Talk:Die Hard with a Vengeance

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Film (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the American cinema task force.
 

Trivia Inappropriate Comment[edit]

"The World Trade Center is visible in several shots in this movie, it was destroyed in the September 11, 2001 attacks."

Why is this trivia? Many movies show the World Trade Center towers, and therefore it should not be a major deal that Die Hard with a Vengeance displays it. I don't believe this warrants being put as trivia as well as including information that alludes to the fact they were destroyed.

Is it spelled out anywhere that McClane was in danger of being lynched? A knife is thrown at him while he is wearing the sandwich board, but I do not recall any discussion of lynching in the film.

Furthermore, according to the Internet Movie Database, the Sandwich board that McClane is wearing in actuality says "I Hate Everybody" and was changed using CGI to read "I Hate Niggers."

I agree with everything and yes the sandwich board change was done after the fact but the "I Hate Everybody" version is still used for TNT and TBS broadcasts while the other is used for premium cable channels like Encore and HBO. --Chad 06:45, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
I for one think the trivia section needs searious trimming. Its about 2 pages of trivia, with only 4 or 5 actual trivia pieces in it. Someone needs to take the time to read, and delete most of the worthless trivia in there. DurotarLord 01:22, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Flaws with Plot Flaws comments[edit]

One thing that was pointed out was that had McClane not reached to the bomb in the subway, Simon would not be able to carry out his plan due to all the emergency crew, police, and likely military precense. Due to the timing of McClane catching the bomb, the only real difference between what could have happened and what did happen was the body count. The bomb still went off, the train wrecked and the tunnel destroyed. People still could have been killed, and yet, with all the emergency crews and police, Simon gave them a reason to abandon the site. The plot scenario was fine and not flawed. The only difference was the death toll.

Another 'flaw' that was mentioned was that Smion had intended to have McClane killed in Harlem, yet he had various other traps laid about, supposedly for McClane to handle. Two problems with the calling this a flaw. One is thinking it was only for McClane and his plans centered around that. Without his enemy to solved the riddles, his plan would be useless. But it could be assumed that after offing McClane, Simon would just sucker someone else to do the chosen tasks. McClane only got the next task after surviving the previous one. Simon knew they were all deadly and figured one would get him sooner or later. Also, since the elephant bomb and the Yankee tickets were together, it could be assumed that it may have been a last minute ploy when McClane survived the subway encounter, which Simon planned to destroy in the first place. Even McClane mentioned it was a miracle he lived or even arrived in time, and only got the elephant assignment afterward. That assignment was solely meant to have McClane killed. All the other bombs had a purpose and McClane was not the only one that could have done it, considering how well laid out the plan was. The elephant bomb was the only one out of place. All the others would have happened just as they did in the movie without McClane. Except for the side projects to kill McClane, you'll notice Simon did not have to alter his plan. Remember, about killing McClane, Simon said,'Life has it's little bonuses.' Killing McClane was preffered, but not necessary.


Just wanted to add to this as I just removed these 2 supposed plot holes. You can look at a couple of ways. 1, the track record of the Gruber characters, and this is eluded to later in the film with McClane saying "I know the family." In the first film, Hans had the entire heist planned perfectly, with the FBI cutting the power, blowing the roof, etc. McClane was "The fly in the ointment."

In the third film, Simon, wanted revenge, but also wanted to compete with McClane. He probably figured that because McClane bested his brother, that he would most likely survive the Harlem stunt and in doing so, would not be able to interrupt the train (he didn't give them enough time even with McClane's improvising).

The whole idea was to get rid of the police, which he did. There were rescue crews and such there and the dump trucks would not look suspect because they would appear to be hauling rubble away from the site. I could probably go into it further if I wanted to waste time, but it's definitely not a plot hole.

Venom-smasher 22:29, 31 December 2006 (UTC)


The factual error about the gold need to be removed. It is mentioned by John McClane that they did not take all the gold, therefore they would only take enough to fill the dump trucks.Agonsw 00:43, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Alternative ending factual accuracy[edit]

i think whoever wrote the alternative ending section was confused - they say the original ending is set in germany, wheras this doesnt seem to be correct, and indeed is not the case in the film I own. - Pm504 21:46, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Gruber → Simon[edit]

I have changed all occurrences of “Gruber” to “Simon”, which is the name by which he is called throughout the movie, and is the name who Jeremy Irons is billed as having played. “Gruber” is not even the character’s name! “Peter Krieg was born Simon Peter Gruber”; i.e. Gruber is not his last name anymore. I would move the Simon Gruber article to Peter Krieg, but it’s already taken, and I don’t really have the energy to create a disambiguation page and move stuff. --193.11.177.69 02:13, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Trivia[edit]

Just caught Die Hard with a Vengeance on TV tonight and noticed a rather blatant allusion to Dirty Harry - in the school with the bomb in it just before the kids are evacuated the teachers are leading them through a group sing-along of 'row row row your boat', just like Scorpio made the kids do on the bus in Dirty Harry.

