The idea that sequels and reboots are endemic only to this
period in time is laughable. Hollywood was founded on stealing ideas and
remakes. In that period it was mostly stealing from plays and books. If you
look at the film Nosferatu, now considered to be a classic, it was simply
a way of making Dracula when the estate said no. They simply changed a few bits
and went ahead anyway. Actually there
was plenty of stealing, literally. They
actually placed signs in the background of the film as proof one company filmed
it and not others so another company couldn’t just steal the reels. Not a surprise when you find out that film
had Edison as an early proponent.
Every once and a while there is a benchmark film that
defines, or rather redefines, a genre. Die Hard is one of those
movies. Interestingly enough Die Hard started its gestation as a sequel to
Commando. This is not entirely uncommon. Quite often a script, an idea, or
another intellectual property will be transformed entirely and laid over onto
existing characters. The laughable sequel Die Hard 2 was based on the book “58 minutes”. A better example of an extreme makeover is
Beverly Hills Cop. It was originally a vehicle for Stallone. The movie was
changed heavily once Eddie Murphy, then contractual allowed to still be funny,
was attached and a good deal of the film, notably the supercop speech, was
improvised. Watch that scene and you’ll
notice John Ashtone (Taggart) is squeezing his nose and looking down trying not
to laugh. Judge Reinhold (Billy
Rosewood) was apparently pinching his
inner thigh.
But Die Hard was so good it ended up setting back action
films for decades because it became a formula. What was fresh then is now a bit
played out. But subsequent copycat films have failed to follow its subtlety and
expert hand. Die Hard, even though it was an action film, was actually a good
piece of cinema that still stands up.
The first two shots of the movie speak volumes. They
set up important elements of the story with nuance. The first shot is a of
plane landing (going from the right of the screen to the left). This usually
indicates coming from the east and entering the west. The second shot is a
close up of wedding ring. This sets up the most important element of the film.
This is the first struggle introduced in the movie. The terrorists/thieves are
introduced after the marriage problems of the McClane’s. Shortly after the films shows McClane’s gun,
the suspicion of the passenger who has sitting next to him, and the enormous
stuffed bear (although Iron Man 3 wins at the ridiculously sized stuffed bear
contest). McClane explains he is a cop
and this soothes the passenger’s suspicion.
This is the guy who indirectly causes McClane to have bloody feet later
in the movie. He explains to deal with
stress you makes fists with your feet on the carpet.
Most stories have two plots. Generally there is the external
struggle and the internal struggle. The better stories untie these two often
disparate struggles and have them strengthen each other. We watch our
protagonist along his or her path as they attempt to get past their hurdles. In
Die Hard we are first introduced to the complication of John McClane’s
marriage. The proud New York City cop has to deal with the success of his wife.
He wants her to give up her high paying
business job and move back to the East coast to only be a mother to his
children and a wife to him. To him their success is his success. He is trapped
in the older mentality of the husband being the solitary provider and the decision
maker. But this is a movie emblematic of it’s time. Women are entering the work
place (Holly), Japanese businesses (Nakatomi Corporation) are buying up America
and coked out yuppies (Ellis) run rampant.
Part of what sets Die Hard apart from other films is the
realism of its characters. They aren’t simply one note stand ins. They have
realistic relationships and reactions. It isn’t just bad guy #4 and #5. There is sympathy for the normally unlikable
characters; like Hans, Ellis and Karl.
It also had innovative, at the time especially, camera work. The uses of the frame helped subtly tell
internal feelings. This is what film can
do and books can’t. Books can tell the
inner thoughts of the characters while film is not only limited to facial
expression unless it is under the direction of hacks (more explosions to cover
up my laziness and incompetence!).
When we first see Holly she is among the crowd far below
President Takagi (a not so subtle spatial reference to his power over those
below). Shotly after in her office
(Holly Genero) we see pictures of her with the kids. Then the audience
finally sees a picture of John linking the two characters. She turns the
chair to obscure that picture further hinting at the trouble between them.
