A Good Day To Die Hard


A Good Day To Die Hard

Critics Consensus

A Good Day to Die Hard is the weakest entry in a storied franchise, and not even Bruce Willis' smirking demeanor can enliven a cliched, uninspired script.



Total Count: 226


Audience Score

User Ratings: 117,575
User image

A Good Day To Die Hard Photos

Movie Info

John McClane (Bruce Willis) heads to Russia in this fifth installment of the Die Hard film series. Skip Woods (The A-Team) provides the script, with Max Payne's John Moore directing. ~ Jeremy Wheeler, Rovi

Watch it now


Jai Courtney
as Jack McClane
Bruce Willis
as John McClane
Cole Hauser
as Collins
Megalyn Echikunwoke
as Pretty Reporter
Péter Takátsy
as Prosecutor
Catherine Kresge
as Neiderbrook
April Grace
as Sue Easton
Jan Gallovic
as Chagarin's Advisor
Patrik Rytmus Vrbovsky
as Handgun Manager
Ferenc Elek
as Unimog Driver
Lin Wai Zhe
as Handgun Manager's Assistant
Janos Finfera
as Chagarin's Security Man
Boris Vodokov
as Chagarin's Assassin
Alekszandr Komarov
as Mi-26 Co-Pilot
Iván Fenyö
as Mi-26 Navigator
Nadejda Savcova
as Russian Model
Anastassija Makarenko
as Russian Model
Attila Arpa
as Alik's Soldier
Sergej Onopko
as Alik's Soldier
Ivan Orsanyi
as Alik's Soldier
Iván Kamarás
as G-Wagon Driver
Zsolt Vicei
as Laundry
View All

News & Interviews for A Good Day To Die Hard

Critic Reviews for A Good Day To Die Hard

All Critics (226) | Top Critics (47)

