all very straight up, just the way it should be! The film is directed by Underworld director Len Wiseman and it's clear that the man knows his way around an action sequence, as this film features plenty! The stunts involve all sorts from the standard trucks and cars to helicopters and fighter jets! It's not just the vehicles involved either that makes these scenes great to watch; someone has actually put some thoughts into them so they're not just merely the same old stuff. You've really got to hand it Bruce Willis too; he's 52 but fit as a fiddle and never looks out of place running round and fighting bad guys. He is joined by Justin Long, who is likable as the computer hacker who spends most of the movie running around with Willis, and Timothy Olyphant who is a surprisingly effective lead villain. Overall, so long as you don't go into Die Hard 4 expecting substance, there's no reason why this movie can't be enjoyed by all. Its pure action and entertaining throughout, and you really can't ask for any more than that! Just make sure that you see it in cinema.
10 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
This movie is not only "Die Hard" x 4...
dv90923 June 2007
...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!
679 out of 1,046 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Die Hard 4 - Here's Why It Sucked...
adlion94429 July 2007
Warning: Spoilers
First off, I'm a Die Hard 1 lover. The second and third weren't very good. Die Hard 1 was a textbook on how to make a thriller and was the first "high tech" heist/terrorist blockbuster thrillers I can recall.

Die Hard 4.0 (which would've been clever in 1998, not so much now) is a loud, expensive, frenetic modern take on Die Hard 1. It's too much of everything. Here are the ingredients, see if you haven't seen these 100 times before (5 seasons of 24, MI:3, Bourne, Matrix, etc.):

1. Indestructible hero 2. Art-directed government computer centers that look like Dr. Evil's lair with plasmas all over the walls. 3. Computers doing high tech things with beautiful unknown operating systems that can pull up 3D wire frame schematics of anything imaginable in 1.5 seconds flat, and make high tech noises and beeps. 4. An aerial establishing shot of Washington D.C. that "types" in courier font the name of XXXXXX government institution (ticka ticka ticka ticka...). 5. Bossy government officials who say "get me XXXX on a secure channel" or addresses everyone as "people, you better get me some answers" and dislikes the hero and ignores his sage advice. 5. Beautiful computer technicians who know kung fu. Also, who wear 9 inch heels to conduct military operations because we all know how easy heels are to maneuver in. 6. Bad guys who take out 3rd tier characters with one shot but empty clip after clip in futility to hit the good guy. 7. Good guys who can launch a car into the air to hit a helicopter or knock open a fire hydrant to get a killer to fall out of his helicopter. First, fire hydrants lose their high pressure once the water has traveled about 3 feet. And the pressure comes from the narrow hydrant nozzle, not the water supply in the ground. If you knock the hydrant over, it won't spray upward more than a few feet and certainly wouldn't knock a guy out of a helicopter (who would've been clipped into a safety harness for rifle sniping anyway). Idiotic.

All in all, this movie is terrible. We walked out. How can chase set pieces be boring? Die Hard 4.0 will show how. Lousy movie.
33 out of 53 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
What is wrong with everybody???
pastaproductions13 July 2007
Warning: Spoilers
8.1? Most of the time I easily accept that many people love movies that I myself totally hate and vice versa. its OK, opinions just vary. But in this case I simply don't get it. How can somebody who is a fan of the first Die Hard possibly give this one such a high rating??- given that not all voters are confused misguided 15 year old who might have dubious judging criteria at times...

A few reasons for being so utterly disappointed

1. Okay, this is just me: I would have liked to see a little more of Mclane's contemporary everyday life ( AA meeting perhaps...) just to get to see the character and how he's changed a while longer before the action kicks in (kind of like in the original)- maybe I'm living in the wrong decade with such wishes...

2. Again I understand if some disagree: The Idea of Willis picking up a kid to take him somewhere and ending up protecting him from killers was already used, and done well, in "16 Blocks" and Shouldn't have been used again...

