Die Hard 2.0.. WTF?

IrishJack89

I'm just after watching Die Hard 2 for the first time and while its sort of entertaining it happens to be the most ridiculous movie ever in my opinion.. Can I just ask were passenegers allowed bring tasers on to planes in the early 90s and have you always been able to use phones on planes? And the last scene where the 2 guys are fighting on the wing of a plane and the colonl just looking at them with a machine gun which moments later turns into a knife when he's fighting John McClane.
I know its only a movie but people are always banging on about how movies aren't as good as they used to be when obviously todays movies are miles better.. Maybe its just older people refusing to let go of what WERE once good movies...

Oasis44

IrishJack89 wrote: »

I'm just after watching Die Hard 2 for the first time and while its sort of entertaining it happens to be the most ridiculous movie ever in my opinion.. Can I just ask were passenegers allowed bring tasers on to planes in the early 90s and have you always been able to use phones on planes? And the last scene where the 2 guys are fighting on the wing of a plane and the colonl just looking at them with a machine gun which moments later turns into a knife when he's fighting John McClane.
I know its only a movie but people are always banging on about how movies aren't as good as they used to be when obviously todays movies are miles better.. Maybe its just older people refusing to let go of what WERE once good movies...

To answer your questions yes you could bring tasers onto planes in the early 90's and yes planes had phones like they do now but that's mainly on US planes. The reason your man doesn't use the gun on mc clane at the end is because the wing is loaded with petrol and guess what happens if you shoot petrol? Hence the reason he uses the knife. BTW did you spot Colm Meaney in this movie he is the captain on the plane the bad guys crash - your right though this movie is far feathed by any stretch of the imagination - better than part 4 though

Elysian

Having watched (and loved) that very film last night I should be able to answer some of your questions:

IrishJack89 wrote: »

Can I just ask were passenegers allowed bring tasers on to planes in the early 90s and have you always been able to use phones on planes

The phones they were using on the planes weren't their own phones, hence John not recognizing the number Holly rang him from. They were public wireless phones which were available onboard the plane.

IrishJack89 wrote: »

And the last scene where the 2 guys are fighting on the wing of a plane and the colonl just looking at them with a machine gun which moments later turns into a knife when he's fighting John McClane.

When the Colonel was making his way out to the wing McClane was on the General told the Colonel not to fire his gun as the wing is fully fueled.

IrishJack89

Thats fair enough but he hardly thought of hitting the fuel tank while they were fighting, plus he could have crouched and then shot across so he wouldn't hit the wing (I play Modern Warfare, I know the ins and outs).

I would be sceptical about the tasers though but I suppose it is a movie. Which Die Hard is the best by the way?

Oasis44

IrishJack89 wrote: »

Thats fair enough but he hardly thought of hitting the fuel tank while they were fighting, plus he could have crouched and then shot across so he wouldn't hit the wing (I play Modern Warfare, I know the ins and outs).

I would be sceptical about the tasers though but I suppose it is a movie. Which Die Hard is the best by the way?

Jesus dude do you even need to ask? Part one obviously:rolleyes:

Jarren

The one with Hans Gruber obviously:)

TiGeR KiNgS

get with 90's OP

Goldstein

The one odd thing I found is when they storm the church, see that the whole place is wired to explode imminently and then...nothing happens - it never explodes.

Still though: It wouldn't be Christmas without Die Hard 2

Inbox

Ha I think these are brilliant movies , no matter how many times I've seen them if they're on the Telly ,i watch them.

James Forde

Die Hard 2.0

It's Die Hard : Die Harder

Did you like "Die Hard 4.0"?

BlitzKrieg

I know its only a movie but people are always banging on about how movies aren't as good as they used to be when obviously todays movies are miles better.. Maybe its just older people refusing to let go of what WERE once good movies...

except it's well known that die hard 2 was actually pretty crap and was until part 4 easily the weakest in the series.

Die hard has reverse star trek syndrom

1 and 3 are great while 2 and 4 are meh

the whole year inn

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

except it's well known that die hard 2 was actually pretty crap and was until part 4 easily the weakest in the series.

Die hard has reverse star trek syndrom

1 and 3 are great while 2 and 4 are meh

I agree,seen 3 last night and was savage!!

Cork boy 55

jarecki1976 wrote: »

The one with Hans Gruber obviously:)

DIE HARD 1.0 is the greatest movie ever made.
We should have a DIE HARD 1.0 subforum

IrishJack89

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

except it's well known that die hard 2 was actually pretty crap and was until part 4 easily the weakest in the series.



