Jory wrote:
I actually like it. Sue me.
I just can't get behind it. 'Die Hard' is probably one of the top three action movies of all time; it's a lot to live up to, sure, but I don't get how anyone could compare the first to the fourth and not be immediately resentful of the latter for carrying the name.
'Good Day' pretty much systematically destroyed everything that was endearing about the original. Remember when John McClane was an actual character, a flawed everyman who spent most of the first movie injured and limping and relying just as much on his wit as his bullets to defeat one of the most memorable screen villains of the '80s? It was a counter to the cartoonish hypermasculinity of Schwarzenegger and Stallone's movies, and it worked amazingly. In 'Good Day' he just survives one implausible explosion after another without a single scratch and his characterization hinges entirely around spouting one-liners (or screaming "JACK!") against an even more implausible plot which serves only to string one action sequence to another. 'Die Hard' became
exactly the kind of cartoonish hypermasculine action film it was originally meant to be a contrast to.
And don't get me wrong, I love cartoonish hypermasculinity. 'Commando' is an amazing film on so many levels. Maybe some people can look past the name, but for me 'Good Day' didn't even stand on its own merits as an enjoyable action film, especially compared to the wealth of excellent action flicks we've seen in the last few years ('The Raid', 'Dredd', 'John Wick', etc.). It just wasn't a good movie to me. Of course you're entitled to like it, your personal taste is your own and I'd never put someone down for liking something, but I was upset enough by it to at least voice my opinion on the matter.