Die Hard 6 "both a prequel and a sequel at the same time"

Simon2015

Not liking what I'm hearing about Die Hard 6. Word is they are going to get Len Wiseman to direct another Die Hard.

I wish they would bring back John McTiernan becuase hes the only director who knows how to make a proper Die Hard film.


IMO Die Hard 4 and 5 and not even Die Hard films.

A sixth film in the Die Hard franchise is in the works, according to a Thursday report from Deadline. This one will be both a prequel and a sequel.
Tentatively titled Die Hard: Year One, it will see Bruce Willis, 60, reprise the role he has played five times before

However much of the story will be set in 1979, before the events at the Nakatomi Plaza in the 1988 action classic that made the actor one of the biggest movie stars on the planet.
Presumably the film will be in the form of a flashback, with the older veteran telling his story to another character.
This means Fox is on the hunt for a young actor to play the New York cop before he became the hero.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-3274655/Bruce-Willis-60-signed-SIXTH-Die-Hard-film.html#ixzz3ogL8Vkrd
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Faith+1

FFS it went past it's sell by date after 3. Just leave it alone!

Mackman

Why not just make a good 70's style cop movie, ala Dirty Harry, French Connection?

Ageyev

Mackman wrote: »

Why not just make a good 70's style cop movie, ala Dirty Harry, French Connection?

This is surprisingly easy and very possible to do ie. make a film today and set it in a genre of the past. I thought Narc in 2002 might have ignited a resurgence of those kinda gritty cop drama thrillers but it didn't really.

House of the Devil was a decent attempt at an early 80s horror. Didn't ignite anything but showed that it is more than possible.

Billy86

My money is on it both being a piece of sh*t and stinking of piss at the same time.

Mr Freeze

I thought 4 was terrible, couldn't even bring myself to watch 5.

6 being a Sequel/Prequel thing, sounds just awful.

Arytonblue

Die Hard surely now challenging Transformers for title of film franchise with most rubbish and unnecessary sequels (and now prequels!)

2smiggy

I thought 4 was ok, well watchable. I have not seen 5 , based on how terrible everyone says it was. Even see Bruce Willis doing an interview on the BBC looking very embarrassed while talking about the film and being told how great it is :pac:

ancapailldorcha

This franchise needs to die. It's become nothing more than a licence to produce action comedies that could not possibly be more generic.

Duggy747

Die Hard 4 for me was actually a pretty solid and entertaining action movie but wasn't even close to being a Die Hard film, it could've been an action vehicle for a number of different actors. 16 Blocks actually felt more like a Die Hard film to me.

McClane's catchphrase being censored was an absolute middle-finger to the franchise. The "unedited" version was funny; "Let's add more digital blood here and there and have random swear words appear off-screen and sound out-of-place to the rest of the dialogue."

Die Hard 5 was just................wow............I put it off for so long and then watched it to see what the fuss was about. It's mind-boggingly terrible, I mean really really terrible and turned McClane into an utterly unlikeable dickhead. It was such an ugly sterile looking film, too, with Joel Schumacher-esque colours to it.

How can they even do a Die Hard prequel? The whole premise of Die Hard 1 was that he was an ordinary, boring, run-of-the-mill cop in an extraordinary situation.

Should be called Eat Shít and Die Hard!

Stone Deaf 4evr

Duggy747 wrote: »

Should be called Eat Shít and Die Hard!

I'm sorry I can only thank this post once.

Simon2015

The only way they can save the Die Hard franchise is to bring back John McTiernan.

Arghus

Simon2015 wrote: »

The only way they can save the Die Hard franchise is to bring back John McTiernan.

The only way they can save the franchise is to stop making them.

A Die Hard sequel? Sounds like only die hard fans will go see this ...

*cough*

A Die Hard sequel? Sounds like only die hard fans will go see this ...

*cough*

The Black Oil

Die Hard 6, for what? What did McClane do before he joined the NYPD and took down Hans Gruber at the Nakatomi Plaza?

Was he the fuppin' architect of said building?

Billy86

The Black Oil wrote: »

Die Hard 6, for what? What did McClane do before he joined the NYPD and took down Hans Gruber at the Nakatomi Plaza?

Was he the fuppin' architect of said building?

