• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Die Hard 3 holds up really, really well

  • Thread starter Deleted member 801069
  • Start date

Pagusas

Elden Member
So, I bought the whole series on a steelbook blu-ray and decided to watch them all in a row... going from 3 to 4... HOLY SHIT IS 4 UGLY TO LOOK AT. 3 looks fucking gorgeous in comparison, one of the best shot and best looking films ever made, but even 2 looks better than 4! Nevermind 1 which also looks fucking great. The switch to digital made the film look like a goddamn TV show albeit with better action/effects. Fuck digital.

As someone deep in the industry, please please please do not blame digital for that. DH4 looks like dog shit because it was horribly made and the DP phoned it in. Digital when done right can look just as good as film. At the end of the day they are both just capturing tools, both can be manipulated to look like the other, and neither can fix flat horrible lighting, bad angles or a bad pallet.

This shot is incredible because of the presence, editing, angle, lighting and amazing technical achievements done on it. You could shoot it on digital and it would still look just as amazing.

explosion-1432043182.gif
 
Last edited:
3 was great, much better than 2. 2 was a huge clusterfuck of plot holes and just a really dumb movie with a couple cool action pieces.

4 was just mediocre. 5 was just four random action scenes strung together with some awkward drama between no charisma son.

2 is fine I don't get why people don't like it. I like the ending sequence a lot on the runway. It's just not as good as the stellar original because it treads so much of the same ground and has less memorable villains and side characters, but it's like the same thing with the same dude.

Everything about the villains plot, the airport, planes, none of it makes sense at all. There is so many plot holes in the film that just fall apart to basic logic. Like literally John picks up the phone and calls Holly at the start of the movie on the plane (you can't do this), yet then no one on the ground can get in contact with the planes in the sky this same way. But then while this is all going on, folks are able to call from the plane phones without issue as we see the shitty reporter guy do it later on. So the whole them having no communication thing makes zero sense when they could have been contacted.

Theres also a ton of logic problems, like how the bad guys are forcing planes to crash, which ignores the fact that planes all have instruments built in that prevent this. Pilots don't look at the instruments, altimeters, or any of the basic safety functions on their aircraft that exist since the beginning of flight because the bad guys are telling them fake info over the radio?

The movie is just super stupid, and it's not even basic shut off your brain action movie like stuff.
 
Last edited:

INC

Member
Any big budget movie that uses almost entirely practical fxs, will hold up

Why nolans films will always look good, there's no cgi to look dated

(Yes I know he does use some cgi, but its 90% practical)
 

daveonezero

Banned
It was quite the formative movie for me. It was one of the first films I remember watching. Was a fun flick as a child and yeah I bet it still holds up I haven't watched it for a while.
 

INC

Member
He blows a plane up by throwing his zippo at the leaking gas which follows the trail to the plane in mid air, while saying yippee kay yay motherfucker, fuck logic

The worst sin of that movie, is how long the grenades take explode, he has like a full 30seconds, to strap himself into an ejector seat.....lol
 

MrMephistoX

Member
It’s the end of the franchise for me those other two 2000’s sequels after Bruce Willis shaved his head and lost his sense of humor don’t exist for me. Ended on a high note.
 
It has the best opening and was the last great (and relevant) Die Hard movie, but I always liked 2 better.
 
Last edited:

Arimer

Member
I disagree, I think die Hard 3 was the beginning of hte end where they lost the plot. Die hard worked because you had a dude stuck in a relatively small place with overwhelming numbers. It lost it's reluctant hero aspect and turned into a generic action movie where they had to just go bigger and bigger to the point where by 5 you have him in Russia stealing a car and driving over other cars on an interstate and nothing happens. The small spaces also evened the odds and made him being able to take these people out somewhat more believable.

My order of best to worst would basically be the order they came out in. And three while being a good movie, wasn't Die Hard.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom