Live Free or Die Hard + summer movies.

"Life or age or something has mellowed [Bruce] Willis, writes Manohla Dargis in the New York Times. "He no longer enters a movie like God's gift... He's making a point and so is [Live Free or Die Hard], namely that McClane (and Mr Willis) is ready to earn our love again by performing the same lovably violent, meathead tricks as before. And look, he's not laughing, not exactly, even if the film ends up a goof."

"The central idea in Live Free or Die Hard - a modern, summer-blockbuster-scaled echo of what we see in Sam Peckinpah's The Wild Bunch or in later John Wayne westerns - is that McClane is an older guy in a young person's game, and every bump, bang and gash hurts a little more," writes Salon's Stefanie Zacharek. "Part of the fun of Willis' performance in Live Free or Die Hard is its unremitting, if grimacing, optimism in the face of the inevitable: that time's winged chariot is eventually gonna bust your ass."

"The ace up the sleeve of these films has always been their wry, sarcastic attitude, one defined by star Bruce Willis and typified by its first sequel, whose SNL parody-worthy title - Die Hard 2: Die Harder - is so upfront about its flippancy that it damn near preempts serious consideration of the series," writes Nick Schager at Slant. Even so, he can't help noticing that the film, "unsurprisingly headlined by a celeb Republican - is cast from the genre's time-honored conservative mold." Added to that is "the misogyny that creeps into Mark Bomback's script."

"Director Len Wiseman, who most recently perpetrated the dreadful Underworld movies on an unsuspecting public, does a pretty good job at what's most important in Live Free or Die Hard: deliver the whammies on a regular and, with a little luck, surprising basis," writes Ann Hornaday in the Washington Post. "With the bad guys here representing technology at its most insidiously powerful, the filmmakers set themselves up as the champions of all that is analog, old school and authentic; thus, the stunts in Live Free or Die Hard have the snarling crunch of a junkyard dog."

"In the canon of movie heroes, I've always viewed McClane as the cartoon extension of Clint Eastwood's nameless gunslinger in Sergio Leone's Dollar trilogy, replete with snarls and unstoppable survival tactics, yet incessantly playful and eager to amuse," writes Eric Kohn for the Reeler. "Willis was in his 30s in the first Die Hard, and at 52, he's no less daunting or smug than the finicky private eye he played opposite Cybill Shepherd on Moonlighting. His persona has only improved with age. Unfortunately, the Die Hard dialogue hasn't."

"[D]espite considerable odds, not only does McClane stay alive, his movie does too," writes Kenneth Turan in the Los Angeles Times. "Inevitable lapses in plausibility and an inflated two-hour, nine-minute running time aside, Live Free or Die Hard is a slick and efficient piece of action entertainment, fast moving with energetic stunt work and nice thriller moves."

"Make no mistake... it is an epic piece of shit," counters David Poland. "I mean, wow! Once I got past the eye-rolling of the first act, I found myself laughing out loud much of the rest of the way."

"Justin Long is to Willis what lanky teen James Francis Kelly was to Stallone in Rocky Balboa, what the young mercenaries are likely to be to his John Rambo, and what Shia LaBeouf's character will probably be to Harrison Ford's Indiana Jones," notes Eric Lichtenfeld, author of Action Speaks Louder: Violence, Spectacle and the American Action Movie - and that "Yippee-ki-yay" piece in Slate.

Lou Lumenick in the New York Post: "Like the latest Stallone film, this is not so much a reboot as a sort of greatest-hits selection that homes in on the original concept of the character - in this case, a no-nonsense cop who, through sheer brawn, specializes in outwitting bad guys much smarter than he - and plunks him down in the post-9/11 world."

"Maybe McClane, in 80s action parlance, is too old for this shit," suggests Rob Nelson in the City Pages.

"Head shaven and still in fine shape, Willis has no trouble convincing that he's still capable of handling heavy action," counters Variety's Todd McCarthy. "Set pieces' outlandishness notwithstanding, pic's physical aspects feel convincingly real."

Susan King profiles Wiseman for the Los Angeles Times.

Rob Humanick revisits Die Hard 2 and gives it a C+.

The New Republic's Christopher Orr sees that a "selection from the Die Hard collection will be on temporary display in the museum's Treasures of American History exhibition at the National Air and Space Museum beginning July 12." Related: Robin Pogrebin reports in the NYT on the leadership shakeup at the Smithsonian.

For the New York Times, Maria Aspan reports on how Fox realized how stupid it was to knock a Die Hard fan video off YouTube; they've now paid its makers to repost it - as well as a new version, naturally, featuring clips from the new movie.

