Reviews (1)

Dead to Rites -Book always better!!
This is a neat, interesting mystery. Acting is good, plot excellent - but the original book, Donato and Daughter, by Sandra Scoppotone who was then writing as Jack Early, is wonderful!! Get both the book and the movie -its a cool, Italian/New York/family kind of police drama with some great turns in the book. Scoppotone is one of the best. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Director Renny Harlin (Cutthroat Island) took the reins of this 1990 sequel, which places Bruce Willis's New York City cop character in harm's way again with a gaggle of terrorists. This time, Willis awaits his wife's arrival at Dulles Airport in Washington, D.C., when he gets wind of a plot to blow up the facility. Noisy, overbearing, and forgettable, the film has none of the purity of its predecessor's simple story; and it makes a huge miscalculation in allowing a terrible tragedy to occur rather than stretch out the tension. Where Die Hard set new precedents in action movies, Die Hard 2 is just an anything-goes spectacle. --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (66)

Suprisingly Weak
The first, and worst, sequel to Die Hard, is terrorised by the same plot as the original. While waiting for his wife's plane to arrive at Dulles Airport (on Xmas Eve), McClane notices a few suspicious exchanges between a group of men amidst the busy yuletide passengers.

Before you know he is neck deep in trouble with an army of mercenaries, led by Colonel Stewart (William Sadler), who are hell-bent on setting free a corrupt South American General/Drug Baron (Franco Nero). There are more bad guys than before. And more suspension of disbelief is required.

There are so many plot holes and illogical moments that the film almost drowns in its own absurdity. But there is enough action and stunts to cancel it out and distract our attention. Though they not presented in a breathtaking or memorable way. It's all too generic and a bit mean-spirited. No audience nowadays would be satisfied with it so prepare yourself for 80's violence.

William Sadler and Franco Nero lack the callous efficiency of Alan Rickman. And a hero can only be measured by his nemesis. But most of the time McClane is just capping off nameless mercs. How boring. Tho this should not be blamed on Sadler, he has a threatening and intense presence and as he has proved himself in movies like Trespass and Demon Knight. Too bad his character here is so badly written and underdeveloped. I'm sorry but blowing up 250 people off-screen to show how evil you are just won't cut it.

This was Renny Harlin's second movie of 1990 (the other was Ford Fairlain) and it is without a doubt the movie that made him a certified action director. It was a tough, and huge, movie to pull off. He just pulled it off with no particular charm. Though he does a wonderful job of capturing the look and feel of an East Coast winter. The wide-open snowfields and ice-covered runways will definitely make you feel chilly.

Although this is another problem. The first Die Hard worked entirely within the space of Nakatomi Plaza. It was claustrophobic and almost plausible. The scale and scope of Die Hard 2 is too big for its own good. Similar to the problems of ID4, the staples of reality are ripped out with ignorance and over-confidence. The bulk of the film is nothing but one dumb action scene after another. It doesn't make for coherent viewing.

Die Hard 2 is a definite lag in between both of McTiernan's very strong outings. By today's standards it seems dated and very 90's. Which is a shame considering the original and 'With A Vengeance' are, in a way, 'timeless'. It's movies like this that inspired 'Last Action Hero'.

Filmed in Panavision, the 2.35:1 anamorphic picture is superb looking with true blacks (a lot of this film is set at night) and nice fleshtones. Fire effects and colors look beautifully orange and overall the quality is top notch aside from a few instances of minor pixelation.

The gunshots are loud and ferocious in both the Dolby Digital and DTS tracks. All explosions and every punch and kick are rendered with amazing clarity. Some of the surrounds tend to stick to mono but the plane crash in the middle of the movie will convince it is actually happening in your living room. Dialogue scenes tend to stick to the front speaker and the musical score by Michael Kamen is well recorded and is sure to excite.

Renny Harlin's commentary is much more interesting that John McTiernan's fatigued and labored effort on the first movie. Harlin talks about the characters more and how he prefers his movies to be in terms of motivation and why characters should smoke only if it is necessary. Among other things. Such as how many of the effects he did then, in many different ways, would be so much quicker and easier to do today in Digital CGI.

The Featurette was made for Fox TV back in 1990 and it is a bit better than the usual, self-congratulatory nonsense that bogs down most featurettes. But it still can't resist talking about how 'great' the movie is. Tho thanks to this extra we now know that most of the snow in the movie is shredded soap. A second, 4-minute, Featurette is basically an extended trailer.

There are a few deleted scenes that are not that interesting and it's easy to see why they were cut from the film. Although the alternate scene on how McClane gets to the Annex Skywalk (The Boiler Room) is quite cool.

The interview with Renny Harlin and the Villain's Profile are promotional titbits in which they discuss how to direct a high-concept sequel and how to be an evil bad guy.

Behind the scenes and storyboards focuses on 2 scenes. The first is 'Breaking the Ice' and the second is 'Chaos on the Conveyor Belt'. The storyboard and film comparison is for the 'Skywalk Ambush' sequence.

Visual effects breakdowns explore, in great length and tedious, repetitive slo-mo, the Ejector seat scene and the Airport Runway. These are basically green-screen evolutions. The other model effects scenes broken down are 'Chopper', 'Airplane Models' and 'Wing Fight'.

Fast-paced follow-up fueled by thrills...
While not as original or inspired as the first, "Die Hard 2: Die Harder" is still an action-packed, slick movie with twists and turns fit for a roller-coaster ride of pure mayhem! Bruce Willis reprises his role as John McClane, this time in trouble at a Washington D.C. airport, where terrorists have taken the air traffic control captive. With McClane's wife on one of the stranded planes, our hero races to kick the butts of the bad guys once again! This is a worthy follow-up to the 80s hit film, with some cool action sequences and some pretty decent scripting.

Almost as good as the original
Count me among the few, it seems, who believe DIE HARD 2 to be almost as good as the original DIE HARD. I personally don't understand why this sequel always seems to be undervalued in favor of the jaggedly uneven, incoherent DIE HARD WITH A VENGEANCE.

