Die Hard has the distinct honour of having both one of the best and most influential action movies as part of its collection, and also one of the the single worst not only action films but cinematic experiences of all time.
I absolutely adore Die Hard and the character of John McClane. So much so that I even like Live Free or Die Hard – and to be in honest, in retrospect of A Good Day to Die Hard it looks like cinematic gold. But the aforementioned Die Hard 5 was such a disappointment. The character of the every man in a bad situation was gone, replaced by an indestructible cut-out moving from poor CG sequence to poor CG sequence. Watching it, my heart sunk, what had they done to John McClane? What had they done to Die Hard?
Imagine my dismay when I learn that the producers had apparently enlisted screenwriter Ben Trebilcook to write the sixth instalment, entitled Die Hardest (see what they did there) which would see John McClane visit Tokyo. Now, a few years ago when I learned that John would be visiting Russia, I thought “great! This will refresh the series, bring a sense of fear for John being somewhere foreign”. Alas, it did not. Therefore, the news of a Jaunt to Tokyo didn’t exactly excite me.
Recently, What Culture interviewed the supposed writer Trebilcook and some more, possibly quite interesting details have emerged about the plot. On the plot, Trebilcook explains;
Hmm, what can I say? What can I say? What am I allowed to say? OK, without spoiling too much, I can say that McClane is invited to Tokyo by the Nakatomi Corporation to be commended for his bravery and efforts in saving 36 lives, celebrating this on the 30th anniversary of the Naktatomi Hostage Crisis. It’s by no means Black Rain. Perhaps has a slight Rising Sun type tone. It’s also not a double-act buddy-buddy story. McClane began on his own and should end on his own. Of course he’s had assistance in various guises, aiding him in his ventures; but it’s not Lethal Weapon or a Jackie Chan film.
Could it be? Are they putting some thought into the plot of this movie? Could he perhaps get what Die Hard is about? He does mention John should begin the movie alone and end the movie alone along with not being a superhero;
McClane is a gunslinger. A now retired, worn-out, tired, busted and broken cowboy. Everything he’s been through has to be taken into account. Yes, it’s a movie, but he isn’t invincible. He was never Bond. That’s what was so appealing to me with Bruce’s character. He got hurt. I see the first one as a drama with elements of action. It took its time to set up the story and unfold great characters. I believe I got that and also what I call ‘the hose-reel moment’.
You know, when McClane, in the first Die Hard leaped off the building with a fire hose, before it went kaboom; in the second, he ejects himself from the plane when he’s surrounded by grenades and in the third, he’s shot out the tunnel, through the air with a gush of water. I’ve got that ‘hose-reel moment’, as well as that cringing ‘glass pulling from the feet’ type scene. Man, that gets me every time. Pursued by bad guys; does he face them and die, or retreat, barefoot, across broken glass? THEN picks out itty bitty shards from his cut feet.
He also reveals a pretty big piece of news, the script includes Die Hard 3 character Zeus.
Yes, I’ve written Zeus Carver in for Samuel L Jackson. Like I said before, it’s not a buddy-buddy script, but you can’t ignore him. Zeus played a major part in McClane’s life. They went through a lot together. They would certainly, without a doubt, still be in contact.
I still have a pretty disgusting taste of Die Hard 5 in my mouth, and like a cheating girlfriend I’m finding it hard to forget and to trust again. But I am certainly hearing things that lead me to believe the film could at least have a standing chance. Now if we can get a director who shares the same mentality that would be brilliant.
Source: What Culture
Are you looking forward to another instalment more so now with this news? Come out to the coast, we’ll get together and Comment Below.