This is dedicated to the sequels who are too good to have linear numeric value. This list isn't simply a "worst sequel title" list where an entry would be "Breakin' 2: Electric Boogaloo." We aren't looking for the worst sequel subtitle like "Jaws: The Revenge" or "Friday the 13th: Jason Takes Manhattan." And something like the James Bond series doesn't apply because they are not direct sequels.
There are established movie franchises that use their base name (i.e. Twilight, Pirates of the Caribbean, Harry Potter, Indiana Jones) and simply add on a 'chapter' title for the movie.
Here, I'm talking about a series of sequel titles in a franchise that keep changing the rules of the titles within the series.
Let's say it's several years in the future and generations of new are curious to watch a franchise. They wanna watch 'Back to the Future.' No problem. Part I, Part II, Part III. The 'Rocky' movies? Sure thing! I, II, III, IV, V, Balboa. Things start to get a little complicated with that one, but it's not hard to decipher.
Then, we get into the franchises that are mind-bogglingly random and twisted, future generations who haven't heard too much of these franchises might not know what order to watch them in without doing a little research first!
Well, I present my top 5 strangest franchise sequel titles!
5. Final Destination franchise
This isn't the worst, which is why it's only number 5. But they had to mess it all up with the fourth movie entitled "THE Final Destination" as opposed to "Final Destination 4." It was understandable at the time, because they wanted it to be the last and FINAL one, so it is "THE FINAL Destination" which isn't that good to begin with because some people may already refer to the first one as that. And do you think general movie-going audiences will know the difference? But then, they came out with another one AFTER that! So it's no longer THE FINAL one! Now the franchise goes like this:
Final Destination 2
Final Destination 3(D)
The Final Destination
Final Destination 5
4. alien franchise
This series started as a horror franchise. Then the sequel turned it into an all-out action movie. So, the subtle change was weird, but understandable. There are more than one Alien in the second movie, so it's not just Alien 2. But the third movie brought it back to one Alien. What to call it now? The only solution is to give it a numerical value. It's the third movie, so "Alien 3." Now this is the only one with a number, because the fourth one, for whatever reason, went with the moniker,"Alien Resurrection." It may have multiple meanings, but this time there are more than one alien again. So, now the franchise goes:
3. Die Hard Franchise
I've addressed these titles before in my 'Die Hard Retrospective' but here they are again. This is a special case where the series started out clear cut, but the director of the first movie wanted to make the third movie a true sequel to the first one and so he didn't want to acknowledge it being the actual third movie in the franchise, so they gave it a phrased title. And the sequels just followed suit in weird ways. Now they're puns on sayings. So, now the franchise goes:
Die Hard 2
Die Hard with a Vengeance
Live Free or Die Hard
A Good Day to Die Hard
2. Fast and Furious Franchise
This series is just a mess. They didn't know what they were doing when naming the first sequel, so the next installments had no rules to follow and just called themselves whatever they wanted. The worst offender is the fourth movie. It is practically the title of the first movie without the word "The" and using an ampersand for the word "And." It's the fourth movie and it bares a title way too close to the original. I've actually overheard people at a video store get confused on which movie they were talking about; the first or the fourth one. Then came "Fast Five." I liked it because I'm not a fan of the series and the movie broke out of the mold, so it's almost like a reboot title while acknowledging it's place. Then, the sixth movie came out and all the promotional material say "Fast & Furious 6", which is all well and good until the movie itself showcases the title as simply "Furious 6." I like it. It is a nice companion title to 'Fast Five.' But now, we have a franchise that goes like this:
The Fast and the Furious
2 Fast 2 Furious
The Fast and the Furious: Tokyo Drift
Fast & Furious
1. Rambo Franchise
It's pretty bad when you refer to the series as the "Rambo" series when the only one with the title "Rambo" is the fourth movie. This series just went through a complete title transition, but remains confusing. The original movie is just "First Blood." It features the character, John Rambo. The sequel demotes "First Blood" to a subtitle. The third movie just doesn't give a shit. They know what movie series this is. It's Rambo's series. But it's the third movie, so just call it "Rambo III." But in a shocking move, the fourth movie comes out and is just named "Rambo." Just "Rambo." So, now, when you talk about the movie "Rambo", you can be referring to any of these movies. The other day, I mentioned the fourth movie "Rambo" to my friend to which he responded,"The first one?"
So, now we have a franchise that goes like this:
Rambo: First Blood Part II
DIE HARD WITH A VENGEANCE
Welcome, one and all! It’s part 3 of E.J.’s “Die Hard” retrospective and we’ll be taking a look at “Die Hard with a Vengeance.”
