Latest news with #DieHardwithaVengeance
New York Post
3 days ago
- Entertainment
- New York Post
Why Frank Sinatra was offered Bruce Willis' part in ‘Die Hard'
Fans almost saw Frank Sinatra do it, his way. Although fans know Bruce Willis for playing the iconic role of John McClane in the 1988 action/thriller 'Die Hard,' it turns out that 20th Century Studios was contractually obligated to offer a certain A-list singer the role first. 'Die Hard' was adapted from the 1979 novel 'Nothing Lasts Forever,' written by former detective Roderick Thorp, and was a sequel to his first book, 'The Detective.' Advertisement 6 Bruce Willis in the 1988 action/thriller 'Die Hard.' ©20thCentFox/Courtesy Everett Collection 6 Samuel L. Jackson and Bruce Willis in 'Die Hard with a Vengeance.' ©20thCentFox/Courtesy Everett Collection The first novel was already made into a film, the 1968 thriller/crime by the same name which starred Sinatra and Lee Remick. Advertisement Since the movie studio had the rights to the original book and its sequel before they were written for the big screen, they had to ask Sinatra first. He was 70 at the time and declined the part. 'Die Hard' also starred Alan Rickman, Bonnie Bedelia, Reginald VelJohnson, and William Atherton. Prior to landing the part of John McClane, Willis, 70, was only known for starring in the comedy series, 'Moonlighting,' opposite Cybill Shepherd. 6 Bruce Willis in the film 'Die Hard with a Vengeance.' ©20thCentFox/Courtesy Everett Collection Advertisement The action star went on to reprise his role in all five 'Die Hard Films,' including: 'Die Hard 2' (1990), 'Die Hard with a Vengeance' (1995), 'Live Free or Die Hard' (2007), and the final installment, 'A Good Day to Die Hard' in 2013. In March, in honor of Willis' 70th birthday, his 'Die Hard with a Vengeance' costar Samuel L. Jackson revealed the advice he received from him on set. 'He told me, 'Hopefully you'll be able to find a character that, when you make bad movies and they don't make any money, you can always go back to this character everybody loves,'' Jackson, 76, told Vanity Fair at the time. 'He said, 'Arnold's got 'Terminator.' Sylvester's got 'Rocky, Rambo.' I've got John McClane.' I'm like, 'Oh, okay.' And it didn't occur to me until I got that Nick Fury role—and I had a nine-picture deal to be Nick Fury—that, Oh, I'm doing what Bruce said. I've got this character now.' 6 Frank Sinatra and his wife Ava Gardner in 1956. Getty Images Advertisement During the Vanity Fair sit-down, Bedelia, 77, who played McClane's ex-wife Holly Gennero in the first two 'Die Hard' movies, also took a moment to reflect on the cult classic. 'I think that he's basically underrated because he was a big box-office star. So that immediately works against you,' she explained. 'I think, in his mind, he always wanted to be an actor and to do interesting work. That's why becoming famous for such a huge, boffo movie was not expected from him.' 'But once he was there, it was kind of like, you know, 'I'm an actor,'' Bedelia continued. 'And I don't think he saw, in terms of the work, a lot of difference between them. One was not more important than the other, because he was getting to work with interesting directors, with interesting scripts.' 6 Frank Sinatra performing. Shutterstock 6 Frank Sinatra takes a break during a recording session. Getty Images Even Willis, who retired from acting in 2022, following his diagnosis of aphasia and then frontotemporal dementia in 2023, didn't know how big him or his 'Die Hard' character would be. 'I never expected to become this famous,' he said in 1990. 'I wanted to be successful as an actor; I never equated that [with being] famous and having your life story in every newspaper in the country. I just never thought that far ahead. And I don't know who does.'
