User Score
4.7

Mixed or average reviews- based on 466 Ratings

User score distribution:
Watch On

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Feb 22, 2015
    1
    I didn't know Hollywood could pump out a major action franchise sequel this terrible. I had to stop watching after 45 minutes because of the shear awfulness of this tripe and that has never happened to me before with an action flick (generally pretty forgiving with this genre). Should be called "The Day Die Hard Died". Woeful plot, rushed pacing, awkward script, no character development,I didn't know Hollywood could pump out a major action franchise sequel this terrible. I had to stop watching after 45 minutes because of the shear awfulness of this tripe and that has never happened to me before with an action flick (generally pretty forgiving with this genre). Should be called "The Day Die Hard Died". Woeful plot, rushed pacing, awkward script, no character development, embarrassing acting, poor direction and ridiculous action to summarise just a few of the problems. This makes movies like the Expendables and some of Steven Seagal's later work seem perfectly watchable. Expand
  2. Feb 21, 2015
    1
    this movie felt like a half hour long and i felt that the bad guys didn't catch my attention compared to alan rickman and that guy from girl next door.....the whole movie should have ended when they thought jumping out the window and russian betrayal or whatever was interesting....also noone even knows what plutonium does...and this should be the last time we hear of it ....so short and sothis movie felt like a half hour long and i felt that the bad guys didn't catch my attention compared to alan rickman and that guy from girl next door.....the whole movie should have ended when they thought jumping out the window and russian betrayal or whatever was interesting....also noone even knows what plutonium does...and this should be the last time we hear of it ....so short and so weird how the dad like spies on his daughter or whatever in the beginning....its like they had a helicopter as the grand finale....we've all seen helicopters before..... Expand
  3. Jan 1, 2015
    1
    Hollywood's worst screenwriter delivers the death knell in a once great series. Willis picks up the cheque and provided as little effort as he did in press interviews. We can only hope that this is the final film.
  4. Dec 15, 2014
    2
    Yippie-ki-whaaaaa? This movie would still be bad even if it didn't have anything to do with Die Hard. The action was okay but very far fetched at times. Die Hard movies can be very over the top, but this one took it too far. Again, if it wasnt for the name 'Die Hard' attached to the name it would be easy to not be quite as critical of this one, but is still a very poor movie that feelsYippie-ki-whaaaaa? This movie would still be bad even if it didn't have anything to do with Die Hard. The action was okay but very far fetched at times. Die Hard movies can be very over the top, but this one took it too far. Again, if it wasnt for the name 'Die Hard' attached to the name it would be easy to not be quite as critical of this one, but is still a very poor movie that feels like every line is being read directly from que-cards as they are being said. Expand
  5. Nov 13, 2014
    2
    "A Good Day to Die Hard" 10 Scale Rating: 2.5 (Terrible) ...

    The Good: Jai Courtney doesn't do a bad job as John McClane's son, Jack. The Bad: Does not feel even remotely like a Die Hard film at all. It is an over-the-top and explosive laden mess. All the charm and wit of the first few films is gone as Willis repeats "I'm on vacation!" a good twenty times as he shoots bad guys and
    "A Good Day to Die Hard" 10 Scale Rating: 2.5 (Terrible) ...

    The Good: Jai Courtney doesn't do a bad job as John McClane's son, Jack.

