Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation | Release Date: February 14, 2013
4.6
USER SCORE
Mixed or average reviews based on 512 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
136
Mixed:
165
Negative:
211
WATCH NOW
Stream On
Stream On
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)
3
LamontRaymondFeb 14, 2013
If there's one thing I can stand, it's when there are great shots or great lines in the trailer, and when you see the movie, those lines aren't in it or the shots didn't make it. Let me cut to the chase. In the trailer, a leathered-upIf there's one thing I can stand, it's when there are great shots or great lines in the trailer, and when you see the movie, those lines aren't in it or the shots didn't make it. Let me cut to the chase. In the trailer, a leathered-up hottie rides her motorcycle into a garage, she unzips her bodysuit, and she she's left with a black bikini-looking thing. IT"S NOT in the MOVIE. That really sucks. And the line where Willis says, "My boy and I are gonna lay a whoopin' on you" isn't in the movie either. Too bad. It's by far the worst Die Hard. Expand
5 of 8 users found this helpful53
All this user's reviews
0
strapcharlesFeb 26, 2013
Honestly, this is the worst film I've seen in years. It tried way, too, hard. To be an action film. It was an action film, but it didn't feel authentic at all. Just a bunch of fighting. Made me want to go out and be violent. I don'tHonestly, this is the worst film I've seen in years. It tried way, too, hard. To be an action film. It was an action film, but it didn't feel authentic at all. Just a bunch of fighting. Made me want to go out and be violent. I don't want that crap in my brain and I don't want to live in that kind of world. We need anti-violence in cinema. This was disgusting and pointless. Expand
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
2
nutterjrJun 21, 2013
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.
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
0
MargateExpertMar 3, 2013
Unmitigated garbage. This movie begins with a 20-minute chase scene that lacks a reason, then it goes steeply downhill. I liked the first few Die Hards, which had memorable villains and a McClane whose character hadn't yet become a cliche,Unmitigated garbage. This movie begins with a 20-minute chase scene that lacks a reason, then it goes steeply downhill. I liked the first few Die Hards, which had memorable villains and a McClane whose character hadn't yet become a cliche, but if this one puts the franchise out of its misery it'll be better for us all. Expand
2 of 3 users found this helpful21
All this user's reviews
0
M3chaGr4nFeb 14, 2013
Is there a way of describing something this awful? It is of course worse because it pretends to be Die Hard, but its the movie equivalent of Mocolate. Awful, terrible, horrible, boring, wooden, unoriginal. All I can come up with isIs there a way of describing something this awful? It is of course worse because it pretends to be Die Hard, but its the movie equivalent of Mocolate. Awful, terrible, horrible, boring, wooden, unoriginal. All I can come up with is BAWFURRIBLE. This is Bawfurrible. Never ever watch it, Expand
4 of 7 users found this helpful43
All this user's reviews
2
007Feb 14, 2013
A Bad Film to Watch is Hard.
Avoid this one at all costs! Honestly, watch the original, and forget the rest. The reason that this franchise has gone on for this long(other than money) is beyond me.
9 of 17 users found this helpful98
All this user's reviews
3
KangarooKurtJul 14, 2013
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 shouldAbout 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
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
2
Eric_LevengoodFeb 14, 2013
DHINO 2 is an agonizing, painful film to watch.

I was hoping with the R-rating and all that it would go back to the good old days, but what we get is a terrible action movie script that happens to have John McClane in it. The chemistry
DHINO 2 is an agonizing, painful film to watch.

I was hoping with the R-rating and all that it would go back to the good old days, but what we get is a terrible action movie script that happens to have John McClane in it. The chemistry between the father and son was okay, but everything else, including the supporting cast, was a dread to listen to, while there were terrible shots and weak effects as well.