Die hard has reverse star trek syndrom



1 and 3 are great while 2 and 4 are meh

Thats funny because all I've seen is Die Hard 2 and 4. I thought 4 was a bit far fetched as well with all that computer crap going on. Still there watchable..

I'll have to give 1 a go so..

And 1 more thing actually.. Do any of those super hero guys like John McClane ever die or in any of the movies or are they all invinsible?

Cork boy 55

the plot and the bad guys plan in die hard 2.0 makes no sense whatsoever
There's one point where two groups of bad guys are shooting at each other with blanks to fool the good guys

having said that it is a ok yarn and worth a watch 5.7/10

DIE HARD 1.0 = 15/10
DIE HARD 2.0= 5.7/10
DIE HARD 3.0 = 7/10
DIE HARD CGI = 2/10

Mint Sauce

IrishJack89 wrote: »

I would be sceptical about the tasers though but I suppose it is a movie. Which Die Hard is the best by the way?

It was an internal flight, internal flights in the US pre 9/11 were like boarding a bus.



Plus, its a movie.

corcaigh07

IrishJack89 wrote: »

Thats fair enough but he hardly thought of hitting the fuel tank while they were fighting, plus he could have crouched and then shot across so he wouldn't hit the wing (I play Modern Warfare, I know the ins and outs).

I would be sceptical about the tasers though but I suppose it is a movie. Which Die Hard is the best by the way?

dear lord, sur i suppose McClane would recover from an entire clip by resting against a wall...:rolleyes:

Mickeroo

Far-fetched is not a valid criticism for a balls out action movie, much less any of the die hards!

bnt

I still don't understand why they got Colm Meaney to play a supposedly English airline pilot. His attempt at a "RAF English" accent is atrocious, sounds like David Niven struggling not to fill his trousers.

I had to wonder: why was Holly permitted to carry a Taser on board the plane? They did have airline security back in 1990 ... :rolleyes:

Lastly: the idea of the flame following the trail of kerosene, catching up with the plane and exploding, was the subject of a Mythbusters episode, and was busted on all counts. They couldn't light aircraft kerosene or diesel at all, no matter what they tried - only normal petrol. Then the flame moved extremely slowly, depending on how "fresh" it was, and there was no explosion even if permitted to reach the tank.

Dotrel

My favourite is Die Hard 1.1 (the UTV edit) Yippee-ki-yay, Kemo Sabe!

Mickeroo

bnt wrote: »

Lastly: the idea of the flame following the trail of kerosene, catching up with the plane and exploding, was the subject of a Mythbusters episode, and was busted on all counts. They couldn't light aircraft kerosene or diesel at all, no matter what they tried - only normal petrol. Then the flame moved extremely slowly, depending on how "fresh" it was, and there was no explosion even if permitted to reach the tank.

Yea, I think i saw that. They myth busted the whole cars exploding when they go off cliffs thing too. The only way they got it to work was fill the car with explosives.

There was a heated argument on another thread recently too about how bullets don't actually knock people off their feet in real life either.

Drumpot

Die hard 1 was just an awesome piece of cinema. But let's not forget that there was a decent amount of suspended disbelief required to enjoy it aswell.

A new york cop who seems to have an intricate knowledge of explosives, including how to arm them using a computer screen and a chair?!

The bit where he wrapped A fire hose around himself And jumped off the building was a brilliant stunt but alot harder to believe then somebody getting a taser on board a plane!

That aside, movies like die hard are there to enjoyed, not rationalised!

LighterGuy

Dotrel wrote: »

My favourite is Die Hard 1.1 (the UTV edit) Yippee-ki-yay, Kemo Sabe!

Man you are bringing back memories!

My dad taped Die Hard 2 when it premiered on UTV when I was a kid. Must of been around 1993/1994 as movies took 3 years to get onto the tv.

I watched that tape so many times growing up and it wasnt until I saw the untouched version did I realise how much UTV butchered it!
Everything was censored with dub-overs. The word f**k was never said... and as we all know Die Hard 2 has the word f**k dozens of times in it.

It cut the bad guys getting shot (a shot of the 'squibs' going off) Such as the Robert Patrick Terminal Scene. I also remember the line of "mother fu*ker" being replaced with "Mothers arm" ... I only remember that cause even as a kid i questioned what "mothers arm" meant. lol.

Podge_irl

Oasis44 wrote: »

guess what happens if you shoot petrol?

Nothing.

e_e

I only watched the original Die Hard the other night (only 3 euro in Tesco for the first 2 movies).

