Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Mr. Monday Morning
At the time 1 was a groundbreaking movie, so it gets the nod for that as much as anything. You just can't overlook Alan Rickman either, Hans is one of the great cinema villains of the modern era.
3 I like, a lot, more than most people I know actually, but I dunno...I think at times it just seems to slow down a bit too much. Like the parts where they're trying to evacuate the school, yeah great but it's not Willis and/or Jackson on screen, and it kinda drags as a result. I'm not saying that's the *only* reason but...ionno. Compared to the first it just doesn't have the energy, I don't think - and of course there's less tension, what with 1 being in an enclosed space.
|
So you wanted Willis and Jackson to be attention hoares in the last one?
It makes sense though, because Simon's idea was to distract the whole police department, whilst trying to kill Willis and swipe billions of dollars worth of gold. If Willis was at the school, then he wouldn't have died, and Jackson had to be with Willis beause it was the way Simon wanted to play the game.
When I watched Die Hard it was hardly groundbreaking, so I guess I didn't appreiacte it as much as you did.
As I have said, one of the drawbacks of Die Hard 2 IMO is that it is one location, which is too similar to the first one, I think it's good that Die Hard 3 (also being lazy) doesn't have it in an enclosed space.