David Foxley covers the local premiere for the New York Observer.

Online listening tip. Matt Singer and Alison Willmore of IFC News chat about Willis.

Via Movie City News, the latest on Transformers, opening next week: Peter Howell attends an appearance before "a Beverly Hills hotel ballroom full of movie scribes" by Michael Bay and the result is actually a fun, quick read; Simon Ang caught the Michael Bay Show on its stop in Seoul and reports for Singapore's Electric New Paper.

"Paramount Pictures has taken over the campus of Yale University to film the forthcoming fourth installment of the popular Indiana Jones series." Spencer Morgan has the fast-breaking story for the New York Observer.

Updates: Richard Schickel on Live Free: "In its primitiveness, its refusal of anything like psychological nuance or big ideas, lies its dubious glory. It is a movie born to be forgotten - except as something that against your better judgment, you had a pretty good time watching back in the summer of '07. Which is more than you can say for other elephantine sequels moping dolorously around us this year." Also for Time, Joel Stein profiles Willis.

"Like McClane himself, this is an analog movie in a digital world - proudly outdated, yet guaranteed to get the job done," writes Aaron Hillis for Premiere.

At Hollywood Bitchslap, Peter Sobczynski watches Willis suffer the slings and arrows of "entertainment" "journalists": "To be fair, the press-oriented people asked reasonably intelligent questions and Willis, who has made no secret in the past of his dislike of the entertainment press, answered them in kind. Alas, the radio people seemed to be having some kind of personal contest to see who could ask the most inane thing possible in an effort to prove why most people no longer listen to terrestrial radio. I'll put it this way - one woman pulled out a harmonica and asked him to play a little bit for her and that was only the second dumbest question that she personally asked."

"This is how you revive a movie franchise." For Edward Copeland, Live Free is "the best popcorn action film I've seen in quite some time."

"As a high-octane action film starring Bruce Willis, Live Free or Die Hard is really quite spectacular," writes Erik Davis at Cinematical. But "you have to ask yourself this: Am I here for the popcorn action or am I here to spend two hours with one of my all-time favorite movie characters? If it's the latter, then you might find yourself slightly disappointed."

Updates, 6/28: "No point arguing cinema vs gaming," writes Armond White in the New York Press. "In Live Free or Die Hard, the latter has usurped the former. All that matters now is figuring out the new hybrid's ultimate value."

For the Los Angeles Times, Mike Flaherty gets 60 seconds with Timothy Olyphant, who plays the cyber-terrorist.

Live Free "brings back 80s action filmmaking through sheer muscle," writes Slate's Dana Stevens. "This is a movie that believes in doing things the old-fashioned way, hurling real cars at real helicopters and dangling real SUVs down real elevator shafts. Sure, there's computer-generated enhancement, but only as much as necessary to keep those hurtling vehicles from killing the equally real (and certifiable) stuntmen and women who agree to climb behind their wheels.... Though the movie's at least 20 minutes too long, it's deeply satisfying, full of old-school buddy banter and the kind of action sequences that make you burst out laughing at their sheer audacity."

Transformers reviews are coming in... and they aren't too good: Jay at Funky Duds (via Xeni Jardin at Boing Boing) and, at Twitch, The Visitor and Mike McStay.

Hold the phone. Xeni Jardin's back on the line with positive reviews: Joel Johnson and Bonnie.

Via Anne Thompson, the London Times is running what it claims is the first review of Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix. Leo Lewis writes in from Tokyo: "The film itself is a solid, occasionally spectacular set-piece that struggles unsuccessfully to give us thrills and fun we have not already had in previous instalments. It is far crueller than its predecessors and begins to introduce properly the idea that we are no longer in an amusing magical playground, but are en route to an epic confrontation with real victims."

DK Holm explains "why the Die Hard series and its new entry Live Free or Die Hard need to be viewed as fundamentally comedies. They hark back to Keaton and the physical comedians as improvisers out of cunningly constructed binds, where mind is as important as the body, where indeed it fuels the body."

Updates, 6/29: "Most self-respecting film critics shy away from graven-in-stone statements, but here goes: I consider Die Hard to be just about the perfect movie, boasting a nigh-unbeatable combination of explosions, humor, and the seminal performance of Bruce Willis, who came as close to an ordinary schlub as the action genre would permit - a guy who cursed a lot, bled even more, made bad jokes, and genuinely didn't want to be in the middle of the action." So begins Andrew Wright in the Stranger. As for this new one, "Even accounting for some major flaws - lumpy storytelling, an unfortunate decision to dilute the carnage into PG-13 land, the presence of Kevin Smith - it still manages to deliver an agreeably retro kick."

