My Ranking of the Movies in the "DIE HARD" Franchise

Below is my ranking of the five movies in the "DIE HARD" movie franchise that starred Bruce Willis as John McClane: 

MY RANKING OF THE "DIE HARD" MOVIES

1. "Die Hard" (1988) - The first movie is not always the best. But in the case of this particular movie franchise, it is for me. While visiting his estranged wife, New York City detective John McClane is trapped inside a Los Angeles skyscraper during a Christmas Eve heist led by former German terrorist Hans Gruber. Alan Rickman, Reginald VelJohnson and Bonnie Bedalia co-starred.





2. "Live Free or Die Hard" (2007) - John McClane is ordered to escort a suspected hacker targeted by cyber terrorists led by former Federal tech employee Thomas Gabriel trying to steal from the U.S. government in this surprisingly well-made film. Justin Long, Timothy Olyphant and Mary Elizabeth Winstead co-starred.





3. "Die Hard With a Vengeance" (1995) - McClane and a Harlem electronics storekeeper named Zeus Carver are forced to play mind games by terrorist Simon Gruber (brother of Hans), while he plots the robbery of the Federal Reserve Bank in New York City. Samuel L. Jackson and Jeremy Irons co-starred in this first-rate action film, marred only by an anti-climatic ending.





4. "A Good Day to Die Hard" (2013) - McClane finds himself helping his son Jack, a C.I.A. operative, protect a Russian ex-millionaire from terrorists who want to use him to access a source of valuable weapons-grade uranium. Jai Courtney, Yuliya Snigir and Sebastian Koch co-starred in this movie with a first-rate and original narrative that is marred by a running time shorter than it should have been.





5. "Die Hard 2: Die Harder" (1990) - McClane ends up clashing with former Special Forces mercenaries at Dulles Airport on Christmas Eve, while waiting for his wife’s plane to land. William Sadler, John Amos, Dennis Franz and Bonnie Bedalia co-starred in what I believe is an entertaining film. But . . . I thought it tried too hard to copy the success of the 1988 movie.

"BRIDGE OF SPIES" (2015) Review

"BRIDGE OF SPIES" (2015) Review

Several years ago, I read an article in which Steven Spielberg had expressed a desire to direct a James Bond movie. It has been over a decade since the director had made this comment. And as far as I know, he has only directed two movies that had anything to do with spies - the 2005 movie"MUNICH", which co-starred the current Bond actor, and his latest film, "BRIDGE OF SPIES". 

Like "MUNICH", "BRIDGE OF SPIES" is a spy tale with a strong historical background. Based upon Giles Whittell's 2010 book, "Bridge of Spies: A True Story of the Cold War", the movie centered around the 1960 U-2 Incident and the efforts of attorney James B. Donovan to negotiate the exchange of U-2 pilot Francis Gary Powers for the captured Soviet spy Rudolf Abel - whom Donovan had unsuccessfully defended from charges of espionage against the United States. Although Whittell's book focused upon a larger cast of characters involved in the U-2 incident and the famous spy exchange, the screenwriters - Matt Charman, along with Joel and Ethan Coen - and Spielberg tightened their focus upon Donovan's role in the incident.

It occurred to me that in the past fifteen years, I can only think of five Steven Spielberg-directed movies that I have truly liked. Five out of eleven movies. Hmmmm . . . I do not know if that is good or bad. Fortunately, one of those movies that I managed to embrace was this latest effort, "BRIDGE OF SPIES". I enjoyed it very much. I would not rank it at the same level as "MUNICH" or "LINCOLN". But I thought it was a pretty solid movie for a director of Spielberg's caliber. The latter and the movie's screenwriters made the intelligent choice to focus on one particular person involved in the entire incident - James B. Donovan. If they had attempted to cover every aspect of Whittell's book, Spielberg would have been forced to release this production as a television miniseries.

Yet, "BRIDGE OF SPIES" still managed to cover a great deal of the events surrounding the shooting of Powers' U-2 spy plane and the exchange that followed. This is due to the screenwriters' decision to start the movie with the arrest of Rudolf Abel in 1957. More importantly, the narrative went into details over the arrest, the U.S. decision to put Abel on trial, their choice of Donovan as his attorney and the trial itself. In fact, the movie covered all of this before Powers was even shot down over the Soviet Union. The screenwriters and Spielberg also went out of their way to cover the circumstances of the arrest and incarceration of American graduate student Frederic Pryor, who was vising his East Berlin girlfriend, when he was arrested. And that is because the writers had the good sense to realize - like Whittell before them - that the incidents surrounding the arrests of both Abel and Pryor were just as important as Powers being shot down by the Soviets. 

