A Good Day to Die Hard

A bad director and a bad screenplay can turn even a good series into a disaster. What's the problem? Well, actually, it's probably everything. It doesn't work from start to finish, unfortunately even from the side of the cast. More: http://www.filmovy-denik.cz/2013/07/smrtonosna-past-opet-v-akci-2013-30.html (2013-07-31)

A crazy day to die hard. When writing this script, Skip Woods occasionally forgot that he was writing another installment of an established series and often broke its established rules – unfortunately, including the traditional showdown with the villain. However, even so, I mostly enjoyed it in spite of myself. Because right from his first glance, Bruce Willis proves that he has missed his iconic role and relishes every shot or argument with the senator. Besides, John Moore, no matter how many flaws he has, simply knows how to handle action; he just needed a little push. I understand that McClane's adventure shouldn't focus on family values, but currently, the universal reactionism really disappoints me. That's why I will add an almost invisible plus to the solid 70 percent. But I want the sixth installment to be more personal in a completely different way. (2013-05-31)

Merciless crap. It starts slowly and smells like a cheap production from Bulgaria. It is beautifully apparent how most of the budget went into action scenes (I must add that everything had to be completely blown to smithereens, of course), but their clarity is incredibly bad. I felt sorry for it and wondered where the director's talent from the Behind Enemy Lines era went – I didn't even breathe during the jet shooting scene, and that scene is already an immortal legend. Unfortunately, it is not just about the chaotic and bad action, the humor doesn't work either. There are only two or three interesting gags, and that's it. The R rating is basically pointless. I liked the cccasional self-parody (whether it’s intentional is another question) and the escapades like the Maybach in Chernobyl, but the casting is awful, and so is the script. Basically, it's a patchwork with 3 or 4 big action set-pieces, of which only one is truly memorable – no filters, work with lighting, low-angle shots like Michael Bay. A big disappointment. The fourth installment is indeed "the most decent" by far, but it's packed and no expense was spared on it. Here, the only evident thing is the attack on viewers' wallets to squeeze the last bit of money from the legend. (2013-03-31)

A masterful funeral of the best action series of all time that can only be accepted at this symbolic level. Putting this material, which for three decades reflected and pushed the possibilities and the nature of Hollywood action films in an original way, into the hands of an average B-movie director like John Moore, with a script that suppresses, if not downright ruins everything that made McClean fun was an idea worthy of immediate defenestration. I can’t be bothered to describe everything that irritated me and I don’t even know why it shouldn’t end at 1*. Maybe out of respect for Willis’s best role and for a couple of solid action scenes, but it’s better to quickly forget about it. (2020-01-18)

The fact that Skip Woods suffers from screenwriting elephantiasis, and that anyone with a heightened sensitivity to moronic dialogue and story in general will probably get cancer while watching the new McLane escapades is unfortunately pretty much covered up by the fact that, from a directorial standpoint, this bullshit is surprisingly innovative and masterful. In fact, the alpha and omega of AGDtDH is that 20 or so minute car chase in downtown Moscow, where all the trump cards are laid out and, in fact, justify the entire existence of this film. The authenticity of the clashes here is aided by the multiple shots of the same situations from different angles, as well as the editing, which cuts away from the collision that the next shot records from somewhere else. Imho, it was purely deliberate that one of the shots ends at an angle where we see a crew member in a helmet along the right edge, controlling the vehicle on which the camera is placed. Combined with the senseless (but impressive) destructiveness of the entire scene, this makes every impact doubly felt and almost brings back that good old feeling of crossing your fingers for the stuntman, wishing him a speedy recovery. Moreover, the armored transport starring in this scene is actually the link between the chase scenes in Terminator 3 (a slow, multi-ton, virtually indestructible crane) with those in The Bourne Supremacy (fast, punchy, unconcerned with consequences), thanks to its destructive potential and not inconsiderable speed. In fact, everything before and partly after – the camera, for example, hiding fearfully behind a car during a gunfight, the shooting of situations from inside passing cars, the escape on the roof that we see from an aerial shot and hear only the echoes of gunfire – are the viewer's preparation for this scene. ________ Yeah, but otherwise it's really terrible crap, which in places defies the very basic creative precepts ("The whole room is contaminated with radiation" "Don't worry, luckily we have a secret substance with us 24/7 that will get rid of the radiation" – no kidding!) and the characters work about the same as in the snuff videos. McLane isn't in this movie, but I think he'd like it on TV. (2013-06-19)