User Score
4.8 out of 10

Mixed or average reviews- based on 255 Ratings

User score distribution:

Review this movie

  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Mar 23, 2013
    3
    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 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 fifth chapter-this film is dead on arrival. Bruce Willis returns in his most iconic role, (and mind you-he will again), as John McClane the "real" hero with the skills and attitude to always be the last man standing. 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 can punch holes through written by Skip Woods, and poor directing by John Moore ("Max Payne", "The Omen"). Little in either Woods' filmography suggests that his is capable of rising above mediocrity, and this display in blandness is proof of just that. To compound the on-going issues, the very premise in itself doesn't hold a shred of credibility. Continuous sequences of explosions and utter destruction, and ever raising body count in and around Russian capital, and there is never any sign of any law enforcement or government involvement what so ever. It's an action film for sheer entertainment, and people like explosions, but come on. The chemistry between the characters and story line is lacking development due to the limited time available and poor dialogue. John's lines are horrid, the rest of the characters can be no better and 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 nary 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. Sadly, a missed opportunity to possibly lead the franchise into a new direction-John passing the baton to his son, a CIA operative. 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
  2. Apr 7, 2013
    8
    This was a decent action flick and a respectable sequel to add to the four Die Hard films already out there, but at the end of the day it was nothing ground-breaking. Great to still have Bruce in there, and his son Jack is an entertaining character. You are kept both interested and entertained throughout, but the genre itself and the type of film it is can tend to bore me a little so it's not one I will rush to see again, but fans of the first four will probably still love it Expand
  3. pxl
    Feb 25, 2013
    9
    I liked it, I don't understand peoples problems with this film, I enjoyed it and it's what I expected for a Die Hard film, the gags and the explosions..
  4. Mar 5, 2013
    7
    I honestly don't see why its got such a low rating, after all its got such Awesome action, fair enough the story line wasn't brilliant and is a bit confusing but its still worth watching just for the gun fights and car chases.
  5. Feb 22, 2013
    7
    What's wrong with you people? I had the exact same thing with 'Bullet to the Head'. This is a 'Die Hard' movie with John McClane doing what he does best, kick ass. I'll agree that it's (arguably) the weakest of the franchise but I knew precisely what I was going to see and that's what I saw, an action packed 'Die Hard' flick. The plot is same ol, same ol but this John McClane vehicle was never about hidden messages within a complex plot. As if!, lol. I'll also agree that using the Russian angle was scraping the story barrel and taking it to a new low but again, do we care too much? You do? Why go to see an action movie with Bruno in it then? The DH franchise did have a chance to breath new life into itself or even go out in dramatic style but I can't bring myself to blame Bruno or even the film itself. I will put some blame on Skip Woods who has written some decent screenplays for the likes of Swordfish, Hit-man and Wolverine but this was a job for a writer made of classier stuff. I don't know who wrote the screenplays (not the book) for the Bourne series but that type of writer. Oh well, I still enjoyed this film because it still had some amazing action sequences with Mr Willis throwing in his usual one liners.

    The bottom line is, forget going to see this if you want a deeper meaning in your story, (I hear tell of a film called 'The Master' that might suit you brainy types, lol), but for unadulterated, brainless action then John McClane Son do the job rather nicely.

    Recommended

    Score: 7/10

    N∆V navq@ymail.com
    Expand
  6. Feb 23, 2013
    5
    Remember to place your expectations appropriately the previous Die Hard films have been released in order of quality. This movie follows its expected design and doesn’t falter in regards to FXs, action, cinematography, or direction. Give this film the same chance and patients as you would a James Bond movie and you’ll be content.
  7. Feb 28, 2013
    6
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Recibí lo que esperaba: poco, Un buen día para morir es una película para un público poco exigente que sabe a lo que va, buenos efectos especiales utilizados como nube de humo para esconder personajes poco carismáticos que olvidaremos fácilmente, la química entre los personajes padre e hijo fue cero y acartonada. Bruce Willis hizo lo suyo, al menos lo que pudo a su edad.

    Es una película que entretiene más por sus fuegos artificiales que por sus diálogos, las glorias de años pasados han llegado a su fin. Con algunas inconsistencias en el tiempo y en escenas, la película se centra en la relación de McClane y su hijo, que intentando salvar a un presidiario se envuelve en más enredos de los que esperaban, al final, los malos pierden, los buenos ganan, fueron felices y comieron perdices, no defraudará a los seguidores de la saga ni del género.

