Before beginning the post, I wanted to get something off my chest. Something that was bothering me. It’s nothing scandalous or life-changing, it’s just that I haven’t kept up with my blog as regularly as I would have hoped. I’m writing this article in December 2024. The last post I wrote was in July (which I have not yet published). I have had a lot going on between work, and personal life, developing my screenwriting portfolio, and keeping my head above water. Yet, that entire time, I had this blog in my head. I vowed that I knew I would have to get back to it. Earlier this month, I went back to fine-tune the site to make it more functional, but I knew I would need to keep writing. I have a list of topics and thought I would jump back in. As Christmas is approaching, I decided to start with my favorite Christmas movie, Die Hard.
This should go without saying, but spoiler alert.
Let us dive in. Which came first, the chicken or the egg? If a tree falls in the woods and nobody hears it, does it make a noise? Is Die Hard a Christmas movie? These are some of the oldest questions known to man. Unlike the first two questions, the answer to that last question is a resounding yes, unless you’re Bruce Willis. Opinion seems to be sharply divided. I think for us to come to a definitive answer, we would need to establish a universal definition of a Christmas movie and determine if the film fits that criteria. We’ll get to that in a bit, but right now, I want to talk about the film as a whole and its legacy.
For those of you unfamiliar with the film’s plot, here is a little summary. John McClane (Bruce Willis) is a New York City cop visiting his estranged wife, Holly (Bonnie Bedelia), in LA. She’s taken a job for the Nakatomi Corporation and McClane meets her at the company’s annual Christmas party at Nakatomi Plaza, which is a 35-story building. McClane and Holly’s chances of reconciling seem slim after they have a squabble just minutes after his arrival. During the party, the building is seized by German radical, Hans Gruber (Alan Rickman) and his team of “terrorists.” McClane manages to elude the “terrorists” and pick them off one by one to save his wife and her co-workers. That’s the gist of the film on a micro level. There’s much more nuance, action, and emotional stakes than that overview might have led you to believe.
The production of Die Hard is interesting enough that it could be its movie. The film is loosely based on the Roderick Thorp novel, Nothing Lasts Forever. The novel focuses on retired NYPD detective Joe Leland, who is visiting his daughter on Christmas Eve at her company party in a large tower when it is taken over by terrorists. Joe then must spring into action to save his daughter and her co-workers. Some action sequences like Leland throwing C4 down an elevator shaft and him jumping off the roof made it into the script. Some characters carried over to the film with their personalities relatively intact including Al Powell (who was aged up in the film), Dwayne Robinson, and Harry Ellis. Stephanie Gennaro became Holly Gennaro and went from Leland’s daughter to estranged wife. Anton Gruber became Hans Gruber, and his motivation was altered to depict him simply as a thief, rather than a thief with a political agenda.
This is where the similarities end. Joe Leland was changed to the younger character of John McClane and much of the book’s sad and pessimistic outlook was changed. In the original ending, Stephanie was a drug addict who fell to her death alongside Gruber. The studio gave writer Jeb Stuart free reign with the story as long as it retained the “Christmastime in Los Angeles” element. Stuart drew from his real-life marital problems to come up with the film’s theme of a man who should have apologized to his wife before catastrophe struck. Impressed with what they were reading, Fox executives fast-tracked the film for a summer 1988 release date. John McTiernan, fresh off of Predator, was hired to direct.
Casting McClane was no easy task. One thing I failed to mention before was that the character of Leland first appeared in the 1966 novel, The Detective, making Nothing Lasts Forever, a sequel. Because Frank Sinatra had previously appeared as Leland in the 1968 adaptation of The Detective, producers were legally obligated to offer him the role. Sinatra, aged 70, declined the part, allowing producers to start looking for their perfect John McClane. Allegedly, several high-profile stars turned down the role including Sylvester Stallone, Al Pacino, Harrison Ford, and Mel Gibson (among many others). Having worked with the director on Predator, Arnold Schwarzenegger declined the role, wanting to try his hand at comedy, and opted to film Twins instead. Eventually, the role was offered to a young actor named Bruce Willis, who also turned the film down.