"He was human back in 1988; now he's the Terminator," writes Scott Tobias at the AV Club. "The everyman from Die Hard isn't 'one of us' anymore."

"He's a middle-aged Energizer Bunny, this guy," suggests Andy Klein in the LA CityBeat.

"[T]he problem with Live Free or Die Hard is that it's a sequel to Die Hard," agrees Peter Smith at Nerve. "No movie's ever gotten that right."

Kaleem Aftab talks with Willis for the Independent.

Ellen McCarthy profiles Justin Long for the Washington Post.

David Poland points out the many ways Michael Bay's gotten Transformers wrong, while in the Los Angeles Times, Deborah Netburn reports on the mobs at the Transformers premiere at the Los Angeles Film Festival.

Variety's Todd McCarthy opens his review of Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix by making many of the same points Leo Lewis has made in the London Times. Then: "Altered feel this time around stems in large measure from the new blood recruited to push the franchise into ever-darker domains. Director David Yates, heretofore known mostly for his television work (and already engaged to helm the sixth film); screenwriter Michael Goldenberg, replacing series perennial Steve Kloves; and composer Nicholas Hooper, whose vigorously dramatic music uses only a smidgen of John Williams's themes, make the most decisive difference in steering the focus away from flights of fancy and in-house intrigue in favor of elaborate and sometimes heavy-handed foreshadowing of the inevitable showdown between Harry and Lord Voldemort."

Another new Variety review, this one from Dennis Harvey: "Director-choreographer Adam Shankman's buoyant stage-to-screen translation of Hairspray may not equal the comic zest of its 1988 root source, John Waters's first and still-finest mainstream feature. Nonetheless, it's one of the best Broadway-tuner adaptations in recent years - yes, arguably even better than those Oscar-winning ones."

Related: Will Lawrence talks with John Travolta for the London Times.

Updates, 7/1: "[A]s much as I enjoyed the sequels, I wish they hadn't been made," writes Matt Zoller Seitz at the House Next Door. "They make the extraordinary seem ordinary."

In the New York Times, David M Halbfinger profiles Tom DeSanto, a fanboy and idea guy instrumental in making the Transformers movie happen. More from Josh Friedman in the Los Angeles Times, where Cristy Lytal profiles Shia Labeouf.

Transformers is "a worthy summer popcorn blockbuster which delivers and satisfies," writes Stefan at Twitch. Matt Dentler's got several bullet-pointed notes on the film as well.

Anne Thompson on Hairspray: "While New Line Cinema is nervous about opening this 60s period movie musical on July 20 against the summer onslaught, it should be effective counterprogramming because it is a total crowd-pleaser. It's the kind of movie that puts a smile on your face and leaves it there. And most important, after such duds as The Producers, Rent and Phantom of the Opera, it should prove that the movie musical is alive and well. It works!"

The Guardian has a few words of praise for Hermione Granger. And in the Observer, Kate Kellaway offers an enthusiastic endorsement of Order of the Phoenix.

Also in the Guardian, John Patterson: "Watching Die Hard 4.0 suggested to me a useful method of selection that would not only kill off or horribly injure enough out-of-shape action hacks to clear the decks a tad, but also put a serious and necessary crimp in the action movie genre itself: let them do all their own stunts."

The New York Post's Lou Lumerick on Transformers: "The bombastic Armageddon director’s refusal to take the material too seriously - along with another funny and appealing performance by rising star Shia LaBeouf (Disturbia) - turn out to be the saving graces of an uneven, overlong and at times overbearing flick."

Update, 7/3: Caryn James in the NYT: "Grafting media manipulation onto techno-terror, the latest Die Hard expertly captures a current fear: What if we’re disconnected from our information overload?"

Updates, 7/4: "[I]f Live Free or Die Hard sounds suspiciously like a cocky slogan that might have been batted around in Bush speechwriting bull sessions, it could be because John McClane has been a neocon all along," argues Michael Serazio at PopMatters.

Blogging for the Huffington Post, Lawrence Levi notes that "the government is totally unprepared. ('It took FEMA five days to get water to the Superdome,' the hacker reminds us.) That's what makes this George W's Die Hard: it's explicitly Homeland Security's incompetence and indifference that make the nation so defenseless. In fact, the terrorist mastermind is a former government security expert who wants to prove the network's vulnerability."

Posted by dwhudson at June 27, 2007 10:55 AM