"Die Hard" grossed $140 million worldwide. Not released in China. Cost $0.28 billion. Genre: Action, Thriller. Directed by: John McTiernan. Producer country: United States. Released in 1988.
"Die Hard" is indeed a pristine gunfight and action movie. This film also became a model for other action films that followed. The action design, character portrayal, and plot advancement in the play are basically relatively realistic, rather than the action films in the later stage that are whimsical, fascinating, and only consider audiovisual effects and do not consider the actual situation. The film is also Bruce Willis's best work in his best years.
Some of the small details of the film are impressive. When the male protagonist was looking for the enemy upstairs, when he passed a poster of a nude painting of a woman posted on the wall, he turned his head and looked at it, which portrayed both the character 's personality (a little bit of a shit) and a little funny. These details give the impression of being very real. I believe that this is not a chance encounter, but a deliberate arrangement of the director. Because at the most critical moment of the shootout, when the male protagonist passed by this poster again, he actually greeted the nude poster: "Hello! ”
There is also a detail: a policeman was stabbed by a rose while crossing a rose pond, and the policeman cried out "Ah" and then scolded "Damn! "Although it is a small detail, it vividly shows the incompetence of the police. The important role of the details of the film is to enhance the realism of the film and make the film very vivid and plump.
These gunfight action settings in a small space are all outlined by detail. For example, while changing the magazine on the table, the gangster said to himself: The next time he can shoot, he must not delay. Then the man immediately shot and killed the gangster under the table, while saying: Thank you for your advice. A sense of humor is an important gene of American films.
The storyline structure of the film is very reasonable, and the first hour is the male protagonist fighting the kidnappers alone. Starting from the midpoint of the film, the police are joined, forming a three-way battle game between the kidnapper, the male protagonist, and the police. The situation began to escalate, advancing from the first climax to the second.
The film is very successful in setting up the character. The film does not set a serious policeman as the male protagonist, but outlines a frank, capable, but also a bit of a snarky police character, adding a lot of points of view and laughter to the film - a sense of humor follows.
Some of the dialogue is wonderful. After the conversation between the police and the man on the intercom, the police said: You have time to smoke a few cigarettes. The male protagonist said: I have already lit the brother (I am lighting a cigarette).
The heroine found the kidnapper and said: I have a request. The kidnapper said: Who made you boss? The heroine said: You. You killed my boss. Funny enough.
The plot is cleverly designed. On the roof, when the police shot at the male owner, the male protagonist jumped down the stairs with a fire belt, and at the same time the kidnappers pressed the switch, and the helicopter full of police was blown away. The black driver trapped in the underground parking lot also added a wonderful scene to the film. When the kidnappers were about to transport the stolen goods away, they were unexpectedly killed by the driver of the underground parking lot. At this moment, the cinema must be full of laughter. Finally, the man carried a submachine gun in his hand (in fact, there were no bullets in it), but he taped the pistol with only two bullets to his back. Pull out your gun with your hands behind your back when surrendering, and kill the enemy. Unusually classic. At the last moment, the film even designs a plot in which the patrol officer shoots and kills the kidnapper (the patrol officer is banned from entering the criminal police force for accidentally killing the child). Classics one after the other. Although somewhat unreal. What a surprise. Finally, when the reporter interviewed the heroine who escaped from the business, the heroine punched her face, which was really enjoyable. Then the reporter also said to the cameraman: You have taken all the pictures? (Here's the tone of the question.) This sentence is the mantra of this reporter)
The plot of the male protagonist's encounter with Hans is more exciting. At first, the man thought he was a hostage, but it was difficult to confirm (doubtful), so he gave him a pistol (but did not load the bullet). Finally Hans showed his horse's feet. The plot is thrilling and exciting.
In the end, the man and the kidnapper had a hand-to-hand fight on the roof of the building. It's a regular program for action movies, whether or not the enemy ends up pointing a gun at your head (or vice versa), but it's necessary to have a hand-to-hand combat without weapons. The reasons are naturally various, such as accidentally the gun being shot off by the opponent, the pistol running out of bullets, or the opponent suddenly pulling out a steaming pipe from the side, or triggering some fire extinguisher, and so on. The reason is for the director to think hard, but this cliché has to be repeated, and maybe it can't be a cliché here – if it is the first film to be made like this.
There are many wonderful things about this movie, but the biggest highlight is the core principle of the movie's pleasure - surprise. The hostages were kidnapped, and it happened that the man was upstairs. There are surprises everywhere in the middle of the escape and gunfight. The male protagonist was betrayed, and the surprise was that the traitor was killed by the bandits. Mistaken for Hans as a hostage, he was pleasantly surprised to be given a bullet without a gun. The man was forced to surrender with his hands raised because his wife was kidnapped, but he stuck the pistol to his back. The kidnappers' hard-earned wealth was hit by a black guy in the underground garage (the burden was buried well). Enough surprises.
The change of the times will affect the change of the plot of the movie. For example, in this film, the kidnappers first cut the telephone cable of the building to prevent the people in the building from communicating with the outside world. It was in 1988, and mobile phones hadn't yet appeared. But today, such a plot will not appear again. The plot needs to be redesigned – mobile phones are already widespread.
Although the film is very classic, there are some flaws. At the critical moment when the kidnappers and the police confronted each other, the colleague of the female protagonist in the hostage, the man who looked more stupid, actually went to negotiate with the kidnappers - or in a joking tone, saying that he would hand over the male protagonist. This is unreasonable and overly dramatic.
The kidnappers took the heroine hostage, and when the kidnappers were loading the stolen goods, the heroine actually scolded the extremely vicious kidnappers - what logic is this? Do you really think it's just a movie? And the kidnapper turned to her and scolded her: "Please be polite to me." sky.
The biggest flaw is at the end. The shawl-haired gangster had obviously been hanged by a chain around his neck, and twice showed the scene of his hanging, and finally rushed out with a machine gun, in order to give the black policeman a chance to kill him. That's just too unreliable. Coincidences can be, coincidences are ok, but the obvious illogical fabrication is pure nonsense.