Olympus Has Fallen

The movie just came out and it now has a trope page dedicated to it. For those who don't know it's another "Die Hard" on an X, in the White House. And instead of German thieves its North Korean terrorists. It's got a solid cast, with Aaron Eckhart, Morgan Freeman and Gerard Butler. And the technical were pretty well done as well.

That being said, I think the movie is riddled with so many Plot Holes and implausibility that it stretched my Willing Suspension of Disbelief far past the breaking point. I'll get into specifics in a little bit. Your thoughts?

edited 4th Apr '13 11:03:41 AM by Lawyerdude

It looks okay to me. Plus it has Gerald "Leonidas" Butler in it so...

I might just catch this one on dvd.

Don't bother. The plot holes and plot-incuded stupidity moments are so frequent in this film that it becomes difficult to watch and not scream at the big screen near the end, ESPECIALLY if you know how the abort system and warhead in a nuclear missile works in reality. It's as if the whole United States military, plus Secret Service are utterly inept, except for the hero.

Also, despite the plot stating that the Norks don't have an actual hand in the events unfolding at the White House, it's pretty obvious they do. In particular, why is it that the deepcover Nork agents happened to strike at such an opportune moment, when the DPRK army was already rallying for a potential invasion? Granted, they might've been the ones who decided to execute the plan due to the political climate being appropriate, but the whole plan hinges on the DPRK taking the bait and invading once the US military abandons Seoul and the rest of South Korea.

But then again, I'm trying to pick apart the crappy logic behind this movie and the dumb decisions of the remaining US leadership, so perhaps it's for the better that I forget about it.

One of the worst and most insulting moments was where the terrorist leader gets the code from the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs. The man had decades of service to his country and swore to defend it against all enemies foreign and domestic, but he caves like a little pansy. Naturally the female, civilian Secretary of Defense holds out longer than he does and she lives.

Also there's the fact that the entire plot hinges on the President allowing the PM of South Korea and his top staff into the super-secure Presidential bunker. I know that they had a mole on the inside, and the President said that they should come in, but there's no way that the bad guys could possibly have controlled that. And I'm pretty sure that the Secret Service has some leeway to ignore the President's orders in order to protect his life.

Let's see... Oh, there's also The Mole. And what was the motivation for a Secret Service agent to betray his President? He gives some stupid anti-corporate rant? Or were they paying him, in which case where would he spend his money once the country got blown up? Of course, he apologizes just before he dies, so really did he have any discernible reason whatsoever?

And of course there's the Cerberus system, probably the worst nuclear failsafe ever conceived. Yes it's a good idea to have a failsafe to abort or self-destruct an accidental or rogue launch. There's no reason why that code would require the POTUS, SECDEF, and CJCS to agree to it. And there's no sane reason that the same code could be used to simultaneously detonate all ground-based nuclear missiles in the silos. And there's no sane reason why the launch sites couldn't override abort launches themselves. And there's no reason why Cerberus would have a cancellation code when Cerberus is supposed to be the cancellation code. And a SELF DESTRUCT IS NOT A DETONATION!

And one more thing. Even if the Cerberus system would just disable all of the US's nuclear weapons, so what? The US would still have enough conventional weapons to utterly obliterate an army invading South Korea.

edited 8th Apr '13 11:51:55 AM by Lawyerdude

I watched it with my mom. It was okay.

I keep mixing this movie up with the other one about the whitehouse getting overrun by terrorists. Which one has King Leonidas in it again?

Olympus Has Fallen: Gerard Butler / Leonidas as the hero. And Aaron Eckhart as the President.

White House Down: Channing Tatum as the hero and Jamie Foxx as the president.

edited 10th Apr '13 9:15:36 PM by JRPictures

Don't forget that Olympus also has Morgan Freeman. So we know which one is better.

Saw it a week ago with my cousin. We both thought it was alright, mainly because we both realized that the movie was Die Hard in the White House.

edited 10th Apr '13 10:22:24 PM by Watchtower

Seeing as we already had Die Hard on Air Force One, this film seems redundant. Especially as Air Force One is a brilliant movie.

edited 11th Apr '13 4:35:51 AM by Achaemenid

I'm surprised that nobody made Die Hard in the White House before now. Probably because the idea seemed too far-fetched, as this movie proved. Or maybe they ran out of places to set another Die Hard knockoff.

How about Die Hard on a Die Hard movie set?

So very Meta.

I actually liked this movie a lot. But, I mean, I went to see Die Hard in the White House, so I wasn't displeased at it being Die Hard in the White House. Really, my expectations weren't particularly high to begin with, so it was actually better than I anticipated. And I didn't know Morgan Freeman was going to be in it, so that was just a wonderful surprise; he's awesome in everything. I also liked the Secretary of Defense lady, and the main character agent guy.

DIEHARDCEPTION.

Die Hard meets Inception actually could be pretty cool.

edited 29th Apr '13 4:57:35 PM by Tuckerscreator

When I saw that there was ANOTHER movie like this, coming out right after it...

HEADDESK!!!

and the Nork as baddie was just done with Red Dawn remake too.

For some reason, my dad REALLY wanted to see this.

What, you mean to tell me that they're actually planning on making a sequel to this crap?!

Not a sequel. White House Down is pretty much the same thing, but made by Roland Emmerich, because he hasn't destroyed the White House enough yet.

Why can't they do something like a terrorist plot to take over the Queen of England's residence, or the Houses of Parliament? Or make a comedy about the capitol building of some largely unknown country (say, Estonia) being taken over by Islamic extremists, with the ridiculous condition that the US withdraw their forces from the middle east, or else they'll kill a hostage... and the US, having little to no connection with that country, not giving two shits?

Like Die Hard in Windsor Castle? That would be pretty good. The thing about that is that the palace is heavily fortified and guarded by elite badasses. It's why the White House or Air Force One are less than believable.

Civilian targets make for a more realistic plot. Office building, a train, Alcatraz, a cruise ship.

edited 10th May '13 10:17:39 AM by Lawyerdude

Die Hard meets The Office.

YES.

I'm pretty sure Dwight believes he's the villain of that.

edited 10th May '13 12:25:01 PM by Tuckerscreator

It sounds less like Ricko is saying "I want a Die Hard in a civilian location like a office" and more like he's saying "I want a Die Hard that has nothing to do with the United States whatsoever". Which would be an interesting way to spice things up, though I wouldn't expect anything like it to come out of Hollywood.

Hmm, now I'm curious if there's any foreign Die Hard-esque films.

edited 10th May '13 12:27:12 PM by Watchtower

The original Die Hard was set in an office. Of course, it really could have been set in any country. There's nothing in that particular movie that wouldn't work just as well in Tokyo, London, Paris or Singapore.

Of course with movies like OHF, the symbolism of the White House, the center of executive power in the US is what we relate to. Do Brits have the same emotional connection with the Palace of Westminster or 10 Downing Street?

The premise would need changed somewhat. It would strain credulity to think a British cop would be that handy with firearms. Might see some nice truncheon-fu.