I was 11 years old and my dad was cool enough to take me to see this in theaters and let me tell you, I loved it from the start and it still holds up to this day! Director John McTiernan returns and it’s just so obvious that he understands what makes a good “Die Hard” movie because he succeeds in telling a different kind of story without losing the charm of the original. I get a genuine feeling he purposely doesn’t acknowledge the second movie and considers this a true first sequel to the first one. Why else wouldn’t it be called “Die Hard 3?” Well, I commented on how I thought at the title “Die Harder” was cheesy, but this was just a head scratcher. Never had I heard a sequel put its title in a sentence or phrase before. But to tell you the truth, it grew on me quickly. There’s just something about the phrase “With a vengeance” that screams, “back for a real sequel.”
Well, this movie actually started off as another script named “Simon Says” which was intended to be made into the third Lethal Weapon movie. It’s especially evident by the fact that this installment is more of a buddy comedy. Not to be confused for the movie “Simon Sez” starring Dennis Rodman. For some reason, it became some sort of tradition to make a “Die Hard” movie from a different source material. The first two being books and this one, a different script.
This film literally starts off with a bang. The only credits presented are the titles, then we have a small montage of New York City set to Lovin’ Spoonful. Then, boom! A department store blows up! It grabs our attention immediately! The police department is scrambling for damage control when Police Chief Walter Cobb gets a call from the mad bomber “Simon.” There’s a beautiful shot where we pan slowly around his head throughout Simon’s call and the suspense already starts to build!
John McClane is once again thrust into a situation he doesn’t want to be in. But in a great twist, this time he’s being held hostage as Simon specifically requested John McClane to start participating in a dangerous game of Simon Says and if he fails the tasks, Simon will detonate another bomb. When we first see John, he’s hung over, he’s become an alcoholic and he’s even on suspension. It’s mentioned that he’s once again separated from his wife, although she doesn’t technically appear this time around.
The first task John must carry out is wearing a sandwich board with a message that could get him killed. A humble electrician, Zeus Carver, played by Samuel L. Jackson confronts him and unwittingly gets himself involved in the game. John convinces Zeus to play along and the rest of the movie, they become joined at the hip. It’s a detour to give McClane a direct partner. In the first two movies, he’s usually working alone, but has help from at least one more person. Here, he relies on Zeus on multiple occasions and couldn’t possibly complete all of the tasks without him. What follows is a series of sequences where John and Zeus have to travel around New York City solving riddles and disarming bombs. It’s incredibly fun to watch. It’s just like a video game. It’s not unlike missions in open world games like “Grand Theft Auto” or “Saints Row” where you travel around the city completing tasks or else something bad happens. The riddles were shown in a way to challenge the audience too. I remember rumbling amongst the people in the audience, trying to figure out the answers.
The entire New York police force gets involved in containing the terrorist plot since there’s more than just McClane’s end. It’s great to see him not butting heads with authority as much this time around and you really get a sense of unity between the police officers. What’s funny is you get to see John interact with his old cop buddies and being in New York, everybody is a smart ass and bust each other’s balls all the time. It happens a lot without being overkill and you can really see how McClane developed such a sarcastic personality at his home base.
Samuel L. Jackson and Bruce Willis’ chemistry is perhaps one of the best buddy-cop relationships ever. They play off of each other so well! Zeus is an “angry black man” character and is overly sensitive to everything McClane says like he’s implying something. Their bickering elevates this entry to be funniest of the series. It was just a blast to watch them argue. I remember the theater crowd going nuts. I don’t know how McTiernan does it, but in his “Die Hard” movies, the dialogue delivery seldom sound like actors giving performances. They’re always incredibly natural. It’s like a Howard Hawkes movie!
The “Vengeance” part of the title comes from when McClane finds out that Simon is actually Simon Gruber, Hans Gruber’s brother. It was such a fun twist to find out because it I already loved the movie and it actually had the balls to connect itself with the first one without being cheesy. Simon is played by Jeremy Irons and let me tell you, he gives Alan Rickman a run for his money. He’s just as good and what makes him so charismatic is his confidence. He walks everywhere like he owns the world and makes great quips himself. He’s like an evil James Bond! The great thing is he actually has a personality similar to Hans but has his own personal flare so you believe they WERE brothers instead of being a rehash. The motif of the bad guys in this movie is the song “When Johnny Comes Marching Home Again” just like “Ode to Joy” was in the first one. Whenever I watch this movie, I can’t help but whistle along to this song. Their plot is similar to the first where they pose as terrorists to deviate from their real heist plot, but here, it feels fresh and exciting. Never did it feel forced nor copied.