Unlike the others, Willis didn’t turn down the role because he was uninterested. Instead, he was committed to filming the television series Moonlighting. Fate would intervene shortly when Cybill Shepherd announced her pregnancy. Production was paused for twelve weeks, allowing Willis a window for filming. His casting was a controversial one, as he had only appeared in one other film, the romantic comedy, Blind Date, and because there was still a distinction between a “TV actor” and a “movie actor.” Nowadays, especially with the rise of streamers, those lines are blurred. Actors are drawn to the best project no matter the medium. At this time, there was still a stigma. TV actors didn’t always transition well to the big screen and certainly, no self-respecting movie actor would dare appear on television. Despite this, Willis accepted the role and was paid $5 million.
With Willis cast, writer Steven E de Souza was brought in to rewrite Stuart’s script and add more humor. As the script was being retooled, the cast started to expand. Alan Rickman, already in his early 40s, made his screen debut as Hans Gruber. He was cast after producer Joel Silver saw his performance as Valmont in the stage version of what would become the film, Dangerous Liaisons. Even as filming was in progress, the character of McClane was evolving. McTiernan and de Souza helped to realize the character as a man who hates himself but is doing the best he can in a bad situation. Additionally, McClane adopted some of Willis’ personality traits like his disrespect for authority and gallows humor. The film began filming in November 1987 and finished in March 1988.
Before the film’s release, Fox’s marketing team was nervous over their decision to cast Willis. While the film was in production, another film Willis had starred in, Blake Edwards’ Sunset, was a critical and commercial failure. This called into question Willis’ ability to lead a film. Things weren’t helped when the trailer was released. Bruce Willis had developed a reputation in Hollywood for being a smug, self-absorbed actor. Theater owners reported that many booed when Willis appeared on screen or others, used to seeing Willis on Moonlighting, laughed because they expected it to be a comedy. At the lowest point, Willis was removed from the poster, which now just featured Nakatomi Tower. This was a particular blow to the studio, who paid Willis that unheard-of $5 million salary. That caused a chain reaction in Hollywood because the in-demand actors who commanded a $5 million salary (like Warren Beatty, Dustin Hoffman, and Robert Redford), all bumped up their prices.
Fortunately for the studio, their luck began to change after test screenings came back unexpectedly positive. Their faith in Willis was restored and they slowly began inserting him back into the posters and marketing materials. The film had a wide release on July 22, 1988, and was an immediate hit. Critics and fans were mostly impressed with Willis in the role and began to re-evaluate the notion he could not transition from television to film. Rickman’s performance as Hans Gruber was widely praised, even by those critics who disliked the film, as was Bedelia’s, though some thought she was underused. Many fans also singled out the friendship between McClane and Al Powell (played by a pre-Family Matters Reginald Vel Johnson) as the most developed relationship in the film. When all was said and done, the film grossed roughly $140 million on a budget estimated to be between $25 and $35 million, became a cultural phenomenon, and led to four sequels.
This is the part of the article where I share my opinion instead of summarizing a Wikipedia page. As alluded to at the start of this post, one of the most hotly debated topics is whether Die Hard is a Christmas movie or not. Lots would say no, but just as many would say yes. I asked Google what constitutes a Christmas movie, and this was the provided criteria. Does the film take place during Christmastime? Is the film about Christmas or related themes? Would the plot of the film be different without Christmas? Does the film feature tropes like a love story or a family coming together? Does the film include magical or fantastical elements like Santa, elves, or the North Pole? Given that criteria, I wholeheartedly agree that Die Hard is a Christmas movie. Think about it. Family bonds, in this case, the strained relationship between John and Holly, are present. That checks one of the boxes. It’s also a love story because John, just as much as he is a good person and police officer, is hoping to win back Holly. A second box was checked. Most importantly, and I cannot stress this enough, the film takes place at a Christmas party on Christmas Eve. Is that not sufficient enough? That last fact alone should shut down any haters. I understand that it may not have the optimism of It’s a Wonderful Life, the magic of The Santa Clause, or even the dysfunctional family aspect of Christmas Vacation, but it is a kick-ass adrenaline rush set during the most wonderful time of the year.