Expand
4 of 8 users found this helpful44
All this user's reviews
2
Daliman13Feb 22, 2013
I defy anyone to properly explain this plot in any way that makes even a quarter of the things that happen in this film likely. It truly is just 5 or 6 long action scenes, with some weak dialogue and father-son bonding interspersed for badI defy anyone to properly explain this plot in any way that makes even a quarter of the things that happen in this film likely. It truly is just 5 or 6 long action scenes, with some weak dialogue and father-son bonding interspersed for bad measure. I expected very little, and was STILL disappointed, although for comedic purposes, it's brilliant. Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
0
KadeemluvmusicFeb 14, 2013
A Bad Day to Die Hard is what I like to call and as a big fan of Die Hard for so many years, this 5th installment is one of the worst movie of the series. I really don't want a father/son moment, I just want to see more McClane (by himself)A Bad Day to Die Hard is what I like to call and as a big fan of Die Hard for so many years, this 5th installment is one of the worst movie of the series. I really don't want a father/son moment, I just want to see more McClane (by himself) saving people and kick the living hell out of those alienated hostages. Once they'll be a 6th movie, that's it. John MCClane is soon going to be retired from his job not only as a detective, but a fantastic run. But for that, Happy Un-Valentine's Day, Motherf**ker! Expand
3 of 5 users found this helpful32
All this user's reviews
0
hoops2448Apr 23, 2013
For those of you that hoped for another rollicking good adventure with longtime friend John McClane it might be a good day to cry hard (trust me, that pun is funnier than anything this movie has to offer and that's the problem). The filmFor those of you that hoped for another rollicking good adventure with longtime friend John McClane it might be a good day to cry hard (trust me, that pun is funnier than anything this movie has to offer and that's the problem). The film follows John McClane as he heads to Russia to repair his relationship with his son only to start blowing stuff up moments after arriving and for no good reason whatsoever. The reason behind this short synopsis is because I didn't want to ruin one of worst plot twists of movie history, its so bad its funny. If you hadn't guessed yet, Die Hard 5 is one of the worst films ever made and that's not even hyperbolic, it just is. The worst part is that everything that made McClane a likable every man hero is gone, his lack of care for human life in this film is staggering from his crushing of a car with a woman still inside it to his flipping of an enemy vehicle into a crowded intersection, both of which take place in the same 10 minute chase sequence that just won't end. Die Hard 4 wasn't McClane's finest hour, although it might be Len Wiseman's best film. In fact McClane hasn't been as good as he was in the original in any of the sequels but he was enough of the man we remember for the films to be fun and enjoyable to watch with a hero you genuinely cared for. In comparison 5 has action so badly edited and literally grey (It's Russia so why not make everything look physically repulsive was probably the logic behind this idiotic decision) that its utterly lifeless and uninteresting. I guess you could put the blame solely on director John Moore, the man responsible for other gems such as Max Payne, a film that offended not just a whole generation of gamers but droves of movie goers too. However the film feels lazy, not just in its direction but in its conception as well suggesting a studio with very little interest in making a good movie. Willis tries to bring McClane to a film devoid of his classic humour and ultimately makes the film worse than Hudson Hawk, an incredibly hard feat. Now I know most people will be asking for Bruce to call it a day but I honestly do hope they make another Die Hard because there is absolutely no way it could be worse than this because die hard 5 makes Die Hard 4 look like fine art and that film was directed by the man who made 2 Underworld films, two abominable films I would watch back to back to avoid watching this again. Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
1
sinadoomJan 5, 2014
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 forA 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. Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
1
SkipperJul 2, 2013
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.
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
0
tmantonymFeb 24, 2013
Waste of money. Poor and cheesy acting, awkward comedy and this worst plot I've witnessed from a film in my life. Do not watch this movie. See Django. It's much better. My cinema didn't have Django available for some reason. It's not a goodWaste of money. Poor and cheesy acting, awkward comedy and this worst plot I've witnessed from a film in my life. Do not watch this movie. See Django. It's much better. My cinema didn't have Django available for some reason. It's not a good cinema. That's probably why. We decided to watch this movie because we traveled far to get to the cinema and didn't want to leave without seeing a movie. Poor decision. Thought the movie would be decent after watching the trailer. Not the case. Stupid plot twists that didn't even make sense. See Django. That's a good movie. Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
2
StevenFMar 1, 2013
This shouldn't really be included as a Die Hard film, it should really be re-titled as "Bruce Willis goes to Russia and blows stuff up", not John McClane, but Bruce Willis, because this is no longer the John McClane that we knew fromThis shouldn't really be included as a Die Hard film, it should really be re-titled as "Bruce Willis goes to Russia and blows stuff up", not John McClane, but Bruce Willis, because this is no longer the John McClane that we knew from yester-year, he is simply a shadow of his former heroic self, and has been replaced by an indestructible action man, he isn't GI Joe just yet, but he certainly plays that part in this.
