Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I've only seen the first two, I thought the original was a classic and it had everything from great suspense, memorable villians and lots of verbal humor and one liners, Hans Gruber is one of the best character villians you can find in movie history.
As for Die Hard 2 I thought it was a good follow up to the original and the one thing what I did like about Die Hard 2 was Bruce Willis's performance as John McClane and that William Atherton has gotten a good sized role as the sleazy and obnoxious reporter, I thought William Atherton's character made the movie alot better than what could've been.
I give the first Die Hard movie a 10/10 and Die Hard 2 a 7/10
Over repeated watchings there are things in DH, DHWAV and GDTDH that bug me and affect my enjoyment. So I'm going with DH2.
In the original, the Paul Gleason and Hart Bochner characters and the two FBI Johnsons are just so cartoonishly bad they take away from the movie. In DH2, only Dennis Franz was truly awful.
In DHWAV and GDTDH, well, the entire premises were preposterous for both, although SLJ and Justin Long made those worth watching. Granted, DH2 was preposterous as well, but somehow less contrived as the action was limited to just the airport and a shorter period of time.
The first two were the best. I just saw the 5th and it was terrible.
Ya i can imagine it is.... I have no desire to see it!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.