Certainly DIE HARD 2 is not as good as the original. It lacks the first film's grittiness and claustrophobic atmosphere (but of course a loss of the latter was expected when the scriptwriters expanded the playing field to an entire airport as opposed to one floor of a highrise); its villain is no match for DIE HARD's subtly chilling Hans Gruber; and director Renny Harlin disappointingly favors action over those little human touches that so distinguished the original, insteading favoring more action. (Besides, couldn't the screenwriters have come up with a more creative plot than simply recycling the general structure of the original? But hey, this is a Hollywood product, where it's best not to take too many chances in the quest to cash-in on a big success, which DIE HARD certainly was.)

All that being said, the action sequences are undeniably thrilling---the action of the second half, particularly, moves so quickly from one great setpiece to another that the momentum never lets up 'til the very end---and Bruce Willis is just as good as he was in the original, proving that he will always be John McClane in my mind. All in all, DIE HARD 2 is arguably even MORE entertaining viscerally than DIE HARD.

In short, DIE HARD will forever be a genre classic, but DIE HARD 2 is a worthy sequel when it comes to pure action---and when you are talking about action movies, isn't the action what's really important anyway?

A fan's review
I would like to start by pointing out that this movie gets a lot of crap. A LOT. This is in no way as bad as the reviews may make you think, and in fact this is my favorite Die Hard film.

I'm a huge fan of the series. I've seen them all plenty of times, and this one stands out for me. I'm not the only one, either; Ebert also claims this to be the greatest Die Hard. You've heard the same complaints about this movie a thousand times, I'm sure of it. But what tends to be left out is the amazing special effects, the truely die hard enemies, and the perfectly directed action scenes. This was directed by a different director than the other two blockbusters. Die Hard 2 also made the most money at the box offices. It really is the best!

Overreaches but still exciting
While this installment is the weakest of the three, it still has some exciting moments. All in all, I think the film tried so hard to top the first (best) Die Hard film, that the failure is that much more evident.

The characterizations are not as well fleshed-out as in the others. The action scenes become predictable and less exciting as the movie progresses.

I had to laugh at one of the BIGGEST continuity flaws I've ever witnessed in a big-budget movie: the plane that crashes is forced to the ground by lack of fuel. Why, then, does it explode in a HUGE fireball if it's out of gas? Somebody screwed up. ... Read more

Description

The body of a young woman is found in a ditch in the woods of the small California coastal town of San Benito. SANDRA BULLOCK ("Divine Secrets of the Ya Ya Sisterhood," "Miss Congeniality"), stars as Cassie Mayweather, the seasoned homicide detective and crime scene specialist assigned to the case along with her new partner San Kennedy (BEN CHAPLIN - "Lost Souls," "The Thin Red Line"). The two dectectives make their way through microscopic hints of evidence, which seem to indicate a random act of violence, but Cassie has a gut feeling that there is more to this murder than meets the eye. Something about this case reminds her of her past exactly at a time when she is asked to appear at a parole hearing on an old police matter. These events force Cassie to revisit the past. ... Read more

Reviews (106)

An Well Done Thriller saved by Sharp Performances.
An Police Detective (Sandra Bullock) investages the Serial of Brutal Murder Crimes with the help of her Partner (Ben Chaplin). When two intelligent but deranged teenagers (Ryan Gosling & Micheal Pitt) find ways to hide all the evidences and clues before the Cops do but there's no such thing as a Perfect Crime.

Directed by Barbet Schroeder (Barfly, Reversal of Fortune, Single White Female) made a Smart Suspense-Thriller with an Good Script by Tony Gayton (The Seaton Sea). Bullock, Gosling, Pitt & Chaplin gives Terrific Performances bring this film to life with fine cinematography by Luciano Tovoli (Suspiria, Tenebre, Titus). Bullock also Executive Produced the film. DVD's has an sharp anamorphic Widescreen (1.78:1) transfer and an fine Dolby Digital 5.1 Surround Sound. DVD Extras are:Commentary Track by the Director, Behind the Scenes featurette & more. Do not miss this fine film. Grade:A-.

MURD3R 8Y NUM8ERS
Homicide cop Cassie Mayweather (Sandra Bullock, who also executive produced)discovers the body of a female strangulation victim wrapped in plastic. But the problem with the investigation is that two rich kids, Michael Haywood (Ryan Gosling from BELIEVER) and Justin "Bonepart" Pendleton (Michael Pitt) have planned the murder and are observing the cops as they uncover each clue they have planted for them.
Directed by Barbet Schroeder (SWF, BARFLY) MURDER BY NUMBERS sometimes echoes Hitchcock's ROPE. Gosling and Pitt are good as the rich kids whose "perfect murder" turns out to be anything but. The planning behind the murder will fascinate crime buffs, and MURDER BY NUMBERS basic premise is helped considerably by strong performances from Gosling and Pitt; though the movie tends to fluctuate a bit in the last half hour. Still recommended. Luciano Tovoli's atmospheric photography aids greatly in helping maintain viewer interest.

Dumb and depressing!
This movie is so boring that I like literally found a cure for caffeine overload! Nothing is worth pointing out because there is virtually nothing worth watching iwth this film. Nothing else to say but that this crime borer is one to pass up.

A potentially great movie murdered by weak story.
I am very dissapointed with this movie even when my expectations were modest.

Two young men, likely around high school age, try to attempt to pull of what would likely be the 'perfect murder' and try to get away with it. Sandra Bullock plays a police detective with a psychologically painful and checkered past who is aiming to investigate and find out what happened when a women was found dead in a river recently.

This movie is unbelievably predictable that there is little of anything that instantly grabs your attention. The acting is incredibly hammy and it almost feels like you can tell that Sandra really wanted to walk off the set of this film and for good reason: "Murder by Numbers" is absolutely boring and never gets off the ground. The characters are weak and without any personality and the dialogue is virtually nonexistant.

