die hard 4.0

[romanD]

For the Beltrami Haters among you, you can check out:

http://www.musicload.de/item.ml?releaseid=2446166_2

Sounds like I ROBOT meets DIE HARD, like it a lot how he uses Kamen's motifs.

As for the movie, apparently in Europe will be a longer, more violent cut be released as someone who works on the movie told me the international version was finished with dubbing and sent out when the MPAA called back and told them to cut the movie even more again for the US release.

First I thought that it is highly unusual, but actually the US version of CASINO ROYALE is also cut by 2 minutes! Trimming much of the violence!

Yippie Ka Yay I say!

[AndyDursin]

Thanks for the link Roman, I'm surprised he re-used Kamen's themes. I give it up for Beltrami in this instance, it actually "sounds" like DIE HARD, though I'm still not buying the album as the "mickey mousing" action music of the DIE HARD movies really isn't my thing (I liked how they used Beethoven and Sibelius in the first two films, at least; is there any classical motif being incorporated into this score?).

I'm not sure what they're doing for the rating over here. Even though there are rumors it's going to be PG-13, there actually hasn't been any confirmation at the MPAA site and the trailers still say "Not Yet Rated." Clearly, even if it's cut, I doubt this was being made as a "hard core" violent action movie, IMO that really hasn't been the tone of this series anyway, so a few f-bombs here and there aren't a huge deal to me. Undoubtedly they'll release any "Uncut" version on DVD.

First I thought that it is highly unusual, but actually the US version of CASINO ROYALE is also cut by 2 minutes! Trimming much of the violence!

I thought the torture scene was long enough as it was in the U.S., so honestly I don't believe I need to see any more of it.

[Monterey Jack]

I'm not sure what they're doing for the rating over here. Even though there are rumors it's going to be PG-13, there actually hasn't been any confirmation at the MPAA site and the trailers still say "Not Yet Rated."

I cannot believe that the movie is coming out in less than three weeks, and it still hasn't been rated. How can you efficiently market a movie if you're not certain who to market it to?

[AndyDursin]

I'm not sure what they're doing for the rating over here. Even though there are rumors it's going to be PG-13, there actually hasn't been any confirmation at the MPAA site and the trailers still say "Not Yet Rated."

I cannot believe that the movie is coming out in less than three weeks, and it still hasn't been rated. How can you efficiently market a movie if you're not certain who to market it to?

These sort of things happen all the time though -- the film probably still isn't entirely completed, or if it is, they're trying to get the film rated PG-13.

I would think it's pretty clear they are trying here to appeal to series fans as well as younger viewers.

The fact they cast Justin "Obnoxious Mac Commercial Spokesman" Long as the sidekick, and also added a teen actress playing Willis' daughter, shows they are trying to court younger audiences -- let's keep in mind it's also been 11 years since the last movie and some of Willis' recent forays into the genre have pretty much rolled snake eyes at the box-office too.

I hated -- HATED -- DIE HARD SUCKS WITH A VENGEANCE as well so I'm cautiously hopeful this is at least going to be better than that one.

Whether it's PG-13 or R really isn't a big deal to me, this isn't a Tarantino film we're talking about here. Even if they trim profanity and a few shots of gore, it's not going to heavily impact the film because I'd bet it was made knowing they could go after a PG-13 to begin with.

Besides, the DIE HARD movies aren't renowned for their violence so I think someone who purposefully avoids the movie because it's PG-13 has to be a bit daffy. The first two films play on TV with minimal edits minus some of the profanity, it's not like they're gutting the movie so it can be released.

[Monterey Jack]

Whether it's PG-13 or R really isn't a big deal to me, this isn't a Tarantino film we're talking about here. Even if they trim profanity and a few shots of gore, it's not going to heavily impact the film because I'd bet it was made knowing they could go after a PG-13 to begin with.

Besides, the DIE HARD movies aren't renowned for their violence so I think someone who purposefully avoids the movie because it's PG-13 has to be a bit daffy. The first two films play on TV with minimal edits minus some of the profanity, it's not like they're gutting the movie so it can be released.

I have to disagree with you there, Andy...the Die Hard films are violent as hell (especially the underrated Die Harder...icicle in the eye socket, anyone? ), and a large part of the humor is derived from McClane's unfettered potty-mouth dialogue. Hell, he can't even deliver his catchphrase in a PG-13 movie! I understand how Fox is trying to appeal to a generation that was probably still in training pants when With A Vengeance came out, but remember what happened the last time a pair of R-rated Fox franchises got wimped down to a PG-13...