What I best liked about "BRIDGE OF SPIES" was its ambiguous portrayal of the nations involved in the entire matter - the United States, the Soviet Union and the German Democratic Republic (East Germany). No country was spared. Both the United States and the Soviet Union seemed bent upon not only projecting some image of a wounded nation to the world. Both engaged in sham trials for Abel and Powers that left a bad taste in my mouth. And the movie portrayed East Germany as some petulant child pouting over the fact that neither of the other two countries were taking it seriously. Which would account for that country's vindictive treatment toward Pryor. And neither the U.S. or the Soviets seemed that concerned over Pryor's fate - especially the U.S. Watching the movie finally made me realize how the Cold War now strikes me as irrelevant and a waste of time.

As much as I enjoyed "BRIDGE OF SPIES", the movie seemed to lack a sense of urgency that struck me as odd for this kind of movie. And I have to blame Spielberg. His direction seemed a bit . . . well, a bit too relaxed for a topic about the Cold War at its most dangerous. Many might point out that"BRIDGE OF SPIES" is basically a historic drama in which anyone familiar with the U-2 incident would know how it ends. Yet Both "MUNICH" and"LINCOLN", along with Ron Howard's "APOLLO 13" and Roger Donaldson's 2000 film, "THIRTEEN DAYS", seemed to possess that particular sharp urgency, despite being historic dramas. But for "BRIDGE OF SPIES", Spielberg's direction seemed just a tad too relaxed - with the exception of a few scenes. One last problem I had with "BRIDGE OF SPIES" was the ending. Remember . . . this is Steven Spielberg, a director notorious for dumping a surprising layer of saccharine on an otherwise complex tale. This saccharine was on full display in the movie's finale sequence that featured Donovan's return to the United States . . . especially the scene in which he is riding an El train to his home in the Bronx and his family's discovery of his activities in Eastern Europe. It was enough saccharine to make me heave an exasperated sigh.

Speaking of Donovan's El Train ride back to his neighborhood, there was one aspect of it that I found impressive. I must admit how cinematographer Janusz Kamiński, a longtime collaborator of Spielberg's since the early 1990s, allowed the camera to slowly sweep over Donovan's Bronx neighborhood from an elevated position. I found the view rather rich and detailed. In fact, Kamiński provided a similar sweeping bird eye's view of the Berlin Wall and the two "enclaves" that bordered it. Another aspect of the movie's production values that impressed me were Adam Stockhausen's production designs. I thought he did an outstanding job in re-creating both New York City and Berlin of the late 1950s and early 1960s. And his work was ably assisted by Rena DeAngelo and Bernhard Henrich's set decorations; along with the art direction team of Marco Bittner Rosser, Scott Dougan, Kim Jennings and Anja Müller.

The performances featured in "BRIDGE OF SPIES" struck me as pretty solid. I thought Amy Ryan, Alan Alda, Jesse Plemmons, Michael Gaston, Will Rogers and Austin Stowell did great work. But for my money, the best performances came from lead Tom Hanks, Mark Rylance, Dakin Matthews and Sebastian Koch. Dakin Matthews has always been a favorite character actor of mine. I have always found his performances rather colorful. However, I would have to say that his portrayal of Federal Judge Byers, who seemed exasperated by Donovan's attempt to give Abel a fair trial, struck me as a lot more subtle and effective than many of his past roles. Sebastian Koch gave a very interesting performance as East German attorney Wolfgang Vogel, who seemed intensely determined that his country play a major role in the spy swap and not be cast aside. Superficially, Tom Hanks' role as James Donovan seemed like the typical "boy scout" role he had especially became known for back in the 1990s. And in some ways, it is. But I really enjoyed how the actor conveyed Donovan's increasing disbelief over his country's questionable handling of Abel's trial and his sense that he is a fish-out-of-water in a divided Berlin. However, I feel that the best performance came from Mark Rylance, who gave a deliciously subtle, yet entertaining portrayal of Soviet spy Rudolf Abel. What I liked about Rylance's performance is that he did not portray Abel as some kind of stock KGB agent, but a subtle and intelligent man, who seemed clearly aware of the more unpleasant side of both American and Soviet justice.