So we kick off with the main man heading to Moscow, as his son, Jack (Jai Courtney) is now a"007" type CIA agent who is going to prison after attempting to assassinate corrupt official Chagarin.
Why we are suppose to believe that John was only going over to watch his son go down is questionable, but lets roll with it.
So of course, explosions soon start when an orchestrated attack on the courthouse leads to John teaming with his son and political prisoner Komarov to escape the corrupt man's henchmen.
There are plenty of action packed set-pieces to keep the viewer happy, but not nearly enough of a believable story to back them up, they escape from a massive skyscraper building in one of the worst edited sequences, and end up in a dumpster, they then simply get up, brush off and move on.
It simply doesn't stop.
Bruce Willis delivers in his role as usual, but not in the manner of which we seen in the first entry of the franchise all those years ago, his cheesy quips are there, as are his unrelenting tendencies to succeed, but to what end? We still don't know what he is doing here, an average cop going to help son?
Jai Courtney just comes across as a whining child for the better part of the film, constantly blaming his dad for not being there and so on, and emotional depth is carelessly pumped in by a few speeches about children, but it just doesn't work for the pace of this movie, with character development being virtually non-existant and enough plot holes to make you laugh.
A plot twist in the film was just too little too late, by this point its just unclear who exactly the villain is supposed to be, nobody stands out or is remotely relevant to the plot and I was honestly bored and wanted it to be over at this point.
Gone are the days of the good cop being in the wrong place at the wrong time, and we now have an immortal Jason Bourne wannabe seemingly looking for trouble just to cause a few explosions and say some witty quips.
But I still hope they make another, hopefully just to redeem the bumbling mess of this one, to perhaps strip back the superhero part and replace it with the heroic part again. Utterly disappointing.
Expand
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
3
AlexBugellaFeb 15, 2013
I loved Live Free or Die Hard and when I heard about this one I was stoked, but when I saw it, I was very disappointed. It was very unoriginal and it lacked truly amazing action. Also, without spoiling anything, there was WAY TOO MANYI loved Live Free or Die Hard and when I heard about this one I was stoked, but when I saw it, I was very disappointed. It was very unoriginal and it lacked truly amazing action. Also, without spoiling anything, there was WAY TOO MANY betrayals and plot holes for the story to be remotely enjoyable. Expand
8 of 9 users found this helpful81
All this user's reviews
2
FrostAidenFeb 17, 2013
Painfully boring and dull, annoying characters, cheese EVERYWHERE. Absolutely terrible plot, and absolute crap villain. Even the actors look like they don't want to be there, especially Willis.... he just drags on and on with terriblePainfully boring and dull, annoying characters, cheese EVERYWHERE. Absolutely terrible plot, and absolute crap villain. Even the actors look like they don't want to be there, especially Willis.... he just drags on and on with terrible dialogue and awful... awful awful awful one-liners, WHAT THE HELL KIND OF LINE IS "I'm on f***ing vacation?. Generally boring, and not worth any money, I won't even watch it if it were on T.V Expand
5 of 6 users found this helpful51
All this user's reviews
0
UnbiasedOneFeb 15, 2013
Yet the question still remains: Why dig up something that has been long dead for a fourth and fifth title? The answer, money. History has proven that in general three is the limit. Willis is tired of this and he screams it in his acting shown here.