    Lo bueno: Escenas de acción bien elaboradas, Sorpresas inesperadas al final, Mucha acción, 97 minutos fue el tiempo perfecto para lo que ocurrio.

    Lo malo: Poco química entre los personajes, McClane quejándose constantemente del fiasco de sus vacaciones, sentimentalismos en los momentos menos indicados, guion y trama débil, personajes secundarios pobremente interpretados.

    Ya se ha confirmado la sexta parte aunque pienso que este es “Un buen día para morir”.
    Expand
  8. Feb 22, 2013
    3
    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 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 eve
    ryman 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
  9. Feb 16, 2013
    10
    Just watched the movie, man it's awesome, why do they hate this movie?, it's fun, entertaining, intresting and has got some amazing special effects.
  10. Feb 20, 2013
    4
    An excitable mess of violence and action that Die Hard has always been known for, yet poor direction from John Moore (not for the first time) and a meagre plot, coupled with the generic acting of action hero Jai Courtney, make A Good Die to Just Die Altogether little more than an alright action film. Bruce Willis' iconoclast role as John McClane gently pushes the film into the realm of average, yet without him this film would be very weak, and regardless is already the poorest of the Die Hard franchise. Expand
  11. Feb 15, 2013
    9
    This is probably the 3rd best installment in the series behind 1 and 3. Tons of fan service, tons of action, tons of fun. I've been hearing complaints about people saying it's not realistic enough but honestly that is what helps move this movie along. John McClane is a character who is hard to kill. If you've seen the other 4 diehards you know that. He brings a calmness in this movie as if he's been there before which is pretty awesome, and funny to watch as he is now being put through the ringer with his son.
    The Action scenes are still top tier.
    Expand
  12. Feb 15, 2013
    8
    Just trying to assign my 7 rating. Do I have to write a review for that to happen.? Since I'm here, I will comment that its funny, the delta (difference) between the reviewer scores and the "users". With rotten tomato data, the delta is about 60 points or more.
  13. Feb 16, 2013
    7
    Macht der Film Spaß? JA! Ergibt der Film Sinn? NEIN! Dazu kommt, dass man nichts mehr von der “Die Hard”-DNA spürt. John und Jack McClane könnten mühelos durch Ethan Hunt (Mission Impossible) und seinem Bruder oder einfach irgendwelche anderen Figuren ersetzt werden. Das ist natürlich schade. Wäre dies kein Film der geliebten “Die Hard” Reihe, so würde meine Wertung vermutlich durch die Dech durch die Decke gehen. Ich drücke aber beide Augen zu und sehe den Streifen als eine Art “Die Hard 4.5″; eine Zwischenepisode um Jack McClane einzuführen. Dann funktioniert alles prima. Expand
  14. Feb 16, 2013
    6
    well it wasnt the best film in Die Hard franchise. McClane senior had to compete with Junior for audience attention thus he had less dialogues. But that duo gave us adrenaline boosted action sequences which is what we wanted. If only movie was longer than 1,5 h.
  15. Feb 28, 2013
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. It's interesting to make a movie without obviously having any script. In A Good Day to Die Hard" you have got 100 minutes of pure destruction and action. Bruce Willis gives his best to play John McClane once more and his "opponent" Sebastian Koch as Komarov also did very well but the other actors are just not good enough. The cinematography is partially quite interesting but sometimes too bad to look at. Expand
  16. Feb 22, 2013
    5
    Unfortunately the film fails to deliver. From Die Hard you expect McLane in a bloody tank top being kicked and mauled and still moving on and kicking ass, whereas here the kicking is replaced by fancy scenes with lots of effects and not much substance, it doesn't deliver the classic badassery that we've got used to, you know, like him walking in the toilet and pulling glasses out of his feet, wrap them up and get back in the game, Willis is probably just getting too old for it.

    It also fails with all the father son issue, there are nice gags, it's a nice excuse to get him into Moscow, but aside from that there is no depth to it.

