Love the return of Ode to Joy...but not sure about it though. Gives me a bad feeling, all that washed-out cinematography, the fact it's not a summer movie franchise anymore, and John Moore directing it.

I'm willing to give this a shot...Live Free was a very pleasant surprise, and I think Moore is a capable enough action filmmaker (I really enjoyed his Flight Of The Phoenix remake). Yes, it's awash in blue, but so was LF. The fact that it's being released in February is somewhat troubling, though...LF was released a dozen years after Sucks With A Vengeance, but it was still given a prestige summer release slot.

It'll be competent and watchable. It's always fun watching Bruce do his thing. He's not pretending to be half his age which helps.

Eric W. wrote:It'll be competent and watchable. It's always fun watching Bruce do his thing. He's not pretending to be half his age which helps.

Yeah, the "007 of Plainfield, New Jersey." Although, living in New Jersey, I can't help but wonder - they couldn't have picked another offbeat town for John McClain to reside in? I mean, that's the same town former Govenor Jim McGreevey lives in (not sure if he still does anymore though). I couldn't fathom a meet-up between the two at the local Dunkin Donuts.

McClain always seemed like a "Nutley, NJ" kinda guy, much more in company with Frank Vincent and Joe Pesci.

Edmund Kattak wrote:McClain always seemed like a "Nutley, NJ" kinda guy, much more in company with Frank Vincent and Joe Pesci.

And trailer #2, replete with MEW cameo.



Plus, the poster:

I mean, whatever. It looks like a John Moore movie. There's literally nothing separating it from any other B-movie actioner that's come out in the last ten years.

Mike Skerritt wrote:I mean, whatever. It looks like a John Moore movie.

There's one guy who's never made a movie worth seeing more than once (and a few of them weren't worth seeing at all!).

I really liked Moore's remake of Flight Of The Phoenix.

Yippie-kie-yay!

http://collider.com/die-hard-5-rated-r/223597/

I care more that the movie is good than it is R rated.

And couldn't they have pushed some of these back a bit? Talk about action overload!

-Arnold's LAST STAND January 18th
-Statham in PARKER January 25th
-Stallone's BULLET TO THE HEAD February 1st
-Willis' DIE HARD February 14th

I'm going to have a rough time getting Joanne to all of these! lol.

AndyDursin wrote:I care more that the movie is good than it is R rated.

Obviously (I enjoyed the PG-13 Live Free a lot more than the R-rated With A Vengeance), but I still like to hear John McClane curse, and we won't have to have his catchphrase covered up by a gunshot this time ("Yippie-kai-yay, Mister Falcon...!").

AndyDursin wrote:I care more that the movie is good than it is R rated.

Same here.

And couldn't they have pushed some of these back a bit? Talk about action overload!

-Arnold's LAST STAND January 18th
-Statham in PARKER January 25th
-Stallone's BULLET TO THE HEAD February 1st
-Willis' DIE HARD February 14th

I'm going to have a rough time getting Joanne to all of these! lol.

Pretty dumb scheduling. The fact that none of these is going be in theaters during the summertime and they missed the holidays by two months when it really counts tells me something.

The fact that none of these is going be in theaters during the summertime and they missed the holidays by two months when it really counts tells me something.

If it was 1990, I'd agree with you, but times have changed: this isn't the '80s or '90s when studios slated rescheduled, failed bombs for the January dumping grounds. As we've seen over the last 10 years, major studios aren't afraid of releasing films at any time of the year -- MLK weekend, Presidents Day, etc. It's basically become a 12 month/release calendar and it never used to be that way (I remember when it was shocking to see a high budget film like HUNT FOR RED OCTOBER come out in March!). The newer RAMBO did decently and that was, what, a January release? And the reality is -- aging action stars aren't going to be getting major "seasonal" release dates on their own...not unless it's something huge like THE EXPENDABLES.

Most of these are also moderately budgeted projects that don't have a lot riding on them. The Stallone film has actually gotten good reviews already -- don't know anything about the others. Taylor Hackford used to produce respectable films and he directed PARKER, which has Statham playing the same role Mel Gibson played in PAYBACK (and Lee Marvin did in POINT BLANK in the late '60s). The Arnold movie looks like good fun but it's only a $35 million, moderately budgeted film...studios aren't going to spend $100 million to bankroll these guys anymore as they did decades back. (You can still make a good movie for cheap; I don't think RAMBO was expensive).

I can understand moving those movies into the winter months (Statham's films have done well at this time of the year; RAMBO did well for Stallone), but DIE HARD is interesting and it's a bit different case than the others.

I'm willing to bet that this sequel doesn't have the budget of the previous films. European setting and a more economical shoot probably means Fox was willing to accept an R rating because of a lower budget. They also know it'll do well foreign, so provided they keep the costs in check, they can afford to make it an R rated February release in a less competitive time of year. LIVE FREE OR DIE HARD was likely much pricier, so they had to concede to a PG-13 to get the box-office up to offset the cost.

EDIT - This old story basically confirms as much: "Moore is in final negotiations and was in the running through the entire search as Fox tried to find a filmmaker that pleased Willis and the studio execs that have to shoot this movie in Russia and bring it in on a budget and a tight schedule."