Dubious trivia in the ending section[edit]

The fact about the man carrying a 4 gallon jug being beaten to solve the riddle is clearly false. it's in the wrong section and just doesn't make sense. I've read alot of trivia and listened to alot of interviews about this film and never once have I heard that factiod. Fenton Bailey 07:51, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Alternate Ending Flaw[edit]

I guess I'm really glad they didn't go with the overblown alternate ending after all. The comment that really stands out is that after all of these years, the FBI took away his Pension.

That is illegal. Qualified pension plans are governed by the Internal Revenue Service. Pensions are also referred to as a "defined benefit" plan, meaning that the contributions are based on a defined rate of company contribution typically, contrary to 401ks, where it is based on what the employee puts in.

It is illegal to take away a portion or all of somebody's pension for arbitrary reasons. The FBI would have had to terminate the Pension for everybody in the company by amending the governing plan document, and even then, the benefits promised and accrued before the Pension plan termination would still have to be paid out to all plan participants.

So if something like that happened, McClane could simply call the Department of Labor and he'd have his Pension back. --72.188.153.103 14:38, 8 July 2007 (UTC)SlayerRob

Learn something new every day -- thanks. --EEMeltonIV 21:18, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Correction to One of the Production Notes[edit]

Just want to make a correction on the McClane/Sandwich Board production note. That scene was not, at all, filmed in Harlem. In fact, that scene was filmed in Washington Heights (right outside my building), and Willis' board was blank. "I Hate Niggers" was actually added on in post-production. Patriot174 01:36, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

The board may have been blank...but I have just watched that scene, and Samuel L Jackson and one of the 'harlem mob' refer to John Mclane as hating Niggers. I am a bit of a technophobe, so not sure how they would have edited that in, especially as both times you see the words leaving the actors mouth. And I have no idea how to sign this, sorry.Turdalina (talk) 12:30, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

The key word in your statement is "actors". This may shock you, but Jackson and the others were given a script that told them what to say and how to act around John McClane(who is in actuality just an actor named Bruce Willis). "Die Hard With a Vengeance" is not a documentary. So the fact that Jackson and the black youths act as though the sign said "I hate niggers" doesn't mean that it actually did.--Martin IIIa (talk) 14:15, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

yeah but it has said "I hate everybody" on most stations that air it as a TV edit, and would be found on the dvd copy of the movie saying that. =^-^= --I am an oktau and a baka at times but deny proven facts and you got a fight 03:41, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Frozone=zuez[edit]

In a trivia section i think we should add the refrence to The incredibles. The bit where frozone is at gunpoint trying to get a drink in the jewlry store is the exact same premisis as when zuez carver is trying to awnser the phone in the subway.May i add that frozones voice actor, Samual L Jackson, is zuez carver in the film —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lord Cuthberton (talkcontribs) 14:32, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

"Alternate title"[edit]

Whoever is replacing the the title with, or inserting, that the film is called "Die Hard 3: With a Vengeance," or "Die Hard: With a Vengeance," please stop. Both these titles are incorrect. The film never had a 3 in the title, ever, and the only place where an ellipse is inserted in the title is in the commercial for the DVDs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.100.199.160 (talk) 00:49, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Phil Thesis aka Damian Demento had a small role[edit]

Phil Thesis aka Damian Demento had a small role in a green pick up truck in this movie, according to his youtube video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=afhcwDOTcWs —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.47.241.20 (talk) 01:23, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Look, IMDB says it too http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0857363/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.47.241.20 (talk) 01:29, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

4 Gallons Riddle[edit]

How is the 4 out of 3 and 5 gallons-riddle solved? i watched it threee times, i just dont get it!! it would be nice, if it can be mentioned in the main article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fansoft (talkcontribs) 19:45, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

I may be wrong, but here goes:
    • Fill the three-gallon jug to the top and pour it into the five-gallon jug.
    • Re-fill the three-gallon jug and use it to fill the remainder of the five-gallon jug. You now have one gallon of water left in the three-gallon jug.
    • Empty the five-gallon jug completely. Pour the one gallon from the smaller jug into the larger one. Now, you just have to refill the three-gallon jug and pour it into the five-gallon jug. 3+1 = 4, so four gallons. --UnneededAplomb (talk) 21:57, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
Another way to do it is this-
    • Fill the five gallon tank fully and empty 3 gallons into the 3 gallon tank
    • pour out the three gallons in the three gallon tank, and put the two gallons in the three gallon tank
    • fill the five gallon tank fully, and empty one gallon into the three gallon tank
    • This leaves 4 gallons in the five gallon tank

You can do this either way, but i think the top one is faster. I'm not sure which they use in the movie.