3. The CGI. Most people laud this film, including Willis, for being so real- real images, real stunts (yes, my compliments on the stunt work that WAS real)... however i actually gave up counting the effect shots after a while- no matter how well they're done one can simply tell the difference between real movie and computer game scene. And I'm so sick of watching artificial computer action especially in movies where it is so damn unnecessary.

4. The action. Somewhere along the line in the tunnel this movie stopped being a Die Hard Movie and became a cross between The Matrix, The Transporter 2 and M:Impossible: Mclane and the kid ducking from a falling car that bounces off just inches from their heads. Mclane jumping out of a speeding car- since he's so optimistic about the vehicle taking off and crashing into a helicopter, MClane in a fistfight in a car dangling in an elevator shaft,Mclane taking down a Jet etc... thanks a lot John Hunt!

5. Stupid patriotism "It's not a system it's a country!"... Uh huh...

You know I could go on and on but I think the biggest problem of this movie is that the creators have simply ignored who John Mclane was in the original: A grumpy Anti-hero who gets into dangerous situations (yes Len Wiseman got that right) but who gets himself out of them in a way that is human and doable- HE WAS NEVER A SUPERHERO.

I don't know what most of you see in this that you find so outstanding, I really just think of it as another pebble added to this landslide of senseless sequels that overshadow this summer.
144 out of 231 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
The "hacker" stuff was a little much... BUT......
Jerry_Sprinkle27 June 2007
Warning: Spoilers
I thoroughly enjoyed this movie by the time the credits started rolling! I was like the other skeptics. "PG-13??? YIPPIE KAY AYE MOTHER-FATHER?" If you go into this movie knowing it's not going to be Nakatomi Tower, or With a Vengeance, you can save yourself a lot of whining. Die Hard 2, to the fans, was not a very good movie. THIS ONE makes up for it! There's wasn't much potty language, but realistically, I don't think anybody had any time to drop any F-bombs on account of them having to constantly dodge the real ones. At first the dynamic between McClane and the Mac Geek seems a little "ah here we go again, clash of the generations", and it doesn't seem like a real Die Hard movie until about 30 minutes into it, but once we start recognizing Shoe-less John, a lot of that goes away! The hacker stuff seems to get sort of hokey, at times, but a lot of Die Hard fans won't have trouble letting that slide since John couldn't be bothered with it; he's too busy kickin' ass and takin' names! The action scenes keep you on the edge of your seat at all times. This is definitely the next level of action flicks (best since Casino Royale). Some of the blows McClane delivers are so intense, even Chester A. Arthur felt them.

There's no rehashing of old characters to forcefully remind you it's a Die Hard flick. That means no Sgt. Al Powell, no Zeus, no Holly Gennero side story, no Inspector Cobb, hell, not even a Gruber family member! Also, there's no jurisdictional cliché argument he had with the LA cop or Airport Cop from the sequel we all like to pretend never happened.

Trust me, by the time he says "Yippie Kay Aye..." your jaw will drop! A MUST SEE for Die Hard fans!
56 out of 105 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Watch the Unrated version, it's fantastic!!.
dayton-w-price31 December 2019
For those people that had a negative experience watching the theatrical PG-13, watch the Unrated version. There's more violence and tons of f-words, feels like a Die Hard movie should, John McClane is the same foul mouth guy we love and not edited for TV, the Unrated version delivers the goods. Makes the recent outing seem tame in comparison, despite the R rating. I'm not sure what the producers and director where thinking when they decided on a PG-13 version, a could compare it to Venom, which I loved! and would have loved more if it had been a hard R. So please do yourselves a favor and watch the Unrated version, you won't regret it.
15 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Come On, Give Me A Break
jzappa16 July 2007
In the Die Hard family, Live Free or Die Hard is the dense but rebellious delinquent cousin who everyone dreads coming to Thanksgiving because he's going to ask somebody to borrow more money. The first three Die Hards had an idea of what they were. They were bloody thrillers about a cop from New York who you wouldn't have to be told is from New York judging by his complete confidence, readiness, and detachment when it comes to any confrontation, even terrorists on walkie-talkies threatening to blow up a building. This cop confronts incredibly smart villains who, William Sadler from Die Hard 2 excluded, are suave, brilliant, and match New York cop John McClaine on a personal level and inevitably share a laugh with him. They also have exciting, blood-spattered yeah-take-that gunfights and mortal physical combat. Live Free or Die Hard is so drunk on Hollywood's shallow mentality wherein they want to have their cake, which would be an attempt at an entertaining movie, and eat it too, eating it being compromising most things that make it a good movie in a bad salesman's attempt at expanding the audience.

