A decent third outing. Definitely superior to the second one. I appreciate that The Avengers is almost never mentioned since they all but stuffed it down our throats in Iron Man 2. There are some really awesome set pieces and well developed action scenes, but the villain's intentions are never fully explained. I also appreciated the all too ambitious twist involving one of the villains though I have a feeling some hardcore fans won't. I think my problem is I'm just not the world's biggest Iron Man fan. So, its good, but I'm not dreaming of the day they announce an Iron Man 4.

Its like your fifth slice of pizza. The first three where perfect, the forth didn't kill you, but you should have known better than to go for number five. Now you've got a massive belly ache and you wish you could take that one back. I don't want to completely dismiss this film as being a complete pie of steaming s**t, but don't walk in thinking that you're getting Die Hard:With A Vengeance in Moscow. Its not even close. In fact, there is no circumstance in this film that should make it a Die Hard film except for the shoehorning in of one "John McClain. Honestly, this movie could have stared Liam Neisen or a handful of other aging semi action stars and no one would have known. Its this ongoing trend of franchise sequels buying up scripts that weren't originally written as direct sequels to anything and throwing in the main character. Well, in this case, the name of the main character.

I don't want to sit here and bash this film. Its just hard to see what they were trying to accomplish. Moore is obviously not at the same level as Weisman, Harlen, or of course McTeirnan, but this movie is a mess. Its sad to report that Willis has been reduced to clockwork 3 minute one liners and slopping machine gun murder. Never before has McClain cared so little about human life as to simply point a machine gun at a door and shoot everything with a pulse until nothing is moving. Forget the fact that he doesn't know his surroundings and could just be capping innocent Russian bystanders.

He doesn't seem to care about that. Nor did he seem to care about a courthouse bombing that seemed to have obliterated at least 50 innocent people at the opening action sequence. No, John is on a mission and one mission only. To some how help his estranged son kill lot's of people. I think at one point he even says that directly to him. That's how awful the dialogue is. I won't go into too much detail, but its terrible and it doesn't reflect the way John normally talks.

Who cares about the plot. Its dumb and its not Die Hard. The only good thing about this film is the bad ass helicopter that tears through the two main action scenes its in. That thing is a beast. Other than that, Willis seems tired and not willing to say "Fuck" on camera (it seemed ADR to me), his son is generic, the villains suck, and there's just no real hint of danger. I'd call this a polished turd, but there's not much polished about it. Bruce, if you are seriously making another one, read the script first and/or care about the legacy of your character.

What a heaping pile of hippo sh#t. If I were fingerless, I could count with both hands how many times I laughed during this debacle. Each hand would count for once. And those scenes featured Jim Carey and I only laughed because I forced myself to channel my inner child and see Chip Douglas with long hair being repetitively sprayed in the face with mace. Not funny? I didn't really think so either. It saddens me to say that I think Steve Carrol's days in film should be over.
I say should because I know they won't be, but they "Should" be.

His filmography is such an enigma to me. He has done "very little" great work in the past(Anchorman, 40 year old version), but nonetheless, great work. The Office to me, will always be Michael Scott therefore, Carrol will always be stuck in that desk chair. I will never be able to get over Michael Scott. That being said, Burt Wonderfu#k is not a character. It is simply a paint by numbers, Will Farrell was busy, caricature of an idea that was possibly funny in a 4 minute sketch. Steve Carrol brings so little to this roll that you literally could have watch it with your eyes closed and thought you were watching a funny or die sketch in which someone sedated Will Farrell and through him in Las Vegas. At least that would have been funny.

Sorry, love Jim Carey, but this was no return to form of any kind. He really was the only one trying, but there was just simply nothing there for him. When the only ongoing joke in a movie is the fact that two magicians come out on stage to "Abra ka dabra", sporting obvious, over the top 80's wings, than your problems cannot be corrected. Even Nucky Thompson himself couldn't help this mess. Its hard not to love Steve Buscemi, but this movie aids you in that. He's terrible and clearly hoping for franchise royalties or something.

At the end of the day, it should be a given what all people want out of a comedy is a good laugh. If someone funds your project and the key goal here is to deliver on that promise, when does it become apparent that its not funny? In the editing bay, during filming, or does it actually take testing an audience and being booed out of the theater to make you see it?