McClane and Zeus run all over New York playing Simon’s game until John finally gets a lead. Then, it becomes a detective story, which is McClane’s thing. The beauty of the first and third movie is he relies on his wits. It shows he’s really got street smarts. When it becomes a detective movie, it finally unleashes McClane on everyone. There are few gunfights in this movie, but when they take place, they really get brutal. There is one particularly over the top scene where John is stuck in a flooding tunnel and he surfs on the truck he was driving, but it doesn’t hurt the movie and I can forgive its silliness.
The last third of the movie sees McClane and Zeus climbing aboard a tanker that the terrorists have loaded with their loot. Here, we’re brought into familiar territory as it separates the two protagonists and we have McClane sneaking around another enclosed location trying to find Simon. It’s brief, but a great throwback to the first movie. Bruce Willis can just sell sneaking around and being alert. The ending of the movie is what kind of hurts it. It’s a sequence that seems to pop up out of nowhere and feels a bit tacked on. But this is for good reason, because this was a reshot ending. The original ending, which can be viewed on the DVD set and youtube shows McClane catching up to Simon months later in a German bar. McClane was fired from the NYPD and he’s been driven angry and bitter by Simon’s whole ordeal. There’s practically no action in it. It’s just John and Simon talking. With that and its darker tone, it kind of resembles a Tarantino movie. What happens is John gets out a rocket launcher and institutes his own riddle game, “McClane Says.” This is an interesting ending. I probably prefer the theatrical one more even though it’s a by the numbers action scene. The alternate ending shows McClane being a bit too dark. He’s crazier because he looks so obsessed with killing Simon. In the theatrical ending, it may be a typical action scene, but at least he still has his sanity and John feels more like a cop than a killer here. Overall, this is without a doubt a close second in the whole franchise.
THREE AND HALF STARS OUT OF FOUR.
One more review to go, then it’s “A Good Day to Die Hard.”
DIE HARD 2
Hey gang, it’s part 2 of the “Die Hard” retrospective, I’m going to be talking about the first sequel in the series, “Die Hard 2.”
The first thing that I’ll say is that almost everything I read gives this movie the ridiculous official title “Die Hard 2: Die Harder.” But the only times the movie even uses “Die Harder” is in its promotional material. The movie itself only calls it “Die Hard 2.” It may be nit picky, but “Die Harder” is just so cheesy, I only refer to it as “Die Hard 2.”
This one was based off of another novel. Whereas the first movie was based off “Nothing Lasts Forever” by Roderick Thorpe, the plot to this one is taken from the book, “58 Minutes” by Walter Wager, although I have no clue how faithful this adaptation is. “58 Minutes” has absolutely no relation to “The Detective” series.
This one becomes more of the type of action movie that the first one differentiated itself from. One of the factors is because the director of the original, John McTiernan declined to return because he felt he would be repeating himself. So, the one to step up to the plate is Renny Harlin, who made the “Die Hard”-type movie “Cliffhanger” and even a film a that cloned the third “Die Hard” movie with wrestler John Cena called “12 Rounds.” Here, I feel Renny Harlin does a serviceable job, but the drop in directing quality is pretty evident. He tries to duplicate the formula, but he tries too hard. In fact, I once read a top ten list of “Die Hard” clones where number 1 was actually “Die Hard 2” which I found pretty amusing.
Bruce Willis, his wife played by Bonnie Bedelia, Reginald Vel Johnson, and even William Atherton, who played the blood-thirsty reporter, Richard Thornberg from the first one, reprise their roles. Here, it’s established that McClane is back with his family, now as a cop in LA and he even became somewhat famous after the events of the first movie. He’s at Dulles Airport in Washington D.C. during a snowstorm waiting for his wife to arrive for Christmas vacation.
While he waits, a group of mercenaries plan to hijack the airport. How do you hijack an entire airport? Well, you’ll have to watch the movie cause it’s too complicated to explain in this review. In short, they reroute landing power from the airport tower to their own secret base. Their goal is to intercept a plane that’s transporting a Central American drug lord of a country the movie invented. He’s jailed and he’s paying the mercenaries to break him free. So, the mercenaries suspend landing of all flights until the drug lord’s plane lands. This means McClane’s wife remains in the air in danger of losing fuel.