You will not get a good shoot-em-up, for all you Die Hard fans out there. Instead, you will get a sequence wherein Bruce Willis is driving a semi truck and being attacked by a stealth fighter plane, which only fires missiles when it doesn't have a clear shot, so we can see more highway columns crumble, and only fires its machine guns when it has a clear shot for a missile, so that we can see the truck get ripped up. This is an example of the action sequences in this sudden cash-in idea by a Hollywood exec going to sleep one night and suddenly stricken by the revelation causing a light bulb to appear above his head. Aside from a fun fight between Bruce Willis and Maggie Q that leads to a car tangled in the cables of an elevator shaft, there's no grit, and hardly any real tension, because not only are these million-dollar sequences much more suited for Transformers than a cop movie, but they are so convenient in their improbability that we are hardly worried about McClaine not making it out alright. Everything else in the film is tailored unreasonably for the lazy satisfaction of a shallow audience anyway.

Take for instance the goofy subplot involving McClaine's daughter, who is now a teenager. You must remember his hot-and-cold relationship with his wife in the earlier films. (The film doesn't seem to want you to recall much from them, but it doubles back on itself at this point.) His daughter hates him, refuses to acknowledge his existence, refuses to call him, and calls herself Lucy Ginero, Ginero being her mother's maiden name, just to hurt her father. Why? Because. Because why? Ask the screenwriters this and they may think you're speaking in Greek, because there really isn't a credible reason given for such an intense hatred on her part. I'm not excusing McClaine's behavior in his daughter's first scene, because McClaine barges in on her and her date like an overly jealous, bombastic Southern husband. Why he acts this way in this scene is beyond me, but we're supposed to think it's cool, so unfortunately, this sort of forceful way that he acts in this one scene cannot be relievedly written off as the reason his daughter hates him so much.

Then, suddenly, when she's in trouble---and you know she's going to be in trouble because this is made clear in the movie's trailer, so don't worry, I'm not spoiling anything---she suddenly starts calling herself Lucy McClaine and telling her dad she loves him and showing him affection and things like that. Oh OK, so as soon as she needs him, she loves him. When he needs her affection and love as his daughter in everyday life after a day of avoiding bullets and explosions, she not only doesn't give it to him, but shows him great hate. What a cold, selfish, extremely fickle little brat she's portrayed as.

As for the film's villain, if you're expecting the riveting suavity and calculating control of Alan Rickman or the intimidating cold and German soldier's latent but powerful menace of Jeremy Irons, you'll be disappointed. Instead, you get Timothy Olyphant, who plays another power-hungry computer genius who is frankly weak without his technological prowess, and in essence simply a college-age prep whose heart races and eyes widen when he feels in control, which is in essence an insecurity. Who wants a weak villain after three extremely powerful ones? Olyphant opens his mouth in this odd teeth-showing grimace and his eyes are also squinty but bulging at the same time like a mad scientist's.