A major dissapointment to say the least. Try out "Blood Work" instead because it is far superior even if it suffers too from some weaknesses.

Dull and Predictable Thriller
Extremely boring and unconvinced crime thriller in which two psycho teenagers commited a murder just to prove to them selves that they are genious. But they have to confront smart police officer (played with no intensity by Bullock)who take up the investigation of the gruesome case. Predictable, dull and unsuspenseful. A waste of time, in fact. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Billy Crystal plays the straight man to neurotic Robin Williams when these two very different individuals join forces to find a runaway teenager. Both, you see, have been told they are the boy's father by Nastassja Kinski, with whom each had once been involved. This Disney production is based on the more humorous French farce, Les Compères, by Francis Veber (who cowrote this adaptation). It has its moments as breezy entertainment, but the plot is sloppy enough to seem more like slapstick than sophisticated comedy. The gags are contrived, and it fails to unfold with believability, or grace. More interesting than the writing are the performances, as Crystal brings surprising depth to his cynical lawyer and Williams is exceptionally fine-tuned as a suicidal and dippy writer with a very kind heart. --Rochelle O'Gorman ... Read more

Reviews (10)

Quite Funny
This movie really is pretty funny. Crystal is always funny and Williams, well, what can I say... the guy is funny even if he's not trying to be! Crystal plays a straight-laced lawyer while Williams plays a total psychotic, who really wants to believe he has a son so he'll have a reason to stay partially sane.

This movie's plot may be a bit thin, but who cares because the cast is great. The short version of the plot is that a worried mother recruits two men to find her runaway teenage son. How does she get them to agree to find him? She tells each of the men(obviously not thinking that they may run into each other while searching for the boy) that he is the father. This leads to a silly comic pairing.

There are all kinds of great things in this movie. Crystal and Williams are great together. Mel Gibson makes a cameo-- watch closely because you might not recognize him!! The band Sugar Ray is also in the movie. Cool things like that!

This may not satisfy a hunger for laugh out loud, slap on the knee kind of funny, but it's still funny, with a charming ending.

MUCH funnier than I expected
After looking at the rather....well, dumb cover, and reading the synopsis, I expected it to be a rather medicore movie. Boy was I wrong. I'll tell ya, the script ain't gold, but Billy Crystal and (especially) Robin Williams make this movie quite funny as heck. Everything from Williams' opening lines/scene about how depressing his life is, to his amusing vulnerability, to the way Billy Crystal wittily mocks everybody, makes this movie quite a delight. And notice how I used the actors' names instead of the characters' names. That is because, like I said, it is the talented and hilarious acting that saved this movie from potential mediocracy.

The script isn't anything particularly special, and there is only one somewhat major flaw with it: Williams and Crystal are deceptively sent by a former girlfriend of both of theirs on a search for a boy who she claims to be the son of both of them. But near the end, it is never explained why she does that, instead of....oh I dunno, hiring a detective, or looking for him herself? While this kind of takes away from the believability of the story, the story isn't where the movie is meant to shine so it doesn't end up meaning much.

Williams plays the perfect total loser, and Crystal the witty, successful lawyer, in this movie sprinkled with more than enough hilarious and memorable scenes. If it weren't for a tighter script, it would've gotten five stars. Definatley worth a rental, and most likely a purchase if you're either a Billy Crystal or especially (since he was the focus of the majority of the better jokes) Robin Williams fan.

Best actors but script doesn't do justice.
Overall, I have always enjoyed Robin William and Billy Crystal's performance in many other movies, but I must admit to my surprise that it wasn't making me laughing on the floor as I usually do. The script was boring and the plot was downright disppointing. Didn't like the ending. It was like a stupid wild goose chase for both of them and end up accepting that the mother of the son lied to them. Which is really a bad example for younger audience to see this and thinking it's normal for mothers to lie. I hope someday to see both Robin and Billy to act together in another movie in the near future and hopefully better script than this one.

Distinctly Average In All Departments
The premise of Fathers' Day sounds like one of those ideas that was hatched in a boardroom rather than a creative mind. A woman tells two former boyfriends that they are the father of her teenaged son, who has run away. Naturally, these guys become instantly paternal, reluctantly join forces, and set out to find the kid who may or may not be theirs.

The teaming of Robin Williams and Billy Crystal provides some good moments, although at times Crystal seems to be too much of a straight man. Williams has plenty of scope to be...well, himself - which means that some sickly sentimentality is eventually allowed to creep in. In fact, the film is quite promising until the pair of wannabe dads make contact with their supposed offspring. The kid turns out to be such a snivelling loser that any sane person would disown him rather than try to save him from the conveniently cartoonish drug dealers he owes lots of money to. Junior is also infatuated with a girl who couldn't care less. When she finally tells him that he is boring, you find yourself shouting "Yes!" at the screen.

Even so, Williams and Crystal provide plenty of pleasant and undemanding entertainment along the way. But the film is so built around them that it wastes the talents of Julia Louis-Dreyfus and Natassia Kinski. Having said that, there is a nice uncredited cameo by Mel Gibson.

Not a bad film if you're looking for a nicely mindless comedy. But everyone involved has done much better work elsewhere.

Williams & Crystal make the best movies!
This movie is about a runaway 16-year-old named Scott. The mother goes to two men that she knew and tells them they are the father. First she tells Jack Lawrence (Crystal), a lawyer and he doesn't want to go look for him. Then she tells Dale Putley (Williams) who is a retarded, lonner, and empty life writer who decides to look for him. So the two end up traveling together to find Scott. See what goes wrong next after Dale passing out, crying constantly, getting HOT coffee poured on his nuts, and being a idiot. ... Read more

Reviews (2)

Predictably predictable
A regrettable rental, this run-of-the-mill conspiracy silliness is made all the more painful by the its actors' sincerity. Basically, in the mid-90s someone got the idea of capitalizing on the country's X-Files fetish by producing this paint-by-numbers, half-hearted script. Everything that isn't telegraphed in advance is an inevitable cliche. You end up wanting to ask this dedicated ex-FBI woman as she's wandering around in her desperate confusion, "What's wrong with you? Haven't you seen any conspiracy flicks before?" Typical dialogue:
"They will stop at nothing."
"But who are They?"
"You never know who They are. They are like shadows."
"That's right. You never know who They are until it is too late."
"What are Their objectives?"
"Only this: Power."

