MovieChat Forums > Die Hard 2 (1990) Discussion > McClane VS Stuart

McClane VS Stuart

posted 8 years ago by BendItLikeBender
5 replies | jump to latest

I love, love, LOVE this movie - my favorite in the series, actually. Yes, it is often VERY dumb and full of "aw, c'mon!" moments, but it's handled with such skill and precision, I can't help but watch it often, despite its logical hiccups.

The thing I love the most is that the main antagonist, Colonel Stuart, completely wipes the floor with McClane at the end in a physical fight, which gives it a sense of realism the rest of the film sorely lacks. But, my question... Had McClane not gone through tee-total hell leading up to the final confrontation with Stuart, do you think he would have had a better chance of besting Stuart in a fight? We know McClane is often tenacious enough to persevere against the odds, and that is what helps him win several of his fist fights in the series. I think, more here than any other film in the series, McClane simply wasn't at his most determined because of the physical hell he had gone through leading up to the fight. So, a well-rested McClane against Stuart - does he stand a chance?

[–] Hendry_William_French 8 years ago

McClane was winning tussles all throughout the movie against ex-Special Forces guys, so I reckon he would've put up a good fight against Stuart if he was rested.

McClane fights like Rocky, the underdog up against far more skilled fighters. He just kinda hangs in there, takes the blows and sucker punches his opponent at the right time using a good strategy. Stuart had him good this time because he was an expert in martial arts it seemed, and McClane was just too tired and got outclassed in the end.

At least he took out the following by hand:

Cochrane - http://diehard.wikia.com/wiki/Oswald_Cochrane
Baker - http://diehard.wikia.com/wiki/Baker
Major Grant

Not bad considering how these were elite spec ops dudes.

Acting like you some one-man GPS

[–] manofsteel4455 8 years ago

Why are people always complaining about the lack of realism in movies?

[–] sneezer-28343 7 years ago

Well, McClane doesn't have martial arts skills like it appears Stuart has. It is also funny that Stuart sends McClane to the ground, but the fall from the wing doesn't severely kill or injure him. McClane still can walk and he is still coherant. I am watching NFL football right now. Some of these guys get hit and it's like time to put the player in concussion protocol. I think falling 10-15 feet from the wing of a 727 plane would cause quite a bit of damage to anyone.

[–] pgFiSheYe 7 years ago

Zero.

Cnel Stuart was a highly trained special forces with plenty of experience in hand-to-hand combat and CQC, as well as black belts in martial arts.

Cnel Stuart would have probably killed McClane had the fight been on the ground, or at least a parked plane

[–] DoctorDangerDisco 7 years ago

Nah Mclane is a brawler whereas Stuart is obviously a martial arts expert and would've had hand to hand combat training in the army. If it had been on the flat he'd have wiped the floor with him.

Now Riggs from lethal weapon vs Stuart that would be a good fight