Also, just on a note of personal preference, I don't often really care for action movies and thrillers where everything is controlled by computers, keyboards, the internet, discs, and chips. I like actioners and thrillers, frankly, like the first three Die Hards, where we're trapped in a skyscraper and have to fight our way down, or the characters are forced to run around a big, endless panicky, rushing city like New York in a race against time. Those are exciting. High-tech thrillers just strike me as show-offy. Perhaps if Bruce Willis brought back John McTiernan, they would've made a Die Hard 4 where we maybe get to see some blood on someone's shirt and a script that works.
71 out of 138 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Rock solid!
nisdahm-126 June 2007
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.
272 out of 417 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Fourth Time Is Still a Charm
Michael_Elliott11 February 2013
Live Free or Die Hard (2007)

*** (out of 4)

The fourth film in the franchise has John McClane (Bruce Willis) asked to pick up a hacker (Justin Long) for questioning by the two of them are soon under attack from an unknown group of men. Soon it becomes clear that a madman (Timothy Olyphant) plans on hacking into every U.S. system to bring the country down. LIVE FREE OR DIE HARD sounds like it would be a complete loser. I mean, after all who thought it would be a good idea to put McClane up against internet hackers? As silly as the story might sound, it actually works extremely well thanks in large part to a pretty nail-biting and tense story that fits into the post 9/11 world of fear where we could be hit hard at anytime. Now, I will freely admit that you've really got to suspend your disbelief because not for a single second did I buy McClane being able to pull off what he does here. I'm not going to give away any spoilers but I'd buy the events in the first three films a lot more than I do this one but director Len Wiseman handles everything so well that you can overlook the unbelievable nature of the picture. What works best is the direction actually because he at least makes you believe that this terrorist group could pull off what they're doing and pretty much attack America on three different levels. I'm really not sure if would be as easy as the bad guys do it but this is just a minor problem. There are some really terrific action scenes scattered along the way including a real nail-bitter on a highway where all lanes are opened and this leads to an amazing crash. Another terrific sequence happens with Willis driving a semi and a fighter jet comes to attack. Willis, as you'd expect, is in fine form as he has no problem fitting into this character. The one-liners and his smart mouth are right on the mark and he manages to also play the more dramatic moments. I thought Long was okay in his role but there's no question that it's rather underwritten. Olyphant makes for a good villain as does Maggie Q in her brief scenes. Mary Elizabeth Winstead is also good in her scenes as the daughter. LIVE FREE OR DIE HARD manages to deliver in the entertainment value, the drama and there's no question that the action is fun. The film has a few flaws along the way but it's still another good entry in a very good series that manages to be different yet keep the same type of fun.
16 out of 26 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
The action situations are absurd, but the story is interesting, social and political criticism is present and the script is well constructed
fernandoschiavi6 September 2020
Twelve years after Officer John McCLane's third adventure in facing Simon Gruber and his terrorist group, the Die Hard franchise gains yet another episode, expanding the level of threat like never before, both to the United States and personally to McCLane, the tough, unlucky cop who's always in the wrong place at the wrong time. The new film bears little resemblance to the rest of the franchise, appealing too much to action scenes that deviate from the standards of reality, and a constant adrenaline rush.

Here, the United States is under a new terrorist attack, this time through information technology. A hacker manages to break into the computerized infrastructure that controls the country's communications, transportation and energy, threatening to cause a giant blackout. The perpetrator planned all the steps involved, but did not expect John McClane (Bruce Willis), an old guard policeman, to be called to confront him.

In the past 12 years, there have been many attempts to bring him to the screen, but many impasses involving Willis (who was in no way interested in reincarnating him), screenwriters, and director. John McTiernan, responsible for directing the previous three films in the franchise, jumped off the boat, passing the command to Len Wiseman. It changed the director, and also the essence of the franchise. McClane is no longer the same ... he is now older, evolved, more powerful, and more artificial. It is not good news for those who grew up raving about their adventures. McCLane has always been a completely human hero and rooted in the real world: a man capable of anything, however, with all the feelings of weakness of any human being. In this fourth episode of the series, the United States is not very interested in John McClane, now a tired detective, conveniently hidden in a New York police station. John McClane is also not interested in US destinations. Fortunately, McClane's fundamental fallibility still holds true: his failure as a man. The policeman's efficiency is undeniable, but as a husband McClane has always been a denial. The great asset of the script for the fourth film is not to invent a side-kick, Matt (Justin Long), but to replicate a situation in the first feature: the endangered wife who hates her husband and the endangered daughter who hates her father. An absent father, willing to catch up, wants to know (and control) what his daughter is doing at night. In the best tradition of American voluntarism, this semi-retired police officer exchanges his pajamas for a brief and restless return to his glorious days as a one-man army. This is the big problem in this fourth episode: they turned McClane into a completely unreal character.

