Die Hard 4.0

Die Hard 4.0 (2007)
(U.S. title - Live Free Or Die Hard)

Starring Bruce Willis, Justin Long, Timothy Olyphant, Maggie Q, Mary Elizabeth Winstead, Kevin Smith


Directed by Len Wiseman



As an avid fan of action movies nothing gets me going like the sight of Bruce Willis in a vest. New York cop John McClane is simply the greatest action hero of all time. Riggs and Murtaugh, the Bad Boys and even Keanu Reeves on a bus are nothing but also-rans.
But the old saying goes 'Once bitten, twice shy' and after the crushing disappointment of 1995's Die Hard With A Vengeance, I was anticipating John McClane's long awaited return with guarded optimism. After 12 years us fans desperately wanted Die Hard 4.0 to kick ass!
However, early signs didn't exactly fill me with hope. The movie was stuck in development hell for nearly ten years with all sorts of rumours flying around. It was to be set in the jungle ..... McClane would be partnered by Ben Affleck (Oh god no!!!!!) ..... Britney Spears would star as McClane's daughter.....
These sorts of things don't bode well with a Die Hard fanatic like myself.
And major Hollywood franchises had only just begun stretching to fourth installments with poor results. Lethal Weapon 4 anyone? Alien Resurrection? Give us a break!
Then came the underwhelming news that Len Wiseman (Underworlds 1 and 2) had been given the director's chair AND Brucey would once again be given a sidekick (one of Die Hard 3's fatal flaws).
But then the trailers came out and they weren't half bad. Ok so they did look like something from the Jerry Bruckheimer school of movie-making (style over substance) but they had a solid, focused feel about them that was so missing from Die Hard 3.



So imagine my delight this 4th of July when I was treated to what may prove to be this summer's finest blockbuster.
First of all, unlike 'Vengeance', this feels like a Die Hard movie. It doesn't tinker with the winning formula. It slowly sets its stall up in the way the first two movies did. We catch up with McClane after 12 long years. Time has not been kind to our reluctant hero. He is divorced from his wife, his daughter doesn't talk to him and all his hair has fallen out presumably from the stress. As if that wasn't enough he gets sent on this shitty job to escort some geeky hacker into FBI custody. As you can guess things don't run smoothly and John McClane is about to have a killer 4th of July holiday.
The film has a dark and gritty feel to it. McClane is obviously remorseful about his family problems and we glimpse his humanity in a way not seen since the first film. He's obviously getting too old for this terrorism lark too. When he gets hurt in this film we feel his pain. He ain't as fast as he used to be and those knocks are getting harder to shake off. Welcome to your 50's, John.


"Die Hard 4.0 may prove to be this summer's finest blockbuster."


The opening bout of action lets us know that Die Hard 4.0 means business. These terrorists are slick and ruthless. Justin Long's young hacker knows too much and must die! But McClane stands in their way and a vicious gun battle ensues. But instead of wisecracking his way through it on autopilot, we can feel McClane's fear and we sense the duo are in real danger. McClane even admits to feeling scared and we are reminded of what made him such an originally human action hero in that LA skyscraper back in 1988. This is refreshing because he had almost slipped into 'Superman mode' in the previous two movies.
We also get a real atmosphere of dread, paranoia and panic as the terrorists tighten their grip on America's computer based infra-structure. No-one knows what the hell is going on, the possibility of an anthrax attack is mentioned and even Capitol Hill suffers an attack of sorts. This feels kinda real after the horrors of 9/11. One very nice touch is a speech broadcast by the villainous hackers compiled of clips of George W. Bush and an array of ex-Presidents.
Die Hard 4.0's villians also cut the mustard which is an essential requirement of a Die Hard film. The memory of a dreadfully miscast Jeremy Irons and his equally rubbish terrorist rabble is completely wiped out with a great turn by Deadwood's Timothy Olyphant with ample support from Maggie Q and an army of gun-toting bad guys.


But best of all Die Hard 4.0 is just so much fucking FUN!!!! It's the kind of white-knuckle, adrenaline-fuelled, rollercoaster ride that cinema was invented for! Well paced and full of excellent set-pieces, it's up there with the best of action cinema. It does sag a little in the second half but it regains its mojo for a cracking finale. The climatic set-piece (lovingly pilfered from True Lies) involving a jet fighter is so expertly staged and brilliantly far-fetched it's orgasmic!!!


"The kind of white-knuckle, adrenaline-fuelled, rollercoaster ride that cinema was invented for!"


I apologise for doubting you, John McClane. You truly are the king of action cinema.


Verdict:
Amidst a summer of bloated disappointing sequels Die Hard 4.0 not only delivers the goods but bucks the law of diminishing returns. Watch in awe as old boy McClane shows Spider-Man, Shrek, Jack Sparrow et al how it's done. So much fun it should be illegal, this is absolutely superlative entertainment! Yippee-ki-ya muthafucka indeed!!

Rating
****


Die Hard 4.0 at the IMDB

28 Weeks Later

28 Weeks Later (2007)

Starring Robert Carlisle, Rose Byrne, Jeremy Renner.