I guess if we actually swallowed such farcical and lazy writing, we would be seized with paranoia, but since our leaders are admittedly only so-so when it comes even to geography, it's hard to be impressed by such callow, pandering ridiculousness.

Worth Seeing
As made for video movies go, this is much better than most with solid performances and a conspiracy story-line which is much more than what you expect. Give it a try. ... Read more

Reviews (66)

Suprisingly Weak
The first, and worst, sequel to Die Hard, is terrorised by the same plot as the original. While waiting for his wife's plane to arrive at Dulles Airport (on Xmas Eve), McClane notices a few suspicious exchanges between a group of men amidst the busy yuletide passengers.

Before you know he is neck deep in trouble with an army of mercenaries, led by Colonel Stewart (William Sadler), who are hell-bent on setting free a corrupt South American General/Drug Baron (Franco Nero). There are more bad guys than before. And more suspension of disbelief is required.

There are so many plot holes and illogical moments that the film almost drowns in its own absurdity. But there is enough action and stunts to cancel it out and distract our attention. Though they not presented in a breathtaking or memorable way. It's all too generic and a bit mean-spirited. No audience nowadays would be satisfied with it so prepare yourself for 80's violence.

William Sadler and Franco Nero lack the callous efficiency of Alan Rickman. And a hero can only be measured by his nemesis. But most of the time McClane is just capping off nameless mercs. How boring. Tho this should not be blamed on Sadler, he has a threatening and intense presence and as he has proved himself in movies like Trespass and Demon Knight. Too bad his character here is so badly written and underdeveloped. I'm sorry but blowing up 250 people off-screen to show how evil you are just won't cut it.

This was Renny Harlin's second movie of 1990 (the other was Ford Fairlain) and it is without a doubt the movie that made him a certified action director. It was a tough, and huge, movie to pull off. He just pulled it off with no particular charm. Though he does a wonderful job of capturing the look and feel of an East Coast winter. The wide-open snowfields and ice-covered runways will definitely make you feel chilly.

Although this is another problem. The first Die Hard worked entirely within the space of Nakatomi Plaza. It was claustrophobic and almost plausible. The scale and scope of Die Hard 2 is too big for its own good. Similar to the problems of ID4, the staples of reality are ripped out with ignorance and over-confidence. The bulk of the film is nothing but one dumb action scene after another. It doesn't make for coherent viewing.

Die Hard 2 is a definite lag in between both of McTiernan's very strong outings. By today's standards it seems dated and very 90's. Which is a shame considering the original and 'With A Vengeance' are, in a way, 'timeless'. It's movies like this that inspired 'Last Action Hero'.

Filmed in Panavision, the 2.35:1 anamorphic picture is superb looking with true blacks (a lot of this film is set at night) and nice fleshtones. Fire effects and colors look beautifully orange and overall the quality is top notch aside from a few instances of minor pixelation.

The gunshots are loud and ferocious in both the Dolby Digital and DTS tracks. All explosions and every punch and kick are rendered with amazing clarity. Some of the surrounds tend to stick to mono but the plane crash in the middle of the movie will convince it is actually happening in your living room. Dialogue scenes tend to stick to the front speaker and the musical score by Michael Kamen is well recorded and is sure to excite.

Renny Harlin's commentary is much more interesting that John McTiernan's fatigued and labored effort on the first movie. Harlin talks about the characters more and how he prefers his movies to be in terms of motivation and why characters should smoke only if it is necessary. Among other things. Such as how many of the effects he did then, in many different ways, would be so much quicker and easier to do today in Digital CGI.

The Featurette was made for Fox TV back in 1990 and it is a bit better than the usual, self-congratulatory nonsense that bogs down most featurettes. But it still can't resist talking about how 'great' the movie is. Tho thanks to this extra we now know that most of the snow in the movie is shredded soap. A second, 4-minute, Featurette is basically an extended trailer.

There are a few deleted scenes that are not that interesting and it's easy to see why they were cut from the film. Although the alternate scene on how McClane gets to the Annex Skywalk (The Boiler Room) is quite cool.

The interview with Renny Harlin and the Villain's Profile are promotional titbits in which they discuss how to direct a high-concept sequel and how to be an evil bad guy.

Behind the scenes and storyboards focuses on 2 scenes. The first is 'Breaking the Ice' and the second is 'Chaos on the Conveyor Belt'. The storyboard and film comparison is for the 'Skywalk Ambush' sequence.

Visual effects breakdowns explore, in great length and tedious, repetitive slo-mo, the Ejector seat scene and the Airport Runway. These are basically green-screen evolutions. The other model effects scenes broken down are 'Chopper', 'Airplane Models' and 'Wing Fight'.

Fast-paced follow-up fueled by thrills...
While not as original or inspired as the first, "Die Hard 2: Die Harder" is still an action-packed, slick movie with twists and turns fit for a roller-coaster ride of pure mayhem! Bruce Willis reprises his role as John McClane, this time in trouble at a Washington D.C. airport, where terrorists have taken the air traffic control captive. With McClane's wife on one of the stranded planes, our hero races to kick the butts of the bad guys once again! This is a worthy follow-up to the 80s hit film, with some cool action sequences and some pretty decent scripting.

Almost as good as the original
Count me among the few, it seems, who believe DIE HARD 2 to be almost as good as the original DIE HARD. I personally don't understand why this sequel always seems to be undervalued in favor of the jaggedly uneven, incoherent DIE HARD WITH A VENGEANCE.

