A Good day to Die Hard. Who else can't wait ?

[Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 2,293
Forum Member
✭✭✭
I can't. :D
Love the Die Hard franchise.

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/a_good_day_to_die_hard/pictures/#33

Here are 33 pic's to whet your appetitie.

Here is the IMDb write up:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1606378/
«1

Comments

  • ScooterwolfScooterwolf Posts: 2,645
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I would have been interested in seeing it, then I saw 12A :(
  • JCRJCR Posts: 24,028
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I would have been interested in seeing it, then I saw 12A :(

    They've not announced the rating here yet, www.bbfc.co.uk is where it'll be put up.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 7,305
    Forum Member
    I would have been interested in seeing it, then I saw 12A :(

    It's an R in the US (for "language and violence", implying more than one use of the F word), so its fairly unlikely that it will be anything less than a 15. Plus, as JCR said, they've not announced the UK rating yet.
  • Dai13371Dai13371 Posts: 8,071
    Forum Member
    No jokes about inserting zimmer frame, bus pass or pension in the title? ;)

    Die Hard films always worth a look.
  • -GONZO--GONZO- Posts: 9,624
    Forum Member
    CJClarke wrote: »
    It's an R in the US (for "language and violence", implying more than one use of the F word), so its fairly unlikely that it will be anything less than a 15. Plus, as JCR said, they've not announced the UK rating yet.

    Just seen this posted on AVforums
    This has been given a 14A cert (closest to our 15 cert) in Canada for the following reasons

    for comparison Last Stand, Gangster Squad, Silver Linings playbook and Django Unchained(!) were all 14A over there

    The following were determinative to the classification decision:

    - Several scenes of violence depicting fighting, beating, shooting, stabbing, mutilation and explosion.

    Classifiers also noted the following:

    - Approximately 43 instances of coarse language
  • MrSuperMrSuper Posts: 18,471
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    The first Die Hard movie to be under 2 hours long. You heard right folks, it's only 97mins long.

    Die Hard - 131mins: 2hrs 11mins
    Die Hard 2 - 124mins: 2hrs 4mins
    Die Hard With a Vengeance - 131mins: 2hrs 11mins
    Live Free or Die Hard - 128mins: 2hrs 8mins
    Die Hard 5 - a very, very short 97mins: 1hr 37mins

    Seems like the script will keep things moving very fast indeed.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 52
    Forum Member
    MrSuper wrote: »
    The first Die Hard movie to be under 2 hours long. You heard right folks, it's only 97mins long.

    Die Hard - 131mins: 2hrs 11mins
    Die Hard 2 - 124mins: 2hrs 4mins
    Die Hard With a Vengeance - 131mins: 2hrs 11mins
    Live Free or Die Hard - 128mins: 2hrs 8mins
    Die Hard 5 - a very, very short 97mins: 1hr 37mins

    Seems like the script will keep things moving very fast indeed.

    This may sound weird, but I've never even thought about the length of them, mainly because I enjoy them so much. Seeing the times listed there makes me wonder how many hours I've spent watching these films over the years :D

    But I digress.

    I've got high hopes for the DH5, so hopefully the fact it's shorter than the others won't be a detriment.
  • PJ68PJ68 Posts: 3,116
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    die hard was a classic, an average man facing off against a group of villains. each film has got progressively worse, he's almost a superhero now

    the scene of him running across broken glass - i doubt he'd even notice it now..
  • Theo_BearTheo_Bear Posts: 997
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    PJ68 wrote: »
    die hard was a classic, an average man facing off against a group of villains. each film has got progressively worse, he's almost a superhero now

    the scene of him running across broken glass - i doubt he'd even notice it now..

    They'd probably have him flying over it in a big red cape.

    As for 97 mins, Jesus wept. Who wrote the script? A 6 year old with ADHD?
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 2,293
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    John McLean Super hero !!!

    Works for me. :D:D

    But yes I do agree, he was supposed to be the 'everyman' in the wrong place at the wrong time.
    Or actually, for everyone he happens to save 'at the right time'. :D
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 7,305
    Forum Member
    If the Canadian rating info posted above is accurate then my hopes have gone up a bit, it at least sounds like they've gone back to the hard R of the first three films. I'm not overly bothered about the 97 mins running time, if it's long enough to tell the story efficiently then I see no problem with it being shorter than the others. Commando is 88 minutes, doesn't stop it being an action classic does it?
  • pburke90pburke90 Posts: 14,754
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    97 minutes?!?! A Die Hard film has to be at least 2 hours long!

    If it gets a 12A rating, I'm not watching it. I didn't go to see DH 4 for the same reason, and when I seen it on DVD after it came out I was so glad I didn't see it in the cinema as I was so disappointed.
  • JCRJCR Posts: 24,028
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Paddy C wrote: »
    97 minutes?!?! A Die Hard film has to be at least 2 hours long!

    If it gets a 12A rating, I'm not watching it. I didn't go to see DH 4 for the same reason, and when I seen it on DVD after it came out I was so glad I didn't see it in the cinema as I was so disappointed.

