This is a good thread and shouldn't quietly die.
So Doc, have you seen Die Hard yet?
Sorry it's ridiculously late, but I have now.
I was uncertain about what to expect, quality-wise. It could be a generic and cliche film, or could be a surprisingly good or even great one. Well, at the very least, I can say I enjoyed it. There were moments of genuine suspense that made it worthwhile (like when Willis was in the elevator shafts, or when he was nearly dragged out of a window by the hose) and it's hard to shirk being caught up in the deliriously fast-paced thrills and against-the-clock type tension. John McClane was a surprisingly well-crafted character - he is made human and down-to-Earth at the start, and instead of being an unstoppable force of vaguely sadistic masculinity, he is panicky, febrile and initially out of his depth. But besides McClane, most of the characters are very cliche archetypes and I did find the scenes with the deputy constantly being wrong and the sergeant right overdone and rather annoying. One device that I wasn't expecting was the dramatic irony of the villain pretending to be a guest and going along with McClane. It was frustratingly underdeveloped and cut too short, yet was compelling while it lasted. As for the humour (of which there was an unexpectedly abundant amount), I could be generous and say it was hit-and-miss, although most of it did miss. In fairness, there was a handful of genuinely amusing lines and moments, but in short supply compared to how much comic relief there was.
On the whole, Die Hard is an efficient escapist fantasy, almost like a modernised, explosion-filled Hitchcock, but wholly lacking the wit and ingenuity.