McClane catches on from the very beginning when he spots two mercenaries doing some sort of recon work in the baggage area. He tries to alert authorities, but through some weird personal vendetta, he decides to handle it himself. And that’s part of the problem I have with this entry. McClane becomes a little too willing to get in on the action in this one. In the first one, he exhausts all options before getting involved himself. Although he isn’t too gung ho about it. He tries to alert the tower after he gets in a fire fight with the bad guys, but the McClane of the first movie couldn’t wait to step aside for the LA police and here, he goes out of his way to bring down the mercenaries. I understand his wife is on one of the planes, but his wife was held up at gunpoint in the first movie and he didn’t want to be the one to save her! Here, he willingly works by himself. It’s almost like he gets caught up in his own press like they say in the movie.
The main villain this time around is Colonel Stuart played by another character actor, William Sadler, whom you may recognize from “The Shawshank Redemption” and who hilariously played the Grim Reaper in “Bill and Ted’s Bogus Journey.” Colonel Stuart is a villain archetype that we see all the time in action movies. He has a cold gaze and stern delivery. He doesn’t have too much charisma, and I can understand that, since he’s more of a military-type character, but with better writing, he could’ve been a lot more memorable. He does have a memorable introduction though. The first we see of Colonel Stuart, he’s doing some sort of Martial Art kata in his hotel room naked. Uh, thanks. Wasn’t expecting that! Although it’s sort of awkward to watch, it does show his character is pretty hardcore in some way. This scene was actually taken and used in a Chinese “Die Hard” clone starring Jet Li! Although, the villain was just in his underwear.
I would go more into the plot, but really, it’s just a rehash of the first one. The whole movie takes place around the airport. Everyone works against John again. I mean, did we really need the reporter, Thornberg, to come back? The characters in this one fall a bit short, but they don’t necessarily hurt the movie either. They really do try duplicate the intelligence of the original, but it’s just far too over the top to be taken as seriously. And here, John’s jokes are even cheesier than the first movie. I think I read somewhere that they let Willis improvise a lot more in this movie and it shows.
The suspense, save for maybe a couple scenes, is all gone. It’s a straight up action movie. And they up the ante of the first one. Here, planes explode, the body count is probably the highest in the series and McClane is put into extraordinary situations. There’s a particularly fun scene where McClane is locked in a cockpit of a plane and the mercenaries throw grenades through the windshields. All the grenades take a laughably long time to explode. Enough time for McClane to react, come up with a plan to escape, strap himself into an ejector seat, then eject. I’m not experienced with grenades, but even in the movie world, that took a while. It does showcase some pretty cool special effects though.
In another fun, over the top, scene, McClane enters a skywalk shootout from the air ducts from maybe two stories up, drops down and rolls into the middle of gunfire! If you’ve ever played a first-person shooter video game, you know that won’t give you any clear advantage! This whole scene is hilarious, but pretty awesome too. It’s a typical 90’s action scene.
It’s all fun though. This movie may have traded its suspense for action, but at least it’s entertaining. This one is more of a guilty pleasure for me. It’s almost like a parody of the first one. John even says to himself, “How can the same thing happen to the same guy twice?” That should tell you everything. It’s more tongue in cheek and even more violent than the first one. John McClane may feel different, but he’s still a charismatic character and it’s a pretty fun story to watch.
TWO AND A HALF STARS OUT OF FOUR.
One more thing of note, the edited for TV version of this movie is notoriously bad.
Coming up, John McTiernan returns as director for the third movie,”Die Hard with a Vengeance.” Stay tuned.
Well, the newest “Die Hard” movie is about to be released on DVD and Bluray, and if you know me, you know that I pretty much grew up loving the first three films. So, I thought I’d do a retrospective over the whole series, offer my review and my personal thoughts since the movies have been such an influence on me.
This will be the first of four reviews, so buckle up; this is E.J.’s “Die Hard” Retrospective!
The first movie is actually based on the novel, “Nothing Lasts Forever” by Roderick Thorp. In that novel, the character who would eventually become John McClane is actually an older character, a detective named Joe Leland. He’s invited to his daughter’s Christmas party rather than his wife’s. And the terrorists are actually political radicals rather than thieves. The book has a darker tone and more complex themes, but a lot of it is surprisingly faithfully adapted on film. “Nothing Lasts Forever” is a sequel to Thorp’s book, “The Detective” which actually was adapted into a film starring Frank Sinatra as Joe Leland. So, if you’re so inclined, you can consider this Frank Sinatra movie to be a prequel to “Die Hard.”
