Die Hard II > Die Hard III

THERE, I said it !

While 3 is good, it lacks depth, is hoakey at times.

Die Hard II continues the dark comedy and bloody violence from the original.
3 is the only one I like, probably bc I seen it first. Same with Terminator 2
 
Comedy is my favorite genre + your suggestion = step brothers is GOAT

I will have to give it a watch, but I'm not sure it'll be a match for my favorite buddy film.

3006770.jpg
 
THERE, I said it !

While 3 is good, it lacks depth, is hoakey at times.

Die Hard II continues the dark comedy and bloody violence from the original.

I completely agree. No doubt that Die Hard II is an imperfect film, but in many ways it had a similar feel to the original (including humor and violence). You also felt like John McClain was confined to one area like the original. In Die Hard with a Vengence and Live Free or Die Hard, he was all over the place.
 
1, 3 or 4, 2, 5
 
I completely agree. No doubt that Die Hard II is an imperfect film, but in many ways it had a similar feel to the original (including humor and violence). You also felt like John McClain was confined to one area like the original. In Die Hard with a Vengence and Live Free or Die Hard, he was all over the place.

People underestimate what a victory it is to recapture the tone of a move like the first Die Hard.
 
Die Hard 1 and 3 have one huge advantage over the rest. They had Alan Rickman and Jeremy Irons as the villains.
 
People underestimate what a victory it is to recapture the tone of a move like the first Die Hard.
I think Die Hard II gets a worse rap than it deserves because it lives in the shadow of the original more than the other sequels do. People went in to Die Hard II with high expectations because the original Die Hard was an instant classic. But, when they realized Die Hard II was not Die Hard, they were extremely disappointed. Die Hard II could never be Die Hard though. That was never a realistic expectation.
 
I think Die Hard II gets a worse rap than it deserves because it lives in the shadow of the original more than the other sequels do. People went in to Die Hard II with high expectations because the original Die Hard was an instant classic. But, when they realized Die Hard II was not Die Hard, they were extremely disappointed. Die Hard II could never be Die Hard though. That was never a realistic expectation.

I consider Die Hard 2 one of the all-time classics among sequels.
 
1, 3 or 4, 2, 5

That's my ranking too but it's important to emphasize that Die Hard had a Lethal Weapon-esque track record of four entertaining movies before the 5th one came on the scene and stopped that in its tracks and stunk up the joint.

It's more like

Die Hard
Die Hard 3
Die Hard 4
Die Hard 2





A Good Day to Die Hard
 
That's my ranking too but it's important to emphasize that Die Hard had a Lethal Weapon-esque track record of four entertaining movies before the 5th one came on the scene and stopped that in its tracks and stunk up the joint.

It's more like

Die Hard
Die Hard 3
Die Hard 4
Die Hard 2





A Good Day to Die Hard
Couldn't agree more. The biggest gap is between 2 and 5. I think 1 and 3 are in a class of their own.
 
That's my ranking too but it's important to emphasize that Die Hard had a Lethal Weapon-esque track record of four entertaining movies before the 5th one came on the scene and stopped that in its tracks and stunk up the joint.

Die Hard 5 is an abomination. Jai Courtney managed to tank both Die Hard 5 and Terminator 5, though both would have still been dog shit without him.
 
Back
Top