A Good Day to Die Hard (2013)

Labels it the worst film in the series by far, turning McClane into an invulnerable superhero with no tension or human cost. Singles out the lazy, obligatory script and the absence of any real stakes or vulnerability.

The film fails to overcome the odds against a fifth entry in the series and suffers from being an unnecessary addendum to the original trilogy. The Moscow setting and father-son dynamic are singled out as missteps that undermine the action and supporting characters.

The critic finds the film a tired, by-the-numbers sequel lacking imagination, zest or inventiveness, with a yawner plot, bland villains and little charisma from the cast including Willis and Courtney. Destruction and expected twists are delivered but fail to engage.

The review calls the film an uninspired victory lap for the franchise, with big stunts but no heart or exhilaration. It singles out the pro-forma performance and muted catchphrases for complaint.

The critic finds the film a generic, explosion-filled action sequel that strips away character depth from John McClane. He singles out the over-the-top set pieces and lack of meaningful father-son connection for complaint.

The franchise has lost its charm; the film lacks compelling villains or magnetic heroes and relies on overblown action that proves deadening.

Describes the film as a generic international actioner reverse-engineered from its tagline, stripping away any lingering humanity or vulnerability from the series. Singles out the ham-handed direction and thin plotting that prioritizes the son's setup over McClane.

The critic finds the film directionless and indifferent to its own story, with McClane reduced to yelling catchphrases amid generic action set pieces that could be set anywhere.

The critic calls it the weakest entry in the franchise, with preposterous and laughably directed action sequences that lack any sense of danger or logic. Notes the short runtime as a minor positive amid the overall cheesiness.

The critic sees the film as a frantic, logic-defying action spectacle that has lost all character development. He singles out the excessive, video-game-like stunts and shift to Chernobyl for complaint.

The review portrays the film as a noisy, uninspired entry in the geezer-action genre with elaborate but unexciting set pieces. It singles out the simple-minded plot and half-clever lines for complaint.

The critic finds the film a tedious, trashy throwback to 1980s action movies, with laughable plotting and uncharismatic supporting cast, though Willis holds his own.

The review deems the sequel subpar and cynical, with McClane shoehorned into a Moscow-set story. It singles out the weak father-son chemistry and generic plot for complaint.

Finds the loud action boring and the film lacking good lines, fights, or purpose, leaving the franchise in its death throes. Singles out one mildly effective revenge killing amid the general emptiness.

The critic calls the film the most tedious and lazy entry in the series, a charmless exercise in brand exploitation that shows contempt for its audience through its lack of plot or character interest.

The film is a joyless, faceless, tedious actioner where McClane is a non-entity and the father-son dynamic uninspired; stunts are impressive but overall monotonous and uninspired.

Everything feels like an obligation in this limp, paper-thin sequel where Willis is weary comic relief; the action has jaw-dropping scale but no one seems to care, leaving viewers half-rooting for the villains. Jai Courtney provides some new energy but the family dynamic and overall execution disappoint.

The critic finds that John McClane's personality survives but everything else in the film dies horribly, with a convoluted plot, poor action geography, atrocious pacing and cheap effects. Willis tries harder than in the previous sequel, but the movie fails to understand what makes a Die Hard film work beyond the catchphrase.

The film puts McClane out of his element overseas in a more James Bond-like story with political intrigue, where he is on his heels and not fully in control. It honors the series with callbacks and in-camera stunts but feels like a potential passing of the torch, with schmaltzy father-son moments and a score suggesting a shift in the franchise.

The film is a letdown that fails to live up to the intelligent plotting and character work of earlier entries in the series. The critic singles out the nonsensical plot and awkward father-son dialogue for particular complaint.

The film is called out as pretty terrible, a bad Die Hard and bad action movie that disposes of the series' DNA in favor of loud, incoherent set pieces with too-high stakes and little investment. Solid sequences exist early but it grows dull and ridiculous, with a disappointing Willis performance.

The critic finds the film a sketchy, cheap outline of a Die Hard movie with a disinterested Willis and poor editing; praises the marketing for making it look better than it is.