I might as well be frank. I do not think I would ever regard "BRIDGE OF SPIES" as one of Steven Spielberg's best movies. I thought the movie lacked a sense of urgency and sharpness that nearly robbed the film of any suspension . . . despite it being a historical drama. But, I still believe it was a first-rate film. I also thought that Spielberg and the movie's screenwriters did a great job in conveying as many details as possible regarding the U-2 incident and what led to it. The movie also featured a first-rate cast led by the always incomparable Tom Hanks. Overall, "BRIDGE OF SPIES" proved that Spielberg has yet to lose his touch.

"BRIDGE OF SPIES" (2015) Photo Gallery

Below are images from "BRIDGE OF SPIES", the 2015 account of the 1960 U-2 Incident. Directed by Steven Spielberg, the movie starred Tom Hanks: 



"BRIDGE OF SPIES" (2015) Photo Gallery

"A GOOD DAY TO DIE HARD" (2013) Review

"A GOOD DAY TO DIE HARD" (2013) Review

Five-and-a-half years following the successful release of the fourth movie in the DIE HARD movie franchise - 2007's "LIVE FREE AND DIE HARD", 20th Century Fox Studios release a fifth movie about the adventures of New York Police detective John McClane called "A GOOD DAY TO DIE HARD". 

A high-ranking, yet corrupt official in Moscow, Russia named Viktor Chagarin plans on incriminating political prisoner/government whistleblower and former billionaire Yuri Komarov without a fair trial when Komarov refuses to hand over a secret file believed to have convicting evidence against Chagarin. A young man assassinates a colleague of Chagarin's and agrees to testify against Komarov for a shorter sentence. He turns out to be John "Jack" McClane Jr., Detective McClane's estranged only son. The NYPD police officer, who has not been in touch with his son for years, learns of Jack's situation and travels to Russia to help. 

But when John arrives and approaches the courthouse that holds Jack and Komarov on trial, an explosion orchestrated by Chagarin and his henchmen disrupts the courthouse, and Jack breaks free with Komarov. After spotting Jack, John confronts him, but their dispute is cut short when Chagarin's henchmen, led by main enforcer Alik, chase them throughout the streets of Moscow. John learns that Jack is a CIA agent and has been on a three-year mission to rescue Komarov from Chagarin's clutches and retrieve a file that can link Chagarin and Komarov to the Chernobyl nuclear disaster. The file will enable the U.S. government to bring down Chagarin, who has proven to be an obstacle to U.S.-Russian relations. But the McClane men not only learn to heal long-standing family rifts, but also discover there is more to this mission than evidence against Chagarin.

"A GOOD DAY TO DIE HARD" received negative reviews from movie critics. In fact, their response to the movie strongly reminded me of the negative press that the James Bond movie, "QUANTUM OF SOLACE" had received in 2008. In a way, I could see why. Both movies share two negative traits that prevented them from becoming even better films. "A GOOD DAY TO DIE HARD", like the Bond film, suffered from what I liked to call the "Paul Greengrass film editing style". I realize that this editing style has been popular with recent filmmakers who use it to trim a movie's running time. But I can do without it. I disliked in the second and third JASON BOURNE movies. I disliked it in "QUANTUM OF SOLACE". And I also disliked it in "A GOOD DAY TO DIE HARD". Director John Moore and editor Dan Zimmerman used it with strong effect during the Moscow car chase, making the latter one of the most confusing car chases since the one featured in 2007's "THE BOURNE ULTIMATUM".

Moore and Zimmerman's use of this fast speed editing style also enabled them to give "A GOOD DAY TO DIE HARD" the shortest running time in the franchise's fifteen year history . . . one of 97 minutes. The idea of a DIE HARD movie running slightly over 90 minutes makes me shake my head in disbelief. Also, the plot for this latest film, penned by Skip Woods, is too complicated and quite frankly, too good to be wasted on a 90-something minutes running time. If "A GOOD DAY TO DIE HARD" had possessed a longer running time, Woods story could have been told with greater detail. For instance, the movie could have revealed how John learned of Jack's arrest with greater detail. And the situation regarding Chagarin, Komarov and Jack could have been told with greater detail with a longer running time. Also, Cole Hauser could have enjoyed more screen time as Jack's CIA partner, Mike Collins. Instead, Hauser was barely on screen for five minutes tops.

