Question: Can someone please explain the scene where McClane and Hans are alone near the roof. Hans says his name is "Bill Clay" and the camera zooms in on a board with the name Clay on it. What is the significance of this? Does this give Hans away? And if so how?
Answer: John already knew what Hans looked like. He saw him through the vent on the top of the elevator (after sending Karl's brother down wearing the sweater) - He also saw Hans shoot Takagi (which is why he says "Just like you did with Takagi" after Hans says he's gonna count to three).
He never sees Hans' face in either scene. In fact, once the scene where they meet on the roof was added (midway through filming, once the director realised Alan Rickman could do a passable American accent), the scene where Hans shoots Takagi was reedited in such a way as to be clear that McClane never gets a good look at Hans' face, only hears his voice.
Question: It is quite obvious that both Hans and Karl are Germans. So how is this possible that, when Hans ordered Karl to shoot the glass (Schieß dem Fenster) in German, Karl didn't understand it? He complied with this order only after Hans repeated it in English.
Answer: Karl understood what Hans was saying in German. He hesitated because he was puzzled by the request, probably unaware, unlike Hans, that John would have to run through shattered glass while barefooted. Hans repeating it in English is merely a plot device so that the audience understands what he's saying without subtitles being used and it emphasizes Hans' urgency.
My interpretation is that when Hans said it in German, he said it too quietly for Karl to hear. When Hans repeated his command in English, he said it louder.
Question: Were the terrorists intending to blow up the entire building, as opposed to just the roof, to fake their deaths? If that's the case, then how can they continue with the plan to fake their deaths if McClane already took some of the explosives on the lower floor?
Answer: They were planning to blow up just the roof, with the hostages on it, while they (Hans and crew) were safely below, to make law enforcement, the FBI, etc. think they'd been killed along with everyone else in the roof explosion. The plan was to then escape with the loot in the ambulance that Theo was driving and flee the country before anyone could discover their bodies were not among the scores of others. The former element was foiled by McClane's intervention on the roof, leading Hans to activate the explosives prematurely, while the latter was stopped by Argyle when he t-boned the ambulance and punched Theo unconscious in the parking garage.
But what would cause the authorities to think that the terrorists would be on the roof when it blew up? They could have been on the bottom floor for all they knew. I remember the movie quite well, but may have missed a line that clarifies to the authorities that they were going to be on or close to the roof.
As Hans says: "When they touch down, we’ll blow the roof. They’ll spend a month sifting through rubble, and by the time they figure out what went wrong, we’ll be sitting on a beach, earning twenty percent." I don't think Hans was expecting the authorities to assume they were all dead forever, just cause enough carnage and confusion that they can escape. The FBI might think they were dead, or if nothing else not know where they went. The bodies McClane had left behind might even help muddy the waters. They could then escape to a non-extradition country and live in peace, no matter if anyone figured out they were alive or not.
Shortly after he kills Ellis, Hans radios Deputy Chief of police Dwayne T. Robison. He tells him to get his "comrades" released. He lists off several actual terrorists, then tells Dwayne that after those people are released, the hostages will be taken to the roof and accompany them by helicopter to the airport. Later, Agent Johnson of the FBI tells Hans that his demands have been met and that helicopters are en route as requested. That's why the Feds think the bad guys will be on the roof.
Question: When Hans is interrogating Takagi, why would he remove a silencer to fire the weapon indoors without hearing protection? Wouldn't it be more menacing to put a silencer on in that situation?
Answer: I think he's just subtly showing Takagi that he's in control of the situation - there's no need to hide behind a silencer, which they were using earlier. They've taken over and can do whatever they want, including loudly executing people. It's a very subtle power-play.
Answer: They used guns with silencers to access the building and take control swiftly and quietly. Now that they no longer need to do that he takes off the silencer. A silencer affects the gun's accuracy. It is also highly likely he wanted the people in the other room to hear the shot.
Corrected entry: When Bruce Willis throws the C4 (stuck with a chair and a computer screen) down the elevator shaft, the C4 explodes. C4 is very manageable and won't explode through physical force; even a bullet won't make it detonate. You'd need the blaster caps or some other explosion to set the C4 off. For more info on C4, read this: http://science.howstuffworks.com/c-42.htm.
Correction: My understanding of the scene was the monitor was there to ad weight to the chair and keep the C4 in place. The detonators set off the C4, not the computer monitor.
The detonators won't randomly set off the C4. That's not how detonators work. The mistake is accurate.
Not "randomly". CRT screens / capacitors famously store a dangerous level of electricity for a long time after being turned off, and smashing the screen / damaging them will be enough to discharge it, which would in turn trigger the detonators and thus detonate the C4.