Audience Reviews for A Good Day To Die Hard

  • Feb 16, 2015
    Die Hard has always been home to over the top action set pieces, but this fifth entry to the franchise is the film where they decided to have them instead of story or characterisation. And though it's not as phoned-in as I was expecting it to be, it is the first Die Hard film that's not good. The tone is all wrong and the end result is a disappointment.
    Gimly M Super Reviewer
  • Dec 25, 2014
    When Jack(Jai Courtney) gets arrested on drug charges in Moscow, of course his father, no matter how much he hates flying, will travel all that way to visit him. When said father is NYPD Detective John McClane(Bruce Willis), you know it's not going to be that simple. But he couldn't have expected the part about his son actually being a CIA agent breaking out Komarov(Sebastian Koch), a political dissident, out of prison. So of course, John does what every parent should do, and impedes and then assists his son who then returns the favor by rescuing his father. All of which occurs with huge amounts of property damage, of course. First off, a couple of things you need to know about "A Good Day to Die Hard." One, it's not as bad as you heard, nor is Bruce Willis sleepwalking through the movie.(And Jai Courtney is not bad either.) However, the movie could have worked best as a silent movie for its first two acts, as there is a lot of wooden dialogue to work through. But at the same time, you have to remember that this is a family who needs to be literally under fire, especially if it involves Eurotrash, before they can deal with their various issues and this is no different. Plus, the McClanes are not the only family with issues in this movie. That all leads up to a thrilling, if typically improbable, climax that sadly does not involve John McClane either overthrowing Putin or attending a Pussy Riot concert.
    Walter M Super Reviewer
  • Jul 14, 2014
    If it jumped the shark with the 4th installment, it full on sharknadoed in the 5th. This is a pale imitation of what made Die Hard good in the the 1st and 3rd installments. Willis here seems to be having it botoxed shit eating grin being puppeteered by someone off screen or it is just Willis as all CGI. The father and son relationship shenanigans grate and irritate, overall this isn't a good day, it's pony and it's time for this franchise to curl up and die...whichever way it wants.
    Jon H Super Reviewer
  • Dec 07, 2013
    Yup, because Valentine's Day is the perfect day to die hard... for some poor saps. As depressed as some of the bums who watch films like this one get to be around Valentine's Day, this title probably upped the suicide rate somewhere, and not just among die-hard "Die Hard" fans, though that may have just been over the tagline, which would be kind of understandable. In the first and third "Die Hard" installments, John McClane was taking on German terrorists in a Japanese company's tower, and in the second, he took on Italians (I know they were pretending to be Spaniards, but Val Verde is not a real country, so I'm not counting it), so by taking on Russia, McClane is finally back to finishing where we left off against our enemies during WWII, yet might need to bring down the bomb on whoever came up with "Yippie ki-yay, Mother Russia". I think that tagline and, for that matter, the sheer forcefulness of this title should tell you why this was released, not necessarily as deprogramming during Valentine's Day, but during the first quarter of the year, when they dump all of the ostensibly lazily lame fluff pieces, rather than kick off the summer with a Father's Day release. Looking at this father-son action duo premise, the May-to-July release moth that this series usually guns for is as fitting as it's ever been, although that the only tradition broken with this installment, because, quite frankly, I don't know what's more momentous, the reminder that John McClane has a son, or the fact that this film runs around the 90-minute mark. I can think of some people out there who would say that it figures that we finally get a "Die Hard" installment that's under two hours, yet by existing in the first place, it's still way too long. I for one won't go nearly that far, but yeah, this is still mighty mediocre, and yet, decency certainly dies hard against mediocrity, as it puts up quite the challenge through style, alone. Sure, all of the shaky cam provides a somewhat amateur feel to dilute visual style that is limited enough by conventionalism and little dynamicity to lighting plays, but this has to be the best-looking out of any of the "Die Hard" films, as cinematographer Jonathan Sela delivers on a certainly bleakly blue color palette that is both handsome and fitting for the thriller's gritty tone, which is most brought to life in the heat of battle. The action is often too over-the-top for its own good, yet it's still consistently strong, with broader action set pieces being elaborately well-staged, while tighter brawls prove to be well-choreographed and intense, especially when it pays attention to violence in a way that the PG-13 "Live Free or Die Hard" couldn't get away with, and reinforces a sense of consequence. The film is not quite as stylistically sharp as it perhaps could have been, yet if nothing else is strong here, then it is, in fact, the style, even when it overshadows substance that, I must admit, still has some room to poke its head through. When it comes to the story, or at least the telling of this story, messiness is plentiful, but there are still some intriguing attributes to this trite narrative, done justice by highlights in direction, whose constant momentum grows cold after a while, yet keeps pacing brisk enough to sustain a moderate degree of entertainment value, complimented either when tension really kicks in - often accompanied by the aforementioned action - or when the cast is given an opportunity to shine. Okay, co-leading man Jai Courtney, while not as bland as they say, has range limitations that water down his convincingness, but outside of him, most everyone is decent, with Bruce Willis once again nailing the iconic John McClane character with a potent action star charisma that plays a big part in almost saving this film. Really, as much as everyone complains about this film, and as much as I myself am about to complain about this film, if mediocrity is achieved, then it's by the thinnest of hairs, for although the fact of the matter is that decency is lost, sharp style, a degree of intrigue to substance, and an endearing lead performance by Willis do about as much as anything in bringing the final product to the brink of decency. Sadly, that brink is not quite passed, and while I am among a handful of non-fans of this film who can see what might attract fans, potential is lost in the overwhelming wake of messy and even formulaic storytelling. There have been refreshing elements here and there throughout the series, yet no installment has escaped glaring genericisms, with this particular installment being about as generic as any, boasting trite dialogue and characterization to thin out bite to storytelling something fierce with hopeless predictability. Skip Woods' script certainly has plenty of problems, but among the most recurring is all of the blasted familiarity, which is a clear reflection of laziness, though arguably not the clearest. On top of bombarding most every element of storytelling with conventionalism, Woods bombards fluffy bits with particularly generically overblown, fall-flat material that drives unevenness into a generally intense tone more than relief, even though the "dramatic" writing even gets to be cheesy, due to the narrative concept's being questionable to begin with, without the shamelessly clichéd, maybe near-monotonous dialogue and character action pieces which beat you over the head with themes through histrionics that only leave a sense of weight to further suffer. Where "Live Free or Die Hard" took itself a little too seriously at times, this film all but consistently takes itself way too seriously, when it really shouldn't, not just because the narrative is questionable, and interpreted with blatantly unsubtle writing and direction, but because meat to this story concept is limited, no matter how much they try to bloat themes, which still don't bloat the final product so much that they compensate for, of all things, an unreasonably "short" runtime. With all of my joking about how glad I am to see a relatively short runtime applied to an installment out of a series that, at least up to this point, has been comprised of overlong action filler pieces, briefness is one of the final product's biggest problems, awkwardly rushing immediate the immediate development segment through slam-bang story editing, then leaving its body to dash from one set piece to another, which would be easier to forgive if Woods didn't struggle to work in dramatic elements that have no time to develop and only make the coldness of the pacing all of the more glaring. Even on paper, this narrative is cold and inconsistent, juggling constant visceral momentum and dramatic intensity, and slipping up with either storytelling extreme through anything from too much exhausting freneticism to dramatic laziness, yet director John Moore could have compensated enough to save the final product as decent, were it not for highlights in tension's being matched, if not outweighed by a prominent sense of laziness to challenging written cheesiness and exhausting plot structuring. Really, if nothing else is off about this film, it is a distinct lack of inspiration, at least on the whole, and while there are moments in which inspiration kicks in and drives the final product to the edge of decency, on the whole, Moore doesn't do anything special enough for you to stand a chance against all of the familiarity, unevenness and coldness that slowly, but surely eat away at the effort, until it collapses into mediocrity. When the day is done, handsome cinematography and outstanding, if implausible action certainly provide plenty of style, but it's a reasonably intriguing premise's being brought to life by highlights in direction and a colorful cast - from which leading man Bruce Willis once again stands out - that bring the final product startlingly close to decency, ultimately lost in the wake of considerable genericism, a questionable and thin narrative concept, and bombastically overblown, uneven and exhaustingly slam-banged storytelling that, when backed by generally uninspired-feeling direction, drive "A Good Day to Die Hard" into mediocrity, no matter how close it comes to decency. 2.25/5 - Mediocre
    Cameron J Super Reviewer

A Good Day To Die Hard Quotes

News & Features