Holy sheeeeeeeeeeeit I wasn't expecting it to be that good. Alan Rickman makes the best movie villain ever.

jonnyfingers

I don't think Die Hard and "believability" can be used in the same sentence. They are what all action movies should be, great fun, plenty of shooting and blood (except 4), plenty of swearing (except 4), a likeable hero, good villains (well only if your surname is Gruber), one-dimensional and expendable henchmen, and ridiculous plots that are crazy fun to watch.

I will watch all the Die Hard films (4 included!) over and over again. In fact I must have seen 1 and 2 over 20 times each at this stage and 3 easily over 10 times. And I own none of them on DVD!:D

podgemonster

"Do you really think you have a chance against us Mr. Cowboy"

Hans you are a legend! Love the series.
Die Hard 1 > Die Hard 3
Die Hard 3 > Die Hard 2
Die Hard 2 > Die Hard 4
Die Hard 4 = Dirt


One plot hole on the first one that i never noticed was this...
Hans' man Teo spends the whole the whole movie slowly cracking through the vault. At the end when Hans and the only terrorist that isnt killed are clearing it out, John tracks them down and enters the vault. End result is Hans exiting the stage via the GLASS WINDOW. My question is, if the vault was so tough why didn't they just disguise themselves as window cleaners and go in via the window.

norrie rugger

Dotrel wrote: »

My favourite is Die Hard 1.1 (the UTV edit) Yippee-ki-yay, Kemo Sabe!

In a big thick Northern accent

Joey the lips

Nah part one was the best but the baddie bitch in 4 that gets killed in the lift shaft(elevator if your from america) is very hot hot hot.

In order of goodness based on first time watching

Best

1
3
4
2

Isnt john amos(part 2) the coloured dude just a brilliant actor. Remember him in coming to america and of course kunta kintae.

hidinginthebush

bnt wrote: »

I still don't understand why they got Colm Meaney to play a supposedly English airline pilot. His attempt at a "RAF English" accent is atrocious, sounds like David Niven struggling not to fill his trousers.

I had to wonder: why was Holly permitted to carry a Taser on board the plane? They did have airline security back in 1990 ... :rolleyes:

Lastly: the idea of the flame following the trail of kerosene, catching up with the plane and exploding, was the subject of a Mythbusters episode, and was busted on all counts. They couldn't light aircraft kerosene or diesel at all, no matter what they tried - only normal petrol. Then the flame moved extremely slowly, depending on how "fresh" it was, and there was no explosion even if permitted to reach the tank.

As said above, they really didn't. That's why they got so much tougher after 9/11. Before that, you could nearly get on an internal flight in the US without id. It was only slightly more inconvenient than boarding a bus.

Ellian

Cyril Rafaelli was the only saving grace of Die Hard 4 - things kicked up a gear any time he was onscreen. Everything else was total meh

Tomk1

Die Hard 1&3 had chenistry.
No matter how many times I've tried to watch DH4, it always ends the same with me switching it of in frustration, once I got half-way.

I see Patrick Stewart is set to be the badie in 'A good day to Die Hard'... I'd love to see JM actually dying in the end, also if Gurger's Son could appear in the plot seeking revenge.
Source: Wiki-Die Hard

Mr. K

Die Hard 2 really is terrible, painfully 90s and so juvenile. I think 4 is much better, despite the CGI and weak villain.

ziggy

This post has been deleted.

LighterGuy

Alternative ending for Die Hard 3 (yes, its real)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RSVwuFsiZv4

Dempsey

podgemonster wrote: »

One plot hole on the first one that i never noticed was this...
Hans' man Teo spends the whole the whole movie slowly cracking through the vault. At the end when Hans and the only terrorist that isnt killed are clearing it out, John tracks them down and enters the vault. End result is Hans exiting the stage via the GLASS WINDOW. My question is, if the vault was so tough why didn't they just disguise themselves as window cleaners and go in via the window.

Plan A was to get the code from Takagi, Plan B was to get the FBI to knock out the power for the 'final lock'. Both plans needed the hostage scenario

Loomis

Karl, schieß dem Fenster.

podgemonster

Dempsey wrote: »

Plan A was to get the code from Takagi, Plan B was to get the FBI to knock out the power for the 'final lock'. Both plans needed the hostage scenario

You don't say:P
I know what the plan was. (Watched it every Christmas since I was 11). But the vault scene in the final showdown has a glass window which would be easier to break than the 7 locks of the vault door.

Dempsey

A glass window inside the vault, I dont think so! The final scene wasnt inside the vault

Plazaman

Dempsey wrote: »

A glass window inside the vault, I dont think so! The final scene wasnt inside the vault

+1 The last scene was in the room where the vault was, not in the vault itself.