6 of 7 users found this helpful61
All this user's reviews
3
theahsanhaseebMar 2, 2013
Save your time, don’t watch this film. I read a review somewhere that this film is a bad version of Die Hard 4 fan fiction, that means it is even worse than the previous instalment. I have no idea why Bruce Willis keeps doing these actionSave your time, don’t watch this film. I read a review somewhere that this film is a bad version of Die Hard 4 fan fiction, that means it is even worse than the previous instalment. I have no idea why Bruce Willis keeps doing these action roles when especially now, his body doesn’t allow him to do that. Of course, he can do whatever he want but he should, at least, reconsider before committing to roles like these. The film lacks good sense of direction and sufficient characterizaion, the action sequences aren’t so good either. It doesn’t offer that witty writing plot and great characters which Die Hard 1 did. All these factors make this film a waste of time, to some extent. Final Verdict: Never watch it. NEVER!! If you wanna waste your time, then go ahead, nobody’s stopping you. Collapse
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
3
DCM-2099Feb 17, 2013
Unfortunately worse than it's prequel, this iteration of the Die Hard series just serves to show how far the series has fallen. Courtney was a surprise, in not being as bad as expected, but the rest of the movie was nonsensical to the extremeUnfortunately worse than it's prequel, this iteration of the Die Hard series just serves to show how far the series has fallen. Courtney was a surprise, in not being as bad as expected, but the rest of the movie was nonsensical to the extreme and badly acted. The story was passable at best (save perhaps for a twist round the middle of the movie, which is disappointingly resolved) and the action pieces were over-the-top when they should have been subtle and slow when they should have been over-the-top. All-in-all, I felt like I would have felt better about the franchise not having seen this last entry. Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
3
starscream97Oct 12, 2013
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)
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
2
DeitiesforsaleFeb 14, 2013
Very Disappointing. I wasn't a huge fan of Die Hard 4, but I would rank it higher than this one. Sad to see a good franchise be ruined by stupid studio money grabbing decisions, this could have been so much more.
6 of 7 users found this helpful61
All this user's reviews
2
ClayMerrittJul 21, 2013
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'tWhy? 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
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
2
cameronmorewoodAug 3, 2013
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.'
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
0
OroiaelFeb 17, 2013
Random and wholly unbelievable action sequences strung together by one-liners and a completely out of place father and son story makes for a babbling and incoherent mess. We should take sharp objects and decision making power away from peopleRandom and wholly unbelievable action sequences strung together by one-liners and a completely out of place father and son story makes for a babbling and incoherent mess. We should take sharp objects and decision making power away from people who like this movie. I'm not sure how this movie was top of the box office, our theater was nearly empty and in talking to the theater manager the ticket sales were real low. There is a reason this movie was released in February and not the summer. Mainly that it stunk. Expand
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
3
Nesbitt10May 28, 2013
Making a good action movie is challenging because it requires continuity between the storyline with the action scenes--appearing balanced, maximizing the level of excitement while providing some credibility to the plot. Despite using theMaking a good action movie is challenging because it requires continuity between the storyline with the action scenes--appearing balanced, maximizing the level of excitement while providing some credibility to the plot. Despite using the formula that has worked so well time and time again, the end result is truly disappointing--easily the worst installment: loud, mindless, and an utterly uninspiring. The fifth chapter in this on-going franchise is dead on arrival.

Bruce Willis returns to his iconic role, (and mind you, he will again), and this time around, McClane is in the wrong place at the wrong time--again--after traveling to Moscow to help his estranged son Jack. Bruce has no idea that Jack is really a highly trained CIA operative, whose mission is to stop a nuclear weapons heist. With the Russian underworld in pursuit, and battling a countdown to war, the two McLane's discover that their opposing methods make them the ultimate two-person army.

Willis is not the reason this fails so miserably. A weak script written by Skip Woods containing numerous problems, and poor directing and direction by John Moore ("Max Payne" (2008), "The Omen" (2006)). Woods' limited filmography contains nothing surpassing mediocrity, and this display is further proof of just that. To compound the on-going script issues, the very premise in itself doesn't hold a shred of credibility. There are continuous sequences of explosions, carnage, and utter destruction surrounding the Russian capital, and yet there is never any sign of any law enforcement or government involvement what so ever. It's an action film for sheer entertainment purposes--I get it--and people like explosions, but come on.