Edinburgh Live
10-05-2025
- Entertainment
- Edinburgh Live
Netflix action film with huge actor has fans all saying the same thing
Our community members are treated to special offers, promotions and adverts from us and our partners. You can check out at any time. More info The Ice Road, penned by the American screenwriter behind hits like Jumanji, Die Hard with a Vengeance, and Armageddon, sparked high hopes among audiences, only to leave many feeling let down. The 2021 thriller showcases action veteran Liam Neeson as a North Dakota trucker embarking on a vital quest. Now at 72, the celebrated Irish thespian boasts a career peppered with memorable roles in films such as Schindler's List, the Taken franchise, Star Wars, and Love Actually. Still, even though Neeson's fans commend his acting in The Ice Road, they are not all that taken with the film itself. Critiquing the movie, one Rotten Tomatoes reviewer remarked: "Borderline embarrassing almost throughout. Predictable and clichéd. Possibly Neeson's worst film." The plot centers on a convoy of truckers navigating perilous frozen lakes and wintry paths to rescue miners from a caved-in diamond mine in Canada. Their travail is marred by numerous hazards including melting ice, fierce snowstorms, and the ever-present danger of the ice giving way beneath them. Disgruntled, a viewer commented: "One ridiculous impossible scene after another as these amateurs try to make a dramatic film. The really baffling thing is, why would an actor of the status of Liam Neeson lend his name and reputation to such horrid dreck?", reports the Mirror US. (Image: ALLEN FRASER/NETFLIX) Elsewhere, an individual commented: "A 'so bad it's good' disaster movie, but only just. Whilst the concept of having a rag-tag crew of big rig drivers embark on a noble mission against time and the extremes of nature to save those in peril holds some merit, the actual plot comes across as silly and very unrealistic." Although bypassing cinemas, the film carved its niche online with a digital release on Netflix, quickly becoming the most streamed title on the platform during its debut weekend. In a thrilling turn for fans, April 2023 brought news of a sequel, set to star Neeson once more, in what's been dubbed The Ice Road 2: Road to the Sky. Criticism wasn't absent, with one disgruntled critic remarking: "Liam is always worth a watch, but unfortunately the plot has many holes and implausible actions leading to a bit of a disappointing viewing. On a cold, rainy day it's worth a watch, but it's not popcorn worthy." However, opinions are, as always, divided. There are viewers who deemed the film a decent pick, one stating: "The film was gritty in places. I loved the bond between the brothers; shame one of them had to die. But it was well worth a watch, and I'd like to watch it again, which says a lot from me." Another expressed their appreciation: "Why the bad reviews? I am tired of car chases in big cities. This is no more unbelievable, and the setting is much more interesting." Fans eager for more of Liam Neeson's action can catch him in The Ice Road on Netflix now.
Daily Record
10-05-2025
- Entertainment
- Daily Record
Netflix action movie starring Liam Neeson has fans all saying same thing
The Ice Road is a 2021 disaster thriller film directed by Jonathan Hensleigh and starring Liam Neeson, Laurence Fishburne, Amber Midthunder, Marcus Thomas, Holt McCallany and Matt McCoy The new action thriller from the pen of the American writer behind Jumanji, Die Hard with a Vengeance, and Armageddon had audiences brimming with anticipation. However, The Ice Road, which hit screens in 2021 with Liam Neeson at the helm as a North Dakota truck driver on a vital mission, has left some viewers underwhelmed. Now 72, Neeson, whose storied career includes legendary films like Schindler's List, the Taken series, Star Wars, and Love Actually, has received acclaim for his personal performance. Yet, despite the praise for Neeson, The Ice Road has garnered less favourable reviews. A critic on Rotten Tomatoes remarks: "Borderline embarrassing almost throughout. Predictable and clichéd. Possibly Neeson's worst film." In The Ice Road, Neeson's character leads a group of truckers risking their lives over ice-laden lakes and stormy roads to rescue miners trapped in Canada. Their perilous quest pits them against melting ice, blinding snowstorms, and the looming danger of ice collapses. A disappointed viewer commented: "One ridiculous impossible scene after another as these amateurs try to make a dramatic film. The really baffling thing is, why would an actor of the status of Liam Neeson lend his name and reputation to such horrid dreck?", reports the Mirror US. One viewer said: "A 'so bad it's good' disaster movie, but only just. Whilst the concept of having a rag-tag crew of big rig drivers embark on a noble mission against time and the extremes of nature to save those in peril holds some merit, the actual plot comes across as silly and very unrealistic." Despite bypassing cinemas and being released digitally on Netflix, the film enjoyed its moment of glory, becoming the most streamed film on Netflix during its debut weekend. In April 2023, fans were thrilled to hear that a sequel is on the horizon, with Neeson confirmed to reprise his role in The Ice Road 2: Road to the Sky. Another critic expressed their disappointment: "Liam is always worth a watch, but unfortunately the plot has many holes and implausible actions leading to a bit of a disappointing viewing. On a cold, rainy day it's worth a watch, but it's not popcorn worthy." However, opinions are divided, with some viewers still recommending the film. One person said: "The film was gritty in places. I loved the bond between the brothers; shame one of them had to die. But it was well worth a watch, and I'd like to watch it again, which says a lot from me." Someone else defended the film, stating: "Why the bad reviews? I am tired of car chases in big cities. This is no more unbelievable, and the setting is much more interesting." Fans of Liam Neeson can catch him in The Ice Road, currently available for streaming on Netflix.
