MovieChat Forums > Die Hard 2 (1990) Discussion > What is so bad about it?

What is so bad about it?

posted 11 years ago by Web_Head91
16 replies | jump to latest

I'm new to the Die Hard series (better late than never), and I've only seen the first one a few days ago. I'm going to watch this as soon as I can, but I see that many people don't seem to like it much. I'd like to get general thoughts and avoid spoilers, but I realize getting spoiled is the risk I take when making a post like this. But what is so bad about this film? It'll take a few days for me to get to watch it, so I want to hear from others before I do.

------------
I find it a little odd that your scripture stick has dried blood on it.

[–] TMC-4 (19567) 3 years ago

https://lebeauleblog.com/2015/09/27/worst-to-first-ranking-the-die-hard-movies/

What’s Bad: The basic story is pretty far-fetched. It would’ve been easy enough to re-direct the planes to the nearest suitable airport where they could land rather than leaving them up in the air until they run out of fuel and become falling bombs. The aforementioned plane crash scene can be pretty disturbing in the post 9/11 era, even if the movie was released 11 years prior. Dennis Franz’s character is quite annoying. I was always astounded that Roger Ebert gave the original film a low rating primarily on account of Paul Gleason’s character, yet let Franz, who was even more of an idiot, pass. Finally, Sadler, while effectively evil, isn’t on the same level as Alan Rickman.