Reel Rumbles #27: “Die Hard” vs. “Lethal Weapon”

Nigel Druitt

A self-described fanboy, Nigel has always looked at movies as entertainment first and art second. (Not that a film can't be both.) His personal Flickchart Top 20 is dominated by the likes of Frodo Baggins, Indiana Jones, Marty McFly and Christopher Nolan. Nigel is the Canadian arm of the Flickchart Blog, but try not to hold that against him. You can find him on Flickchart as johnmason, where his chart is currently undergoing a major overhaul.

You may also like...

3 Responses

  1. KingofPain says:

    I’ve seen both of these about a quarter of a million times. Up until the late 90s I even claimed Die Hard was my favorite Christmas movie. Now, though, I can’t stand Die Hard. So many of the characters are so obnoxiously stupid that watching it hurts my head. The news guy is an idiot, the deputy police chief is an idiot, Ellis is an idiot… Way too much of the movie is wasted on McClane arguing with Robinson. It’s a petty and pointless conflict. (And that “cheap horror movie” part is made even worse by the cheesiness of Powell mustering the courage to draw his gun again. Just awful.)

    Now that I think about, I guess I actually do prefer Lethal Weapon. You are right about Rickman being a more colorful villain, but the guys in Lethal Weapon are scary. I never really thought the villains in Die Hard were that threatening, but those Black Ops (or whatever) killers in Lethal Weapon really were sinister and creepy. I seriously would not want them pissed off at me. I’m going with Lethal Weapon on this one.

  2. johnmason says:

    Well, I can’t argue with your choice, because I think they’re both great.

    You do raise a good point about Die Hard: The movie goes out of its way to make every “good guy” EXCEPT McClane and Powell to be total morons…