    I still believe is worth the cinema ticket and the popcorn, especially if for any reason you haven't watched the older ones that won't disappoint you, but as an old fan of the franchise this film made me sad.
    Expand
  17. Feb 24, 2013
    10
    I really liked this flix if you have watch from its beginings you understand what is happening besides being a loyal WILLIS fan it was fun to watch!!
  18. Feb 24, 2013
    3
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Review A good day to Die Hard
    Bearded Russian (Nijinsky that what John McClane calls him later) is playing chess in a glass cell, obviously very intellectual, well he is playing chess on his own, is threatened by another Russian in a really smart suit. Young tough looking Russian or so you think, goes into night club, shots and wounds this guy who is a friend of the Intellect. He gets caught and does a deal with dodgy looking secret service Russian guy, the one you think is Russian. He ends up on same trail as the Intellect, in the meantime John McClane has a very detailed conversion with a guy from the FBI after shooting load of bullets into paper. Turns out the Russian guy who shoots the Intellect's friend is his son Jack McClane and they don’t get on.
    So off we go Moscow, lots of tension as people who look dangerous talk over various devices and cars are checked for bombs. Court room blows up and John can’t believe it happens again where ever he goes there is trouble. His son escapes with Intellect, and just as he tries to get away John is there in front of his getaway van. “Hey why don’t you write” and that type of thing which causes a problem for him, as he is secretly working for CIA and is not a Russian hood (didn’t see that coming). Nasty people are really shooting a lot of bullets at then by the way, but John wants to talk, by the way who is you friend (the Russian Intellect).
    Then a fantastic car chase through Moscow, cars and a good bit of the city motorway infrastructure are really damaged. Innocent Russian city drivers having the crap knocked out of them by this massive armoured truck. One guy had only popped out to get some Then John gets up and shouts at the evil guy who has been chasing him and his son separately in the massive armoured truck, and teases him (not really called for). Son has a change of heart and goes back to help John get out of car he has totalled and after he has been rude to evil Russian gun man.
    They now run to the safe house which the evil people know about and shoot it all up. They all manage to escape and get the Intellect to meet up with daughter in an empty classy restaurant but it’s a trap, she double crosses her dad, the Intellect. The evil guy that John Mclean was rude to gets his own back on him by doing some dancing and hits John and his son. They get out of this, don’t want to spoil it by telling you, and suffice to say it keeps you on a knife edge. Lots of glass falling as well. Then they jump out of a building and slide down the shute that builders use to throw rubble down, that’s looks like fun (I could see that as a ride at one of the Disney parks). Luckily missing shots being fired from a helicopter, God the tension!
    Then there is great line of dialogue, o yeah there is dialogue as well, John gets Chernobyl mixed up with Grenoble in Switzerland, deliberately, makes Jack (John’s son) smile, but he really wants to laugh. You know how dads can sometime just be so silly and crazy.
    They all turn up at Grenbolbe sorry Chernobyl, it was just a cracking line, can’t seem to let it go. John and Jack aren’t worried about radiation, whilst the evil people are all dolled up in protective clothing, really sissies. Turns out the daughter and the Intellect have a triple bluff and have been working together all the time, and he is also evil, God you just don’t know who to trust. Anyway big shot up everyone dies except John and Jack, and those words you have been waiting for throughout the film are finally uttered by Jack “Dad, wherefore art thou”, they just fell into an old swimming pool. You see he keeps calling him John throughout the movie which is very disrespectful to your father, especially if his name isn’t John, you could confuse your dad with things like that.
    Final scene they land at a small airport and John’s daughter there to meet him and Jack can’t hear what they say, but I imagine it is very deep and meaningful. About the times he regrets killing scum bags but making the world safer, probably best if we didn’t hear this dialogue because it would just have become to wordy like Lincoln.
    Expand
  19. Feb 26, 2013
    5
    The Movie will leave you questioning if this movie was good or bad and for the first time a die hard film is not about our title character instead most of the story follows his son on their adventure in moscow while the plot is easy to follow and the action is not bad i felt the writing was good for bruce willis as he had a good performance and was funny from time to time while everybody else just tried to follow in his footsteps and try to give good performances Collapse
  20. Feb 27, 2013
    6
    I am a huge fan of die hard,but i am not really satisfied with the second part of die hard,the first part was really better than second.although its trying to show a love of a father towards his son but still its not able to connect it in a proper way.
  21. Mar 3, 2013
    2