Question: Can someone explain what the one Johnson agent meant to the other one when he said "it's like Saigon, ain't it slick?"
Answer: I don't remember the exact quote, verbatim, but using your wording, the proper punctuation would be "It's like Saigon! Ain't it, Slick?" The older Johnson is referring to Army Helo Ops in Vietnam. He's calling the younger Johnson "Slick", as a nickname. I believe the younger's response was something like "I was just a kid then" or something similar.
The younger one says "I was in junior high, dickhead". :-) Clearly not holding the older Johnson in especially high regard, or keen to make it clear he's not as old.
Answer: The elder Agent Johnson is a Viet Nam vet who excitedly says, "It's just like f***in' Saigon, eh Slick? The younger Johnson mockingly responds, "I was in Junior High, dickhead!" meaning he was too young to have served in that war. The older Johnson is comparing shooting at the terrorists (or just John McClane) atop the Nakatomi Tower to killing enemy soldiers from a helicopter in Nam. He is macho, has lost objectivity about the hostage situation, and is treating it like an arcade game. As pointed out in another answer, "Slick" is just a nickname, like calling someone "Dude."
Answer: "Like Saigon" could mean that under the circumstances, they were not likely to win or be successful in what they were trying to accomplish. Largely in the 1960s, the U.S. military was stationed in Saigon. While there, parts of the city were ruined or demolished by fighting. There was a lot of destruction in the Die Hard movie, and the situation seemed dire.
Question: What's with the scene where the cops drive towards the Nakotami building, but then turn around? Didn't Hans order 911 to be called so the FBI could be called out?
Answer: It was all about timing. Hans' plan did require having the police and the F.B.I. involved eventually, but John McClane set off the fire alarm before Hans was ready for the authorities to intervene. That was why Hans then ordered Eddy, the terrorist impersonating the security guard at the front desk, to call 911 and cancel the alarm.
It was just the Fire Department that responded.
Question: At the start of the movie we see McClane arriving on the plane and he has his gun on him, would a detective really be allowed to carry his gun on board a plane?
Chosen answer: Yes, at the time this film was made; McClane would only need to have his badge and credentials verified by airport security.
I'm not sure how this works now but even as recently as 10 years ago, many departments required off-duty carry, except in certain situations. Now I know it's optional for many.
Corrected entry: It seems to me that alerting the enemy to his presence with the "ho ho ho" stunt was a pretty stupid thing to do and not what a trained officer would do. Without this, the terrorists may have believed that the new fire alarm system had malfunctioned but this made it clear that he was there.
Correction: Even if they did think that initially, when the terrorist didn't return, suspicions would have been raised.
But it would've given John more time to plan what to do next. Or give him time to address the situation.
Factual error: A few of Gruber's henchmen set up the rocket-launcher to blast the armored police vehicle. As one of them swings the legs of the launcher down, another uses a 'Hilti' gun to anchor the leg in place. A 'Hilti' gun is a construction device that uses gunpowder (usually a .22 shot) to 'blast' a nail into very hard material such as concrete. With the model they're using, the nail has to be manually loaded into the front of the gun for each shot before it can be used, however the guy using the gun never loads a nail into the gun. As it is, the result would be worthless.
Suggested correction: Hilti sells powder actuated fastening guns with collated fasteners and gunpowder shots lined up. Usually one can fire 10 rounds in a magazine. The gang would have probably selected such a model for this feature.
But that specific collated gun was not the one they were using.
Correct, but the pin could have already been in the Hilti gun, no? Any idea what model?
Question: Why would an exploding helicopter take so long to slide down the side of the building? Enough time for McClane to get down to the party area?
Answer: This is a movie, not reality. The doomed helicopter's descent was deliberately slowed down on film for a visually dramatic effect. It is also timed so it coordinates with McClane's movement and better serves the plot's pacing. It is also not necessarily linear, timewise, cutting back and forth at different points to show what is happening.
Sorry not adequate explanation. Hundreds of action movies are made regularly the world over they don't make these sorts of errors. Insufficient explanation.
Corrected entry: McClane uses the festive holiday tape that was used to wrap gifts to tape his pistol to his upper back before the big finale. Considering how much blood, grime and sweat McClane had on him, that tape would never have stuck to his skin, especially considering that it is only wrapping tape, not some kind of industrial tape like duct tape or anything stronger.
Correction: It would take no time at all to wipe off his back where he's taping the gun.
Correction: I'd add that the position of the gun on his back would be very awkward for a person to place there themselves. It's almost in the middle slightly below the shoulderblades...an almost impossible place to reach unless you're double jointed. And he is NOT Martin Riggs or Riddick.
Almost impossible, in your opinion, doesn't count as a mistake. Being double jointed wouldn't make a difference. Also, neither Martin Riggs or Riddick are double jointed, they can dislocate their shoulders.
Corrected entry: When McClane confronts Hans and Eddie in the vault, he shoots Hans and Eddie in quick succession with his 9mm handgun. One problem, a 9mm round wouldn't go straight through someone even at close range, so where did the bullet hole in the window behind Hans appear from?
Correction: This is opinion, not fact, and is highly disputable. If a 9mm round did not hit bone it could easily penetrate a human body. Since the bullet was taken from an assault rifle it could be an armour piercing round, for instance, in which case Han's body wouldn't even slow it down. There are dozens of explanations - only one of then is needed.
The bullets were taken from a Heckler and Koch MP5 sub machine gun, not an assault rifle. And the rounds are plain old 9mm Parabellum ball rounds anyway. A 9mm round will rarely over-penetrate the body even at close range.
Saying a 9mm round would "rarely" over-penetrate is incorrect. 9mm rounds frequently over-penetrate. Self-defense rounds from companies like Hornady are designed specifically to prevent this, as a standard 9mm round is very likely to go through walls, people, and objects. A standard full metal jacket round will very likely not be stopped in the body unless it hits bone.
An MP5 has a longer barrel. That means higher bullet velocity = higher penetration.
Question: While running away from the bad guys, John McClane severely wounds feet by stepping on broken glass. Wouldn't his feet be at risk of infections if they were as severely wounded as shown in the movie? He's feet don't appear to have any infections.
Answer: Infections take time to set in. The whole events of this film take place over 1 evening. Not long enough for an infection to set in. Especially since he receives medical attention at the end.
How long would John have to go without getting medical for his feet to get infected?
Per a google search: "An infection can develop any time between two or three days after the cut occurred until it's healed."
Answer: Infections take a while to develop - the events of Die Hard are borderline real time, and given the injuries happen towards the end of the film, that's way too soon for any significant side effects.
Question: John is heard running and moves into a room, and he locks the door. After Karl and the other bad guys run, they see the door is locked. The logical conclusion is that the guy they heard running locked the door, so why not shoot the door open?
Answer: Karl might have done that, but Hans calls them off before he can. In any event, it would be easy enough to rationalize that the door was simply locked...plenty of people lock their offices when they leave.
The movie only showed the 1 way to get in that room is with an elevator, and since John wouldn't be able to use the elevator before they ran in it's a huge oversight that none of them shoot the door.
Stupidity: Hans keeps a major part of his plan secret from his own team: that the electromagnetic lock will be disabled if the FBI shuts down power to the building. The mercenaries hired as muscle don't need to know the minutiae of the plan, but it seems ludicrous that Theo wasn't told. Theo states on more than one occasion that he can't proceed past a certain point and that he hopes Hans has a plan for the final lock. Evidently, Hans was keeping this information secret simply to amuse himself, which makes little sense considering how much planning went into the heist.
Suggested correction: Or because he simply doesn't trust anyone with that kind of knowledge. He neither trusts them or cares about them, it's all him.
So he trusts that Theo would be on board with all the murder and mayhem, open all the other locks, be in a tactical lookout position when the police try to breach, and drive the getaway vehicle. But he doesn't trust Theo enough to tell him the last lock will open when the power goes out?
It's not about trust; Hans needs Theo to do what he is there for and that is all you mention up to the final lock. He has a plan for the final lock and so there's no need to discuss it with the team, since it won't be any of them responsible.
The more people that know the plan the more chances of someone talking. Especially when they are hired mercenaries.
Theo was already on board with taking hostages and committing murder. Him knowing that the power needed to be shut off to open the last lock doesn't appear to be particularly important information you would need to keep from someone to keep them from talking.
If he's the only one that knows the final step to get the money, then at least up until that moment he is absolutely indispensable to the plan and ensures no-one would double-cross him. In any case I'm not sure being more cautious than necessary really qualifies as "stupidity."
Question: They say the wires for the electromagnetic seal "can't be cut locally" - how is that possible? I mean at some point the electricity for them has to come into the building, surely?
Chosen answer: I took this to mean that cutting the lines themselves wouldn't open the safe. The safe is designed such that the physical locks could be destroyed but the electromagnetic lock wouldn't open unless the power to the entire building was shut off.
But my point is they've got control of the building, including the basement/anywhere else. General power has to enter the building from the street somewhere, and I don't see how they wouldn't be able to just cut through a main power cable and achieve exactly the same result as a switch being flipped by a city engineer.
The city engineer shuts down an entire city grid. I think that has something to do with it. It's not as simple as cutting a power line or flipping a switch.