Yahoo
10-05-2025
- Entertainment
- Yahoo
Die Hard With A Vengeance Is One Of My Favorite Action Movies, And I Guess I Have Steven Seagal To Thank?
When you buy through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission. When it comes to the Die Hard franchise and the best '90s movies in general, Die Hard with a Vengeance will always be at the top of my list. Admittedly, this was the first John McClane movie I saw (it came on HBO when I was like seven years old), and so I've always had a soft spot for Bruce Willis and Samuel L. Jackson teaming up to save the 'Big Apple.' The frenzied New York City setting, the cat-and-mouse game, the big twists, the ties to the franchise's early days. All of it is just perfect. While I've known for years that this didn't start out as a Die Hard movie, I only recently learned that we saw this iconic version of it because of a classic Steven Seagal action flick. So, I guess I have the controversial actor-turned-musician-turned-sheriff to thank for it all. Here's why… The 'Die Hard on a [insert location]' trend took off like wildfire soon after Bruce Willis first played John McClane back in the 1988 franchise starter, but the series almost tried that angle out itself in the early 1990s. Following the release of Die Hard 2: Die Harder, 20th Century Fox made plans for another sequel, which wasn't going to take place in New York City, but instead on a boat. Yes, we were close to having Die Hard on a Boat. Back in late 1992, the Los Angeles Times reported that the threequel's original idea would have seen the grumpy, hungover, yet dependable detective attempt to save a yuppie cruise ship from a band of terrorists. In that report, it was also pointed out that this version was based on a spec script titled Troubleshooter, but more on that later. So, what ended up causing the studio to back off and pivot to what would become the 1995 blockbuster? Though a script was adapted and fine-tuned for Die Hard 3, and it looked like things were going to pick up steam, the project was abandoned at some point in 1992 because of a little movie called Under Siege, starring none other than Steven Seagal. In the same Los Angeles Times article mentioned above, the studio and film's producers decided that the similarly plotted movies – Under Siege centers on a U.S. Navy ship hijacked by terrorists – would have come out too close to one another and didn't want it to look like Willis was following in Seagal's footsteps. This also followed a trend of other movies that took a page out of Die Hard's book (Passenger 57 and Cliffhanger also came out in the months following Under Siege's success). I totally see why Willis, Fox, and the Die Hard 3 producers wanted to take a different approach to the franchise after the success of Under Siege, as well as the trend of similarly-plotted action movies at the time. However, I'm not going to lie and say I wouldn't want to hear John McClane say his famous line while swinging from a cable connected to a ship's smokestack or while taking out a terrorist by swinging on an anchor or something. John Milius, the man who wrote classics like Jeremiah Johnson, Apocalypse Now, and Magnum Force before directing quintessential '80s movies like Red Dawn and Conan the Barbarian, was tasked with working on Die Hard 3 after the original plans sank. I don't know about you, but the idea of Milius writing a John McClane story seems like a match made in action movie heaven, and it almost happened. According to the same Los Angeles Times article, Milius, who told the paper, 'We're off the boat,' was approached to make a non-nautical Die Hard movie at some point in late 1992 with the idea that it would shoot in mid-1993 and come out during the 1994 summer blockbuster season. There were some massive movies in '94, and Die Hard 3 would have been right in the middle of it all. Imagine two Bruce Willis movies, two all-time great action flicks, and more in the same summer. Bonkers! At some point, I can't really figure out when, Fox scrapped the Milius idea (I really want to know what this would have been about) and decided to just take an unproduced script that it owned, retool it, and make it into Vengeance. I've been aware that the movie started out as a thriller called Simon Says (that aspect remained in the finished product), I didn't know that it was originally supposed to be a Brandon Lee movie before the actor's tragic death on the set of The Crow. According to Comic Book Resource, Simon Says was pitched after the success of 1992's Rapid Fire, with Lee taking on the role of NYPD officer Alex Bradshaw and the character that eventually became Samuel L. Jackson's Zeus Carver being a female instead. But those plans were scrapped when Lee died in a freak on-set accident in 1993, and the script was put back in the pile before being turned into Die Hard with a Vengeance. Perhaps the craziest thing, however, I learned throughout all of this is that not only do I have Seagal to thank for Die Hard with a Vengeance, I also have him to thank for this absolutely insane Willem Dafoe death scene. Digging around, I discovered that the unused Die Hard 3 script from the early 1990s was later retooled and turned into Speed 2: Cruise Control. Though the story ended up being used for a random sequel to 1994's Speed (without Keanu Reeves) that is considered garbage by most, it still got to see the light of day. When speaking with Movieline back in 2001, John McTiernan, who directed the original Willis actioner and Vengeance, explained that most of the material that was developed for the aborted third installment was turned into Speed 2, including the iconic scene where the ship washes ashore, causing all kinds of destruction. See, it wasn't all lost. All in all, Die Hard with a Vengeance is one of my favorite action movies, my most-watched installment in the Bruce Willis action series, and a game-changing blockbuster. Maybe it's for the best that Steven Seagal had to come in and make a mess of things.
