There's an episode of "The Movies that Made Us" which covers Die Hard. More of a deep dive than this promotional video, for anyone interested.

Your video, The Making Of Die Hard (1988), has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Timestamps and films

0:00 28 Days Later
0:35 The Matrix
0:50 The Terminator
1:04 T2
1:09 Predator
1:12 Die Hard
1:25 Face Off
1:30 Predator
1:45 Die Hard
1:55 Rambo (not sure which one)
2:08 Die Hard
2:18 The Professional
2:35 Captain America: The Winter Soldier
3:22 Star Wars The Phantom Menace
3:28 Star Wars A New Hope
3:37 Star Wars The Empire Strikes Back
3:43 Die Hard
3:44 Platoon
3:46 Invasion of the Body Snatchers
3:56 Aliens
4:10 Highlander
4:44 The Right Stuff
5:14 Minority Report
5:19 Disclosure
5:38 2001 A Space Odyssey
5:56 Blade Runner
6:15 Patton
6:29 A Few Good Men
6:43 The Breakfast Club
7:06 Rain Man
7:20 Ghost
7:42 An Officer and a Gentleman
7:55 My Dinner with Andre
8:14 Sixteen Candles
8:18 Lost in Translation
8:23 Star Wars The Empire Strikes Back
8:35 Good Will Hunting
8:58 An American Tale
9:08 The Shinning
9:20 LOTR: The Two Towers
9:43 MTV- The Real World: Seattle
10:04 House Party
10:09 The Color of Money
10:14 Pulp Fiction
10:22 The Breakfast Club
10:26 Zardoz
10:29 Blazzing Saddles
10:32 MIB
10:34 Hook
10:36 The Beastmaster
10:41 Wallstreet
10:44 The Shawshank Redemption
10:51 The Fugitive
10:55 Pulp Fiction
11:10 The Ring
11:12 Vertigo
11:14 National Lampoon’s Vacation
11:35 Animal House
12:31 Good Will Hunting
12:44 Dead Poets Society

No LOL from EP1. But it wasn't a bad thing to me because I feel the constant panning of all things Star Trek ever since the reboot movie from the die-hard fanbase is making the ST franchise extremely depressing. So it's high time to try to inject something fun into the ST universe.... even if it's just OK comedy. At least I don't have to take ST seriously all the time.

Good for him! I fully endorse trying to prove things for yourself... using your own money and life. I await the development of this story, but don't see how this upcoming flight is gonna change the minds of die-hard flat-earthers. Just a second baby step, I guess.

WTF does Hillary have to do with any of this?

Let's be very clear here. No-one is talking about banning guns (and if anyone is, they can fuck right off). Guns are useful tools. I've been target shooting a few times, I have friends who hunt. I wouldn't see their guns taken from them because they are sensible people who use guns in a reasonable way.

What we are talking about is a reasonable level of control, like background checks, restrictions on certain types of weapons, etc.

BTW, you might want to actually read the 2nd amendment.
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed"

None of these people are in a well-regulated militia, and in 2017 "a well regulated militia" is not necessary to the security of the state, that's what a standing army and a police force are for.

Your seatbelt analogy also makes no sense at all. If I drive around without a seatbelt and crash, the only one hurt is me (I'm still a fucking inconsiderate asshole if I do that, but that's another story). Guns are all about hurting other people, so it makes sense to regulate them.


Fundamentally, the USA needs to grow the fuck up and stop believing "Die Hard" is a documentary.

You are not Roy Rogers.
You do not need a gun for "home defence".
You are more likely to be killed by a criminal if you have a gun than if you don't.
And the most powerful weapon you have against a fascist dictatorship is not firearms, but the ballot box.

The irony is that while your democracy is increasingly slipping away from you (gerrymandering, super PACs, voter suppression), you have a corporate-funded lobby group protecting your firearms.

In terms of the UK, your average house price was under £10 000 in the 70s. If wages had increased at the same rate as house prices have increased, which is not an unreasonable request, especially if you're mocking them for not having the money, then the average wage would be £87 000. Alternatively, if house prices had increased at the same rate as wages have, the average house would be worth around £60 000. It's no good talking about people buying iPhones when that disparity exists - if anything, the iPhones help distract them from their poverty.

It's been rigged for 40 years now, bob. Who do you think a landlord/renter economy benefits more - the young or the old? You are blind to the reality of life for people just starting out.

Sooner or later, civilisation is going to have to change to account for this. You can call me a lefty all you like, but the numbers don't lie - this isn't sustainable, the cost of living does not match full time pay for a huge number of people, including necessary and skilled jobs like nurses and teachers (in the UK).

