In the first half of Director John McTiernan's movie, Willis wears an undershirt. In the second half he gets rid of it. And that's pretty much it for his performance.
Jan 14 - 12:28 PM
Its official-this critic sucks.
Jan 16 - 10:41 PM
Nah hes alright... he's even sort of right in this case... but its like, hello, for better or worse it's the progenitor of the gigundo Die Hard-lite action genre, not North by Northwest-complex.
Jan 31 - 10:42 PM
Sometimes there has to be a guy that just HAS to be different. This is that guy.
Mar 13 - 09:56 AM
This movie is an over-rated action flick. If you want good action with gun battles without any plot or interesting characters and with poor dialogue that goes where you can predict it will go in the crdit sequence, here it is. And yes, Schickel is very right, the "acting" in this movie is terrible if not non-existent.
Aug 8 - 10:21 AM
you've got to take this movie for what it is. It's an action movie from the 80's, but it's by far better than 95% of 80's action movies and here's why, an everyman stuck in a situation he doesnt want to be in, instead of some muscle bound bullet proof hero, the claustrophobia of the high rise skyscraper ratchets up the tension when he's climbing around in the vents and elevator shafts, and if he dosent have it hard enough, he's got no shoes, this movie defines what a good action movie should be
Jul 1 - 11:33 PM
Yeah go watch what passed as an action movie before Die Hard.Still a decent movie today and it raised the bar. If anything diminished Die Hard it was all the me to copycats that came after it.
Aug 11 - 08:36 AM
I don't care how much glass Mr. Everyman wears when he's killing bad guys. THERE HAS TO BE AN INTERESTING PLOT. This didn't have it
Jun 22 - 11:05 PM
No plot or interesting characters? Terrible acting? Poor dialogue? Are you sure you watched the same movie as everyone else? Or do you simply not understand what good acting, etc, is?
Sep 14 - 01:15 AM
Yeah... dialogue so poor that people are still quoting this movie 20(+) years later.
Die Hard redefined the genre. Anyone who doesn't see that isn't old enough to remember the types of movies that came before.
Apr 28 - 08:17 PM
You're a fucking homo
Jul 29 - 06:16 PM
Every great movie i've visited on this site, some ******* from time magazine has given it a bad rating, I think they even gave raging bull a bad rating... after seeing them show up ruining 100% ratings for at least 5 or more films I have to say they have no credibility and are just trying to be pricks for their own pleasure
Sep 21 - 03:39 AM
I cant beleive there is a human alive who doesnt like this movie. wow.
Sep 24 - 08:51 AM
Those people are critics that have watched too many movies.
Oct 2 - 10:40 PM
This is the same guy who hated Taxi Driver as well
Sep 26 - 04:19 AM
The thing that needs to be considered here is when this movie was made. I say this because you cannot compare it to similar action movies of this time because I feel that Die Hard may have been quite original in its hay-day. Haligh!!!
Sep 28 - 05:57 PM
Maybe you say this because your performance is sub-par and I think you know what I mean. Don't take it out on this film, which by the way, is one of the great action films ever. What have you done...oh yea, nothing.
Dec 5 - 02:15 AM
I did not like this annoying film.
Dec 25 - 10:27 PM
WTF is with TIME Mag (especially this ****-ckel) trying to stand out and make GREAT movies bad?...sure he wasn't TOO dramatic about everything, but you dont need to be a DeNiro in Taxi Driver to explain how he feels in every situa-...wait...you said Taxi Driver was to descriptive! WTF PICK A SIDE!
Jan 5 - 08:01 PM
hahaha die hard rotten??? are you kidding me? someone has to get laid...
Jan 15 - 05:06 AM
you call yourself a critic? when you give a review like that it's pretty much a short cut two thinking. If you dont like the movie that' sfine but at least give a plausable reason.
Jul 1 - 11:25 PM
Who the hell do you think you are?
Aug 4 - 01:19 PM
Whew...thank god this critic isn't full of himself...wait...
Aug 15 - 03:32 PM
I expect critics to be smart asses (to compensate them for their lack of creativity); but I also expect some analysis. If Richard Schickel were a movie, they definitely wouldn't be making a sequel!
Sep 14 - 01:11 AM
This review was posted in 2008, and yet this man somehow wants to review it 20 years after its release? And says that the acting is bad? Really? I'm appalled...I really am. I thought it would be impossible NOT to like this movie. I stand corrected. Still the perfect action movie, and Johnny is one hell of a director.
Oct 5 - 07:06 PM
The review was posted July 25, 1988. In TIME.
But was added to the site in 2008.
And regardless of when it was written, it sucks.
Lousy critic. Great film.
But I thought you should get your facts before saying certain things.
Jan 19 - 07:05 AM
Mickey Mic Mean aka the Monsta
i think it`s 1 of the best action movies EVER!
Oct 21 - 11:02 AM
TIME and the NY times are neck and neck for being the worst movie reviewers around. Consistently terrible.
Dec 24 - 03:37 PM