• LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    11 months ago

    Unpopular opinion but I don’t think this movie is good lol. I get that it’s very nostalgic and it has its moments but otherwise it’s not too different from any other late 80’s/early 90’s action film. Which is frankly not a high bar to achieve.

    • TheColonel@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      41
      ·
      11 months ago

      I understand how, in retrospect, it may feel like it isn’t groundbreaking, but do consider that before Die Hard, there really wasn’t anything quite like it.

      A quote straight from Wikipedia:

      It is considered to have revitalized the action genre, largely due to its depiction of McClane as a vulnerable and fallible protagonist, in contrast to the muscle-bound and invincible heroes of other films of the period.

      While it did sort of fall apart and away from what made it great in the later sequels, I think it’s important to put the film into the context of when it was released and what it did to the genre.

      All that to say, Die Hard fucking rules.

      • jballs@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        Exactly, this is 100% Seinfeld is Unfunny material.

        In the eighties, action films preferred invincible heroes who slaughtered mooks by the dozen with casual disdain. Die Hard popularized grittier and more realistic action, with heroes who are vulnerable and suffer from character faults. It also popularized the concept of action movies confined to limited space, a setup that this very wiki calls ““Die Hard” on an X”. (For example, Speed is “Die Hard on a bus.”) Also, at the time it came out, people were shocked at the idea of a comedic actor like Bruce Willis being an action star. Nowadays, what with Tom Hanks Syndrome, comedic actors doing serious roles aren’t nearly so amazing. Younger fans might not even know Willis got his start in comedy.

        • callouscomic@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          11 months ago

          Same reason I like Dredd from 2012. They confined the story mostly to a location and one main enemy, and I think it helped a bit cause Dredd generally has no flaws and can’t be beat.

        • ditty@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          Just learned about the Seinfeld is Unfunny trope from your comment. What a helpful expression in describing media/pop culture progenitors!

          • jballs@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            11 months ago

            Yeah it’s a good way of realizing why certain things from your past felt so amazing at the time, but are seen as less impressive to people just experiencing it now. It’s hard to describe just how awe inspiring The Matrix was to see in the theaters, or how incredible Golden Eye felt to play on the Nintendo 64 for the first time. Looking back, those things feel like one of a million other movies and games. But that’s only because a million other movies and games were changed forever because of them.

            • thanksforallthefish@literature.cafe
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              11 months ago

              Or to take it a step further back, try getting someone without context before the modrrn era to understand how groundbreaking Casablanca is. So many tropes were invented in that movie, but watched without that understanding many would say “what’s the big deal ?”

              It’s a good movie even now. But it’s a great movie with context

      • Veedem@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        11 months ago

        That was my complaint after Die Hard with a Vengeance. He became a little indestructible and lost some of the flaws that made the character exciting to watch. The first 3 are great in keeping true to the character, but the movies after DHwaV are just generic action movies borrowing a character’s name.

        • donslaught@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          11 months ago

          I maintain that Live Free or Die Hard is a much better movie when you watch the uncensored version. Yeah, a lot of the shit McClane goes through is not something any regular Joe would survive but the movie at least tries to make it survivable. And the uncensored version adds in a lot of the blood that should’ve been present with all of that bullshit in the first place.

            • donslaught@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              11 months ago

              It’s a little hard to find. Never released on Blu Ray and only available to purchase in 1080p and also not streaming anywhere (that I’m aware of). Might also be hard to find on the high seas as a result. But good luck to you!

        • callouscomic@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          11 months ago

          Oh come on, Die Hard 4 & 5 show he’s clearly a flawed character with common average everyday struggles like being a deadbeat dad.

    • Num10ck@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      it was so different because he was an anti-hero, and he got visibly beat thoroughly and never stopped being a smart ass about it.

    • Wrench@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      11 months ago

      That’s because it set the mould, and dozens of copy cats followed the formula thereafter.

    • Spuddlesv2@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      11 months ago

      My kids watched it for the first time ever last weekend. They had no nostalgia or frame of reference for it and yet they both loved it - “the dumbest fun movie I’ve seen in ages”. We’re watching #2 tonight.

      • callouscomic@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        11 months ago

        I’ve always told people they’re thinking too much when they watch these movies. Just have fun. They’re ridiculous, that’s the point.

      • LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        Well, maybe that’s my problem. It’s not some grand masterpiece of film and I didn’t find it very entertaining. Obviously that’s a subjective judgment on my part though.

    • DredUnicorn@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      11 months ago

      That’s the thing, it WAS different to other action movies at the time. Im not going to say you are wrong not to like it, but it can’t be denied that it blazed a trail for a new type of action movie and, as a result, is loved by millions.

    • Noel_Skum@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      I suppose you had to be there at the time. For people who only watched US/Hollywood films it was wild. There hadn’t been much, if anything, like it before. Everything that came after it… came after it.