Shut up, they have a backstory to ruin here!! :mad:

The whole point of McClane in Die Hard is that he was just an ordinary, run-of-the-mill guy with nothing spectacular of note up until then, was it not? This whole plot (and all the movies since With a Vengeance) just make me think of...

Ageyev

The Black Oil wrote: »

Die Hard 6, for what? What did McClane do before he joined the NYPD and took down Hans Gruber at the Nakatomi Plaza?

Was he the fuppin' architect of said building?

He was Moonlighting as a private investigator

Skerries

Simon2015 wrote: »

The only way they can save the Die Hard franchise is to bring back John McTiernan.

forget that! just bring back John McClane who we haven't seen since the 3rd film

Ageyev

John McTiernan only got out of prison last year. Can't see him getting a big gig like Die Hard again tbh.

OU812

No, no, no no NO!

This can't happen, not as a movie anyway.

A gritty set in 70s NYC cop show with McClane as a rookie cop would be worth watching. Particularly if done by Netflix or Amazon or even HBO, I want violence, drama, swearing, but he doesn't get to say YKYMF unit the last episode.

Joseph Gorden Levitt being the obvious choice to play him, but that won't happen. Maybe Michael Angarano? He kind of has that Cocky broody look going on.



For my money, 16 Blocks and White House Down (cut the first 20 minutes & substitute it with John McClane is on vacation in Washington & visiting the Whitehouse when it's taken over), should have been Die Hard movies

Duggy747

DH 6 should be just Sgt. Al Powell putting a round in McClane's head to put him out of his misery.

Unearthly

I actually liked the 4th but the 5th was a travesty. They gave it to an absolute hack of a director.

The premise to this one sounds poor, as others said, John did nothing special before Die Hard 1

Billy86

Unearthly wrote: »

I actually liked the 4th but the 5th was a travesty. They gave it to an absolute hack of a director.

The premise to this one sounds poor, as others said, John did nothing special before Die Hard 1

Just looked into his filmography... Behind Enemy Lines? Jaysus, that was beyond God awful, don't know how it didn't get panned so much more than it was. I also didn't know he was from Dundalk!

_Kaiser_

Unearthly wrote: »

The premise to this one sounds poor, as others said, John did nothing special before Die Hard 1

Confirmed by the man himself in Die Hard 1 when he talks to Argyle in the limo at the start about how he's a New York Cop with a 6 month backlog of New York scumbags he's trying to put away.

Die Hard 6: Paperwork just got real!

JP Liz V1

Unearthly wrote: »

I actually liked the 4th but the 5th was a travesty. They gave it to an absolute hack of a director.

The premise to this one sounds poor, as others said, John did nothing special before Die Hard 1

Jai Courtney as the son Jack was bad in 5

Unearthly

JP Liz V1 wrote: »

Jai Courtney as the son Jack was bad in 5

Yes I've only seen him in that and the latest Terminator. Stop killing my childhood Jai

GreatDefector

Simon2015 wrote: »

The only way they can save the Die Hard franchise is to bring back John McTiernan.

It'll be more like Tommy Tiernan

faceman

Ironically the original Die Hard is kind of a sequel to the Frank Sinatra 60's flick, The Detective. They wanted Sinatra to reprise the role, he said no, then out popped the Die Hard we know as a result.

Ageyev

Billy86 wrote: »

Just looked into his filmography... Behind Enemy Lines? Jaysus, that was beyond God awful, don't know how it didn't get panned so much more than it was. I also didn't know he was from Dundalk!

John Moore is one of those awful "directors for hire" that exhibit absolutely no passion in filmmaking. He shows up, says action and cut then collects his pay. From Ireland btw.

Nice work if you can get it.

Ageyev

faceman wrote: »

Ironically the original Die Hard is kind of a sequel to the Frank Sinatra 60's flick, The Detective. They wanted Sinatra to reprise the role, he said no, then out popped the Die Hard we know as a result.

Sort of. He was offered the role per a contractual arrangement. Sinatra was way too old to play an action role and films had changed greatly by the late 80s after Spielberg and Lucas blockbusters as well as Mad Max, Lethal Weapon etc

OU812

faceman wrote: »

Ironically the original Die Hard is kind of a sequel to the Frank Sinatra 60's flick, The Detective. They wanted Sinatra to reprise the role, he said no, then out popped the Die Hard we know as a result.

