A Good Day To Die Hard Page 5

  • Mola_Ram 11 Feb 2013 02:58:38 17,577 posts
    Seen 22 minutes ago
    Registered 6 years ago
    Post deleted
  • Deleted user 11 February 2013 12:57:19
    If you ignore it it might go away.
  • Scurrminator 11 Feb 2013 13:09:16 9,033 posts
    Seen 1 day ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    Fucking weaksauce

    The fifth film in the Die Hard franchise, the confusingly named A Good Day To Die Hard, has been given a 12A rating by the British Board of Film Classification, even though it was classified as an R over in the US.

    You can read the BBFC's guidance below, but be warned in advance that it contains the words "mild innuendo".

    "The film contains four uses of strong language ('f**k') and a partial use of ‘motherf***er’, the end of which has been cut short so the implied strong language is not heard in full".

    "Against a backdrop of explosions, car chases and the destruction of property, there are a number of scenes featuring shootings which occasionally show brief bullet impacts, but there is no focus on blood or injury. In scenes of hand-to-hand combat we see brief punches and kicks, impressionistic rifle butt blows and an implied, but unseen, neck break. Although there are some crunchy sound effects and incidental shots of the heroes with blood on their faces and clothes, no detail of injury is shown.

    "A Good Day To Die Hard also includes scenes of gun threat to the head and several brief shots of knife-blades as the heroes prepare to defend themselves. There are also passing references to 'doing drugs' and some mild innuendo."

    A few notes from our end. A partial use of motherfucker? If the word motherfucker is going to be used in a Die Hard movie, chances are it'll be said after the words "Sniff my cheese!" "Yippee-kay-yay" so expect that catchphrase to be more muted than previous instances. Also, as previously hinted at, "mild innuendo" sounds more Carry On than John McClane. Sad, but true.

    A Good Day To Die Hard will motherf***er its way into cinemas on February 14.
  • Ultrasoundwave 11 Feb 2013 13:14:27 5,693 posts
    Seen 7 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    Are there any proper reviews out for this yet?, early buzz seems to suggest its good (better than 4.0 anyway) but looking for some official confirmation from Empire, Total Film, etc.....
  • beastmaster 11 Feb 2013 13:17:27 18,071 posts
    Seen 7 hours ago
    Registered 14 years ago
    I have just seen this on the Empire website myself. I'm a bit disappointed. What the fuck happened here?

    It's like they put Deputy Police Chief Dwayne T. Robinson in charge of the situation.

    Edited by beastmaster at 13:20:47 11-02-2013
  • Scurrminator 11 Feb 2013 13:20:46 9,033 posts
    Seen 1 day ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    Those motheruckers!!!
  • glaeken 11 Feb 2013 13:24:13 11,893 posts
    Seen 4 days ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    I barely remember 4.0. The only thing that really stands out is when Willis gets attacked by a CGI jet fighter. I also vaguely remember a CGI helicopter doing something or other.
  • Benno 11 Feb 2013 13:27:07 11,700 posts
    Seen 18 hours ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    Die Hard 1 and 2 are all that matters. They cant take them away from me! (unless they make a prequel)
  • Blotto 11 Feb 2013 14:19:50 2,778 posts
    Seen 3 years ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Wait, so is it heavily edited in the UK?

    Or is that seriously what merits an R rating in the states?
  • Deleted user 11 February 2013 14:21:53
    TarickStonefire wrote:
    Die Hard is not Die Hard if it's not Bruce Willis trapped in a single location (and no, New York doesn't count, Die Hard 3, even though you were a lot of fun and definitely get an Honorary Membership of the Real Die Hard Movie Club).

    4 was a mostly awful movie only made good in a few parts by Willis being flippantly McClane-ish, but it was mostly awful and not remotely close to being a Die Hard movie.

    I was in no way surprised to recently learn the Staggeringly Undertalented Len Wiseman was the director. I cannot understand how he keeps getting gigs apart from the fact that Crappy Big Budget Marquee Name Movies clearly make enough money to warrant his continued employment; it sure as shit ain't based on directorial panache and skill.
    Len Wiseman is a top guy and pretty talented.

    I met him once (didnt get to meet his wife though sob sob) and he genuinely is a top bloke.

