Fourths Of July: LIVE FREE OR DIE HARD (2007)

Looking back on it, there's a part of me that wants to call LIVE FREE OR DIE HARD ahead of its time. In terms of how it portrays what is now clearly the beginnings of cybercrime and cyberterrorism, it is. However, in pretty much every other way, it's a film that is very much exactly of its time in the mid-to-late 2000s. I feel like if you look closely, action movies and horror films are their most popular in times of great societal strife. We deal with the anxiety of uncertain times by exorcising our fears through art. Through that lens, after 9/11, it's not much of a surprise that within around six months of each other (from 2007 to the beginning of 2008) we had the return of characters like John McClane and John Rambo to multiplexes.

It's a little surprising that the Die Hard franchise was put on the shelf after DIE HARD WITH A VENGEANCE in 1995.

It's a solid entry in what I would call the most consistent of the major action franchises. On top of that, it was financially successful and it's not like its star had become any less of a box office draw; Bruce Willis was probably as popular in the '90s and ‘00s as he ever was. However, for 12 years, the Die Hard series languished. When the franchise was finally dusted off and returned to the screen, it did so in a way that continued its reign of dominance...or at least its reign of surprising consistency. I say this as someone that enjoys the original DIE HARD quite a bit but wouldn't go as far as to say that they love it. The same holds true for the second and third movies. However, whereas most franchises have peaks and valleys...it deserves to be lauded that the first four Die Hards are incredibly well-constructed action films.

The more you learn about the production of LIVE FREE OR DIE HARD, the more miraculous that this movie is as solid as it ultimately turned out to be. I won't go into all of it but between what Kevin Smith had spoken of regarding what being on the set was like in his one man shows and even in the commentary for the film, you're able to get a very specific insight into blockbuster filmmaking. The script was constantly being rewritten, even on the day. The ultimate broad strokes of the plot were constantly in flux. The villain wasn't even cast by the time they started shooting. There's more but suffice it to say that the entire experience sounds like a nightmare for all involved, especially for director Len Wiseman. This is the only film made by Wiseman that I've enjoyed but learning about its production did make me really feel for and respect the guy. What he was able to accomplish in the midst of this kind of adversity can't really be overstated. Granted, there are still some of his hallmarks present that annoy me (the film has that bluish/grayish tone that he loves so much), but in the end, more works than doesn't and that's all any viewer can ask for.

A big part of why LIVE FREE OR DIE HARD works as well it does is that the cast is as good as it is. Obviously you have Bruce Willis but his performance in this is actually his second best outing as the character of John McClane. Inarguably, the first DIE HARD works in a way that's different than almost all other major action movies did at the time is Willis' performance. The reality he brings to John McClane in the original film and the pathos he brings to the character is why it is such a seminal film. That stuff was largely scraped off in the next two films in the Die Hard series but is largely back for this one.

Some of it is simple dialogue but a lot of it is down to the actor’s performance with much of it conveyed through his eyes, body language, the look on his face, etc.

He plays McClane as the ordinary guy in extraordinary circumstances and he does that probably better than anyone else ever could.

Beyond Willis, Justin Long is great as the comedy sidekick. I'm not entirely sure why the franchise went in the buddy movie direction from DIE HARD WITH A VENGEANCE on but it worked in that film and definitely works in this one. Long's always been fairly underrated in terms of what he can do and his work in LIVE FREE OR DIE HARD makes me sad that he never got to do more stuff like this. More than anyone else, he's really the one with the best, truest arc in the film, despite him being in a supporting role. In some ways, his character's arc mirrors Willis' in the first film. Mary Elizabeth Winstead admittedly isn't given a whole lot to do as Lucy McClane/Gennaro besides being attractive and surly. However, she does the same here as her other myriad supporting roles throughout the 2000s: completely lights up the screen every second that she's on it. She's magnetic and it's criminal that she hasn't been given more opportunities as a lead because she elevates everything that she's in.

The villains are rarely given a lot to do in most action films and LIVE FREE OR DIE HARD isn't really an exception to that. Having said that, I have never seen a performance by Timothy Olyphant where he doesn't more than just hold his own but completely owns the scenes he's in. Given the fact that he wasn't even cast until after the film had already started shooting, this film is maybe the closest to being an exception but his streak still remains intact. When the man plays a villain...hell, even sometimes when he plays a more heroic character...Olyphant just oozes menace in the most beautiful way. I remember some criticism at the time of him being a weaker antagonist but I don't agree.

However, the other villains don't really get much else to do. Jonathan Sadowski as the hacker is one note as nerdy. Much like Winstead, Maggie Q is basically there to be attractive but instead of adding surly to that description, Q is attractive and badass. She's even more of a convincing physical threat to the heroes than some of the typical big dude henchmen in this movie. I say "some" because while casting Cyril Raffaelli to do parkour is maybe the most 2000s thing about this movie overall, it's incredibly impressive to behold when he's going full Spidey on screen.

I’ve said many nice things about the film and definitely will defend it if necessary, I do have to point out a personal note of criticism. I will never forget LIVE FREE OR DIE HARD as being one of the few times that my suspension of disbelief was broken. I vividly remember sitting in a theater with my brother on opening night when the scene with the fighter jet in the climax occurred. I realize that as a Die Hard movie and a major studio tentpole blockbuster that LIVE FREE OR DIE HARD had to not only up the ante of the previous films in the franchise but also other blockbusters of the time. Having said that, there is a lot that I am willing to buy into while I'm enjoying a movie. An almost retirement age John McClane taking on a fighter jet with a big rig and coming away successful is not one of those things. I remember audibly saying "bullshit!" through laughter, much to my brother's chagrin. I just couldn't help it. It still doesn't work for me when I rewatch the film but since it's really the only bit in the whole film that doesn't work for me. I choose to let it go.

Looking back now, the mining of IP by studios with stuff like the Die Hard movies is probably largely what puts us in the oversaturated moment that we're in. That doesn't change the fact that LIVE FREE OR DIE HARD is great. It's an extremely entertaining summer blockbuster released in a time when that really meant something. More than that, while it might not be something that's considered a legacy sequel per se, the fact that it (briefly) rejuvenated the Die Hard franchise and showed that John McClane could still be a hero for the 2000s the way he was in previous decades is an impressive achievement in and of itself, even without acknowledging the inherent strife that apparently came with bringing him back to screens. If nothing else, it's provided another holiday movie featuring McClane, which is something I am grateful for.