Even his new look with a shaved head gave him a certain air of superiority, de-characterizing that image of the ordinary, bald human being from previous films. Before, despite being a great policeman, he was afraid, he was hurt ... now he doesn't lose a tough guy for a second and at most he suffers from scratches. Look at the moment when he, absurdly drops a helicopter throwing a car at him and Justin Long's character is amazed, while he just responds "I was out of bullets". And worse: in the first action scene, when Long asks him in the car, if he happened to be afraid, and he says "yes", maintaining a constant air of superiority. This is definitely not the grumbling of the previous films, much to the disappointment of the fans.

We must remember that the first three films deal with terrorism in a more "open" way, mainly on the second and third tape, where explosions and violence are wide open. But also, it was a time before 9/11, a time until then that nations (mainly the American) believed to be indestructible. It is a fact that the biggest terrorist attack in history touched the Americans and changed the way of making cinema, also changing, John McCLane. Therefore, putting McCLane to face a cyber-terrorist (after several changes in the script), was perhaps the most correct decision, but also the most wrong. The history of terrorism against the United States gave scope for the script to constantly make its political criticism. There are some passages where Bush's "nudge" is evident. One of these "nudges" occurs when the detective tells Farrel that the government must have several agencies prepared to face that situation, and the young man responds by talking about how the government was prepared to help the flood victims in New Orleans, where the population was forgotten by the Bush administration, which left them for several days in a precarious situation, even without drinking water. In addition, the villain himself intends to shock Americans by showing them the mistakes of the current government. Die Hard 4.0 is a politically engaged film, and it knows how to do that, too, in a good-natured way. The scene in which terrorist hackers invade broadcasts from TV stations and begin to spread fear through an edited video in which several ex-presidents, including the current one, are making speeches, is an example of this. The result of the edition are speeches that, together, show the authorities concluding that they cannot avoid the worst, but promise to strive to avoid the catastrophe. At every moment we follow characters using an ironic humor.

The film has this great quality, the humor. Leaving politics, he plays at all times in different situations. Facing a digital enemy, McClane shows that he is not at all prepared for all the existing electronic paraphernalia, resulting in more funny moments. Anyway, jokes are the keynote of the feature. But, it's not just jokes that Die Hard 4.0 is made of. There is also a lot of action. Some scenes are really exciting, like the first one; others not so much. There are scenes so exaggerated that they are almost ridiculous. These are scenes that undermine all the realism built by the good script. In fact, the special effects, due to the physical scenes, are discreet. They are just there to check more reality.

Die Hard 4.0 is the type of film that exudes testosterone. In times of sensitive superheroes, with existential crises, this production brings a protagonist who saves the world in brute force. John McClane does not have time to think about divorce or emotional problems with his daughter when he has all the American territory to save. The action that is spectacular, in the incessant and noisy sense that applies to the adventure super productions of the last years, but that also has the characteristic cynicism of the protagonist and in a way to take things in play: the jokes that "relativize" the violence want to inscribe it in a graphic and playful sphere. This is another film with a video game soul, efficient in the genre, mathematically skilled in seducing young audiences, full of references to pop culture and, above all, to the digital age, with which director Len Weiseman (of the series) deals very freely "Underworld") and screenwriter Mark Bomback ("Godsend"). Wiseman knew how to understand and reproduce the concept in Die Hard 4.0. Anyone looking for Willis' most famous character is already expecting a lot of unlikely action and little explanation, and in that sense the fourth film in the series is up to its predecessors. McClane's untimely nature, in turn, lends itself well to a mood that pits the wisdom of the elderly against the presumption of the youngest, and contrasts a world that is still analog with the new virtual order.