Check out this TV edit of Die Harder for an example of what we'll be facing with a PG-13 Die Hard movie...

[romanD]

I agree, the first 2 DHs are very violent. Our censorship in Germany had big problems with them for a long time. They got re-rated for DVD and with the upped violence in movies today, they didnt mind that much anymore. Still I think they have 18 rating.

Part 3 also looks like it was actually very gory but got trimmed by the studio at the last minute. Everything is just a mess there.

As I said, the movie is finished and has been shipped, just the US version gets recut and recut for rating issues.

There is no classical theme this time in it, they use however the US Anthem... , though I dont know in what way. I hope in an ironic way for the villains.

[AndyDursin]

Fair enough. I guess what I'm getting at is -- quick kills, gore, that stuff is easily trimmable. The profanity may or may not be, but if they went into this movie thinking PG-13 you could end up with a movie like JUDGE DREDD, which was basically an R-rated PG-13 film (it was shot for a PG-13 but didn't get it).

It almost seems to me that this movie might've been made "lighter" on purpose in terms of violence. If that's the case -- and I'm saying IF -- then the discrepency between the PG-13 and the R isn't going to be as great as, say, the earlier movies were. So why people are all hyped on that when they haven't even seen the approach to the film is just weird. I mean, how does anyone KNOW they weren't aiming to go lighter on those aspects? It's entirely possible they were from the outset. Maybe they did two different takes for coverage, it's entirely possible.

IF that's the case then it's no big deal at all.

And if it's not the case, then I'd be more worried about the movie itself. The original films all did well with R ratings, so if they feel the need to re-cut it to nab a PG-13, it's possible it's due to the fact that they're concerned it's not going to do well. Who knows

But from what I've read in interviews, the idea was to do a PG-13 version or variation from the beginning. There are conflicting stories there, but it seems likely to me.

No matter I will try and get into a sneak preview and find out for myself!

[Monterey Jack]

Well, it's officially PG-13. There goes my seven bucks.

[AndyDursin]

Well, it's officially PG-13. There goes my seven bucks.

Hey it's your choice, but I find boycotting the movie for its rating utterly ridiculous at this stage. As I said, it seems pretty apparent to me they might've been aiming for a "light R"/PG-13 to begin with. If that's the case then the basic tenor of the film ain't gonna be much different if it's R or PG-13. As it stands we don't really know what they were making, while internet wackos continue to mount this opposition based on the fact that it's not R and worrying they won't get their gore fix on -- even if they, too, have no idea what the movie is actually like.

If the cuts are obvious it won't help, but more importantly, if it sucks it will suck no matter what it's rated. That said I'm still giving it a fair shake whether or not the requisite number of f-bombs are thrown in, since I personally care more about story and dialogue than the amount of head-shot kills the movie contains.

It is interesting though to see this being the exact reverse of SNAKES ON A PLANE. That film was a PG-13 in every way possible until the producers decided to add gratuitous sex and gore (which added nothing at all to the film) to make it R, and it quite obviously killed the film at the box-office.

But I also find it amusing that these "rabid fans" don't think a PG-13 DIE HARD could work. I know the films are "violent" but I never found them excessive, finding the storylines interesting in both of the first two films and the violence kinda gory (but not dwelled upon) and the profanity amusing, but again not overly excessive and certainly not anywhere near the level of a Tarantino film. But then again, I guess it depends on why you go to see a DIE HARD movie in the first place.

[romanD]

well, of course I accept a PG-13 rating, but to me it seems like this movie was shot for R and then later recut, and that is something which always shows. Especially here now where Marco said, that the score is totally cut up and has nothing to do with what was recorded and is on the CD. There goes artistic value and I seriously doubt that heavy music cuts will improve a movie. Just take CURSED... you could hear each cut in the score on the PG-13 version, they did not even bother to hide them!

And I hate it in action movies when they shoot around and nobody gets hit. That lessens the effect of tension. It is fine not to do it violent, but then it has to be shot that way and not for bloody mayhem and later take it all out.

All DIE HARDs were R, so why suddenly thinking this needs to be something for kids? I guess, the studio just got cold feet that they are too late this summer, the biggest movies have taken their money already and they are competing then again against TRANSFORMERS, so they just want to get as much money as they can as they believe the movie will not do well anyway.

