Review: Live Free or Die Hard

When I heard oh so long ago that they were making another "Die Hard" and it was going to be starring Bruce Willis, I was a bit skeptical if the old man still had it in him to pull off another performance as the grizzled veteran NYPD cop John McClane. (I was even more skeptical upon hearing that Harrison For is reprising his role as archaeologist/treasure hunter Indiana Jones, but thats a whole 'nother story) But then, as if I needed anything else to increase my skepticism about this movie, I saw that it was indeed going to be given a PG-13 rating. Now, in this day and age of needlessly violent "torture porn" (as I like to call it) like Hostel and it's equally unnecessary sequel, a PG-13 rated movie almost seems like it might as well be a G rated Disney flick. But after watching just the first 15-20 minutes of "Live Free or Die Hard," it becomes obvious that maybe a PG-13 rating doesn't instantly equal a lame movie after all.

The story goes as such: A group of high-tech hackers somehow manage to infiltrate every significant level of government and federal security and start causing havoc, like messing with telecommunications across America and basically shutting down all modes of public transportation. Once the feds figure out that all of these incidents are related, they decide to bring in every major hacker they can find and since they are short on manpower, they decide to call on local law enforcement to help them bring in some the "high value" hackers. Enter John McClane. McClane gets called to pick up the co-star of the movie Matt Farrall (Justin Long) because apparently he is one of the names on the FBI Cyber Division's watch list. Pretty much from there on, the movie is a non-stop, balls to the wall, all out action flick as McClane needs to protect Farrell while he transports him to the FBI and then find the terrorists responsible and issue a beating the way only John McClane can.

The acting in "LFDH" is fairly run of the mill with no stand out performances to speak of. Though the mere fact that Willis was able to get out of his wheel chair to play John McClane again was pretty amazing. (I kid, Willis, I kid...please don't throw me off a skyscraper) But since there weren't any stand out performances, I'll have to go the opposite direction and talk of the lackluster performances in the movie, such as Justin Long's weak attempt at side kick comic relief and Timothy Olyphant's less than frightening job playing the villain. Firstly, I don't know who keeps giving Justin Long work, but they really should stop. I mean, I liked him in "Dodgeball"...but purely for the reason that a big part of his role in "Dodgeball" was to continually get hit in the face with wrenches. But past "Dodgeball"...ehhh. Hell, I think I would've liked it better if Kevin Smith were bumped up from his cameo appearance to comic relief instead of Justin Long. Plus, Olyphant just wasn't a scary villain. Other than having tons of personality-less henchmen and being a good computer hacker, nothing about him screams "Watch out for this guy or he'll F you up" so you just knew that once McClane got his hands on him it was gonna be game over.

While the story seems like an interesting concept at first (a group of hackers decimates the federal government), the plausibility of it all becomes really suspect after a while. Because I don't claim to know pretty much anything when it comes to hacking, but it seems to me that it'd be a a step past impossible to infiltrate every level of government security as quickly and as efficiently as the villains of "LFDH" did without someone catching on sooner than they did in this film. At least in the earlier "Die Hard" movies there were villains who committed tangible crimes like random bombings and hostage taking, but this movie dealt with a topic thats so obscure to the average person that they could pretty much get away with anything without the normal movie goer being able to call them on their bullshit. But then again, one doesn't go see a "Die Hard" movie with the expectation of a concrete, bulletproof plot, does one?

But past the suspect story lies the real meat of the movie - it's intense, McClane death-defying, unadulterated action. And believe me, this movie has that in spades. Within the first 20 minutes, viewers are treated to no less than two explosions, a ridiculous firefight inside of a Camden apartment, followed by a short car action sequence, punctuated by McClane's own special brand of badass-ery and Long's feeble attempt at comic relief. But this again, brings us to one of the original points of my initial apprehension about this movie: the PG-13 rating. And after seeing it twice, I almost fully understand why it got the rating it did - and it wasn't for lack of action, no sir. This movie shares one large difference between the other three "Die Hards" and that difference is this: while many, many people die in this movie, McClane personally kills less of them (though his body count is still high) and when people get shot or dropped into or off of crazy shit, you don't see all of the gory carnage because frankly, you don't need to. If you've seen McClane shoot one terrorist henchmen a bunch of times, you've seen them all. Also, there isn't very much blood to speak of in the movie, except for McClane being covered in his own blood by the movie's end but, thats just the nature of a "Die Hard." This movie is about off the wall action sequences, car chases and McClane somehow surviving everything that is thrown his way which is people, cars (literally), and even jet fighters.

So if car chases, gun fights, and huge explosions all perpetrated by the single most grizzled, badass cop to ever live is your thing, you may want to forget your preconceived notions about the MPAA rating system and go see "Live Free or Die Hard."