    The Bad: Does not feel even remotely like a Die Hard film at all. It is an over-the-top and explosive laden mess. All the charm and wit of the first few films is gone as Willis repeats "I'm on vacation!" a good twenty times as he shoots bad guys and escapes impossible scenarios. McClane is supposed to be difficult to kill and resourceful ... this is what makes past movies so good. However, in this film we see him escape two brutal car crashes in a ten minute span without even limping, falling off of a helicopter, smashing through several stories of flooring, and running from a hail of high powered bullets ... all without needing to go to the ER. It becomes too much and belief can only be suspended so much. The story itself is boring and the film lacks any decent villains ... another staple of past Die Hard films. Please let this series die.
    Expand
  6. Nov 10, 2014
    3
    A Good Day to Die Hard boasts huge (though overlong) action sequences but that does not cover up for it's stupid script and forced father son relationship.
  7. Sep 2, 2014
    1
    This movie was a total train wreck. I don't understand. The other four movies had the recipe down for what works in a Bruce Willis action adventure, they showed that they could hold their own...I mean...what...what in the world happened? I watched this and I couldn't believe my eyes. The Die Hard series, one of my most loved series's, has been butchered. Everything that made the otherThis movie was a total train wreck. I don't understand. The other four movies had the recipe down for what works in a Bruce Willis action adventure, they showed that they could hold their own...I mean...what...what in the world happened? I watched this and I couldn't believe my eyes. The Die Hard series, one of my most loved series's, has been butchered. Everything that made the other films good had been left behind for no reason at all. In the other Die Hards, Bruce led the charge and was the primary driving force of the action and the plot. He had help yes but there was no mistake that he was the big daddy. Without that you get a movie like this. There is no complex network of evil to figure out and break down, there is no playful, humorous, bantering, no well defined plot, there is just Bruce Willis with a gun yelling things every now and again. No lead acting at all! They give his whiny brat of a son too much screen time as well. Its like Batman and Robin just bickering at each other but you're not even really sure which ones which at times. This was a shot to the face as a fan. Seriously, how could you? This doesn't belong in the Die Hard legacy. Fail. Expand
  8. Aug 26, 2014
    4
    This movie was borderline disappointing. Of course, there was explosions and car chasing like any typical Bruce Willis movie but I felt that this movie did not live up to it's expectations.
  9. chw
    Jul 17, 2014
    3
    What a god awful Die Hard sequel. If I have to watch it a second time I'm going to die hard it was that terrible. I'd say "in my opinion" but I just can't, because millions think the same.
  10. May 25, 2014
    2
    disappointing does anyone remember die hard 1 nothing about this is anything like that bruce wilis does not even smoke he just gets chanced and chances back with his son who pulls a gun out of know where in 1 seen but suppose any 5th instalment or the end of a trilogy doesn't end well
  11. May 4, 2014
    1
    Live Free or Die Hard may have been PG-13, but it was still worth watching. If you want to see John McClane at his worst, then this is the movie for you to avoid. This franchise went from completely different to using too much of their old tricks. It stoops to the level of Jason Statham's "Parker" and Sylvester Stallone's "Bullet to the Head", both of which make their main actors look likeLive Free or Die Hard may have been PG-13, but it was still worth watching. If you want to see John McClane at his worst, then this is the movie for you to avoid. This franchise went from completely different to using too much of their old tricks. It stoops to the level of Jason Statham's "Parker" and Sylvester Stallone's "Bullet to the Head", both of which make their main actors look like pedestrians. With a title like "A Good Day To Die Hard", no wonder John McClane is ready for euthanization. Expand
  12. Mar 26, 2014
    1
    Willis literally threw away the franchise - with the help of a director (John Moore) who hasn't had a movie above 37% on RT (Lifetime average: 24%)...
  13. Feb 2, 2014
    3
    A Good Day to Die Hard boasts huge (though overlong) action sequences but that does not cover up for it's stupid script and forced father son relationship.
  14. Jan 17, 2014
    1
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This movie it's even a bigger insult to the Die Hard franchise, Than the previous horrible sequel, with no charm of the first 3 movies, there is no chemistry between Bruce Willis, and Jai Courtney, no Yipee-Kay-Yay mother *beep* moment, terrible and fake looking CGI action scenes that doesn't hold a candle to the originals, and finally Bruce Willis just acting like a douche, and not John McClane. Expand
  15. Jan 5, 2014
    1
    A disastrous movie all round. The action isn't Statham-like unrealistic but it's pretty dumb, the story doesn't seem to exist and it's far too short to have any meaning. The occasional bonding between father and son can be credited but for the most part, it's cheesey action and one-liners all the way, with a context and (attempted) storyline that's older than life itself.
  16. Dec 30, 2013
    2
    Awfully directionless and frustratingly lacking basic fundamental film elements. The film seriously damages the character John McClane. Where were all the Russian cops following all the destruction of the first scene? When did it become acceptable for an American Cop to turn up in Moscow and kill hundreds of innocent bystanders just because he wanted to track his son? There was littleAwfully directionless and frustratingly lacking basic fundamental film elements. The film seriously damages the character John McClane. Where were all the Russian cops following all the destruction of the first scene? When did it become acceptable for an American Cop to turn up in Moscow and kill hundreds of innocent bystanders just because he wanted to track his son? There was little emotion in the film other than the pathetically forced father and son scene at the end. There was no peak in the film, just a boring, flat story with forced action drivel. Expand
