It’s tough to maintain a decent movie franchise nowadays. A lot of them over time have shifted their main character into watered down versions of themselves, or lacking the action that once made the franchise notable in the first place. When it comes to A Good Day to Die Hard, the previews may show some gun-toting goodness, but the reviews don’t spout too much love for the new film. There are many fans out there who will ignore the critics and what they have to say about their precious John McClane (Bruce Willis), but if you’re curious we rounded up some of the best and worst reviews out there for the movie so far.

The Good:

EntertainmentTell:

“‘A Good Day’ actually owes more to the “Taken” films than to the “Die Hard” series, as it features a pushing-60 hero traveling to a European capital to rescue one of his children, and subsequently taking on that city’s entire underworld in a series of explosive setpieces. It’s fun, but ultimately inconsequential, and doesn’t feel especially like a “Die Hard” movie.”

Toronto Star:

“The visuals, alas, are a blur of flying bullets, squealing wheels and shattered glass. Moore goes in big for the shaky cam, ADD editing and lens flare that weakly substitute for action in today’s movies. Fortunately, it hardly matters, because the personal dynamics are what really count. Willis and Courtney make a strong match, believable both as fractious family members and also as sarcastic adversaries forced by circumstances to work together.”

The So-So:

Chicago Reader:

“Unnecessary but not unwatchable, this maintains a brisk pace as it moves through the familiar action set pieces, most of them decently orchestrated; it also avoids both the leaden self-seriousness of Sylvester Stallone’sRambo and Rocky reboots and the self-congratulating, would-be camp of his Expendables movies.”

The Bad:

NPR:

“Even McClane’s trademark one-liners are fewer in number, generally clunkers, and often nearly drowned out by things going boom. It’s difficult to tell if the mildly bemused air Willis carries with him through much of the movie is a character choice or just smug satisfaction that he’s actually getting away with getting paid for this.”

Wall Street Journal:

“…All you need to know is that the car chases are visual gibberish, most of the 97-minute running time is devoted to people shooting at one another, the magazines on their assault weapons contain thousands of rounds, Mr. Courtney’s charms range from undetectable to nil and the movie, directed by John Moore, plays on the theme of father-and-son reconciliation with the finesse of a primate taught to play “Chopsticks.”

Chicago Sun Times:

“A quarter-century later, McClane has been stripped of any real traces of an actual three-dimensional character. We feel as if we’re watching Bruce Willis in a Bruce Willis movie in which Bruce Willis can survive anything while taking out the villains, video-game style. “A Good Day to Die Hard” hits the ground shooting, never giving us a chance to get the least bit involved with any of these characters, including McClane’s now-grown son, Jack (Jai Courtney).”

Will you see A Good Day to Die Hard? Why or why not?