Before one begins to think I share the critics' dislike of "A GOOD DAY TO DIE", you will be mistaken. Because I do not share their opinion. Despite the Paul Greengrass editing style and the shorter running time, I still enjoyed the movie very much . . . in fact, more than I thought possible. As I had stated earlier, Skip Woods penned a very strong story for the movie. Yes, it featured the usual over-the-top action that has been a hallmark of the franchise for years. One of my favorite scenes proved to be John, Jack and Komarov's escape from the CIA safe house in Moscow. It not only gave Bruce Willis (or his stunt man) another chance to prove how great he can be as on-screen badass, it gave Jai Courtney, who portrayed Jack McClane, a chance to show that his character is a badass, as well. In fact, another scene provided more great moments for both Willis and Courtney - namely the McClane men's escape from death after they and Komarov were captured by Alix. 

One of the best aspects of Woods' screenplay proved to be the complicated story surrounding the strained relationship between Chagarin and Komarov. This storyline provided audiences an interesting peek into Russian politics - if it is somewhat accurate. I suspect that it is not completely accurate, but this is a work of fiction we are talking about, not a documentary. More importantly, Woods' story added the Chernobyl disaster as a catalyst to the former colleagues' estrangement . . . enabling audiences a chilling peek at the infamous Chernobyl site in the Ukraine, during the movie's final action scene. This sequence also provided a plot twist that brought back a memories of the 1990 film, "DIE HARD 2". The best aspect of "A GOOD DAY TO DIE HARD" is that the movie allowed a more satisfying portrayal of the relationship between John and Jack than "LIVE FREE AND DIE HARD" did for John and Lucy, five years ago.

Speaking of the relationship between the two McClane men, it would not have worked without the chemistry between Bruce Willis and Jai Courtney. I understand that the movie's casting director considered a good number of actors - including Liam Hemsworth and James Badge Dale - before Australian actor Jai Courtney was chosen. Willis was in top form, as usual. I found Willis very effective in portraying McClane's desire to reconcile with his son in conflict with the NYPD cop's penchant for butting into situations where he is not wanted. And he formed a top-notch chemistry with Courtney. The latter did an excellent job in portraying Jack's initial resentment toward John, his growing regard for the latter and intense fixation on his mission. German actor Sebastian Koch (whom I last saw in 2011's "UNKNOWN", gave a subtle, yet complex portrayal of Yuri Komarov, the former billionaire and criminal who found a conscious and exposed his former partner. Sergei Kolesnikov gave a solid performance as the corrupt politician Viktor Chagarin. But I found Yuliya Snigir very impressive as Komarov's daughter Irina, who proved to be more than meets the eye. I wish I could say the same about Radivoje Bukvić, who portrayed Chagarin's main henchman. But I found his performance a little over-the-top. It was nice to see Mary Elizabeth Winstead reprise her portrayal of Lucy McClane, and she proved to be as spunky as ever. But Cole Hauser was really effective as Mike Collins, Jack's CIA partner. He was subtle, brutal and slightly scary. And his performance made me wish he had more scenes.

I can understand the critics' disappointment with the shorter running time and quick flash editing in "A GOOD DAY TO DIE HARD". But despite these flaws, the movie still proved to be very entertaining, thanks to solid, yet slightly flawed direction by John Moore, an interesting story penned by Skip Woods and a first rate cast led by Bruce Willis and Jai Courtney.

"A GOOD DAY TO DIE HARD" (2013) Photo Gallery

Below are images from "A GOOD DAY TO DIE HARD", the fifth entry in the DIE HARD movie franchise. Directed by John Moore, the movie stars Bruce Willis and Jai Courtney: 


"A GOOD DAY TO DIE HARD" (2013) Photo Gallery

"UNKNOWN" (2011) Review

"UNKNOWN" (2011) Review

I have noticed that during the past few years, Hollywood has released a minor political thriller during the first or second month of a new year. And to my surprise, I discovered that I found all of them quite entertaining. The latest political thriller to hit the movie screens during the winter season is film starring Liam Neeson called "UNKNOWN".