  17. Dec 24, 2013
    0
    What the heck is this I can't imagine if someone would be happy to spend nearly 1 hour and 40 minutes on this crap. I strongly think that it's high time series "Die Hard" ended for good
  18. Dec 17, 2013
    2
    'Like father like son' The Idea was good to bring John Mclane's Son in the movie, but it lacked story and I was completely disappointed. The movie sure did Died Hard.
    Overall 3/10
    Acting 5/10
    Storyline 2/10
  19. Nov 4, 2013
    4
    This was horrible. I've not seen any of the previous Die Hard films, but I can tell you that "A Good Day to Die Hard" is simply not good. The whole movie is filled with loud, noisy and underplotted storytelling.
  20. Oct 27, 2013
    0
    One of the most stupidest movie ever made! Amount of mistakes made in this movie is way above of any reasonable limit. Its even more offensively that it was another part of a good sequel, it wasn't McClane, it was Bruce Willis acting some guy in absurd universe.
  21. Oct 12, 2013
    3
    If you watch it with friends (like I did) then it's hilarious but otherwise it's a piece of crap and shouldn't be viewed by anyone for any reason. Should've been called Fail Hard (sorry I couldn't resist)
  22. Oct 8, 2013
    3
    Another action movie franchise based on overexploited. Bruce Willis is in his role, it is not surprising. The only surprise is how well he is for his age he has.
  23. Aug 13, 2013
    2
    Unnecessarily vulgar. The script was lacking in variety and frankly, childish. A bad script ultimately leads to poor acting. With big names and a promising promo, this film really let its audience down.
  24. Aug 12, 2013
    3
    this is more like a Bad Day to Die Easy. This is a film so choppy, so poorly edited, so poorly paced, and so horribly unnecessary that its a crime to watch. Now, I was looking forward to this movie before it came out. I am a relative fan of Die Hard so it was no surprise that I was excited for this one. However, the movie feels like the writer had watched the Bourne Supremacy and Hitmanthis is more like a Bad Day to Die Easy. This is a film so choppy, so poorly edited, so poorly paced, and so horribly unnecessary that its a crime to watch. Now, I was looking forward to this movie before it came out. I am a relative fan of Die Hard so it was no surprise that I was excited for this one. However, the movie feels like the writer had watched the Bourne Supremacy and Hitman too much (he actually wrote hitman) and felt that Moscow needed more explosions and John Mclane. I have no clue why Fox had this guy right the fifth die hard movie. IT DOESN'T EVEN FEEL LIKE A DIE HARD MOVIE. The only thing that comes close is the soundtrack and Mclane's famous catch fraze. A good day to die hard lacks a huge element-John Mclane. He has no reason being there whatsoever in this pointless and confusing plot. I mean HOW??? How could Fox do this to a franchise? I mean i could understand if this franchise was like the Resident Evil series and they pumped out a lackluster action thriller, but this is DIE HARD. The villain sucks in this movie, you never really find out what their motives are or their cause all you get is them shooting up buildings and chasing some russian scientist. The action is tensionless, a lot of explodes and cars fly but you don't care really. In the end A good day to die hard is a waste of time, money and potiential. I'm sure this seals the funeral for the franchise. Shame. Mclane deserved more. Expand
  25. Aug 3, 2013
    2
    Perhaps a better title for this senseless, loud, ridiculous, and tediously preposterous action droll would've been 'A Good Day to Not Go to the Movies.'
  26. Jul 29, 2013
    1
    this is why mclane son was never really shown in the other films.predictable sad and missing life. watch it it is wasteful how many minutes they waste on cliches if u get the feeling of deja vu well im with u man this is a movie ill waste 5 dollars for just to hear the commentary. sad so sad
  27. Jul 21, 2013
    2
    Why? That's a legit question. Why? One of the biggest movies to come out in the 80s was Die Hard, then along came Die Hard 2, then Die Hard With A Vengeance in the 90s, then Live Free Or Die Hard most recently. After this, I honestly don't know if this franchise could be saved. Its fallen from one of the most beloved action franchises, to has-been action franchise. The PG-13 label on LiveWhy? That's a legit question. Why? One of the biggest movies to come out in the 80s was Die Hard, then along came Die Hard 2, then Die Hard With A Vengeance in the 90s, then Live Free Or Die Hard most recently. After this, I honestly don't know if this franchise could be saved. Its fallen from one of the most beloved action franchises, to has-been action franchise. The PG-13 label on Live Free Or Die Hard was an experiment from what I read, so, naturally, they take this one and slap the R rating back on it. So what do you get? You get the star Bruce Willis saving his son from the Russians in a crazily, sometimes unnecessary, violent mashed together pile of crap. If, for some reason, Fox decides to make another Die Hard film, call it Die Hard 3 & get an actual story, director, and supporting actors to rally around Bruce Willis, so maybe, MAYBE the franchise won't seem as bad anymore. Expand
  28. Jul 14, 2013
    3
    About a decade ago, Bruce Willis appeared on a late night talk show (Letterman?) and proclaimed that he wasn't doing any more Die Hards because 'there are only so many ways you can run down the street with a gun, screaming.' He really should have stuck with that.