The situations in Die Hard 4.0 are so absurd that the viewer must leave reality outside the cinema and this is the biggest source of fun in productions like these. Many of these scenes are considered to be the high point of action: a car gliding towards the sky to shoot down a helicopter; a vehicle flying through the air towards the detective and the young man when two other cars appear preventing them from being crushed; an army jet opening fire on the truck driven by McClane on a highway. Everything very well done. But they are laughable scenes. They end up making the viewer remember that everything is out of reality. That is, it undermines the belief that everything that has been shown can, in fact, happen. However, there are great action scenes, like the aforementioned first scene, is the one that McClane faces Mai, the main assistant of Thomas Gabriel (the film's villain). The fight between the two is sensational and funny. It's the bully having to beat up a woman. The detective's challenges only increase. In addition to facing a powerful enemy, he will have to fight to rescue his daughter, who was kidnapped by the terrible Gabriel. McClane has to defend his homeland and watch over his family's life. The perfect setting for the hero figure. However, he is an ordinary hero, a normal person, and not someone with superpowers. This identification that the film is able to build with the main character is of fundamental importance. It is impossible not to root for him.

Die Hard 4.0 exaggerates, but does not displease. For those who like the genre and do not mind the impossible, it is an unmissable example. Otherwise, everything works. The story is interesting, social and political criticism is present and the script is well constructed. It is not a serious feature, which stimulates thinking and reflection. It is another blockbuster popcorn, made for large masses and for immediate consumption. But it also serves to show how remarkable the 1980s was for the pop universe. After this return and Sylvester Stallone, in Rocky Balboa (2008), the next was a sixty-year-old Harrison Ford in Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (2008). A sign that this group still has something to offer. And if the public continues to accept these old icons with joy, what is the problem with that? Bruce Willis did his part well, showing that he has a lot of room for new challenges.
9 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
A different kind of Die Hard, but in great ways!
SPZMaxinema25 August 2021
The casting of the charismatic Tim Olyphant and the hot and sexy Maggie Q. Was a good choice! The surprise appearance in the middle of the film was fun too and John McClane and his new partner do well together! The action is also top notch stuff, I think it's probably one of the best action movies of the 2000s!
19 out of 24 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Unbelievable plot, action packed, but certainly no Die Hard
lspijker5 January 2008
This movie for me was disappointing. I had three main expectations: 1) a continuous 'grabbing' plot, that could be 'movie' believable. 2) a human John (Bruce Willis) who rescues us from evil and we can relate to. 3) a good sidekick that has his/her own place in the plot

None of these expectations were met. 1) The story was really too fantastic to be believable, too far reached. 2) John wasn't John anymore, he was turned into superman, which made it hard to relate to him. This is the main reason why I rated this movie low. Die Hard has the charm that, all be it in fantasy, that you could be John Mc Clane, you can identify and live with him, and so together rescue the world from evil. That concept has been killed by this new Die Hard 4. 3) the sidekick in the form of the hacker, Matt Farell. His performance was good, but he was too closely tight into action with John and was too weak to stand out. He is no Samuel Jackson, who stands out as strong as Bruce Willis and forms a tag team with him. Here, both in the plot and in acting, Matt Farell was more a drag then a tag team player.

