EssenceStory Well Deserved Praise

Diagonaldi Very well executed

ChikPapa Very disappointed :(

AniInterview Sorry, this movie sucks

Minahzur Rahman It's actually a good sequel, but at the same time, it couldn't live up to the original film, and it's of no surprise because the original film is probably the greatest action movie of all time – most would agree. Still, Die Hard 2 is right up there among the best action films of the 90s (Die Hard was made in the 80s) and everyone knows that the 90s was the time where action films dominated the cinema screens due to the success of Die Hard. What I enjoyed about Die Hard 2 is that it was set inside an airport, and the airport is large and full of people, so it makes it more interesting to follow. The villain wasn't that great, and it's probably one of the main reasons why this film couldn't at least come close to the original. All in all, it's worth watching, but at the same time, you shouldn't expect it to be as good as Die Hard.

richspenc The second and third Die Hard movies were better than the first. I rated 2 and 3 an 8 and the first one a 6. "Three" was great with Samuel Jackson and Jeremy Irons as "Simon", the nursery rhyme cracking psycho. The second film is great with the addition of "NYPD blue"'s tough, temperamental, no nonsense Dennis Franz. Bruce Willis is his usual tough wise cracking cop who is always either on vacation or suspension, and his marriage to Holly (Bonnie Bedella) is always on the rocks.The bad guy here is William Atherton who's hungry to have a huge Christmas Eve power trip controlling Washington DC's Dullus airport. They plug in their communications network at a nearby church, of course after murdering the caretaker there. William and his men have a soft spot for South American dictator Franco Nero (who does look like Fadel Castro, Roger Ebert was right) who's getting transported to the USA for major drug smuggling charges. William, in order to free his buddy,is willing to hold up the entire airport,leave planes circling for hours including Holly's plane, and cause a plane full of innocent English passengers (since when does an English narrow bodied plane fly to the US?) to crash (I don't like how they made the passengers and attendants on that plane so pleasant and nice when two minutes later were a fiery death).I like how on Holly's plane, smarmy,annoying passenger William Sadler, who the flight attendants can't stand, re unites with Holly after a previous incident. Flight attendant to Holly: " what did you do to him?" Holly: "I knocked out two of his teeth". Attendant: " champagne?" I liked that. I also liked a lot of the action with Willis and his enemies at Dullus, first in the baggage handling areas, there were several shootouts, and a very narrow escape from a grounded plane with fresh grenades just thrown in and Willis catapulting straight up into the air on a parachuted ejector seat.I also liked the back and forth banter between Willis and Franz (some of it really played out like an "NYPD blue" episode). Franz did not like a badass with an L.A. badge preforming his own style of active duty in his airport. Franz tells Willis off in his office after gunning it out with a couple of bad guys, and does not care that Willis was only shooting in self defense. He tells him "you're in my little pond now,and I'm the big fish who runs it". Willis then in the control tower, fails to convince Franz and the control tower head that there's a plot going on. Then when they all see the runway lights shut off and they get a dictation over the intercom from the terrorist about his demands, everyone can now see what's really happening. But instead of Franz acknowledging to Willis he made a mistake by not believing him, he just pushes him away saying "we got a first class unit, SWAT team and all, we don't need no Monday morning quarterback!" Like he told him before, that LA badge didn't mean s*** in his airport. There's also the annoyingly over chatty Washington D.C. press news anchor who gets the same words from each person she comes to with her microphone when she says "just give me two words", the words in response being " f***" and "off". It is annoying that while during a terrorist crisis, you don't want some bubbly news anchor coming to you chatting your ear off. She even says to Willis at one point "who-y who?" after not hearing a name Willis mentions. Overly talkative people seem to want to not just increase the amount of words they say but also embellish their words like saying "who-y- who" instead of just "who" or "givetty- give" instead of just "give". I've meet overly chatty people in real life who do that, and it does annoy some people. I did like Willis saying while showing his ring finger "just the fax" to a pretty woman offering to take him out for a drink, after helping him fax some papers to L.A., to his Twinkie eating friend who was seen doing just that several times in "Die hard 1". I also noticed the addition of what's his name, the cop who gave Willis a parking ticket at the beginning of the movie playing his usual wise*** character.