The chemistry between the characters and story line lacks development due to the limited time to actually speak, and when they do you wish they weren’t. What really takes the cake is when John's nemesis Alik (Rasha Bukvic), talks about how he used to be a pretty good tap dancer whom no one appreciated. Ironically, what passes as John McClane's wise cracks is anything but humorous. Most of McLane's lines are in the context of his father-son relationship with Jack (Jai Courtney), but are hardly witty or engaging. They are also frustratingly repetitive, consisting of John lamenting how Jack rarely shows him any respect as a father, or John lamenting how he had expected no more than a vacation in Moscow.

Despite the frenetic pacing in a compact 97 minutes-the abundance of action is staged so unimaginatively that it fails to even interest, let alone excite you. A missed opportunity to possibly lead the franchise into a new direction: John passing the baton to his son, a CIA operative is never considered. Ultimately, just another big budget action movie dumped into middle of February that will score big in the box office, and as a result "A Good Day To Die Hard" will have another tomorrow.
Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
2
b-radMay 19, 2013
A Good Day to Die Hard is a colossal disappointment. Fans of the franchise would surely agree that the fifth entry in this action-packed series pissed all over its four outstanding predecessors out of it's sheer awfulness.
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
3
SummersausageFeb 16, 2013
I love the die hard movies. They are usually on the cutting edge of new action movies combined with a classic romanticist age character, but this one fell flat. It did not have a good story that didn't really make sense and people just wouldI love the die hard movies. They are usually on the cutting edge of new action movies combined with a classic romanticist age character, but this one fell flat. It did not have a good story that didn't really make sense and people just would die for no reason. It was just... crap. Expand
13 of 13 users found this helpful130
All this user's reviews
3
NiamLeeson79Feb 22, 2013
I was at first angry and outraged and rightly so with the decision to hack the said material to shreds and produce a 12a certificate but even without comparison and heavy scrutiny, a good day to die hard just doesn't even work as a standI was at first angry and outraged and rightly so with the decision to hack the said material to shreds and produce a 12a certificate but even without comparison and heavy scrutiny, a good day to die hard just doesn't even work as a stand alone action film. These executive commercial decisions for financial gain are becoming all too frequent.
Despite one or two in-jokes, Bruce Willis's everyman tough guy may aswell have been called John Major or any other name, such has the iconic role of John MClane and what he stands for has seemingly slipped away. What remains is a questionably stylish old man with a gun and a few half-hearted one liners.
So why two and a half stars you may ask?(the chase sequence gets a star all on its own). In the confines of an action movie there has and will be worse. You just have to look at the bargain bins in your local supermarkets to see all the Seagal and Lundgren films to know that. The action, though sillier and less plausible as it goes on, is well handled and a 15 minute vehicular car chase is brilliantly spectacular and a raid by the woeful bad guys on a safehouse provides an injection of tension and jeapordy but is extremely shortlived. It is what surrounds these brief moments of entertainment that lacks engagement with the audience. The father son bonding is crass, predictable and cringe-worthy and the main bad dude makes Die Hard 4's cyber terrorist look like Hitler. Despite the ood moment of fun this just lacks the principles that made the others, especially the first three, more than just action movies. Better than being caught with your pants down right?...no, not really!
Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
0
Gary_2013Feb 16, 2013
After waiting since last summer to see this movie and then finally seeing it... So very very disappointed. the concept of John McClane fighting bad guys with his son Jack is a great idea Only there was no story to it only explosions and a 20After waiting since last summer to see this movie and then finally seeing it... So very very disappointed. the concept of John McClane fighting bad guys with his son Jack is a great idea Only there was no story to it only explosions and a 20 minute long car chase scene. I believe Die Hard just died hard. Expand
5 of 6 users found this helpful51
All this user's reviews