Conclusion: The movie was certainly action packed. The acting was good (except for the bad guys, that was really weak in my opinion. Though Maggie Q played a deliciously evil tough woman that performed a Die Hard worthy fight with John). The plot really out of reality and too fantastic. It was definitely no Die Hard, that was severely disappointing.
33 out of 65 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
chitty chitty bang bang
Mohamad0212 March 2021
You know it's gonna be chitty chitty bang bang when Bruce Willis is in a movie. I'm happy as I write this. It will blow the popcorn box out of your hand. If you're into action then there is no way you dislike this movie. Who doesn't like 2 hours long chitty chitty bang bang?
5 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
As a generic action flick it passes, as the Die Hard 4 it fails
SozeTheKeyser1 July 2007
The Die Hard dynasty is the definition of the heroic anti-hero. John McClane is a hero by accident. He is forced to be a hero, not because he is inclined to be one.

This is why I, and others, distinguish between Die Har 1&3 and Die Hard 2. And without telling to much, I now put number 4 in the series in the latter category.

I'll tell you why.... John McTiernan had the right take on it, and you see it in both the 1 and 3. He doesn't treat John McClane as a hero, he treats him as an ordinary guy, albeit a bad-ass type of ordinary guy. This is what makes Die Hard ultra cool. - Bruce Willis kicking ass and cracking jokes. If you hit him he falls over, bleeds, but gets up again, retaliates ending in fatality, and a snide remark.

Number 2 made him too much of a generic hero, and Live Free or Die Hard aka Die Hard 4.0 has a bit of the same problem. John McTiernan made a balanced gourmet (action)meal, in the proper serving size. 4.0 struggles with the same as you do, when you try to recreate the meal you just had. You liked it, so you make a double portion, and because you liked certain elements, you add extra of that. And the result of that is always the same, it's OK, but not as good as you had, because it's out of proportion and after gorging on it, you suddenly feel you've had too much, spoiling it all a bit.

Although John McClane in 4.0, is very vocally underlined as not being the heroes hero. The rest of the movie portrays him as such. Everything is a little bit extra, and little big bigger, and a bit more explosive. Sometimes you wonder if the director was thinking, "and then here it would be nice with another explosion, maybe John bleeding a bit more".

Live Free or Die Hard goes a long way with the template and the pedigree, but because of it's eager to give a little bit more of everything, it stops short of giving the same cool feel as the John McTiernans.

As an action flick though, it's exciting and keeps you entertained most of the time. It does get a little long towards the end, and some of the mushy elements, gets well... a little too mushy

All in all, it's worth seeing, and you should take a hide during the summer to do just that. Because Bruce Willis is good company. Even if you do miss the John McClane of the past millennium.
36 out of 72 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Really Bad.
zyphex30 June 2007
Warning: 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.
178 out of 289 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Entertaining Non-Stop Action Movie
claudio_carvalho15 December 2007
When the FBI computer system is invaded in the weekend of July 4th, the Director of the Cybercrime Division Bowman (Cliff Curtis) requests that all the available agent and policeman bring the known hackers for a conversation about the breech in the system. NYPD Detective John McClane (Bruce Willis) is assigned to bring a New Jersey's hacker named Matt Farrell (Justin Long). While with Matt in his apartment, they are attacked by hit-men of a terrorist organization and sooner they find that seven other hackers have been killed. Matt identifies the beginning of the chaotic "fire sale" when all the computer systems are shutdown by a terrorist organization leaded by the former government analyst Thomas Gabriel (Timothy Olyphant) bringing a digital Armageddon to United States of America. McClane chases Thomas with Matt, but when his daughter Lucy (Mary Elizabeth Winstead) is kidnapped by the criminal, his pursuit becomes a personal issue.

"Die Hard 4.0" is an entertaining non-stop action movie. The story is absurd, but works in this type of film. Bruce Willis is tailored to perform John McClane, a man that survives to the toughest and most incredible situations. If the viewer likes action movies, he or she will certainly like this one very much. Otherwise, why spending time watching a "Die Hard" franchise film? Just to say or write that have hated the film etc.? I saw exactly what I expected to see and I liked it. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil): "Duro de Matar 4.0" ("Die Hard 4.0")
20 out of 37 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed