Subscribe via RSS Feed

WHAT ELSE DID DIE HARD 4 LIE ABOUT?

[ 15 ] October 21, 2012 |

Everything you wanted to know about flying the F-35B:

Share with Sociable

Comments (15)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

    • BigHank53 says:

      I’m pretty sure that those missile warheads don’t contain a tenth of the explosive you’d need to knock down an overpass. Reinforced concrete is tough–there’s a reason they make bunkers out of the stuff.

      • Major Kong says:

        I didn’t see the movie, but air to air missiles have a 25 – 50 pound warhead, designed for fragmentation. Wouldn’t do much to a bridge except strip some paint off it.

  1. Nemo_N says:

    Why did Die Hard 4 felt so “small” compared to the others? I want to blame the CGI/Green Screen thing but I’m not sure that’s it.

    • Some Guy says:

      No, that sounds reasonable.

    • BigHank53 says:

      Can you remember who the villain was? I can’t. Consulting Wikipedia tells me Timothy Olyphant played some kind of diabolical super-hacker bent on stealing everyone’s data. For a tenth the effort he could have opened an investment bank and earned a few billion dollars.

      Boring villain = boring movie.

  2. wengler says:

    Pfff. Like an English guy is going to try to do cool shit in a F-35.

  3. UberMitch says:

    I appreciate the subtitles; that guy was speaking American with a weird accent that made him hard to understand.

  4. allium says:

    Yeah, well jumbo jets weren’t intended to crash, and yet they tried this as a test.

    Forever’s a long time, buddy!

  5. Jason says:

    So you can add “True Lies” and “Avengers” to the list of liars, then…

  6. asdf says:

    At this very moment posters on The National Review The Corner are saying Obama is a traitor because he didn’t send fighter jets to Benghazi to rescue Ambassador Stevens.
    http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/331125/first-aid-living-bing-west

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.