Remember reading that. They slashed the budget too after he turned it down. Would have been an interesting movie.

AFAIK, none of the first three (AKA the only ones that really exist) were written as Die Hard. They were all adapted books or scripts with other main characters.

I can't understand why they didn't do the same with 16 blocks. It's literally a Die Hard movie, just the central character has a different name.

The same with "White House Down". If you haven't seen the movie & have 2½ minutes to spare, watch this trailer:

If they cut the first 20 minutes of it which sets up why he was there (Job Interview) & instead John McClane was on vacation touring the whitehouse, then boom... We're right in Die Hard territory. The central character is even called "John McHale" & ends up in a blood & dirt covered white vest, which has to be deliberate...

OU812

Actually, here's the whole background to the Original "Die Hard" & the first sequels.

TLDR (but do, it's really quite interesting) - It was originally supposed to be Starring Sinatra, then they tried to convert it into a sequel to Commando starring Swarzenegger & then it became Die Hard... Die Hard 2 was based on a book called "58 minutes" & Die Hard 3 was wanted as the basis to Lethal Weapon 4, but fox wouldn't sell.

They really need to go back to this sort of film making, if they really want to continue sequels & can't come up with anything original, adapt.

And stop "rebooting"

Agent Coulson

Somebody took out a full-page ad in The Hollywood Reporter to pitch a Die Hard sequel

The Die Hard series is in desperate need of an intervention. “Your first three movies are all great to very good. But I can’t support the decisions you made in Live Free or Die Hard and A Good Day to Die Hard. No one wants to see John McClane: One-Man Wrecking Crew. We miss the old you, John McClane: Reluctant Hero, and want to see you get better. Without Justin Long.”

There’s going to be a sixth Die Hard, which will reportedly “feature flashbacks to McClane’s days as a rough and tumble New York City cop in 1979.” Details beyond that are scarce, unless producers go with the idea pitched by writer Eric D. Wilkinson in a full-page ad he took out in the Hollywood Reporter.

http://www.avclub.com/article/somebody-took-out-full-page-ad-hollywood-reporter--228227

pixelburp

Between a lead actor who just doesn't care anymore to the point of unprofessionalism, a potentially restricting 12A cert. and a set of screenwriters that probably won't be up to the task, I don't imagine any Die Hard 6 being remotely good, not after the borderline offensive garbage that was #5. The fourth was a bad Die Hard but at least a passable action-blockbuster; Live Free... was just abysmal.

Has to be said, that proposal does sound more in keeping with the traditional Die Hard ethos, and would feel like an effective way of getting back to basics. Of course the ideal in all this would be to stop making Die Hard films, but we all know that won't happen.

Duggy747

That pitch feels very Die Hard With A Vengeance.

Which is just fine by me!.................then just kill the goddamn franchise.

Hande hoche!

Fair point regarding Willis slumming it, can't remember the last film he seemed to put the effort into.

OU812

I'd watch that movie.

Ageyev

pixelburp wrote: »

Between a lead actor who just doesn't care anymore to the point of unprofessionalism, a potentially restricting 12A cert. and a set of screenwriters that probably won't be up to the task, I don't imagine any Die Hard 6 being remotely good, not after the borderline offensive garbage that was #5. The fourth was a bad Die Hard but at least a passable action-blockbuster; Live Free... was just abysmal.

Has to be said, that proposal does sound more in keeping with the traditional Die Hard ethos, and would feel like an effective way of getting back to basics. Of course the ideal in all this would be to stop making Die Hard films, but we all know that won't happen.

I think "Live Free or Die Hard" is also known as the fourth Die Hard film.

OU812

Willis has allegedly (according to THR) been made aware of the plot of the "alternate" Die Hard 6... Maybe some magic will happen & it'll be made

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/bruce-willis-responds-die-hard-840466?mobile_redirect=false

Nervous Wreck

OU812 wrote: »

Willis has allegedly (according to THR) been made aware of the plot of the "alternate" Die Hard 6... Maybe some magic will happen & it'll be made

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/bruce-willis-responds-die-hard-840466?mobile_redirect=false

TL;DR Bruce Willis still doesn't give a fuck about anything.