If the original DIE HARD was a near perfect piece of popular fimmaking then LIVE FREE OR DIE HARD should at least get four stars for being a bit of a throwback to a simpler time. Actually it really only deserves three stars, but I can't help myself because I liked it so damned much.
The problem with modern action movies is that they have adopted a near childlike attitude toward emotional escalation. Filmmakers assume that bigger is better, most is best, and that loudest should arrive before you even get to louder. It's a common misconception we have with our "everything America" attitude. We just expect things to come to us. We don't think in shades of grey. We project an immediate assumption of greatness and have no time to work for it. We no longer build greatness brick by brick. Modern action movies are a reflection of that attitude. Emotionally speaking, we are a country of 14 year olds. We want our boom booms big and loud and we want them now.
This sequel does a small amount to go against that grain, while simultaneously enabling its worst tendencies. I enjoyed it, but then I think of all those moments of sheer excess that made me feel I was watching the travesty of TRUE LIES all over again.
It's hero (Bruce Willis) is a scarred, aging veteran of multiple disasters and bureaucratically mis-managed near catastrophes. If only there had been a John McClane around during Katrina maybe someone could have gotten water to those f%^&#g people a little sooner. This is a return to the emotional roots of the first DIE HARD, if not the sheer skill and technique of its filmmaking. Timothy Olyphant is no Alan Rickman that's for sure. He's a mediocre villain. Fortunately, however, this is Willis' show and he equips himself nicely. In this script, Willis somehow achieves that Indiana Jones type balance (between common vulnerability and superhuman indestructable survivalism). I'm not sure how they did it, but in the middle of all the explosions McClane is funny without being too jokey, old fashioned without being a stodgy bore, and vulnerable without enducing the wrong kind of chuckles. He's mellowed a bit but other than that he's the same guy. It's a pleasure to be around this character again.
Although the movie trucks along at a decent clip, it is nowhere near as tightly constructed as the first DIE HARD and its characters are not as memorable. Don't get me wrong, I'm a huge Justin Long fan (he was vastly underrated in both Galaxy Quest and Jeepers Creepers, and there's a reason the most intelligent company of the past twenty years chose him to advertise their computers) but he ain't the bad guy. We do need a greater evil on the other end of the phone to perry and thrust with Willis. Again, I miss Alan Rickman.
There is also just a little too much ARMAGEDDON in LIVE FREE OR DIE HARD. Willis' exploits are just a bit too grandiose. Instead of merely staying alive inside a giant skyscraper and crawling through glass, here he jumps on top of a supersonic fighter jet and drives a giant semi truck across a collapsing freeway and outruns explosions and such. It's just a little too far outside of realilty to feel like the real DIE HARD and this is what seems to be part of the problem.
Can you really go home again? Would a modern audience accept a leaner more scaled back McClane? Who knows. I think next time we should try it though. How about a single location? Does that scare you Hollywood? And let's also concentrate more on creating great characers, scenes and moments rather than trying to out-explode our predacessors.
Still it's fun to have Willis back again in something approaching the balance and tone of the original. He's getting old. I'm not sure how many more of these he has in him before it's time for Shia LeBeouf and all the other young action stars bank rolled by Coca Cola, AT&T and Steven Spielberg to take their turn on the action stage. It's just that kind of world Bruce. You can only be cool for so long.