    Wow this movie stunk compared to the other ones. The acting was awful!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Especially Jai Courtney's acting. Not to mention how corny it is. The stupid storyline was one of the biggest problems though.
  22. Mar 6, 2013
    4
    A Good Day to Die Hard suffers from a slew of problems. Poor pacing, poor camera work at times, a weak dynamic between the two main protagonists, a b-movie plot, and at the end of the day it just simply didn't feel like a Die Hard movie.
  23. Mar 7, 2013
    6
    I generally enjoyed going to see Die Hard, although it doesn't have the same feel as all previous installments. Sure, Bruce Willis is there killing bad guys, but it seems as though this one was rather unnecessary. The movie develops almost exactly as you expect it (besides a twist later on in the film). I can't say I regret going to see it, but I can say it probably could have been better in my opinion. Expand
  24. Mar 8, 2013
    2
    Let me start off by saying I am an action film fanatic. I understand some action films should not be judged like dramas or thrillers. The thing is, The action in this latest Die Hard installment Is completely forgettable, Therefore it must be judged by everything else in the film. It's almost as if Bruce Willis didn't read the script. When I originally read the reviews and saw that the movie was bust with the critics I called BS. "No way can a Die Hard film be THAT bad" I thought to myself. It saddens me to say this, but the critics are right. Hell, Battleship was more entertaining than this film. Now that's SAD! I can only hope Bruce Willis has a Stallone moment, and realizes the mistake of this film and ends it right like Stallone did with Rocky Balboa. I'm patiently waiting... Expand
  25. Mar 8, 2013
    7
    Enjoyed the film for what it was, a popcorn flick that you will probably watch once and forget most of it but is an entertaining way enough to kill 90 mins or so.. I think the expectations are that people want Die Hard 1 but you can't recreate it (and if it hadn't been made until now it would probably be panned in the reviews.). It's not as good as Die Hard 1 or 3 but is better than 4.0.. so it's a start! Expand
  26. Mar 9, 2013
    1
    Director John Moore does what no man can do kill John McClane. The script is horrible, you don't care about one of these characters including McClane, and the CGI action scenes are just a waste of time.
  27. Mar 19, 2013
    0
    If you dont want to catch cancer, dont watch this movie. It is like watching 2 girls 1 cup 90 minutes and paying for it. But if you you want to hear non stop John Macklane moaning that he is on vacation see "radiation neutralizator" in action ,roadtrip from Moscow to Pripyat in one evening, unnecessary 30 minutes car chase, evil protagonist and neutral antagonist go ahead and watch it.
  28. Mar 20, 2013
    4
    I wanted so hard to be able to say that I LOVE this one. However, the only thing I do love is the son. The face, the smile, the figure.^-^ What has happened, the fun is still there and the action... They just managed to make 98mins like forever. It just never stop. Die Hard? However about just stop and breath for once.
  29. Apr 22, 2013
    5
    I really wanted this one to be a great "Die Hard" film. I wanted it to be just like "Live Free or Die Hard". But instead, this is what we get. I'm not saying this movie was pure crap, but I honestly think it could have been done better. When I first heard that John Moore was going to directing, I had to search him up and see if his other movies were good. Turns out they weren't good at all, but i still decided to give this one a shot. Yet, i was wrong. "A Good Day to Die Hard" is a muffled action movie that just goes all over the place. Bruce Willis doesn't even act like John McClane in this one. John just wasn't in this movie. But the chemistry between Jai (Jack) and Bruce (John) somewhat turned out alright. But with the other distractions like trying to figure out who the real villan was just drove me up a wall. It didn't capture a good villan. It captured too many other villans that it was hard to find the actually villan. I was really expecting something like a good "Alan Rickman" or "Jeremy Irons" or even "Timothy Olyphant". None of that was there. The movie does have some good action though, other than that, the story's just a mess. Overall, it's a dissapointing Die Hard movie. Expand
  30. Apr 2, 2013
    1
    A Good Day to Fall Asleep During a Crappy Movie..... how bad was it?!?!

    They should not have called this a 'Die Hard' movie..... it was sooooo boring. At least in the first 3 Bruce played a consistent portrayal of John McClane. I think he needs to go back and watch those films again as i did not once feel like i was watching the character John McClane at all! Very little in terms of
    being a cheeky wisecracking guy, and was more yelling out something every 1/2 hour which tried to remind us we were watching McClane.... which backfired. It did not feel like i was watching a jaded NYC cop in Russia.... i felt like i was watching some other old man. My fiances family went with me who are all huge DH fans and not one of them liked it at all.

    On a positive note i could not fault the action but this would have been better served up as 'Expendables 3' than 'Die Hard 5'.... the DH series deserves better..... go back to LA or NY and wrap this story up the way it deserves!
    Expand
Metascore

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.