I can't understand Mc Clanes relationship status with the wife throughout the movies, the continuity is a bit screwed. In 1 they're divorced (on the brink of it) but all lovey dovey at the end. In 2, she's still living in a different city so still seperated but then all lovey dovey at the end. In 3, BAM, splitsville AGAIN! In 4, a brief mention of her, the daughter takes centre stage.

JoeA3

Plazaman wrote: »

+1 The last scene was in the room where the vault was, not in the vault itself.

I can't understand Mc Clanes relationship status with the wife throughout the movies, the continuity is a bit screwed. In 1 they're divorced (on the brink of it) but all lovey dovey at the end. In 2, she's still living in a different city so still seperated but then all lovey dovey at the end. In 3, BAM, splitsville AGAIN! In 4, a brief mention of her, the daughter takes centre stage.

I think they were back happily "together" in 2, but she was still working in L.A. and traveling home for Christmas! In 3, they were definitely separated and McClane had gone off the rails as a result. In 4, I think we're left to assume they're long since estranged.

skelliser

IrishJack89 wrote: »

I'll have to give 1 a go so..

WTF!!:eek::eek::eek::eek:

You have never seen die hard!!

And you start a thread to dis' die hard 2!!

Yippee-ki-yay, IrishJack89!

LighterGuy

Plazaman wrote: »

+1 The last scene was in the room where the vault was, not in the vault itself.

I can't understand Mc Clanes relationship status with the wife throughout the movies, the continuity is a bit screwed. In 1 they're divorced (on the brink of it) but all lovey dovey at the end. In 2, she's still living in a different city so still seperated but then all lovey dovey at the end. In 3, BAM, splitsville AGAIN! In 4, a brief mention of her, the daughter takes centre stage.

In the first, I took it as they were still married but seperated. Even John gets angry as she is now using her maiden name (you are still my wife talk) But through the events of the film of john saving the day ... they rekindle. Thats grand. Tis the whole 'happy ending' deal.

The second, as you say, they are still together and the movie ends with them being together. Thats also grand because they kept continuity.

Then the 3rd? could be defined as rehashing. So many sequels do that. Be it an entire plot line or a characters previous standpoint (McClane originally being "seperated") ..... Or maybe it was because Die Hard 3 was originally Lethal Weapon 3's script. Maybe they didnt want to rewrite too much to allow for his wife?

I still find it funny that they cast Samuel L Jackson, a black man (ala Danny glover) as the sidekick in the revised Die Hard 3 script :P

kippy

Jaysus if you thought Die Hard 2.0 was far fetched you should take another look at Die Hard 4.0 - the stuff with the jet is just silly. That doesn't bother me though, tis an ok movie - not a patch on the earlier ones mind.

ankles

What always always :mad: bugs me abour DH2 is Lt Col Colm Meany on his Windsor Airlines flight stating that he's flying on fumes or whatever and when the plane crashes there's an enormous fireball. WHAT THE HELL CAUSED THE FIREBALL!!!! There was no fuel, it should have just been a break-up with no flames at all.

I know, suspend disbelief and all but it really bugs me.

It also kinda bugs me that surely if it created a long fiery wreck this could have been used as a landing strip like what happens at the end.

Dempsey

ankles wrote: »

What always always :mad: bugs me abour DH2 is Lt Col Colm Meany on his Windsor Airlines flight stating that he's flying on fumes or whatever and when the plane crashes there's an enormous fireball. WHAT THE HELL CAUSED THE FIREBALL!!!! There was no fuel, it should have just been a break-up with no flames at all.

I know, suspend disbelief and all but it really bugs me.

It also kinda bugs me that surely if it created a long fiery wreck this could have been used as a landing strip like what happens at the end.

The fireball thing was 'artistic licence' :pac:

At the end, wasn't the plane trying an emergency landing and they were close to the ground as it is?

IrishJack89

Plazaman wrote: »

+1 The last scene was in the room where the vault was, not in the vault itself.

I can't understand Mc Clanes relationship status with the wife throughout the movies, the continuity is a bit screwed. In 1 they're divorced (on the brink of it) but all lovey dovey at the end. In 2, she's still living in a different city so still seperated but then all lovey dovey at the end. In 3, BAM, splitsville AGAIN! In 4, a brief mention of her, the daughter takes centre stage.

Is the main guy called John McClane in all the movies?

Jumboman

bnt wrote: »

I still don't understand why they got Colm Meaney to play a supposedly English airline pilot. His attempt at a "RAF English" accent is atrocious, sounds like David Niven struggling not to fill his trousers.

If you think thats bad you should listen to Brendan Gleeson trying to do a posh English accent in mission impossible 2:D