The first thing people rave about this movie is how much of a breath of fresh air it was. Considering it was an action movie in the era where Sylvester Stallone and Arnold Schwarzenegger ruled the cinemas, Bruce Willis’ John McClane was a different type of action hero. His physique isn’t that of a bodybuilder and he doesn’t plow through a sea of bad guys all at once without getting injured. It’s ironic because before being adapted into “Die Hard,” this movie was supposed to be a sequel to Arnold Schwarzenegger’s “Commando,” and if you’ve seen how ridiculously over the top that movie was, I can only imagine how this one would’ve turned out.
I feel the brilliance of the movie is in the pacing. A lot of people seem to think “Die Hard” is all about the action, and while I agree that the movie certainly features mind-blowing sequences, it’s actually more of a thriller and the suspense plays more of a key role than the action. Imagine if someone took an Alfred Hitchcock movie and inserted a bit of John Woo into it. There’s a good chunk of time before the terrorists show up where it almost seems like a different genre of movie. We meet John McClane as he first gets to L.A. He’s thrusted into a minor case of cultural mergence being he’s from New York and California just seems too out there for him. He sits up front in a limo, LA’s technology is trendy and he gets kissed by a drunk guy. So, wait does that never happen in New York on New Years Eve? John finally meets up with his wife at her new job in the Nakatomi Towers. It’s a somber occasion. The mood is awkward and they’re obviously still at odds with each other after she accepted the job relocation and John stayed in New York without the family. Right off the bat, John is proven to be stubborn and doesn’t waste any time arguing with his wife.
The terrorists finally show up and take control of the building while John is relaxing with his shoes off in an office bathroom. The phones are cut and John hears gunfire which springs him into action. He manages to sneak away, thus leaving John alone and is literally the hostages’ only hope for survival.
When the terrorists arrive, the movie basically becomes a “heist gone wrong” movie. Although, instead of following the thieves like most heist movies, we’re following the guy who becomes the factor that the thieves don’t anticipate. Here, we see immediately what separates John from other action heroes. He runs away, he gets scared, he doubts himself and most notably, he’s trying to pawn the situation off on someone else to handle. He goes the whole movie without shoes too which makes him so vulnerable to the action.
Every tactic John uses to get word on the outside that the Nakatomi building has been seized gives away his position. In response, the terrorists realize there’s a rogue person in the building and keep trying to rectify the situation. The cat and mouse game is really this movie’s charm and instead of normal action movies where bad guys fight the good guys in a chance meeting, the action scenes serve the story and everything in the script is based on action-reaction. John gives authorities information that exposes him, so he risks bad guys coming after him.
The main villain is Hans Gruber, played perfectly by Alan Rickman. This was his first major movie role and it’s no wonder why he became such a great character actor after this. Hans is such a charismatic individual, he’s a hard villain to hate. In interviews, Alan Rickman has even said he played the character, not as a villain, but as a man on a mission. It’s just that he’s willing to go as far as killing everyone to accomplish that mission. Despite his sociopathic nature, he’s the reason the whole villain plot becomes more fun as well as menacing. The rest of the terrorists mostly have distinctive characterizations which elevates them from being more than just a body count. And what makes this movie such an effective action-comedy is McClane’s attitude through it all. He’s such a New Yorker at heart that even in the face of danger, he can’t resist being a smart ass to the bad guy. This goes well beyond having one-liners for the sake of puns. Hans’ reactions to McClane’s attitude is just so funny!
When the police finally arrive and surround the building, they are very little help to John and even become another reason for McClane to maintain control. His only real ally is Sgt. Al Powell played by Reginald Vel Johnson of “Family Matters” fame. The dynamic is interesting here because they only communicate by CB radio which is monitored by the villains so they actually listen in on the entire genesis of their friendship. The police officer who is running the show on the outside is a quintessential 80’s asshole who is in great doubt of McClane’s status. Then, there’s the blood-thirsty news reporter who tries to exploit the situation and one of the hostages is a typical 80’s yuppie prick who tries to give McClane up and has a crush on his wife. I mean, have you ever seen an action movie with THIS MUCH characterization? Even if they’re a one-dimensional figure, they’re explored to their mass potential!
The movie was advertised and received in 1988 as a wall-to-wall action movie that’ll blow you to the back wall of the theater, but by today’s standards, the action doesn’t really ratchet up until the last half of the movie when there’s no more messing around. They just use brute force to solve all their problems!
Bottom line, I just can’t recommend this movie enough. I feel as though the sequels have cheapened its image, like the sequels have done for “Jaws” and “Rocky,” but if you ever see just one movie out of the entire series, make sure it’s this one.
FOUR OUT OF FOUR STARS.
Tune in next time where we look at its sequel “Die Hard 2.”
E.J. is just a simple man who loves movies. Don't judge.