It's no longer about aspiration, or working harder at school. Average people are struggling and that should be a concern to you if you care about society at all. In fact, if you're a die-hard, card carrying, flag waving capitalist it should worry you. Landlords aren't wealth creators.

If "Die Hard" is a Christmas movie, then so is "1984" and "Tootsie". If you get to the point of referencing a movie by holiday season just because that's when you first saw it, well, get ready to call "The Adventures of Priscilla, Queen of the Desert" a Summer Action Flick.

Man, I'm suuuper late to this party....
Anyways, Die Hard is and is not a Christmas movie at the same time. And it depends on your definition what makes a Christmas movie.
I'm gonna take an insane detour here that'll make sense.
Is Star Wars Episode 4 a science fiction movie?
That setting is futuristic, sure, must be sci-fi then. Lasers, Spaceships, Robots, the works. The checklist is done. Sci-Fi.
But what are the themes it touches upon, what is the story?
A young farmer's boy (naturally an adoptred orphan) named Luke is dragged into a rebellion against an evil king (Palpatine) by accident. When the boy get's hold of a pretty princess' (RIP Carrie Fisher) message to an old ally and menthor (Obi) through the fault of her two comic-relief servants (Robot-slaves), he decides to seek the adventure he's yearning for. He finds the old man (by fucking up) and both seek the next harbor to board a ship to join the resistance. The hire smuggler/pirate/bandit/nerfherder Han and his foreign friend Chewie and cross paths with the black knight Lord Vader, the evil kings enforcer. Hijinks ensue, princess rescued, the magic castle/ship/train of the evil king get's destroyed and everyone gets a medal.
What's exactly sci-fi here?
That could play out in medieval times. Or ancient greece. Or the wild west. Or on Christmas.
The setting and the genre are two different things and both determine what you'll label a story with.
Alien is a horror movie, a slasher. Aliens is a war movie. Alien³ is a horror movie of the animal-gone-maneater kind. Alien: Resurrection is a disaster movie (hihi).
They're all sci-fi, like Star Wars. Because of the setting.
Now look at Star Trek: The Next Generation Season 2 Episode 9 'The Measure Of A Man'.
Lasers, spaceships, robots, the usual. What is it about?
A Robot who's so sophisticated that he has to go to trial to prove he's not property but a real boy. Sure, you'll say, I've seen Pinocchio and I can see african men argue the same stuff in the 18th century. The point of the story is not only that is humanity is questioned, the point is he's an artificial lifeform. The question is not only 'What makes you a person?' but also 'When does artificial intelligence become an artificial person?'
That shit won't work in a setting without spaceships and robots. That's sci-fi because of its story.
So, setting and story are both what makes you label a movie a certain way but they're not the same.
Die Hard. Happens on Christmas. Could be Thanksgiving too. Setting interchangeable.
Story? Doesn't contain any christmas-related themes beyond two estranged family members become closer again. That could happen at a funeral as well.
I'm in my mid-thirties and I love Die Hard. It's one of the best 80's action movies. I can watch it anytime and I've seen it at least 20 times (noit joking here). But mostly in the summer. But I understand the question and its diverse answers perfectly well.
Die Hard is a christmas movie if it feels like one to you. For me, Lord of the Rings (especially Fellowship) feels like a Christmas movie to me. I've seen them all in theatres in December, I watched them on VHS and Blu-Ray only in December so far. They have fuck all to do with the occasion but this year was the first one I didn't watch any of them in December. And I feel I missed something this year. I'm not sure I can watch them at this time of the year.

http://www.gameinformer.com/b/features/archive/2016/12/23/replay-holiday-special-2016.aspx has three Die Hard games.

The Onion Looks Back At 'Die Hard'

If it's a Wonderful Life is a Christmas movie (because aside from the last scene that everyone remembers, it pretty much has nothing to do with Christmas), then Die Hard is definitely a Christmas movie.

Interesting question.

My personal take is that I wouldn't call it a "Christmas movie" because the Christmas elements aren't particularly integral to the story, but it is borderline.

Elf and Ernest Saves Christmas are Christmas movies. Home Alone and Die Hard are harder to call, but I'd say yes for Home Alone and no for Die hard.

Yes.

Just because a movie happens on Christmas, doesn't automatically make it a Christmas movie. For example, I don't consider Home Alone a Christmas movie (or at least as much), but I do Die Hard, though I don't know if I could say why.