I also believe that childhood traditions, including what films you watch, shape your view of what you consider a Christmas movie. Most people think of classics like White Christmas, Home Alone, or The Grinch. Most people wouldn’t think of films like Edward Scissorhands, Gremlins, or Batman Returns as Christmas movies. For example, I just saw Eyes Wide Shut at my local Alamo as part of an “alternate Christmas movie” series. It takes place during Christmas time, but if you asked me to name a Christmas movie, it wouldn’t even cross my mind. However, if you made the point to me that it takes place around Christmas time and it is an important element in the film, I would accept that. If I were in court, this would be the point where I rest my case.
Moving on from the Christmas aspect, the other reason I love Die Hard is because I think it’s a well-made film. The filmmakers know how to balance action with storytelling. If they up the action, they have to up the stakes for John McClane. The story is economical and thrilling. Each scene pushes the story forward while keeping you on the edge of your seat. There is not an ounce of fat anywhere in this film. I watch a lot of movies and can be excited, but few of them get my heart racing and my brain engaged as Die Hard. I have a growing list of films I watch every Christmas. Some of the usual suspects make the list (Christmas Vacation, The Santa Clause 2, Bad Santa) as well as some newer fare (Spirited, The Holdovers), but Die Hard is a must-watch.
Looking back, I find it mind-blowing that Bruce Willis was once considered a comedy actor. I can’t remember the first thing I saw him in. I had to look back at his IMDb page to find the answer. It was his voiceover roles as Spike in The Rugrats Go Wild and RJ in the Dreamworks film Over the Hedge. Even as a child, I knew the name Bruce Willis. Other than those two voiceover roles, I had enough cultural awareness to know Bruce Willis as that bald guy who appeared in a lot of B-level action films and the occasional comedy misfire. I believe I saw Die Hard for the first time in middle grade and it became a holiday staple for me during my upperclassman years of high school. The first time I saw the film, I thought it was an enjoyable action movie. Quite frankly, it was more jarring for me to see Willis with hair.
Off-topic, but worth mentioning, I also grew up on Harry Potter. My mind was blown when I put two together that Alan Rickman played Snape because they looked vastly different.
It would be fair to say that I’ve been watching Die Hard every Christmas season for close to a decade, but last year two things became clear as I turned it on for my annual watch. The first was how well-written the film is. It’s economic, compelling, and thrilling. The writers had the insight to know that the spectacle and action don’t mean shit if we don’t care about the characters. I consider this film and Back to the Future to be two of the best-written blockbusters from the 1980s and I believe they still hold up today. Circling back to Willis, the second thing that became clear was this was a cultural phenomenon. I know this is probably a no-brainer, but this movie came out a decade before I was born. Willis was famous during my life, but never at the level he achieved post-Die Hard. Watching Die Hard is the closest thing to experiencing Bruce Willis when he was on top of the world. It also says something that Fox was either so desperate or confident (depending on who you ask) in Willis that they paid him an unheard-of sum for a TV star to appear in a film.
The studio can’t ignore a blockbuster this successful, resulting in the release of four sequels over 25 years. The first sequel, simply called Die Hard 2 (also known as Die Hard 2: Die Harder) came out in 1990 and was directed by Renny Harlin. Set on Christmas Eve, the film sees McClane fight off terrorists taking over the air traffic control unit at Dulles Airport before his wife’s plane (and all the others) runs out of fuel and crashes. To be completely honest, I would probably rank this as the second worst of the franchise. Despite a couple of impressive action sequences, I found the plot to be a little convoluted and I didn’t care much about most of the characters. Quite frankly, I also feel it did not deviate far enough from the original.