I get that's the argument, I just don't see how. Because eventually it has to come down to the building being connected to the city grid via...something, and I don't see why the bad guys couldn't just interfere with that "something" themselves. There's either a technical reason or it's a plot hole, but I'm not really bothered about the mistake aspect, it's more just a query my brain can't let go of and I want the answer. :-).
Answer: There's no mention as to where the cables actually enter the building. They could come in via the basement, there could be a separate utility room that can only be accessed from outside or the cables could simply be inside a wall somewhere. They'd probably need to find the building blueprints to find out where the cables come into the building.
Question: The armoured vehicle that gets sent in when the SWAT team are struggling to get in, before they're even attacked...what's that meant to actually achieve? If it's just meant to smash the doors, the men with guns could do that. And if not...will it just sit there?
Answer: I believe it is supposed to be that it was a precautionary measure and probably standard operating procedure to have it on site when dealing with a terrorist situation. To have it at the ready for if they needed it. Not only this, but a large armored vehicle like that could serve as physiological warfare to make the terrorist more fearful merely by it just being there. A show of strength. As for using it on the door, yes, guys with guns can smash those doors. But guys with guns are still targets to be shot at especially though glass doors. The armored vehicle can smash through it and get the men inside without exposing them to small arms fire.
But why send the armoured car into the lobby before being attacked? And why send it in in the first place? Once it's in the lobby it becomes a sitting duck. Easy pickings for when the occupants decide to disembark.
In some cases, maybe. But the vehicle itself still provides cover for the men in it. They usually would exit from the back or the top, and have that as something to hide against or shoot from. Also, most armored SWAT vehicles like that usually have a very high powered water cannon on the top that has the pressure of a fire truck. This can quickly subdue any hostile forces and knock their defenses down, giving the SWAT ample time to make their move while the enemy is still recovering. Not only this, but the vehicle can have inside more equipment the SWAT members can use, like throwing out smoke and flash bang grenades, or have riot shields as the exit. But this at least gets them inside and up where they can do good. If they tried to walk up to the door without cover, they would be easy pickings from small arms fire and snipers.
Good answer. I would add that presumably, the SWAT vehicle could be put in reverse, and once the front entrance was breached, it would back up. Also, this being a movie, it's shown that the overall police and F.B.I. response is supposed to be somewhat bungled, with different egotistical characters vying for control. Plot wise, it shows how well armed the "terrorists" are supposed to be by blowing up the SWAT vehicle with a missile, and how they anticipate and outsmart the police's every move. This is not reality.
Corrected entry: When Hans, Theo, Karl and Takagi come to Takagi's office, Hans quotes that when 'Alexander the Great saw the size of his realm, he wept, for there was nothing left to conquer.' Actually, he did weep because he couldn't conquer more - but not because there was nothing left, instead because his men refused to go any further (they were homesick); and reluctantly, Alexander had to turn back.
Correction: Hans is quoting Plutarch. Whether the quote is actually true doesn't matter - this is not a movie mistake.
We would not judge here as a movie mistake the words of an ancient historian, obviously. Thing is, Gruber is saying something that is NOT what Plutarch said at all. Plutarch's passage had Alexander say: "Is it not worthy of tears that, when the number of worlds is infinite, we have not yet become lords of a single one?" The story as quoted by Gruber (not that he ever said it was Plutarch, mind you, how could he when Plutarch's story has the exact opposite wording?) is entirely made up, and therefore would qualify as a character mistake. It's like the "Helsinki syndrome": something this movie got wrong but that generated a misconception that still survives decades later.
Corrected entry: Towards the beginning of the movie, Bruce Willis notifies the cop outside that there are 12 terrorists. However, if you tally the numbers as he takes out each one, you wind up with 13.
Correction: When does he say 12? He says "unknown number of terrorists...at least 6." Later he says " They're down to nine now, counting the skydiver you meet."
Correction: John only sees twelve of the terrorists. The 13th is the Computer Expert, Theo.
As a point of fact, John sees Theo in the scene where Takagi is killed. Karl and Theo are both in the room during that scene.
Answer: No, this doesn't give Hans away - the zoom represents McClane checking the board out - getting proof that there is indeed a person in the building with that name (listed as W. Clay, for William). Hans has obviously done his homework, but McClane doesn't trust him anyway, hence the trick with the empty gun.
Tailkinker ★
Actually, it said "Wm. Clay", which is for William. W. Clay could have been for Wanda or Walter or Wesley or Waldo, etc.
posty
It's most likely "WM" for William Mark Clay or similar - no reason William would have an extra letter tacked on but others wouldn't.
Wm is commonly the initials for "William", as opposed to W for "Will." On the board, it shows WM simply because they don't have/use any lower-case letters; they're all block letters.
Bishop73