Plot length[edit]

The plot on this article is presently too long for a typical movie article. I have attempted to shorten it but am being reverted. As per WP:NOT#PLOT and WP:WAF, as well WP:MOSFILM, the current plot is too long and goes into too much detail for an encyclopedic article. The plot needs to be shortened. --MASEM 17:42, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Sigma Epsilon Chi's version (now): 1088 words, Masem's version: 860 words. I still see ample opportunity in Masem's version to trim the plot summary down to 600-700 words. Since less is more on wikipedia when it comes to plot (wikipedia isn't trying to replace watching the film), I prefer Masem's version and work from there just based on word count. – sgeureka tc 18:26, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
Hmm, 400-700 words... That's tough. Even at over 1,000 words, the plot summary was missing some important points before I edited it. I think one obvious place we can cut is that we don't need elaborate descriptions of all of Simon's "games", since they were only distractions from his real plan. I'd say we could use less detail on the school bomb, and no detail at all on the trash can and subway bombs. I'll see if I can edit that out in the next couple days.--Martin IIIa (talk) 14:09, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
Well, I cut out everything I said I would, plus a whole lot more, but the plot summary still sits at a little over 800 words. So I give up for now; someone else see if you can do anything with it.--Martin IIIa (talk) 23:26, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
Went back to it and cut a few more unnecessary phrases out... still at just a little less than 800 words.--Martin IIIa (talk) 17:48, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
Under 600 now, hope that helps, see how you like it. Kaleeyed (talk) 01:44, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Should have a reception section[edit]

I think This article should have some kind of section on it's reception, especially since this fil was not so well recieved as the others, and it's the only article of the fur without one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.87.69.48 (talk) 16:13, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Script origin[edit]

Does anyone know a reliable online source for the story of the origin of this movie? According to the DVD commentary it was originally supposed to become a standalone movie called "Simon Says", then the script was in the race to become Lethal Weapon IV. The script was then acquired for the Die Hard franchise when the original idea for Die Hard 3 (aboard a ship) was made obsolete by the release of Under Siege. The first hour of the movie is said to be quite close to the original Simon Says script. The details are also listed in bits and pieces in the IMDB entry, but since their verification process is relatively superficial it's not really a reliable source. --MikeZ (talk) 03:42, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Why do you need an online source?--Martin IIIa (talk) 03:14, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Simon's henchmen[edit]

Anybody know the names of Simon's henchmen in this movie? Anyone who knows who they are will be appresciate. BattleshipMan (talk) 22:42, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

  • Check IMDB. Niteshift36 (talk) 12:53, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
    • That's not good enough. It doesn't tell you which ones they are. BattleshipMan (talk) 20:15, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Only one is really named in the movie. It's pretty unlikely that any of the other characters are significant enough to included in the cast section of the article. Niteshift36 (talk) 20:48, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Actually there are three or four names of those henchman that are mentioned in the movie. BattleshipMan (talk) 21:03, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
  • You know what.....I have a better question: How will adding the names of very minor characters to the article improve it? Niteshift36 (talk) 12:36, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
  • You know what? It doesn't change anything. You and I agreed on that. BattleshipMan (talk) 00:29, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Then if it isn't going to improve the article, why are we discussing it here? Niteshift36 (talk) 12:18, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Since part of the storyline is that Simon worked as an infiltrator of some kind using specially trained Germans and others who spoke perfect English, the names of his henchmen are likely to have been fake anyway. Only Targo and 'Otto' (the one who steals McClane's mate's badge) actually get a name check. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr Morden76 (talkcontribs) 21:43, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Actually, one of the guys name Karl was one of guys disguised as a security guard and the name Nils is one of the two Simon's men that McClane killed in the New York City Tunnel Number 3 where the aqueduct is at. BattleshipMan (talk) 03:15, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Binary Liquid explosive[edit]

I have an issue the plot summary here. The film makes no reference at all to the material being 'bio chemical', just a binary liquid and I did provide a link to a (admittedly very short) Wiki article that had its own external links. I just thought it was a fairly minor edit/correction that only added about 10 words, and didn't really see why it needed to be removed. The same could be said for my edit of the bit where Mclane realises whats actual happening from the comments made by the youth. He didn't 'overhear' a conversation (as was stated in the pre edited article), he directly engaged with the youth after catching him stealing --Mr Morden76 (talk) 22:10, 30 January 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr Morden76 (talkcontribs) 21:37, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

I don't know about the second point but to the explosive part, we have a word limit when writing plots and the only important part about it is that it is explosive, it doesn't matter if it needs to mix, its no different than a timer and from what I recall, you don't need to know it mixes to understand the plot, just that it will explode. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 22:29, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
I told Morden the same thing previously. As for the second part, we could just as easily say, "Mclane realizes..." and leave it at that. Exactly how he realizes it isn't essential to the plot. Doniago (talk) 14:16, 31 January 2013 (UTC)