Then she puts the picture down so John is obscured. This is important much later as Hans doesn’t
see the face and the link.
Meanwhile John is in the limo and sitting upfront with Argyle. The film is desperately trying to show how
likable but out of touch he is. The
shows he is unused to limos, that he is comfortable with the working man,
resistant to trappings of class, and grouchy (but in an endearing way). When John gets to the building and walks
through the lax but ever present and sophisticated security he notices Holly is
listed under Gennero, her maiden name, and not McClane.
The inevitable argument between the two ensues and Holly
walks out. John shows he is upset with
himself and not just the situation by banging his head on the door frame. At this time he is making the mistakes of
walking around bare footed.
The terrorists are introduced to the sound of music as they
are calmly and methodically entering the Nakatomi building. Fun note the truck they arrive in has
‘Pacific Courier’ on it. This translates to ‘Bringer of Peace’. The guards are quickly disposed of and they
have started to take control. At this point we have no idea why they are
there. Previous to this it was simply a
melodrama about a cop stuck in the past and his wife who is dangerously close
to leaving as he is forcing a choice between a successful career she chose and
the life he chose for her. Now it
becomes, almost reluctantly an action movie.
The terrorists show some really personality here which is useful so they
aren’t in people’s minds simply dude with a shotgun, gun with funny hair, the
one who talks. We know that there are
two brothers; the nerdier one (Tony),
made obvious by his glasses and the fact he is hacking into the phone lines;
and the burlier one (Karl) who delights in pushing around Tony. He pulls out chainsaw while he is brother is
work forcing him to sweat and work rapidly.
He risks an alarm and jeopardizing the plan to tease his brother.
McClane escapes into the stairwell once the fireworks start
sadly still in bare feet. He tried to
stop the whole thing by pulling the fire alarm by the switchboard now operated
by the terrorists stops this attempt.
Nerdy brother Tony confronts McClane but dies in the confrontation. McClane shows his sense of humor and dressed
him in a santa outfit. Ho Ho Ho
indeed. This gives Karl an immediate need
to kill McClane beyond simply he is a bad guy and John is a good guy. Yay layers!
Like an ogre, or onion. Or a
parfait. Everyone loves a parfait. But let’s ignore the scene by scene
breakdown.
Die Hard can be enjoyed as a dude simply shooting other
dudes. But it is so much more than
that. We have smart inventive
characters. Plot twists. Yeah, they aren’t terrorists they’re just
thieves, really good thieves. Plus it
had some rather snappy dialogue.
Supervisor: [as McClane tries to call up police] Attention,
whoever you are, this channel is reserved for emergency calls only.
John McClane: No fucking shit, lady. Does it sound like I'm
ordering a pizza?
While John is battling the bad guys Holly is trying to
remain hidden and not be a pawn in the game.
Her boss Takagi, whom she tried to protect, already died violently. There was a nice touch with Karl and Theo
(the hacker) betting over the ending of the negotiation. She now gets to see the infuriating side of
her husband as a good thing. His
never-ending stubbornness and sense of humor are good in this situation. It reaffirms to her that he is out there trying
to save everyone.
Ginny: [Karl smashes a table of glasses in fury] God. That
man looks *really* pissed.
Holly Gennero McClane: He's still alive.
Ginny: What?
Holly Gennero McClane: Only John can drive somebody that
crazy.
Now it seems ridiculous that a beat cop could eventually
bring down a group of well-prepared bad guys replete with Hans Gruber at the
helm. But the film treads lightly
here. Treating it as every second that
he could, and should by all rights, be dead.
The first person he killed (Tony) died accidently when his neck was
broken). He fails in jumping in the
elevator shaft and barely makes it to the vent to crawl through. His feet were bloody due to having to run
through broken glass. He struggles on
valiantly each time only barely surviving.