    All his films in my eyes have been okay.

    remember though Len Wiseman was hired to direct Die Hard 4.0. He didnt write the script or the screenplay. He was just the director and I though he did a pretty good job with it.

    For what its worth I also enjoyed the 2012 Total Recall too.
  • Deleted user 11 February 2013 14:23:20
    Seems it was going to get a 15 and Fox recut it for a 12A.

    I bet we get the "exclusive uncut Blu-ray" marketed at us at some point.
  • Deleted user 11 February 2013 14:24:29
    Having seen A good day to die hard, I can confirm the violence is on a par with Die Hard 4.

    Die Hard 4 hate it or not made a lot of money, so Fox were always gonna go down the same route with the sequel.
  • Scurrminator 11 Feb 2013 14:24:51 9,033 posts
    Seen 1 day ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    Blotto wrote:
    Wait, so is it heavily edited in the UK?

    Or is that seriously what merits an R rating in the states?
    They probably edited it to get the 12a here. In the states if a film is an R kids can still go with adults so I guess they don't lose the 'young' crowd but here they want the kiddies to get in.
    As if anyone under 15 gives a fuck about Die Hard anyways!

    Esp; does the BBFC blurb tally with what you saw or did your version have the full Yippie Ki Yay line?

    Edited by Scurrminator at 14:25:11 11-02-2013
  • beastmaster 11 Feb 2013 14:27:49 18,071 posts
    Seen 7 hours ago
    Registered 14 years ago
    From the BBFC website for the film

    "Precuts information

    During post-production, the distributor sought and was given advice on how to secure the desired classification. Following this advice, certain changes were made prior to submission"
  • Deleted user 11 February 2013 14:31:15
    Are we honestly concerned about the artistic integrity of fucking Die Hard 5??
  • Deleted user 11 February 2013 14:34:44
    Violence was cartoon like, big explosions hardly any blood or language.

    Die Hard was an adult thriller. Now its a teenagers wet dream, F35 in Die Hard 4. Mi 29 Hind Gunships in 5.
  • beastmaster 11 Feb 2013 14:35:08 18,071 posts
    Seen 7 hours ago
    Registered 14 years ago
    The best I'm hoping for is an entertaining action flick. I expect there will be plenty of property destruction.

    There's also no need for it to be set in Russia. No need to have his kid in it. It's got to have a better plot and baddie than 4.0 though.
  • Deleted user 11 February 2013 14:35:58
    Oh noes. A film that has constructed by film execs for no reason other than to get bums on seats has been further meddled with by film execs to get more bums on seats. It's the end of cinema.
  • Deleted user 11 February 2013 14:36:39
    Just get a sample of him saying his catchphrase and listen to that on repeat. If him saying motherfucker a couple of times means that much to you then there's something wrong with you.

    The lack of swearing isn't why 4 was shit.
  • Deleted user 11 February 2013 14:38:50
    Guess the reason willis has seemed so pissed off with interviews this week is the fact hes seen the film and was not impressed apaprently.

    So now begins 3 months of promos for him for a film even he thinks is shit.

    Its on a par with 4. If you liked 4 you will like this.

    Edited by espibara at 14:39:19 11-02-2013
  • Dougs 11 Feb 2013 14:47:43 85,240 posts
    Seen 9 hours ago
    Registered 15 years ago
    I liked 4 the first time. Probably because I really wanted to like it. The second time highlighted just how poor it was, a few scenes aside.
  • Aretak 11 Feb 2013 15:00:32 10,391 posts
    Seen 1 week ago
    Registered 15 years ago
    Still never seen 4. I did see a little bit on TV the other night though, and it didn't really seem to have much to do with Die Hard. Police cars flying through the air and crashing into helicopters isn't what I associate with John McClane, but in the five minutes I saw that's what happened. I switched over at that point.

    Then again, 2 and 3 were both shit too, so it's not like it's ruining a classic franchise or anything. Easy enough to pretend the first one has nothing to do with any of them.
  • ronuds 11 Feb 2013 15:05:17 21,781 posts
    Seen 5 years ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    Is 4 the one with the kid from the Apple ads? I've lost track since they turned into generic turds.

    Edited by ronuds at 16:23:50 11-02-2013
Log in or register to reply

Sometimes posts may contain links to online retail stores. If you click on one and make a purchase we may receive a small commission. For more information, go here.