ridiculous rating

People are voting emotionally.

The film makes a home in your brain and the only cure is to see it again.

Good films always raise compelling questions, whether the format is fiction or documentary fact.

I don't even want to acknowledge this as a movie - forget about acknowledging it as a Die Hard movie. Some plotlines are recycled versions of the plotlines from previous Die Hard movies. In "Live Free or Die Hard" (2007) we saw McClane's daughter having daddy issues, now we get to see his son with daddy issues .... so original. I am not saying previous Die Hard movies were totally original, they were some sort of rehash of the first one or of the ones prior to them. But all of them were different at the same time. They had their own moments, the rehashes weren't a mere rehash. But this one? Holy crap! The rehashing is merely a rehashing. As it is clear from the trailer, they are gonna pit McClane and his son against each other ..... which sounds interesting. But as the movie goes on, and (no spoilers) they start getting along, the reason behind it is revealed so abruptly. It's not that you don't get a feeling of you're watching a not so good movie, right after the first 10 minutes or so - but right after the reveal, the father-son conflict seems so lame, the movie loses all its weight and the remaining of the movie feels tiresome. They put certain twists here and there - which I did not expected. But, none of them made any sense. In fact the entire planning of events that drive the story feels like a typical screenwriter's convenience relying completely on coincidences, and the coincidences are known to the planner prior to its occurrence - Spidey sense, I think. The "losing of weight" I mentioned is so much similar to "X-Men Origins: Wolverine" and I happened to know that the monkey who wrote this crap, was also a co-writer of Wolverine 1. Also prominent in this movie is the weird characterization of John McClane - he is literally unkillable and is more invincible than Superman. Plus, he's an annoying @$$#0le. He isn't a "people loving" guy who kills just the bad guys. Looks like this writer is the one who made the clown out of Deadpool in Wolverine 1 - other writer of that movie being someone who wrote 25th hour and apparently unlikely to ruin a fan favorite character. Bruce Willis plays a parody of his most infamous character, John McClane and a shallow and ridiculous version of David Dunn from "Unbreakable" at the same time. He looks as interested to star in this movie as much as I enjoy the movie "Son of the Mask". Also, the actions are bad. They have no drama or character moments in them, they are noisy and too yellowish orange. At least they could've been well choreographed, but that would make this movie a little redeeming, won't it? Plus, they mock Hans Gruber as if it was so cool to do so. All it does is it pisses off the fans and simply looks ridiculous. And CGI - terrible. I am not someone who complains about CGI, normally, if it isn't absolutely bad. It looks so fake. Like I said just yellowish orange things that look like MS Paint edits converted into a video, of course with some whacky noise. Terribly written, inconsistencies everywhere badly directed and will piss you off completely. Yippee-ki-yay motherf****r, the makers gave us a franchise killer. It gets an "F" and a "0/10".

Going into this my hopes were high as the last installment in the series was truly amazing. This film starts with one of the best opening scenes I have seen in cinema, and a solid cast makes the constantly moving story-line both fun and interesting to watch. We return in this film to the same characters we all loved in the last one, each one bringing something new to the table as they are given their own stories. And of course no-one could forget Gandalf, such a favourite character whom we lost in the last film makes his epic return just as he did in the books. Now, with the fellowship estranged and the dark powers of Mordor rapidly approaching on the people of Middle-Earth the story becomes urgent for the characters, and through this a new threat of Saruman battles against the forces of the men of the Rohirrim. If you were to ask me, this is the best of the Lord of the Rings film trilogy, and the best work of Peter Jackson.

A far cry from the original 3 that we all know and love. I urge you to watch this yourself and make up your own mind but don't say I didn't warn you.Why introduce the son? Someone to pass the torch too? Oh dear.The originals were about one man against great odds, who despite his faults got through it with luck, determination and brute force blood and sweat, other than one-time reluctant sidekick Samuel L. Jackson in Die Hard with a Vengeance. Know body wants 2 John McClain's and that is how the son is portrayed. 2 protagonists at odds with each other fighting over the steering wheel thus steering this movie off a cliff.Yippee ki yay melon farmer!

As this episode opens Yuri Komarov is about to go on trial in Moscow. It appears that he has upset the wrong people; most notable Viktor Chagarin, a corrupt official and former friend who wants an incriminating file that Yuri possesses. Around the same time American Jack McClane is arrested and agrees to testify against Komarov. Back in the United States his father, police officer John McClane, hears what has happened to his son so flies out to Moscow. Just as John gets to the court in Moscow a massive explosion rips the building apart. The attackers want Yuri but Jack has helped him away from the scene. He is briefly united with his father and it is clear that they do not have a good relationship. Jack and Yuri drive off in a van, followed by the villains in a heavily armoured vehicle and John in a small truck. After a spectacular chase John and Jack are reunited and we learn that Jack is now a CIA operative hoping to get Yuri and his file out of Russia. There are complications though and before the dust has settled there will be numerous twists and a spectacular confrontation in the remains of Chernobyl.This film has some good points and one real problem. That problem is that it doesn't feel like a 'Die Hard' film; I feel it would have been much better had the character been renamed and the film been released without being connected to the previous films. I guess that would be less profitable though. On the plus side that at least means it can be enjoyed by anybody who has never seen a Die Hard film. The story is decent enough and there are some pretty good twists. There is also a lot of spectacular action from start to finish. The action is ridiculously over the top but, if you can suspend your disbelief it is rather fun. The action includes numerous explosions, a car chase and even an attack from an Mi-24 Hind helicopter! The acting is decent enough but nothing special; this is a film you watch for the action not the acting. Overall I don't think this is as bad as many other reviewers do but it is certainly a bit disappointing for a 'Die Hard' film.