Directed by Juan Carlos Fresnadillo





I'm probably in the minority but I found 28 Days Later to be overrated. The sequel is slightly better but that's not really saying much. It's a strangely soulless, moribund and empty affair. Entertaining but instantly forgettable. Maybe us Brits just can't do this stuff as well as the Americans. Face it, we just ain't fit to lace George Romero's boots.
As an average horror outing it cuts the mustard though. You get breakneck pace, real scares that make you jump out your seat and some really spectacular carnage! It also becomes clear that no-one in this movie is safe. Every character is fair game and potential zombie food. It's also refreshing to have a central protagonist who is clearly a coward. Wife getting attacked by zombies? Fuck her. I can always find another one.
By adding grand special effects and telling this story on a wider scale than the original movie (with bonus Iraq analogies) the director has sacrificed character development so it's pretty hard to give a shit about any of the people struggling to survive. You leave the cinema with a weird feeling you've just been watching a videogame.

Verdict:
It passes the time but Romero won't be losing any sleep.

Rating
***


28 Weeks Later at the IMDB

Lights In The Dusk

Review coming soon.

Inland Empire

Review coming soon.

Deja Vu

Review coming soon.

Casino Royale

Review coming soon.

Calvaire

Review coming soon.

The Lives Of Others

Review coming soon.

Pulse

Pulse (2006)

Starring Kristen Bell, Ian Somerhalder, Christina Milian

Directed by Jim Sonzero



Pulse?
You'll wish this film had one. Instead you'll find it dead on arrival.

Hollywood needs to quit it with the Japanese horror remakes. The Ring and The Grudge I can accept but this piece of crap is just lazy and dull. The original Pulse (or Kairo) had themes related to society, suicide and the end of the world but the new version (co-written by Wes Craven) serves only to provide superficial entertainment. Superficial? Oh God yes. Entertainment? Oh God no.
Shot in a blue hue that makes it look like a music video (Yes, the director is a veteran in that field), Pulse lacks colour in every department. It's The Ring for the Wi-Fi generation. (Doesn't even look good on paper, does it?)
The story is ambigious in the worst way. Something about ghostly spirits spreading throughout the world using phones and the internet. They suck the lifeforce from those of us who depend on such technology. Ok so there you have a Matrix-like metaphor but any further attempt to explore similar themes is eschewed for dumbed down action and scares. Except Pulse commits the worse crime a horror movie can commit. It's not scary. Visually, we get the same old evil spirits we've seen before in this sort of stuff. It's a hollow and completely forgettable experience laced with crummy dialogue, fuzzy exposition, mediocre acting and two-dimensional characters.
Avoid.

Verdict
The victims in this crappy horror movie lose their souls and their will to live. And after 80 minutes of this drivel you'll know how they feel.

Rating
**

Pulse at the IMDB
Buy Pulse at Amazon

Spider-Man 3

Spider-Man 3 (2007)


Starring Tobey Maguire, Kirsten Dunst, Thomas Haden Church, Topher Grace, James Franco


Directed by Sam Raimi



It seems to be incredibly hard to sustain quality within a movie trilogy. George Lucas did it with the original Star Wars movies and Steven Spielberg (with Lucas's help) just about found consistency with Indy. Other directors as esteemed as Francis Ford Coppola, Robert Zemeckis, the Wachowski brothers, George Miller and Richard Donner have tried and failed. Even Sam Raimi blew it with the lesser third instalment of his Evil Dead trilogy.
Sad to say he's blown it again with Spider-Man 3. It's not a bad movie and it makes for a good night out at the cinema. It's just that we had come to expect so much more from Raimi. Spiderman and Spiderman 2 were probably the best superhero movies ever made. (I say probably because Superman and Superman II have to be considered also.) This year the stage was set for Raimi to complete the hat-trick and leave behind a legacy that equalled those of Lucas and Spielberg. Except it hasn't happened. I don't doubt this movie will rake it in at the box-office and justify the $250 million price tag (making it the most expensive movie ever made) but it's only good when it could have been great.
So where did it go wrong?
Well, for a start there are too many villians cluttering up this film. When it was originally confirmed that Venom would feature in the film we all rejoiced. He is the coolest of all Spidey villians and the fans' prayers had been answered. However, the filmmakers seem to have made the same mistake that was committed in Gotham City. Too many crooks spoil the broth. Keep it simple stupid. By cramming in too many villians Raimi has sacrificed quality for quantity. With so many different characters involved and intertwining stories to tell Spider-Man 3 lacks the depth and soul of it's predecessors. One could compare this to Joel Schumacher's Batman films and Brett Ratner's X-Men 3.
You can't help thinking about what could have been. If Raimi had ditched The Sandman all together and made Venom the main villian this would have created time and space to delve deeper into Peter Parker's dark side. Instead Venom only emerges towards the end of the movie - more of an afterthought than the main event. Raimi just doesn't have enough time for the greatest Spidey villian of all time! And that's just disrespectful!!
And if that wasn't enough to provoke the wrath of the fanboys - The New Goblin switches on us! Twice!
By the end of this overlong mess, as tears flow and the sun sets on the cliched finale (cheesy - but not as cheesy as the shot of the American flag.......pass the sick bucket!) you just won't care anymore. Somewhere between Spiderman 2 and 3 Raimi has gone from genius to generic. Coppola, Zemeckis, Wachowskis, Donner, Miller, Raimi - at least he's in good company.


Verdict
An enjoyable but dangerously pedestrian entry into the Spiderman series. By trying to give the audience more it ends up giving us less. Shame.

Rating
***

Spiderman 3 at the IMDB
Buy Spiderman 3 at Amazon