Favorite Die Hard

[Guest converge241]

for me its part one..no contest, just an all around classic but pt 3 is great..

 

the tidbit was Bruce Willis was the fifth actor asked..Could you imagine the movie with these 4 people(listed in order they were asked)

 

Schwarzanegger

Stallone

Burt Reynolds

Richard Gere

 

i could see AHHHHHHHHHnold but it would have made for a differnt feel

[Guest starvenger]

>Schwarzanegger

 

It's hard to see Ah-nold as an "everyman". It'd probably end up more like Commando or something

 

>Stallone

God, no.

 

>Burt Reynolds

This COULD have worked, but I doubt sequels would have been made

 

>Richard Gere

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!! Mind you, he does this movie, and it's a success, maybe Pretty Woman doesn't get made, and the overrated actress that is Julia Roberts doesn't become an instant star.

[Guest Bricks]

RICHARD GERE?!?!?!

 

That just seems sooooo coming out of nowhere.

 

Anyways, a vote for the first one from me. I liked all three of them. But the first one was the best.

[Guest midnight_burn]

The original would probably be my favourite ahead of the third installment of the series. And that certainly is an interesting tidbit, it's hard imagining the movies with those actors instead of Bruce Willis.

[Guest Vern Gagne]

Die Hard is without question the best.

 

The John McClaine character would probably of been different. Or at least the everyman wise cracking character Bruce Willis played so well would not of worked like it did.

 

With Arnold and Sly the movie would of completly different.

 

Burt Reynolds would of been in his 50's which is too old. Willis was only like 32 during the filming of the movie. More so than that Reynolds is a hack. Whose made only like 2 good movies.

 

Richard Gere.He's too much a pretty boy to play John McClaine. It also doesn't seem like he could pull off the great lines that McClaine have.

[Guest pochorenella]

For me is a real toss-up between the first two (the third one felt like a Lethal Weapon movie).

 

I'm voting for Die Harder for now. The first two are really awesome, I'm not much into the third one.

[Guest Mattdotcom]

Doesn't the book which Die Hard was based on (the title escapes me) star an older man? Burt could've worked in that situation.

 

Riddle me this, though: On the commentary track for Evil Dead 2, Sam Raimi quips that Ash (Brice Campbell) is crying because he "didn't get the part in Die Hard". Is that a joke or did King Bruce audition for a role?

[Guest Youth N Asia]

I like them as

 

Die Hard

Die Hard: With a Vengence

Die Hard: Die Harder

 

The 3rd one barely beats out #2...great movies when you just want to sit back and be entertained.

 

The thing about movies like this...after someonears in a movie and kind of makes the character their own it's impossible to picture someone else doing it...even if it was meant for someone else.

[Guest Youth N Asia]

Riddle me this, though: Pn the commentary track for Evil Dead 2, Sam Raimi quips that Ash (Brice Campbell) is crying because he "didn't get the part in Die Hard". Is that a joke or did King Bruce audition for a role?

 

I'm reading Campbell's book now actually...I'll get back to you if there's mention of it

[Guest kkktookmybabyaway]

Went with #1...

 

And for some reason I can't picture Gere in that role. That hippie will probably try to understand the crooks instead of shooting them...

[Guest Shaved Bear]

first one...yippie kay yay motherfucker

[Guest cabbageboy]

I actually said the 3rd one. Man it gripped me and didn't let go. The first one doesn't hold up all that well today I don't think.

[Guest Mindless_Aggression]

Yes, Campbell did go out for the role and supposedly was pretty good. But they wanted a big star for it or at least someone who was established so he was a no go. Which is too bad, he's a legit better actor than Willis is, and certainyl could have pulled of the wiseass part better.

[Guest El Satanico]

The original is easily a better all around movie then the sequels.

 

I didn't like the second one very much.

 

The third was better then the second but still wasn't anywhere near the original. Sam L. Jackson carried the movie i think. If it was just Willis i don't think it would've been that good.

 

I just hope a fouth is never made. The franchise has ran it's course and making another would just be flogging a dead horse.

[Guest the 1inch punch]

The third is brillaint, mainly because of the interaction between SLJ and Willis

[Guest cabbageboy]

Well, the 3rd movie is just intense and doesn't let up for a minute. There's no useless characters, no BS. The first movie has all sorts of totally useless people in it (the reporter, half the people his wife works with, Johnson and Johnson). I think that's why it doesn't really hold up all that well.

 

The third one just has Willis, Jeremy Irons and his dudes, and Samuel Jackson.

[Guest redbaron51]

the first one...

 

but really, they are all good

[Guest Mattdotcom]

Thanks, Mindless_Aggression.

 

Oh, I probably should mention I voted for the original, barely edging out Die Hard 3.

[Guest Big McLargeHuge]

I voted for 3. The first is of course a classic. The template for modern day action movies. However, Vengeance just drew me in more. The only thing that could possibly hold the third down is its weak ending.

[Guest J*ingus]

Yeah, they supposedly reshot the ending three different times, they were never happy with it.

 

I never really liked 2 that much, so that leaves 1 and 3. I'd say that 1 had better action and a better villain, but 3 had better performances from the cast as a whole, and thankfully lacked all the bullshit "we're really stupid in order to help show how smart the hero is" type characters. Eh, it's a toss-up, I dunno.