    It ain't a 12A with 43 f***s in it. Die Hard 4.0 wasn't a 12A either, even the PG-13 cut of it was a 15, this is the bbfc advice for the PG-13 version of DH4.0:
    DIE HARD 4.0 is an action thriller about the subverting of computer networks throughout the USA in order to spread destruction and mayhem as a mask for the largest money theft ever. The film was passed ‘15’ for frequent action violence and one use of strong language.

    The BBFC’s Guidelines at ‘12A’ state that ‘violence must not dwell on detail' and that 'there should be no emphasis on injuries or blood’. Throughout the film there are several moments where the violence does focus on injury and it was these moments, in combination with the sheer relentlessness of the film's frequent action violence, which placed DIE HARD 4.0 more appropriately at '15'. The film also contains one use of strong language

    DIE HARD 4.0 also features some mild verbal sex references and a brief scene in which ads for websites offering sexual services are displayed on a computer screen.
  • MrSuperMrSuper Posts: 18,471
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Bruce Willis on The One Show right now. Most awkward interview ever! :D
  • Rincewind78Rincewind78 Posts: 2,198
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Die Hard 4 I looked forward to....but got disappointed by it so much, I am not looking forward to this really.
    Will still watch it though .
  • StansfieldStansfield Posts: 6,097
    Forum Member
    MrSuper wrote: »
    Bruce Willis on The One Show right now. Most awkward interview ever! :D
    Would have been very painful if he had lasted the whole hour....:eek:
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 24
    Forum Member
    Die Hard 4 really let me know. Crashing cars into helicopters aside, it dragged much more than the first three. The first one is the best action movie I've ever seen so I hope they can get another classic here. Bruce always brings it but the 12A rating doesn't look promising.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 7,305
    Forum Member
    BlueShift wrote: »
    Die Hard 4 really let me know. Crashing cars into helicopters aside, it dragged much more than the first three. The first one is the best action movie I've ever seen so I hope they can get another classic here. Bruce always brings it but the 12A rating doesn't look promising.

    The 12A rating isn't confirmed, and judging by the reports from people who have seen it (it's out in Hong Kong and Singapore already) there is far too much swearing for it to be a 12A (assuming these people aren't bullsh*tting). And since he apparently says his catchphrase in full this time without being semi-obscured by a gunshot there is simply no way it cold be a 12A (unless they've softened since Die Hard 4.0 in 2007, the BBFC consider even a single use of "motherf*cker" to be an instant 15).

    Plus, VUE previously had the film down as a 12A but that's now changed to "TBC", so hopefully it is at least a 15.
  • Theo_BearTheo_Bear Posts: 997
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Given the BBFC still hasn't classified it yet, I suspect some lefty BBFC ponce has demanded 2 mins of cuts for a 15 cert after Fox, expecting a routine 15 uncut, submitted the film late in the day.
    Suspect Fox is now having to make hefty cuts and do a very quick resubmission.
  • JEFF62JEFF62 Posts: 5,093
    Forum Member
    Its the premiere tonight in London. So will it be shown without a BBFC classification at the start. It opens a week today so why has it not been given its certificate yet?
  • Theo_BearTheo_Bear Posts: 997
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    JEFF62 wrote: »
    Its the premiere tonight in London. So will it be shown without a BBFC classification at the start. It opens a week today so why has it not been given its certificate yet?

    I think (will have to check) that the local council, can, at its discretion, decide on a classification for a film if it disagrees strongly enough with the BFFC decision, or can allow a film to be shown unclassified. I think this happened with the first Maguire Spiderman film.

    I don't know the exact rules regarding such decisions, but I'm sure someone here will.
  • Delboy219Delboy219 Posts: 3,193
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Yippee ki yay, mother russia?

    For that reason, i'm out. Also, his son looks annoying. Could they not afford the aussie guy from Avatar?
  • InspirationInspiration Posts: 62,694
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Trailer doesn't fill me with anticipation sadly.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 7,305
    Forum Member
    Theo_Bear wrote: »
    Given the BBFC still hasn't classified it yet, I suspect some lefty BBFC ponce has demanded 2 mins of cuts for a 15 cert after Fox, expecting a routine 15 uncut, submitted the film late in the day.
    Suspect Fox is now having to make hefty cuts and do a very quick resubmission.

    It's possible that they have rated it but just not put it on their website yet, i imagine the BBFC will have at least seen it and granted them permission to screen it tonight at the premiere.

    I've seen them taking their time updating the website before, although granted it was mainly for stuff being released on DVD/Blu Ray. Episodes from Season 3 or 4 of Breaking Bad didn't appear on the BBFC website until after the DVD set had actually been released! Obviously that can't happen here with it being a cinema release, but just because a certificate hasn't been announced yet doesn't mean that they're taking the scissors to it.

    'This Is 40' also comes out on the same day as Die Hard and that was only certified three days ago too.
  • Syntax ErrorSyntax Error Posts: 27,735
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I certainly can't wait.

    4 films in & the quality hasn't dipped.

    I fully expect number 5 to maintain the high standard.

    PS: I'm glad they've not called it Die Hard 5.00 or something!!! Why was the last one called 4.0; what was the reasoning behind that?:confused:
Sign In or Register to comment.