What defines a Christmas movie?

Every year at this time I get into the debate about what defines a Christmas movie.  I have always said that Die Hard is a Christmas movie, but very few people agree with me.  So let's examine this more closely.

First, for a movie to be considered a Christmas movie, it has to take place during the holiday season.  Die Hard takes place on Christmas Eve.  Check.

Second, many Christmas movies include a staple of the holiday season, Santa Claus.  Die Hard doesn't have an appearance by Saint Nick, but many other holiday classics don't either.  Christmas Vacation has no Santa.  White Christmas, no Santa.  A Christmas Carol, also no Santa.  And those three movies are three of the most popular holiday movies of all time.  So, the inclusion of Santa is not necessary to be considered a Christmas movie.  Therefore, Die Hard is still in the running.

Third, there needs to be classic holiday music of some sort.  Die Hard includes the Christmas classic, "Christmas in Hollis" by Run DMC.  Plus the movie ends with a rendition of "Let it Snow".  Another check for Die Hard as a holiday classic.

Next, most holiday movies teach some sort of lesson or moral or give advice of some sort.  A Christmas Carol teaches to not be so greedy and Scrooge-like.  It's a Wonderful Life shows the importance of each person in the larger world.  Home Alone stresses the importance of family.  Now I know what you're thinking: what lesson could Die Hard possibly teach?  Well first, Die Hard gives the excellent advice that making fists with your toes helps relieve apprehension about flying.  That's good to know.  Second, it shows that being the right guy in the right place at the wrong time can lead to heroism.  Or maybe it's the wrong place at the right time.  Or wrong place at the wrong time.  Oh, you get the point.  The bottom line is that there is a valuable lesson to take away from Die Hard.  Another check for inclusion in the holiday canon.

Finally, Christmas movies always have a happy ending.  What happier ending could there be than a terrorist plummeting to his death from a skyscraper, hostages being saved, and a man and his wife rediscovering their love for one another?  And Die Hard wins again.

So, anyone who argues that Die Hard is not in fact a Christmas movie need only look at the evidence.  And with that I say, "Merry Christmas and Yipee Ki Yay!"

Thoughts on Time Travel

I was watching Terminator: Salvation this weekend and it got me thinking about some time travel issues that might arise as a result of Skynet's mission to kill John Connor.  Basically, Skynet has tried to kill John Connor on multiple occasions during various stages of his life.  In the first Terminator, they actually tried to kill his mother, Sarah, to prevent him from being born.  This led to John sending Kyle Reese back in time to protect his mom, which actually resulted in his conception, since Kyle Reese ended up being his father.  Another result of this original time travel venture was the Terminator that was sent back by Skynet.  At the end of the film, Cyberdine Systems ends up with the Terminator arm and microchip, which leads them to develop the technology that would become Skynet.  Therefore, it is imperative that John Connor of the future be allowed to send Kyle Reese to the past forcing Skynet to send the Terminator after it.  If that doesn't happen then Skynet may never exist.  So the attempts to kill John Connor at later times in his life could in fact be destroying Skynet's entire existence.  Unless of course, the sentiment that was introduced in Terminator 3 was to be believed, that you can't change the future, you can only postpone.  By that theory, Skynet would eventually be created and the discovery of the arm and microchip only hastened that creation.

Or you could subscribe to the Back to the Future theory of alternate futures.  If you remember from Back to the Future II, old Biff went back to the past to give young Biff the Sports Almanac causing an alternate future to be created in which Biff is rich and murders George McFly.  In this alternate future old Biff would not have traveled back to 1955 to give young Biff the almanac creating the question of how this future could ever exist if that event never happens.  The same could be said about Connor sending Reese to the past leading to Skynet's creation.  If Connor is killed before this happens, how does Skynet get created?  But if an alternate future is created with Connor's death after Reese has been sent to the past, then that has already happened.  It's enough to make your head spin.

If you're still confused after reading this, I apologize, but I'm convinced that there is no clear way to explain this.  If anybody else has thoughts, please share.  Until then, be wary of time travel, for you may end up in an alternate future.