MaximumMadness "Die Hard 2" is one of those sequels that is unfortunately just a little too in love with what came before to really stand on its own. You know what I'm talking about... movies like "Ghostbusters 2" or "Rush Hour 2" that simply coast by on repeating what worked in the original while doing little else to differentiate itself, other than changing the setting or upping the stakes a bit. Yes, after the neo- classic that was the original "Die Hard", it seems like the production team and director Renny Harlin were perhaps a bit frightened of the prospect of a follow-up, so they played it safe. And I can definitely understand that reasoning, and I don't necessarily even blame them for it. But still, it has to be said... the best moments of "Die Hard 2" are those few fleeting glimpses of originality that are occasionally injected into key sequences. The rest of it? Just a slightly inferior retread of what came before. Is it bad? No, not by any stretch. But it is a bit of a step backwards.A few years after saving the day at Nakatomi Paza, New York cop John McClane (Bruce Willis) is on his way to pick up his wife Holly (Bonnie Bedelia) at Washington Dulles International Airport on Christmas Eve. However, there's a game afoot, as a group of evil former Special Forces operatives headed by the vile Colonel Stuart (William Sadler) seize control of the airport in an attempt to free General Ramon Esperanza (Franco Nero)- a drug lord and dictator from the nation of Val Verde who is being transported to the US to be tried for his crimes. With the planes in the air held hostage, McClane must now battle his way through the airport in order to stop this deadly scheme and save the day- and his wife- once again.To give credit where it is due, the cast is uniformly excellent. Willis is as charming and charismatic as ever, and it's fun seeing him back in the role that helped define his super-stardom. Especially now with the added bonus of him being somewhat self-aware of just how ridiculous it is to be in this situation once again, which generates some good humor and informs the character. Bedalia is a ton of fun in her returning role as Holly, and it's a shame that she didn't continue to play the part in future installments. She helped ground John and make him feel like a real person. William Sadler is adequately menacing as our lead villain, and though he's no Hans Gruber, you'll definitely love to hate Colonel Stuart. There's also some really nice supporting roles, including a blink-and-you'll-miss-it pre-T2 Robert Patrick as one of Stuart's thugs and a really fun cameo from Reginald VelJohnson as his iconic character Al Powell.Finnish director Renny Harlin takes the seat helm this entry in the series, and I think he does a really great job visually and aesthetically, especially given this was his first massive film. He's got a good sense of composition and flow that works well for the material, and he knows how to paint thrilling and stylish sequences of bloody action and harrowing stakes with ease. Even with his background mainly in the world of horror, he proves himself quite capable. It's almost a shame in retrospect, especially seeing where his career has gone in recent years with a string of critical and commercial failures. The man knows how to make a fun flick... and I hope he recovers and is able to deliver on his promise once again.Written by original co-writer Steven E. de Souza and series newcomer Doug Richardson, the script is the source of both the film's most rampant strengths and also its most tragic failures. Penning a sequel is always a hard thing to do, especially with high stakes and even higher expectations. And I do think that de Souza and Richardson for the most part capture the spirit of the original. And at its best, there are some really great sequences. I particularly admired some later scenes where McClane is actually about to leave the airport, as it not only broadened the story but also showed us something new and exciting. And its these moments of originality where the film most shines. However, as I mentioned above, the problem is that there seems to be an inherent fear to try too much new with the film. And thus, it often boils down to just simply re-using tired and true ideas from the first film. Lots of McClane crawling through vents while complaining. Lots of shoot- outs in small spaces. Lots of people talking over the radio. And even some secondary characters like William Atherton's smarmy reporter Richard Thornburg are brought back in wholly superfluous supporting roles, for no other reason than the film to highlight them in an attempt to win the audience over with nostalgia. It feels too "safe" for a "Die Hard" movie, and the inability to take any real risks brings it down a lot.Thankfully, it's not a deal breaker. The excellent performances, likable characters and sharp visual direction are able to overcome many of the fundamental issues in the storytelling. In the end, "Die Hard 2" never reaches the great heights of the original. And outside of a certain fifth film that I like to pretend doesn't exist because it's unwatchable, it's probably the weakest of the series. But it's still most certainly a "Die Hard" film at its core, and it's still a ton of fun. It just can't quite elevate itself beyond the level of "pretty good" due to it just repeating what came before but with somewhat less flair.I give "Die Hard 2" a decent 7 out of 10. Fans of the original should check it out, but don't go in expecting another classic.

TanQ This has got to be one of the worst written pieces of crap ever put to celluloid. That being said, if you don't enjoy seeing it, repeatedly, you're probably already dead. I'm still amazed that this was based on a book, like an actual book and not on a comic or a fortune cookie or even a corporate logo printed on a paper napkin.Let's take a closer look and, although there are spoilers they'll only lead to the enjoyment of this exercise in absurdity. The first thing I noticed is Bruce Willis seems to get the same little cut above his right eyebrow as he got in the first movie. I know, nit picking, but it's almost like a studio found that the eyebrow injury tested well among audiences. Okay, so that was a little bit of a minor thing compared to things like grenades with the longest fuse, ever or the completely gratuitous nude scene from our villain with the perfectly sculpted posterior, but it sort of gives you an inkling of where I'm heading here. If you look too closely at this film, it'll drive you mad. They put so much detail into this film and most of it is pure nonsense. In it, you get Colm Meany and Patrick O'Neal speaking to each other in fake accents for absolutely no reason whatsoever. You'll see a hole in a windshield just to remind you that there's a hole in a windshield. You'll have someone describe the hole in the windshield although it'll really have no impact on the plot other than there being said hole in said windshield. You'll watch airplanes land on runways covered with debris from other airplanes... wait, I'm just going to stop there because there are way too many plot holes, mistakes, goofs or just plain nonsense in this film that it makes Transformers look like a documentary.At the end of it, you just won't care. It has some magical ability to just make all the nonsense go away and leave you rooting for the indestructible John Mclean and his plucky band of sidekicks. Watch this movie, you'll enjoy it more than it deserves.