Certainly DIE HARD 2 is not as good as the original. It lacks the first film's grittiness and claustrophobic atmosphere (but of course a loss of the latter was expected when the scriptwriters expanded the playing field to an entire airport as opposed to one floor of a highrise); its villain is no match for DIE HARD's subtly chilling Hans Gruber; and director Renny Harlin disappointingly favors action over those little human touches that so distinguished the original, insteading favoring more action. (Besides, couldn't the screenwriters have come up with a more creative plot than simply recycling the general structure of the original? But hey, this is a Hollywood product, where it's best not to take too many chances in the quest to cash-in on a big success, which DIE HARD certainly was.)

All that being said, the action sequences are undeniably thrilling---the action of the second half, particularly, moves so quickly from one great setpiece to another that the momentum never lets up 'til the very end---and Bruce Willis is just as good as he was in the original, proving that he will always be John McClane in my mind. All in all, DIE HARD 2 is arguably even MORE entertaining viscerally than DIE HARD.

In short, DIE HARD will forever be a genre classic, but DIE HARD 2 is a worthy sequel when it comes to pure action---and when you are talking about action movies, isn't the action what's really important anyway?

A fan's review
I would like to start by pointing out that this movie gets a lot of crap. A LOT. This is in no way as bad as the reviews may make you think, and in fact this is my favorite Die Hard film.

I'm a huge fan of the series. I've seen them all plenty of times, and this one stands out for me. I'm not the only one, either; Ebert also claims this to be the greatest Die Hard. You've heard the same complaints about this movie a thousand times, I'm sure of it. But what tends to be left out is the amazing special effects, the truely die hard enemies, and the perfectly directed action scenes. This was directed by a different director than the other two blockbusters. Die Hard 2 also made the most money at the box offices. It really is the best!

Overreaches but still exciting
While this installment is the weakest of the three, it still has some exciting moments. All in all, I think the film tried so hard to top the first (best) Die Hard film, that the failure is that much more evident.

The characterizations are not as well fleshed-out as in the others. The action scenes become predictable and less exciting as the movie progresses.

I had to laugh at one of the BIGGEST continuity flaws I've ever witnessed in a big-budget movie: the plane that crashes is forced to the ground by lack of fuel. Why, then, does it explode in a HUGE fireball if it's out of gas? Somebody screwed up. ... Read more

Reviews (3)

Misery In The Living Room
The acting here is hollow, but even good actors can't make a bad script bearable. So I will cut to the chase and blame Jeff F. King (writer) for this bittersweet sci/fi [stuff].

A man who is too busy for his wife finds out she is pregnant, only for the audience to soon learn they *both* look glum because she has cancer. Their oncologist advises that the child probably won't survive to term and without chemotherapy post haste, the poor woman will die.

The caring husband (who we already hate because he's a workaholic wife-neglector) thinks things over. Boldly throwing caution, finances and chemotherapy to the wind, he comes to the conclusion that there's no better time than the present for a second honeymoon in beautiful Bermuda!
Once there, they rent a fishing charter from a grumpy old stereotype of a skipper and motor off into the sunset. Hubby throws the romantic hook "Just think of it as an RV, without a hundred people trying to pass you." Audience: think of it as an RV with an inescapable diesel stench on hydraulic lifts that won't stop rocking even when you're sleeping. These things are built for fishing, not pleasure cruises. Anyhow, our doomed couple can't seem to get into the romantic groove. The wife won't drink because she's too self-absorbed thinking about cancer and her unborn child. Our sensitive hero goes below deck for a moment, and...
The power goes out! Wife stands on the bow and stares, captivated by a magnificent electrical storm. Suddenly, she is gone. Hubby is at a loss, since all he saw and heard was malfunctioning electrical equiment.

Husband is soon at the center of a missing persons investigation. Determined to find his wife, he enlists the help of the grumpy old skipper. Skipper introduces Hubby to Tesla-disciple and science community outcast "Charly." With hubby's finances, Skipper's superb seamanship and Charly's wacky gadgets, our rogue's gallery hatches a plan so crazy that it just might work.

After a near eternity of exposition and needless mechanical preparation shots, our rag-tag explorers of the unknown put propeller to water and head to the coordinates where Wifey went missing. With a quick power-up of Charly's amazing Tesla Orb, they find themselves in a slightly off-color, acoustically-annoying altered reality where phantom islands appear and disappear like bad effects elements.

Hubby tears off without a whit of concern for the teammates who got him here and explores. He finds a child who loves to run from things and can cut a few wicked improv riffs from a conch shell. The boy finally quits running when he leads Hubby to, you guessed it, Wifey. The Wife is obviously great. She explains that the boy is theirs. How can it be?!?! Time in this altered reality "moves very quickly, and almost not at all." (I've said more lucid and plausible things in more easily-achieved altered realities.) Charly is quick to exclaim "Einstein was right!" Translation: "Audience, accept this. It all fits into Einstein's Special Theory of Incoherent Storytelling." Elsewhere, scruffy old Skipper finds his lost love and decides that Green Acres is the place to be.
The heart-wrenching conclusion of this sprawling missing persons adventure is that Hubby can't stay, for reasons Wifey won't explain. All we know is that he has to take the kid and jet along with Charly back to life, back to reality. His happy-as-ever wife must remain on the enchanted isle if she doesn't want to get sick again.
Husband gets stuck trying to explain how he lost his wife, searched for her, lost the skipper and gained one ten-year-old mute he'd like to call "Son." Odd. Bermuda authorities are stumped, and don't consider the husband a threat. Records are sealed and stored away in the Bermuda Police Department archives, along with countless other nauseating scripts dealing with mysterious happenings off their fair shores.

Granted, this is Sci/Fi, but even the solely human story elements are completely unrealistic. Characters behave irrationally to serve a chaotic and tenuous plot. This film threw out all the rules of good storytelling and innovated nothing in the process. Indeed, it deserves an "F" and all the negative and demeaning things one can think of beginning with said letter.