Based upon Didier van Cauwelaert’s 2003 French novel published in English as ”Out of My Head”, ”UNKNOWN” is about an American scientist named Dr. Martin Harris, who arrives in Berlin with his wife, Elizabeth, to attend a science conference held at an upscale hotel. Upon their arrival at the hotel, Dr. Harris discovers that one of his suitcases had been left behind at the airport. While Elizabeth checks into the hotel, Martin hires a taxi to take him back to the airport. Unfortunately, the taxi becomes involved in a serious accident en route, and Martin’s life is saved by the driver. Several days later, Martin wakes up from a coma and returns to the hotel. He discovers that his wife has checked into the hotel with another man assuming his identity. Not only is Martin taken aback by this turn of events, he becomes aware of a mysterious stranger that has made one or two attempts upon his life. Martin recruits the help of the taxi driver, an Eastern European immigrant named Gina; and a former Stasi agent named Ernst Jürgen to help him learn the truth behind the deception being perpetrated with his wife and the man assuming his identity.

I really did not know how I would react to ”UNKNOWN”, when I first saw the trailer. It struck me as one of those movies in which the best parts were featured in the previews. I had also suspected it would be another ”TAKEN” or ”FROM PARIS WITH LOVE”, a lightweight thriller with a great deal of action and a simplified plot. As much as I had liked those two movies, I never really found them that impressive. On the other hand, ”UNKNOWN” seemed to possess more substance as a complex political thriller. The movie had mysteries and plot twists that took me by surprise, before its denouement.

Director Jaume Collet-Serr certainly did justice to Oliver Butcher and Stephen Cornwell’s screenplay. Whether they did justice to the novel is another matter, considering that I have never read it. But ”UNKNOWN” featured exciting and well-dramatized scenes that provided both depth and atmosphere to the movie. One of my favorite scenes featured the recently hospitalized Martin’s attempt to connect with one of the conference’s other scientists, a Professor Bressler. Unfortunately for Martin, the man impersonating him happened to be at Professor Bressler’s laboratory. And both Martin Harrises’ attempts to prove themselves as the real McCoy were both strangely humorous and frustrating . . . at least for Martin and the audience. The meeting between Martin’s longtime colleague, Professor Rodney Cole and Ernst Jürgen, the former Stasi agent, proved to be fascinating and tense, thanks to the first-rate performances by Frank Langella and Bruno Ganz. And Martin’s first attempt to reunite with his wife, Liz, came off as rather creepy, due to both January Jones and Aidan Quinn’s skillful acting.

However, I found myself greatly impressed by Collet-Serr’s direction of two major action scenes. One of those scenes featured the finale in which Martin attempts to prevent an assassination attempt that proved to be one of the plot’s surprising twists. I also enjoyed the action sequence at a Berlin hospital that began with the murder of a nurse and the first attempt on Martin’s life. But I must admit that I believe Collet-Serr did justice to what I consider to be the movie’s best sequence – another murder attempt on Martin’s life at Gina’s apartment that segued into an exciting car chase through Berlin’s streets.

”UNKNOWN” provided some first-rate performances by a cast that included Aidan Quinn, Bruno Ganz and Frank Langella. Diane Kruger proved to be a surprisingly effective action heroine that racked up a higher body count than the rest of the cast. January Jones gave one of the most enigmatic performances I have ever seen in quite a while. She effectively kept me speculating upon the reasons behind her character’s failure to acknowledge Martin as her husband. However, the movie really belonged to Liam Neeson, whose portrayal of the beleaguered scientist proved to be the movie’s backbone. Neeson perfectly captured all the emotions that his character experienced throughout the story, without missing a beat. My only complaint is that I found his American accent a bit stiff and formal.

I really had no idea on how I would accept ”UNKNOWN”, once I saw it. The only reason I went to see it in the first place was because I had nothing else to do. I am glad that I saw the movie. I enjoyed it so much that I went to see it for a second time. And I enjoyed it even more.

"UNKNOWN" (2011) Photo Gallery

Below are images from the new thriller called "UNKNOWN". Directed by Jaume Collet-Serra, the movie stars Liam Neeson, Diane Kruger, January Jones, Frank Langella, Aidan Quinn and Bruno Ganz:



"UNKNOWN" (2011) Photo Gallery