Die Hard 4.0

Die Hard 4.0 Hindi

Excellent movie for everyone 👍

Die Hard 4.0_360P

worst of the series, typical hero story that tears down the terrorists by any means no matter how ridiculous! our bald hero fights the chopper by splashing water! nothing wrong with that! takes the chopper down by a jumping car! original! gets a kid and go ALONE to west Virginia to fight terrorists leaving all the cops behind! then the terrorists take the power down remotely after by directing blasting gas towards it! no comment! he kills the terrorist leader girl friend so they get his daughter, do they kill her? no! they put her in a chair! no revenge, no payback, nothing..terrorists are stupid and predictable! and no one can track them but a 20 yr old nerd! suddenly they get our amazing spider man at gun point! do they kill him? he's nothing, why not just shoot him? oh it must be a happy ending so they just say "we've been expecting you" and smile, then he kicks their asses! the movie goes on and on with this BS to finish the BS story! if u love this crap, watch the movie! it's LOADED!

I'm amazed at the voting going on for this film - are you all as controlled as the computer systems were in the movie! Die Hard's 1-3 made a good trilogy, but they have been tainted forever by this poor excuse of a fourth film in the franchise. I should of known from the clichéd opening scene with John Mclane and his daughter (which is just an appalling, badly written scene, like they'd stand there and talk about their problems in front of the is he/isn't he boyfriend) that this movie's intellectual barometer was set on dumb. Everything about this movie seems to be a cliché of a cliché. Bruce seems to have forgotten what the John McClane character is like, because he doesn't come across the same as he does in the previous 3 films, and is not helped by the poor dialog and cheesy one-liners that are poorly timed. All of the other characters are clichés too - Timothy's ice cold bad guy, Maggie Q's brainy, beautiful, femme fatale, the FBI head who for some unknown reason can't understand what's going on or get anything done, but John McClane can work everything out no problem, even without the resources of the whole FBI to help, all he needs is a phone and a gun! - I mean come on people, this is as lazy a plot as you could get. Some of the set pieces are OK, but then when the filmmakers go into overdrive and have McClane climb onto a moving jet fighter, it all went out the window - this is NOT a fantasy movie, I didn't expect to see Lord of the Rings - so McClane should not be on top of a moving jet plane for Christ's sake! Everything about the movie screams of laziness. Poor script, I mean it just has some of the worst dialog and plot points ever. Poor casting, I mean you can see them now "Hey, let's get the guy from the Mac ads, everyone will relate to him as a computer genius!" Errr, no, we don't! Poor acting - Bruce is totally by the numbers, like he turned up, was told what to say on the day, does a take and then heads for lunch, and Cliff Curtis also does everything by the numbers too, a shame for a good actor to have clearly given up on his duties this time. And Len Wiseman, come on people, what an appalling choice for this franchise, he's a knock off Michael Bay - and Michael bay hasn't made a good movie in a long time - don't get me started on Transformers! This movie is terrible, and the most appalling thing is the rating it's got in IMDb. It's ironic how the movie points towards bringing down a corrupt government and starting again, because everything today is marketing spin, and yet here we are, giving a truly awful film a high score??? Why, because it's Die Hard???? Who are the real suckers at the end of the day huh? Don't believe the hype people, this film is a joke.

Yet another dreadful summer sequel So far this summer, I have seen Evan Almighty, Spiderman 3, Fantastic 4:2 and Harry Potter, all have been awful. I am going to stop going to the cinema and just watch DVD's from now on. I often wonder if directors, writers or producers even watch the originals of movies to see what ingredients actually made it successful. Die Hard worked because it stretched the truth a little, but ultimately was realistic. McClane was a just a normal cop, he wasn't a karate master, ex-green beret or body builder, just a normal New York cop. He suffered and struggled his way to get through his ordeal. Die Hard 2 was were it all went wrong. Instead of continuing on the same theme, McClane, now became Superman, impervious from bullets, fear or making mistakes. He could not fail. Die Hard 3 continued in this comical theme, but for some unknown reason I thought I would give 4 a go. For the first 20 minutes, actually it was pretty good, and then came the first stupid thing, the fire hydrant on the helicopter, stupid. OK I can overlook that one, lets get back on track, oh dear ramming a car into a concrete barrier, somehow magically causing it to hit a helicopter with pin point accuracy. At this point I wondered if I had accidentally wondered into the Harry Potter movie. I guess the overall problem is that John is part of the Heroes cast and has the same abilities as the cheerleader, somehow whatever injury he has, a couple of minutes he has made a full recovery. Needless to say the film did not improve from this moment onwards and descended into a farce. The only positive was that I thought Justin Long was pretty good as the geek, sidekick, he at least played the stereotyped role well. I gave this a 1/10, it should have been a 3, but as so many people had voted 10 !!!, I assume company executives and people connected with the movie, I think it's important to re-address the balance. Awful, please Hollywood wake up and make a good, realistic action movie. We need it !

This film has been getting poor reviews since being released in New Zealand. The 7.9 average rating on IMDb made me think that reviewers were having an off day. Having seen it, the critics were right. Suggested new title - TRY HARD 3.9 If you thought the original premise was straight from a Tom Clancy novel then you are close to the truth. No doubt Mr Clancy has also read the original Farewell to Arms article by John Carlin. The first 30 minutes were vintage wise-cracking, shoot first-ask questions later Willis. The remainder of the film had a plot shot full of holes. Were communications down or up ? Was the power on or off ? Was traffic grid-locked or the streets wide open ? Did the FBI have it's own helicopters or had the bad guys stolen them too (sarcasm).If Warlock was so good, why wasn't he one of the original targeted hackers? And then the dumb set action pieces began. Perhaps the lift scene was a wink and nod to the first movie, but the original John McClane would have broken the Asian ninjas neck and moved on. Speaking of holes. I have seldom seen an action movie where the bullet holes appear, disappear, re-appear and vanish so often between scenes. The director must have found the magic bullet that shot Kennedy. The truck vs fighter scene was like watching the bad parts of True Lies and the Matrix spliced together. And are we really meant to believe that a cyber terrorist would leave the government GPS tracking unit attached to his getaway van ! My only surprise was that they didn't remove it with a barrel roll ala Transporter 2. I walked out of Spider Man 3 after 60 minutes. I wish I had walked out of Try Hard 3.9 after 30.

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+.

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.

In a summer filled with disappointment its nice to see John McClane back even if it is a pg-13 version it still takes my spot as the best summer movie thus far (and with it competition who can argue that). Non stop action grabs you in the first ten minutes and doesn't let go till the credits. Mclane is back rugged and raw, Willis gives a great performance as he reprises his role. There's one scene in particular that i loved, When hes driving the computer nerd that hes protecting after he has several run ins with Assasians and Johns a little banged up. He's asked "Why are you doing this?" (or something like that) and McClane says "If there was someone else I would be glad to let them do it." then the kid asks "So why do it" then McClane responds "Because there is no one else." I don't know maybe I'm reading to deep in but i thought that really shows who and what McClane is, hes the guy who is willing to put his own neck out to protect us because thats what he needs to do, not what he wants to do. He didn't ask to be a hero just that no one else stepped up that was willing to take the hits. Live Free Or Die Hard is a great action movie that even thou it may not rank with the original nor the third installments, i would definitely say its better than the second. And it sure is nice to see McClane back in action.......Yippie Kayay M*therF*cker