If you like Sci Fi, then you will like this one
This is what one might consider as a Sci Fi "B"-movie, but not a bad one, by any means. There are plenty of movies out there with larger budgets, more famous actors/actresses, better locations and equipment, and much worse plotlines. This movie demonstrates original thinking and a few new twists. Its true, there are no famous actors nor actresses here ... and the ending is a little weak, but the cast members look good and give above average performances. I also thought the movie had some fairly decent special effects. I enjoyed it and I believe any REAL Sci Fi nut would too.

According to Mt Bumba, it seems we should just throw out objective criticism and replace it with personal feelings. This doesn't help anyone, dude.

B-Class
Is the only way to describe this movie, and not in the good way. Basically, no-name actor husband loses his no-name actress wife in an electical storm. He is blamed for the murder by the no-name detective. He finds a no-name female scientist and teams up with her to find his wife. And no name actors are alright if they are good. This cast is far from it. The lame ending, the lame story, the lame acting, the lame comedy, the lame emotion, and the lame drama (so basically everything)prevent this movie from being good; or average; or tolerable; or bad; or horrible. ... Read more

Reviews (1)

Satisfactory
Satisfactory adventure film. There are enough tense moments to make the film interesting. The story moves along quickly. The film and actors will win no awards but I found the movie enjoyable enough. ... Read more

Reviews (66)

Suprisingly Weak
The first, and worst, sequel to Die Hard, is terrorised by the same plot as the original. While waiting for his wife's plane to arrive at Dulles Airport (on Xmas Eve), McClane notices a few suspicious exchanges between a group of men amidst the busy yuletide passengers.

Before you know he is neck deep in trouble with an army of mercenaries, led by Colonel Stewart (William Sadler), who are hell-bent on setting free a corrupt South American General/Drug Baron (Franco Nero). There are more bad guys than before. And more suspension of disbelief is required.

There are so many plot holes and illogical moments that the film almost drowns in its own absurdity. But there is enough action and stunts to cancel it out and distract our attention. Though they not presented in a breathtaking or memorable way. It's all too generic and a bit mean-spirited. No audience nowadays would be satisfied with it so prepare yourself for 80's violence.

William Sadler and Franco Nero lack the callous efficiency of Alan Rickman. And a hero can only be measured by his nemesis. But most of the time McClane is just capping off nameless mercs. How boring. Tho this should not be blamed on Sadler, he has a threatening and intense presence and as he has proved himself in movies like Trespass and Demon Knight. Too bad his character here is so badly written and underdeveloped. I'm sorry but blowing up 250 people off-screen to show how evil you are just won't cut it.

This was Renny Harlin's second movie of 1990 (the other was Ford Fairlain) and it is without a doubt the movie that made him a certified action director. It was a tough, and huge, movie to pull off. He just pulled it off with no particular charm. Though he does a wonderful job of capturing the look and feel of an East Coast winter. The wide-open snowfields and ice-covered runways will definitely make you feel chilly.

Although this is another problem. The first Die Hard worked entirely within the space of Nakatomi Plaza. It was claustrophobic and almost plausible. The scale and scope of Die Hard 2 is too big for its own good. Similar to the problems of ID4, the staples of reality are ripped out with ignorance and over-confidence. The bulk of the film is nothing but one dumb action scene after another. It doesn't make for coherent viewing.

Die Hard 2 is a definite lag in between both of McTiernan's very strong outings. By today's standards it seems dated and very 90's. Which is a shame considering the original and 'With A Vengeance' are, in a way, 'timeless'. It's movies like this that inspired 'Last Action Hero'.

Filmed in Panavision, the 2.35:1 anamorphic picture is superb looking with true blacks (a lot of this film is set at night) and nice fleshtones. Fire effects and colors look beautifully orange and overall the quality is top notch aside from a few instances of minor pixelation.

The gunshots are loud and ferocious in both the Dolby Digital and DTS tracks. All explosions and every punch and kick are rendered with amazing clarity. Some of the surrounds tend to stick to mono but the plane crash in the middle of the movie will convince it is actually happening in your living room. Dialogue scenes tend to stick to the front speaker and the musical score by Michael Kamen is well recorded and is sure to excite.

Renny Harlin's commentary is much more interesting that John McTiernan's fatigued and labored effort on the first movie. Harlin talks about the characters more and how he prefers his movies to be in terms of motivation and why characters should smoke only if it is necessary. Among other things. Such as how many of the effects he did then, in many different ways, would be so much quicker and easier to do today in Digital CGI.

The Featurette was made for Fox TV back in 1990 and it is a bit better than the usual, self-congratulatory nonsense that bogs down most featurettes. But it still can't resist talking about how 'great' the movie is. Tho thanks to this extra we now know that most of the snow in the movie is shredded soap. A second, 4-minute, Featurette is basically an extended trailer.

There are a few deleted scenes that are not that interesting and it's easy to see why they were cut from the film. Although the alternate scene on how McClane gets to the Annex Skywalk (The Boiler Room) is quite cool.

The interview with Renny Harlin and the Villain's Profile are promotional titbits in which they discuss how to direct a high-concept sequel and how to be an evil bad guy.

Behind the scenes and storyboards focuses on 2 scenes. The first is 'Breaking the Ice' and the second is 'Chaos on the Conveyor Belt'. The storyboard and film comparison is for the 'Skywalk Ambush' sequence.

Visual effects breakdowns explore, in great length and tedious, repetitive slo-mo, the Ejector seat scene and the Airport Runway. These are basically green-screen evolutions. The other model effects scenes broken down are 'Chopper', 'Airplane Models' and 'Wing Fight'.

Fast-paced follow-up fueled by thrills...
While not as original or inspired as the first, "Die Hard 2: Die Harder" is still an action-packed, slick movie with twists and turns fit for a roller-coaster ride of pure mayhem! Bruce Willis reprises his role as John McClane, this time in trouble at a Washington D.C. airport, where terrorists have taken the air traffic control captive. With McClane's wife on one of the stranded planes, our hero races to kick the butts of the bad guys once again! This is a worthy follow-up to the 80s hit film, with some cool action sequences and some pretty decent scripting.