Five years later, Willis was back in Die Hard with a Vengeance. This time McClane is an alcoholic, divorced from his wife, and on thin ice with the NYPD, and any goodwill from the events of the first film is long gone. He’s a has-been. A terrorist known simply as “Simon” wants to play a game of “Simon Says” with McClane, threatening to detonate another bomb (the film starts with the detonation of a bomb on a peaceful afternoon). Through a series of events, McClane is forced to team up with reluctant shop owner Zeus (played by the young-ish Samuel L. Jackson) to complete the game before mass chaos ensues. This was a step in the right direction. McTiernan returned to direct, the filmmakers dumped the Christmas element, and the studio found a good script that they later turned into a Die Hard sequel instead of hastily throwing together a script. I do think the chemistry between Willis and Jackson is what makes this film work so well. Many fans believe this to be the best sequel in the franchise. While I do think it is an improvement over Die Hard 2, I am not one of those people.
It seemed like Vengeance could have been the end of the franchise. It took 12 years, but McClane was back in 2007’s Live Free or Die Hard. This is the film that brought McClane firmly into the 21st century. In the film, Willis reluctantly teams up with a cyber hacker (played by Justin Long) in an attempt to stop a cyber-terrorist, Thomas Gabriel (played by Timothy Olyphant) who hacks into government and commercial computers across the United States to start a “fire sale” cyber attack that would disable key elements of the nation’s infrastructure. This film gets some flack, but this is my favorite of the sequels. I enjoy the generational banter between Willis and Long and I believe the film has the most impressive action sequences since the first film. I do appreciate that the film acknowledges the passage of time between the first film by introducing us to McClane’s daughter, Lucy (played by Mary Elizabeth Winstead), who first appeared as a little girl in Die Hard. What I later learned was that a lot of die-hard fans of the franchise (pun intended) were upset that the film received a PG-13 rating instead of an R like the previous films. Regardless, I enjoy the film as a fun ride.
Now we arrive at the final installment, 2013’s A Good Day to Die Hard. Keeping up with the familial element, the film sees McClane traveling to Russia to get his son Jack out of prison, only to discover that he is a CIA spy. Of course, he gets caught up in the crossfire of a global terrorist plot and must work with his son to stop it. So, I mentioned that I was in middle school when I first saw Die Hard. That film was fresh in my brain and I was excited for this one. I was in eighth grade when it was released. Because I couldn’t drive and the franchise was back to an R rating, my dad took me to see it. Even at 14 years old, sitting in the theater, I realized this was a dud. I thought Jai Courtney was miscast as his son, I didn’t care about any of the characters (McClane included), and while there were some visually appealing action set pieces, the story was lackluster at best. Critics were all unanimous in panning the film. The Rotten Tomatoes scores for each of the previous installments were 94%, 69%, 59%, and 82%. The score for this film declined sharply to 15%. It’s been almost twelve years since I saw this film in the theater and I still have no desire to rewatch it.
A Good Day to Die Hard wasn’t intended to be the end of the franchise. Bruce Willis announced his desire to star in one more film before retiring the character. Different options for sequels were pitched, including a crossover with the Fox TV show 24 called Die Hard 24/7 and a miniseries called Die Hard: Year One. The closest a sequel came to fruition was the commission of a script in 2018 simply called McClane. Taking inspiration from The Godfather Part II, the film would have featured a younger McClane and Holly (played by different actors) as well as their present-day counterparts. Development did not get any further than this. When Disney acquired Fox in 2019, they put a kibosh on a lot of Fox properties, including Die Hard. It’s a shame that the franchise went out with the whimper that was A Good Day to Die Hard.
Willis, despite the other roles he’s played, will always be associated with John McClane. While I would have loved to see him return one more time to try to remedy the fifth installment, that seems more and more unlikely with each passing day. I’m sure most of my readers know that Willis retired in early 2022 after being diagnosed with Aphasia, a disorder caused by damage to the part of the brain that controls language expression and comprehension. A year later, in February 2023, Willis was announced to have been diagnosed with frontotemporal dementia. I truly feel for the man and his family, considering he has both young children with his wife and his adult children with his ex Demi Moore, as well as a new grandchild.
Bruce, if by some miracle you are reading my blog, I have two things to say to you. First, I hope your final days bring you peace and closure. Second, despite what you said at one of the Comedy Central Roasts, I will politely have to agree to disagree. Die Hard is a Christmas movie and it is one for the ages.