This being a sequel to a film that most don’t consider a Christmas movie anyway, I’d wager that most people don’t watch Die Hard 2 around the holidays.  But, for the same reasons I explained the original film was primarily holiday based, this one holds true as a Christmas film.  It, too, takes place on Christmas Eve, and the plot indeed revolves around the holiday season.   John McClane is at an airport, waiting for his wife’s flight to arrive, so they can be together with their children for the holiday season.  Unfortunately, a team of terrorists hijack the airport via a local church, in an attempt to rescue a friend, who is being transported to the airport that night.  Many jokes about how this is the second Christmas Eve in a row where John has to deal with trained terrorists ensue, as John attempts to help the airport security, who don’t take the situation as seriously as they should.

Like the first film, this one has all the action and funny dialogue that you would hope for, still containing the great practical effects of the time.  The quips about the situation, however, run a little dry, as he says them many times.  All they manage to do is make you remember the previous film, but aren’t really funny or clever enough to make you laugh.  The other lines given to John, that don’t involve the first movie, are as funny as the ones in the original film, and so is the action.  Like most action sequels, the makers of the film feel that the action has to be ramped up, in order for the film to be memorable when compared to the original.  In this case, the action is a bit more ridiculous than the first, which make the movie feel less real.  The action is fun, but not as realistic as the first.

The plot has been over complicated as well, in an attempt to make the movie as good as the first, in terms of plot.  The over complication makes it harder to follow, and the twist at the end, while not particularly predictable, isn’t as good as the first movie.  The complexities of the plot seem like an attempted compensation for lack of good characters, of which this movie suffers.  The first film had John, the villain, and the partner on the ground to keep us interested.  In this movie, the partner is in it very little, and the villain is boring.  It lacks the substance of the first, and makes it a less memorable or influential film.

Is it still a good movie?  Sure; it still has the fun action and the clever John McClane character, but it’s not the predecessor.  Fun, but without substance.