Almost as good as the original
Count me among the few, it seems, who believe DIE HARD 2 to be almost as good as the original DIE HARD. I personally don't understand why this sequel always seems to be undervalued in favor of the jaggedly uneven, incoherent DIE HARD WITH A VENGEANCE.

Certainly DIE HARD 2 is not as good as the original. It lacks the first film's grittiness and claustrophobic atmosphere (but of course a loss of the latter was expected when the scriptwriters expanded the playing field to an entire airport as opposed to one floor of a highrise); its villain is no match for DIE HARD's subtly chilling Hans Gruber; and director Renny Harlin disappointingly favors action over those little human touches that so distinguished the original, insteading favoring more action. (Besides, couldn't the screenwriters have come up with a more creative plot than simply recycling the general structure of the original? But hey, this is a Hollywood product, where it's best not to take too many chances in the quest to cash-in on a big success, which DIE HARD certainly was.)

All that being said, the action sequences are undeniably thrilling---the action of the second half, particularly, moves so quickly from one great setpiece to another that the momentum never lets up 'til the very end---and Bruce Willis is just as good as he was in the original, proving that he will always be John McClane in my mind. All in all, DIE HARD 2 is arguably even MORE entertaining viscerally than DIE HARD.

In short, DIE HARD will forever be a genre classic, but DIE HARD 2 is a worthy sequel when it comes to pure action---and when you are talking about action movies, isn't the action what's really important anyway?

A fan's review
I would like to start by pointing out that this movie gets a lot of crap. A LOT. This is in no way as bad as the reviews may make you think, and in fact this is my favorite Die Hard film.

I'm a huge fan of the series. I've seen them all plenty of times, and this one stands out for me. I'm not the only one, either; Ebert also claims this to be the greatest Die Hard. You've heard the same complaints about this movie a thousand times, I'm sure of it. But what tends to be left out is the amazing special effects, the truely die hard enemies, and the perfectly directed action scenes. This was directed by a different director than the other two blockbusters. Die Hard 2 also made the most money at the box offices. It really is the best!

Overreaches but still exciting
While this installment is the weakest of the three, it still has some exciting moments. All in all, I think the film tried so hard to top the first (best) Die Hard film, that the failure is that much more evident.

The characterizations are not as well fleshed-out as in the others. The action scenes become predictable and less exciting as the movie progresses.

I had to laugh at one of the BIGGEST continuity flaws I've ever witnessed in a big-budget movie: the plane that crashes is forced to the ground by lack of fuel. Why, then, does it explode in a HUGE fireball if it's out of gas? Somebody screwed up. ... Read more

Reviews (10)

Quite Funny
This movie really is pretty funny. Crystal is always funny and Williams, well, what can I say... the guy is funny even if he's not trying to be! Crystal plays a straight-laced lawyer while Williams plays a total psychotic, who really wants to believe he has a son so he'll have a reason to stay partially sane.

This movie's plot may be a bit thin, but who cares because the cast is great. The short version of the plot is that a worried mother recruits two men to find her runaway teenage son. How does she get them to agree to find him? She tells each of the men(obviously not thinking that they may run into each other while searching for the boy) that he is the father. This leads to a silly comic pairing.

There are all kinds of great things in this movie. Crystal and Williams are great together. Mel Gibson makes a cameo-- watch closely because you might not recognize him!! The band Sugar Ray is also in the movie. Cool things like that!

This may not satisfy a hunger for laugh out loud, slap on the knee kind of funny, but it's still funny, with a charming ending.

MUCH funnier than I expected
After looking at the rather....well, dumb cover, and reading the synopsis, I expected it to be a rather medicore movie. Boy was I wrong. I'll tell ya, the script ain't gold, but Billy Crystal and (especially) Robin Williams make this movie quite funny as heck. Everything from Williams' opening lines/scene about how depressing his life is, to his amusing vulnerability, to the way Billy Crystal wittily mocks everybody, makes this movie quite a delight. And notice how I used the actors' names instead of the characters' names. That is because, like I said, it is the talented and hilarious acting that saved this movie from potential mediocracy.

The script isn't anything particularly special, and there is only one somewhat major flaw with it: Williams and Crystal are deceptively sent by a former girlfriend of both of theirs on a search for a boy who she claims to be the son of both of them. But near the end, it is never explained why she does that, instead of....oh I dunno, hiring a detective, or looking for him herself? While this kind of takes away from the believability of the story, the story isn't where the movie is meant to shine so it doesn't end up meaning much.

Williams plays the perfect total loser, and Crystal the witty, successful lawyer, in this movie sprinkled with more than enough hilarious and memorable scenes. If it weren't for a tighter script, it would've gotten five stars. Definatley worth a rental, and most likely a purchase if you're either a Billy Crystal or especially (since he was the focus of the majority of the better jokes) Robin Williams fan.

Best actors but script doesn't do justice.
Overall, I have always enjoyed Robin William and Billy Crystal's performance in many other movies, but I must admit to my surprise that it wasn't making me laughing on the floor as I usually do. The script was boring and the plot was downright disppointing. Didn't like the ending. It was like a stupid wild goose chase for both of them and end up accepting that the mother of the son lied to them. Which is really a bad example for younger audience to see this and thinking it's normal for mothers to lie. I hope someday to see both Robin and Billy to act together in another movie in the near future and hopefully better script than this one.

Distinctly Average In All Departments
The premise of Fathers' Day sounds like one of those ideas that was hatched in a boardroom rather than a creative mind. A woman tells two former boyfriends that they are the father of her teenaged son, who has run away. Naturally, these guys become instantly paternal, reluctantly join forces, and set out to find the kid who may or may not be theirs.