Telegraph
04-03-2025
- Entertainment
- Telegraph
Demi Moore and the original Anora: The sexed-up saga of Striptease
Anora – this year's unqualified champion at the Oscars, with five awards from six nominations – has been the making of 25-year-old Mikey Madison as a young performer with her Best Actress win. But for runner-up Demi Moore, the fact that it's a crime caper about a hard-up stripper can only have been bittersweet. Moore's equivalent film, at the zenith of her mid-1990s fame as a so-called 'popcorn actress', was a debacle: the most high-profile release in a wounding run of flops that sent her packing. When The Substance gets described as Moore's comeback, it's this bitter experience she has come back from. Striptease (1996) was an unfortunate misfire that has left, at best, a limited cultural imprint. It might be hard to stick up for – or even sit through – these days, but the opprobrium piled onto Moore for starring in it seems ever more cruel with hindsight. Adapted from a zany bestseller by the Florida crime writer Carl Hiaasen, this trashy bauble from Columbia Pictures cast Moore, then 34, as Erin Grant, a single mother fighting for custody of her 7-year-old child (played, really quite sweetly, by her real-life daughter Rumer Willis). Erin has just lost her job as a secretary for the FBI, because her scumbag ex-husband (Robert Patrick) has a criminal record. Out of desperation, she becomes an exotic dancer at a strip joint in Miami called the Eager Beaver, and becomes embroiled in a shady plot involving the sleaziest of its patrons, a perma-tanned US Congressman played by a bewigged Burt Reynolds. An admittedly tatty piece of storytelling which grinds to a halt as often as possible for topless dance routines, the film still lingers as a lesson in female risk – much as Paul Verhoeven's Showgirls did the year before. Both were big-budget studio pictures, costing $40-45 million at the time – unlike the very independent Anora, of course, which cost a mere $6 million of 2024's dollars. As glossy commercial propositions, Showgirls and Striptease both used nudity as a 'sell', which Anora makes more complicated. And herein the danger lied. When they failed, a lion's share of the flak was directed, in a predictable but obviously sexist way, towards the actresses who were going out on a limb. Elizabeth Berkley's film career instantly died when Showgirls flopped, and Moore blames the reaction to Striptease, more than any other film, for destroying her reputation at the time. Even before the film came out, the backlash began with her salary. Moore was paid a highly publicised $12.5m for Striptease, which made her Hollywood's highest paid actress at the time. The figure put her nearly in league, even, with the men: her then-husband Bruce Willis got $14 million for Die Hard with a Vengeance (1995). But not quite. (The same year Striptease came out, Jim Carrey became the first actor to crack $20 million for a single role, in The Cable Guy.) Moore would never be paid so much again, but she could point to a track record which justified this coup. She had a string of four hits to her name – Ghost (1990), A Few Good Men (1992), Indecent Proposal (1993) and Disclosure (1994) – which made her the most bankable actress in Hollywood, especially because these pictures coincided with a Julia Roberts wobble in the mid-1990s. Yet her hot streak didn't last long. Moore's first demeaning flop was The Scarlet Letter, in the autumn of 1995, but that was six months after the Striptease deal was in the bag. Indeed, she was already on location in Florida when the bad Scarlet news (it was the critical punching bag of that awards season) came in. Her Grisham-esque legal drama The Juror then tanked, too, in February 1996, boding even more badly. Moore was about to expose herself – in every sense – at the moment when her prospects were at their diciest. The knives were being sharpened. 'It was about changing the playing field for all women,' Moore recently told Variety about her Striptease salary. And it actually did. The very day that news was announced in March 1995, Sharon Stone's asking price jumped up from $6m to $7m, Jodie Foster's from $7 million to $8 million, Meg Ryan's from $6 million to $8 million, and Roberts's from $12 million to $13 million – thereby overtaking Moore, in fact. '[Moore] is every bit as valuable as the dozen guys who get comparable money,' said one studio executive, Martin Shafer, to Entertainment Weekly in 1995, calling her 'the biggest female star in the world' when reckoned internationally. But Shafer was (and still is) the president of Castle Rock Entertainment, who made Striptease. His wasn't the prevailing view in Hollywood. 