Hellen I like the storyline of this show,it attract me so much

ThiefHott Too much of everything

GamerTab That was an excellent one.

TrueHello Fun premise, good actors, bad writing. This film seemed to have potential at the beginning but it quickly devolves into a trite action film. Ultimately it's very boring.

taf130 Besides all the potholes already mentioned in other reviews i was also bothered by the fact that McClane found the bad guy without any serious efforts. It's a big country and shouldn't be that easy to track down a hacker.

DorkKnight It's Independence Day weekend. Flags are waving, National Anthems are being sung. It's a country-wide holiday. And ex-Department of Defense programmer Thomas Gabriel (Timothy Olyphant) plans on cutting the celebration short by cutting off America, electronically. Hackers nationwide are being taken in by the FBI to find connections to this breakdown. One hacker in particular, Matthew Ferrell (Justin Long) gets a knock on his door, and it's none other than New York police detective John McClane (Bruce Willis). Ferrell tries to lead McClane astray from his apartment, when suddenly, hit men strike, and McClane is forced to kick some ass yet again. McClane and Ferrell eventually escape, and begin a national journey to find Thomas Gabriel, take him down, and end his hacker regime.Live Free Or Die Hard has taken the series to the largest scale than ever before. The first took place in a singular building, the second an airport, the third a city, and the fourth, an entire nation. At this point, I don't know if Die Hard could dial back the scale again without it seeming weaker in its spectacle, though the original movie did have the smallest scale. I appreciate the scale, though it makes it seem unlike a Die Hard movie, as the others have taken place over the course of a single day. However, I won't say I don't appreciate the scale it brings to Die Hard. It's fresh, and finally decides to take Die Hard in another direction.The villain is certainly a good threat, but I don't think he's as memorable as, say Hans Gruber from the first film or Simon Gruber from the third film. He is a passable villain. In terms of the concept, I really like it. John McClane, unfortunately, would be useless now due to his lack of knowledge for computers or technology in general. This film proposes that if tech did fail, modern cowboy McClane would be the only one to save the day. The plot is certainly not the most intelligent, and has many lapses in logic, but I forgive it because of it's popcorn movie feel, which was not (At least I would argue) as potent in Die Hard With A Vengeance, save for a few select scenes. I appreciate the third installment trying to be fresh and new, but I don't think entertainment in an action movie franchise such as Die Hard should be sacrificed for a hard-hitting plot. I could even argue that the plot of the first film isn't the greatest an action movie can do. This movie knows it's not very witty or smart, so it makes up for it in being a fun popcorn movie. The messages in this movie are important, but not in the context of the film. In fact, the movie is based on an article, which, unless you use Die Hard for your daily source of social commentary, you should read, because it explains it better than this movie. It's ultimately a dumb action movie, so sub textual stuff like that doesn't land.John McClane is great in this movie. He feels fresh off where the series left off, even within a twelve year difference, ready to quip, kick ass, and save the day. And he delivers the lines and action with conviction, which most older action stars fail to do. I feel the character of Matthew Ferrell is bashed too much. He's a nice, fun, modern character who actually brings something to the duo dynamic with John McClane, unlike Zeus from With A Vengeance, who was just another tough dude. The interplay between McClane and Ferrell is fun, and I enjoy Long in the role. The side characters are pretty forgettable, save for the ninja girl or Kevin Smith. The acting is good, passable for an action movie.The movie is quickly paced, and doesn't stay in one place for long, which keeps the movie within the Die Hard pace. Though it takes place over more than one day, the pacing is quick so it almost feels like a day. It's a quick, fun watch.Addressing its PG-13 rating, it is a shame for a Die Hard movie to stoop low enough to give itself a PG-13 just for the market. I think people would've seen it if it was R anyway. This sequel had a long time coming, and Die Hard is pretty much a big franchise in Hollywood. I don't like the fact that they cut off the latter part of the infamous "Yippie - Ki - Ya" line. I feel like Fox should've given some leeway, because that line is almost a centerpiece of the movies, something you wait for. But, the action feels R-rated, and I don't dislike the movie because of its softening.Live Free Or Die Hard, whether bashed for its unfaithfulness or differences from the rest of the movies, I don't feel can be denied as a good Die Hard movie, or a good movie in general. Lest we forget that the first 30 minutes of With A Vengeance wasn't even a Die Hard movie. It was ripped from a script called Simon Says, and those first 30 minutes of the movie are better than the rest. Live Free Or Die Hard is a fun return to form for the franchise, and the best sequel.

beaconb Let's face it. The 2nd Die Hard tried to be a typical sequel; it wasn't bad, but wasn't that great. The 3rd was a step below that. This sequel didn't feel like a sequel, other than the character being the same. This played more like a buddy movie and had a lot more laughs than previous versions. One final note, if you haven't seen the one that came after this, the one in Russia, don't bother!