    As much as I love watching Bruce and as much as Die Hard has to offer, there's just nothing left of the original in this one
    About a decade ago, Bruce Willis appeared on a late night talk show (Letterman?) and proclaimed that he wasn't doing any more Die Hards because 'there are only so many ways you can run down the street with a gun, screaming.' He really should have stuck with that.

    As much as I love watching Bruce and as much as Die Hard has to offer, there's just nothing left of the original in this one it's as much of a milking-the-box-office exercise as I've ever seen in my life. What a waste.
    Expand
  29. Jul 2, 2013
    1
    Far and away the worst die hard movie. The plot is nonsensical, the twists are contrived, and the script seems like it was written by a 12-year-old. This movie is unwatchably bad, even if you're only in it for the action scenes.
  30. Jun 21, 2013
    2
    A disappointment in every level imaginable. It reminded me of the other film Willis made with another on screen son 'Cold Light of Day' only worse. A good day to call it a day.
Metascore
28

Generally unfavorable reviews - based on 40 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 1 out of 40
  2. Negative: 24 out of 40
  1. Reviewed by: Laremy Legel
    Feb 26, 2013
    16
    The entire enterprise is a bewildering mess, put in place only to frustrate and alienate anyone who buys a ticket. Every action scene is telegraphed, and most of the dialogue is irrevocably stupid.
  2. Reviewed by: Anthony Lane
    Feb 18, 2013
    40
    I hesitate to ask, but did anyone actually tell McClane, before he arrived, that the Cold War is over?
  3. Reviewed by: Joe Morgenstern
    Feb 16, 2013
    10
    For anyone who remembers the "Die Hard" adventures at their vital and exciting best, this film feels like a near-death experience.