'Why pay her $12m to take her clothes off,' griped another anonymous exec, 'when she does it for [magazines] for free?' Despite this reference to her iconic August 1991 Vanity Fair cover, in which Moore posed pregnant and nude, she was clearly taking a far bigger chance on Striptease than Willis was with the third Die Hard. To offer up her whole body as the film's centrepiece attraction, she felt she should be paid accordingly, and given how much she wound up in the firing line, it's hard to disagree. There's a counter-argument that Moore's salary itself was the main cause of the vitriol spilled. But consider Elizabeth Berkley, who was paid only $100,000 for Showgirls. It still ruined her. Moore gained notoriety by fortifying herself with a very expensive entourage, totalling eight assistants, including a personal trainer and private chef, leading her to be dubbed 'Gimme Moore' for her on-set demands. She also paid for breast augmentation surgery, offering audiences the promise of even more Moore. 'For a woman who has given birth to three children, she is in remarkable physical shape,' conceded the review of one female critic who will remain nameless. 'But I don't know what kind of shape a woman's brain would have to be in to get her to make this movie.' Years after being haunted by this kind of terrible publicity around the film's release, Moore manages to be philosophical. As she told Variety last year: 'I think anyone who... was the first to get that kind of equality of pay would probably have taken a hit. But because I did a film that was dealing with the world of stripping and the body, I was extremely shamed.' Striptease has an inflated reputation for awfulness: it's just turgid, dawdling, and mostly unfunny, save for a few quips from the game Ving Rhames as an affable bouncer. Writer-director Andrew Bergman (The Freshman, Honeymoon in Vegas) palpably struggles to make it the romp it was surely intended to be. He defended the effort in 2019, while also explaining the struggle. 'Is Demi the funniest person in the world? No. Would the movie have been made without her? Probably not. No other major star was willing to take her clothes off, and I was not going to do a TNT version of Striptease with people running around in swimsuits.' Bergman's direction is hopelessly adrift, though. The story lumbers. At one point the film cross-cuts, nonsensically, between Moore on a yacht and a co-star stripping in the Eager Beaver, with the same music track (Eurythmics' Sweet Dreams) playing in both venues. This feels like the editor's solution to get another half-minute of bump and grind in, but it rudely interrupts what's meant to be a dramatic showdown with the Reynolds and Patrick characters: so much for priorities. Moore has charming scenes with her daughter and with Rhames, but otherwise seems in a different film from anyone else. Erin Grant is too icked out – too 'above' stripping, with her take-me-seriously backstory – to feel empowered or uninhibited. This gets in Moore's way, or at least prevents her having any fun. It means there's a going-through-the-motions quality to her routines, right on the edge of robotic, which (mostly male) critics certainly noticed when they bandied the word 'unsexy' around. Politely flirting with a wild side, the character belongs to an era of queasy voyeurism. Also an era of mockery and shaming. Moore had yet another scarlet letter stamped on her head when reviews came out. Shafer was right that her international appeal came to the rescue – up to a point. Contrary to assumptions that it was a giant box-office bomb, Striptease grossed a decent-enough $113.3m worldwide. But only $33m of that was in the USA, which counted as a telling defeat on home turf. It was clear that Moore had lost her bread-and-butter appeal at American multiplexes, with or without bigger boobs. It was her third underperforming film in a row, and G.I. Jane (1997) would make it four. She all but gave up after that. Moore must have hoped Striptease would be her daring, funny Pretty Woman moment, but the move seemed so calculated and the financial incentive so blatant that she was vilified for crossing a line. She wasn't alone. Women couldn't give physical, unashamedly sexualised performances in the 1990s without the affront coming back to bite them at some point. It happened quickly with Madonna, and eventually with Sharon Stone. The curse straggled on, besetting the likes of Jennifer Lopez in Gigli (2003) and Halle Berry in Catwoman (2004). Even when Lopez made Hustlers (2018), which began with that extraordinary pole-dance routine she mastered at 50, the acclaim only went so far. It was the performance of her career for many other reasons, and should have netted her an Oscar. She wasn't even nominated. What put voters off? Was it Lopez herself? Or was it that pole-dance? For Madison to have won Best Actress this year in such an overtly raunchy role suggests some portion of the above stigma has been, at long last, set aside. Of course, Anora is much more sensitively 'gritty' than Striptease, and less crass – not a studio picture selling sex, but an indie auteur piece critiquing the way it's sold. Even so, it must be hard for Moore not to look over in Madison's direction and rue what a difference a generation makes, in the films being made, and the pathways for respectable acting careers she poignantly missed out on.