So far Im interested, the shot with the cabs is THE shot of the year and I never get tired of seeing this car flying towards Bruce and crashing on the cabs...

the score also rocks and is really very much in the Kamen mode. Especially the cue THE F-35... it is really nice how Marco incorporated not only some motifs from Kamen but also integrated his style into his own. Didnt expect that!

So far this summer was fantastic in terms of scores, wasnt it? FF2 is great, POTC 3 I like a lot (hated the first 2), DIE HARD 4 is cool, EVAN ALMIGHTY is also really nice, finally a John Debney worth listen to again, SPIDERMAN 3 rocked and boooh to the studio which rejected so much of Young's themes, which were a lot better than Elfman's! heck, even HOSTEL 2 is supposed to have a nice score! But I will never watch that movie!

(if you wonder why I know the scores already, Varese sends them out in Germany always 2 weeks earlier than their official release!)

[AndyDursin]

well, of course I accept a PG-13 rating, but to me it seems like this movie was shot for R and then later recut, and that is something which always shows. Especially here now where Marco said, that the score is totally cut up and has nothing to do with what was recorded and is on the CD. There goes artistic value and I seriously doubt that heavy music cuts will improve a movie.

Heavy music cuts are pretty much par for the course with action films, whether it's EPISODE II or DIE HARD WITH A VENGEANCE, etc.

As far as the film itself being "heavily cut," as I've said repeatedly there are certain movies that are shot with the full knowledge that they might end up going for a PG-13.

How do you know this was ALWAYS supposed to be a "hard R"? More over there ARE stories you can trace, back from when the film started filming, that they might be going for a PG-13 the entire time.

If that's the case, there's going to be no loss of "artistic integrity" if the original intent was do a PG-13 kind of film. If the intention was to do a PG-13 movie, give or take some different takes with more profanity or what not, it won't affect the film in tone or intent....not if the tone of the film was always supposed to be "lighter" to begin with.

Most of the "protest" circulating online is from internet posters mad it's PG-13 but who haven't seen the film and also weren't on-set to know what the intention was.

I'd like to know the deal myself, but until I find out it was heavily cut to get it down to a PG-13, I'm reserving judgment on the hate.

Looking at the running times of this U.S. cut versus the overseas version will tell you how much a difference there is. If it's a minute or two, or a few seconds, you can bet they were aiming for a PG-13 edit the entire time, and the only discrepancy will be some more profanity, alternate takes of kills and what not. That won't affect the story or the overall, prevailing tone of the movie.

If it ends up being like 3-5 minutes or more, then I'd say the film IS heavily cut for the U.S. market and they're making a mistake.

[romanD]

well, I can only tell that from the person I know who was heavily involved in the post prodcution that he said the editing was a nightmare and the MPAA continued to want cuts and cuts and cuts. Again, even after the intl. was passed...

if they went for a PG-13 from the beginning the director apparently made some big mistakes. lol...

again, I dont mind the pg-13 rating, it will have a 16 rating anyway like the first two... this kind of action never gets a 12 rating as we are more concerned with violence than F-words.

I doubt there will be a huge difference between the intl. version and the us version... but still, I wouldnt want to see Casino Royale in the Us version...

even just 3 seconds cut can make all the difference. For example in BREAKDOWN they cut out in Germany that Kathleen Quinlan lets the truck fall at the end! That changes the whole content of that scene!!! And it is just one shot for like 3 secs!

[AndyDursin]

There's one review at AICN that basically states the language was obviously trimmed -- if that's the case, then yeah, probably the movie was shot for an R but was cut.

I was just hoping this would've been like ALIEN VS PREDATOR, which was intended to get a PG-13 right from the get-go.

From the sounds of it, it doesn't appear that the movie is all that great to begin with. A few f-bombs aren't going to help the story, particularly when that AICN reviewer claims it's "not as good as DIE HARD WITH A VENGEANCE," which says to me it must be pretty lousy indeed.

Hopefully it's just one review and the film will turn out OK...we'll see.

[TomServo]

I guess this means there will be 2 versions of the film released on DVD, PG13 and R. But there have been many reasons discussed here on why it seemed inevitable...

[AndyDursin]

One thing the R rated version won't fix: Timothy Olyphant. Every review I've read mentions that he's a horribly bland villain and the movie's biggest problem.