Jumping off the building with the fire hose attached he doesn’t cleanly
make it inside. The glass repels
him. His bloody feet leave red
imprints. He has to shoot the glass to
get inside and even then he almost dies when the metal part attached to the
hose falls dragging him with it. At the
end he is outgunned but he still prevails by his snarky comments and catching
Gruber off guard. He tells a joke and
the all laugh. Giving him long enough to
shoot one of the henchmen and wound Gruber.
But we’ll jump back to that.
In these types of movies there is always the guy on the
inside who sympathizes with the hero who gives him encouragement and moral
support while he is fighting alone. In this case we have Al the Twinkie enthusiast.
Surprisingly twinkies have played an important role in two of my
favorite movies.
Dr. Peter Venkman: How's the grid holding up?
Dr. Egon Spengler: Not good.
Winston Zeddemore: Tell him about the Twinkie.
Dr. Peter Venkman: What about the Twinkie?
But I digress. Al and
“Roy” (McClanes cowboy persona) are linked by camera framing. Whenever we see someone in the film talk to
another character over phone or walkie talkie we see them in their respective
side of the frame; one on the left and the other on the right. Although they aren’t in the same space they
are joined by this framing. It’s done
the same with Hans and McClane but this sets them up as adversaries and
opposites. The moments of levity in the
film allow dark moments like Al’s explanation of never firing a gun. He admits
to having killed a kid. This informs
much about the character.
While John is street smart Hans is book smart. While Hans is tactical John is quick
witted. They both test each other. One of the best sequences is when McClane
finds Hans and Hans pretend to be an employee.
Looking at the list of names on the wall by the elevator McClane quizzes
him. Hans responds Bill, Clay and we see
on the wall W. Clay confirming his deceit.
Back to Hans last moments.
He grabs onto Holly securing in his graps her watch. The watch introduced earlier by the smug, and
now dead, Ellis, is a symbol of her choice of work over marriage. John relases the watch from her
simultaneously defeated the bad guys and resolving, metaphorically, their
marriage issues. Or at least for the
time being.
A film this good left a lasting impression. The following four entries into the series
all looked up their predecessor and all failed spectacularly. The fourth and fifth movies turned the down
on his luck cop into a superhero. In the
fifth entry the heroes simply leap through windows unaware of how they might
land to escape. The second movie had
boring plot twists, boring bad guys, and removed any and all subtlety. Also it added crappy effects and bad camera
work. The third film was probably the
closest to the first but had a rather unenlightened ending.
But Die Hard can be seen in countless other movies from
karate films like The Raid: Redemption (die hard with kicking, also
killing a dude with a door which was way more awesome than it sounds) or Jean
Claudes rather boring Sudden Death (replace the Nakatomi building with a
Hockey arena and add mullets, splits and bad acting, sorry Powers Boothe). It can also be seen in the surprisingly not
awful Dredd reboot which was creatively named Dredd.
The problem often times with imitation is missing the
point. You copy the swagger the style
but not the substance. Other films just
put up a super hero, a nigh invulnerable demi god who cannot possibly lose. The pleasure is not in the conflict or its
resolution as there is no real conflict just a minor inconvenience. The audience know the hero will win there is
no suspense, no tension. The hero
waltzes through danger with nary a scratch.
But in Die Hard John McClane is all scratches, gun shots, bloody
feet, narrow escapes and heaps of luck.
Other action movies focus on building up an icon who is so indomitably
badass that the pantheon of bad guys thrown his way as fodder seem comical.
Is it fair to say that Die Hard has really ruined action
movies? Not really, but every hack no
uses that as blueprint. After Fight
Club came out we had all these other movies starting near the end or
featuring twist endings revealing the protagonist not to be who they think they
are. But Hollywood will simply continue
to recycle ideas until they are used up and shallow husks. Until then Die Hard will be my Christmas tradition. YKYMF!
Ben