MaximumMadness "Die Hard" is pure cinematic gold. Upon release in 1988, the original film in what would soon become a franchise was met with critical acclaim and went on to be an instant classic of action and adventure. Audiences were in awe of its spectacle and sharp writing, and to this very day, it remains a cherished and beloved masterwork that few are able to compare to. Two sequels followed in the 90's, and while not quite able to come close to matching the high bar set by that first film, both were strong and wickedly exciting chapters that continued the series well and maintained its integrity.For a while, it seemed that the series was finished, with the third film having capped off the series while also giving a sense of completion to Bruce Willis' legendary action-hero John McClane. More than ten years passed before we heard the murmurings of a fourth film. Years of anticipation and dreams of a new film would finally be answered. But there were some snags along the way. Most troubling being a studio-mandated PG-13 rating, which betrayed the hard-R tonality set by the previous entries. Some also took issue with the choice in Len Wiseman as director, with his previous directorial efforts in the "Underworld" series being exciting but a little light on story. But even still, we held onto our hope that the newest chapter would be a worthy installment.And oh boy, was it!"Live Free or Die Hard" (also known as "Die Hard 4.0" in some territories) is a darned-good modern take on the franchise, that skillfully mixes the best of both old and new-school cinematic techniques and storytelling to deliver yet another grand installment in the series. While there are some inherent problems with the film (particularly in the tamed-down PG-13 theatrical cut), it was like seeing a dear old friend again walking into the theater. McClane was back. The explosive entertainment was back. The attitude was back. And it was a pleasure to behold.The FBI is tracking a potentially dangerous situation, as a number of highly skilled computer hackers have been assassinated. When it appears hacker Matt Farrell (Justin Long), who is on the FBI's watch-list, may be a potential new target, New York cop John McClane (Willis) is dispatched to collect him for questioning and protection. However, McClane soon finds himself a target for murder upon collecting Farrell when he comes into the sights of deranged former Department of Defense official Thomas Gabriel (Timothy Olyphant), who is seeking retribution for his dishonorable termination. Together, McClane and Farrell must do whatever they can to stop Gabriel's ultimate goal- to cripple the US by initiating a devious scheme known as a "Fire Sale"... where every computer-based network will be eliminated, throwing the country into utter chaos.The strength of the film is that it is pure, unadulterated "Die Hard" in virtually every sense, only given a fresh spit-and-polish with modern day effects and a contemporary storyline. Director Len Wiseman masterfully weaves a tale that takes McClane out of his comfort zone and puts him into a worst-case- scenario where his hard-boiled wit will again be put to the test. Together with writers Mark Bomback and David Marconi, Wiseman delivers non- stop thrills and thorough entertainment from start-to-finish, with some of the most mind-bending action set- pieces of its decade. It's over-the-top... but over-the-top in all the right ways that only "Die Hard" can pull off.Willis is phenomenal as always in his trademark role, and its nice seeing that the script gives him a bit of development as he's struggled in the years that have passed. McClane might be doing things no other man could reasonably survive, but there's a humanity beneath the surface. Olyphant makes for an adequately menacing villain, even if he's far more hands-off than previous foes. He's got a good look and voice for the part of such a treacherous baddie, so I didn't mind that he was more of a behind-the-scenes figure. But the stand-outs here are the delightful Justin Long, Mary Elizabeth Winstead and Kevin Smith in supporting roles. Long might just be a sidekick to McClane, but he's a ton of fun and is never grating. His attitude compliments and contrasts with Willis quite nicely. Winstead, a delightful young actress, portrays McClane's daughter Lucy, and she's a welcome addition, as her small role helps ground McClane and give him a bit more heart. And Smith is just a ton of fun as an underground hacker known as "The Warlock." He hams it up well and gets some good zingers.However, this is not a perfect film, and it loses a few points for a few big issues I have with it. To start, Gabriel might be a decent villain, but he is very underdeveloped. Despite trying his hardest, Olyphant's good performance cannot overcome weak motivation and a lack of screen time. Hans Gruber, he ain't. The film also pushes the boundaries of believability a few too many times, which bugged me. And oddly enough, the problems I had don't lie in a certain sequence involving a jet that I will not spoil. No, to me, it's more that there's a bit too much CG work and inorganic wire-stunts in the earlier half of the movie that feel out of place. And a few too many moments of McClane and Farrell being saved by unlikely circumstances. And finally... the edits made to get the film down to a PG-13 are very obvious. It's blatant where dialog has been redubbed with lighter language and where the film had to cut so they didn't show too much blood. It's a tad irritating. Thankfully, an R- rated edition was later released that corrects these issues."Live Free or Die Hard" is a complete blast and re-invigorates the franchise after a prolonged break. It's exciting. Entertaining. And pure "Die Hard." It's a very good 8 out of 10.