The teaming of Robin Williams and Billy Crystal provides some good moments, although at times Crystal seems to be too much of a straight man. Williams has plenty of scope to be...well, himself - which means that some sickly sentimentality is eventually allowed to creep in. In fact, the film is quite promising until the pair of wannabe dads make contact with their supposed offspring. The kid turns out to be such a snivelling loser that any sane person would disown him rather than try to save him from the conveniently cartoonish drug dealers he owes lots of money to. Junior is also infatuated with a girl who couldn't care less. When she finally tells him that he is boring, you find yourself shouting "Yes!" at the screen.

Even so, Williams and Crystal provide plenty of pleasant and undemanding entertainment along the way. But the film is so built around them that it wastes the talents of Julia Louis-Dreyfus and Natassia Kinski. Having said that, there is a nice uncredited cameo by Mel Gibson.

Not a bad film if you're looking for a nicely mindless comedy. But everyone involved has done much better work elsewhere.

Williams & Crystal make the best movies!
This movie is about a runaway 16-year-old named Scott. The mother goes to two men that she knew and tells them they are the father. First she tells Jack Lawrence (Crystal), a lawyer and he doesn't want to go look for him. Then she tells Dale Putley (Williams) who is a retarded, lonner, and empty life writer who decides to look for him. So the two end up traveling together to find Scott. See what goes wrong next after Dale passing out, crying constantly, getting HOT coffee poured on his nuts, and being a idiot. ... Read more

Reviews (1)

Nicely Done Movie!!
Peter Coyote stars as an Army commander harrassing a married woman on base when her husband is out of town but not without a fight.It's a nicely done movie!! ... Read more

Reviews (1)

Dead to Rites -Book always better!!
This is a neat, interesting mystery. Acting is good, plot excellent - but the original book, Donato and Daughter, by Sandra Scoppotone who was then writing as Jack Early, is wonderful!! Get both the book and the movie -its a cool, Italian/New York/family kind of police drama with some great turns in the book. Scoppotone is one of the best. ... Read more

Description

The body of a young woman is found in a ditch in the woods of the small California coastal town of San Benito. SANDRA BULLOCK ("Divine Secrets of the Ya Ya Sisterhood," "Miss Congeniality"), stars as Cassie Mayweather, the seasoned homicide detective and crime scene specialist assigned to the case along with her new partner San Kennedy (BEN CHAPLIN - "Lost Souls," "The Thin Red Line"). The two dectectives make their way through microscopic hints of evidence, which seem to indicate a random act of violence, but Cassie has a gut feeling that there is more to this murder than meets the eye. Something about this case reminds her of her past exactly at a time when she is asked to appear at a parole hearing on an old police matter. These events force Cassie to revisit the past. ... Read more

Reviews (106)

An Well Done Thriller saved by Sharp Performances.
An Police Detective (Sandra Bullock) investages the Serial of Brutal Murder Crimes with the help of her Partner (Ben Chaplin). When two intelligent but deranged teenagers (Ryan Gosling & Micheal Pitt) find ways to hide all the evidences and clues before the Cops do but there's no such thing as a Perfect Crime.

Directed by Barbet Schroeder (Barfly, Reversal of Fortune, Single White Female) made a Smart Suspense-Thriller with an Good Script by Tony Gayton (The Seaton Sea). Bullock, Gosling, Pitt & Chaplin gives Terrific Performances bring this film to life with fine cinematography by Luciano Tovoli (Suspiria, Tenebre, Titus). Bullock also Executive Produced the film. DVD's has an sharp anamorphic Widescreen (1.78:1) transfer and an fine Dolby Digital 5.1 Surround Sound. DVD Extras are:Commentary Track by the Director, Behind the Scenes featurette & more. Do not miss this fine film. Grade:A-.

MURD3R 8Y NUM8ERS
Homicide cop Cassie Mayweather (Sandra Bullock, who also executive produced)discovers the body of a female strangulation victim wrapped in plastic. But the problem with the investigation is that two rich kids, Michael Haywood (Ryan Gosling from BELIEVER) and Justin "Bonepart" Pendleton (Michael Pitt) have planned the murder and are observing the cops as they uncover each clue they have planted for them.
Directed by Barbet Schroeder (SWF, BARFLY) MURDER BY NUMBERS sometimes echoes Hitchcock's ROPE. Gosling and Pitt are good as the rich kids whose "perfect murder" turns out to be anything but. The planning behind the murder will fascinate crime buffs, and MURDER BY NUMBERS basic premise is helped considerably by strong performances from Gosling and Pitt; though the movie tends to fluctuate a bit in the last half hour. Still recommended. Luciano Tovoli's atmospheric photography aids greatly in helping maintain viewer interest.

Dumb and depressing!
This movie is so boring that I like literally found a cure for caffeine overload! Nothing is worth pointing out because there is virtually nothing worth watching iwth this film. Nothing else to say but that this crime borer is one to pass up.

A potentially great movie murdered by weak story.
I am very dissapointed with this movie even when my expectations were modest.

Two young men, likely around high school age, try to attempt to pull of what would likely be the 'perfect murder' and try to get away with it. Sandra Bullock plays a police detective with a psychologically painful and checkered past who is aiming to investigate and find out what happened when a women was found dead in a river recently.

This movie is unbelievably predictable that there is little of anything that instantly grabs your attention. The acting is incredibly hammy and it almost feels like you can tell that Sandra really wanted to walk off the set of this film and for good reason: "Murder by Numbers" is absolutely boring and never gets off the ground. The characters are weak and without any personality and the dialogue is virtually nonexistant.

A major dissapointment to say the least. Try out "Blood Work" instead because it is far superior even if it suffers too from some weaknesses.

Dull and Predictable Thriller
Extremely boring and unconvinced crime thriller in which two psycho teenagers commited a murder just to prove to them selves that they are genious. But they have to confront smart police officer (played with no intensity by Bullock)who take up the investigation of the gruesome case. Predictable, dull and unsuspenseful. A waste of time, in fact. ... Read more