Mainlining Christmas

I hadn't intended to spend anywhere near this much time on "Slasher Santa" movies this year. As I mentioned in my top 5 list , I'm way outside my wheelhouse here - I typically dislike slasher movies, and my background in horror remains relatively limited. I only put the list together after being surprised by the number of movies in (or at least adjacent to) the genre I considered good enough to warrant recommending. And while I'd originally intended to just sort of "wing it," I ultimately found myself re-watching everything on the list to confirm my rankings. In the process of going through all that, I wound up with a few observations I couldn't fit in the introduction. In particular, I noticed that every one of these movies in some way incorporated two related themes: identity and the dual nature of Santa Claus. Actually, back up a minute. Every one of these except for Santa Jaws. But Santa Jaws is really more a parody of this trope than an example

If you read that headline and thought it was full of crap, you were at least partially right. I'll admit up front I technically went with four  movies and an episode, which is kind of cheating. That said, the episode in question isn't XMas Story from Futurama  - this is limited to horror, and all five of my picks come from that genre. The idea that I would be able to assemble this list at all would have been unthinkable a few years ago. This is, after all, supposed to be the dregs of holiday entertainment - the worst trope Christmas media has to offer. Only... it's not? While there's no shortage of abysmal slasher movies where the killer either is dressed as Santa or - in some bizarre sense is  literally Santa himself, there are a shocking number of movies where the otherwise tired premise results in something absolutely fantastic. Just to reiterate, by "shocking," I mean five. Okay, four and a half. I was going to start with some history on this trope, but...

I honestly think this might be the most high-profile pre-2010 Christmas horror movie I haven't gotten to yet. Hell, it might be the most high-profile Christmas movie regardless of genre, excluding a bunch of indistinguishable remakes of A Christmas Carol and The Nutcracker. Part of the reason it took me so long is it's easy to confuse with countless other movies in the same subgenre. I've done Silent Night, Bloody Night , Christmas Evil , and countless other " Killer Santa " movies . Hell, I even did Silent Night , the 2012 remake ("remake" in the loosest meaning of the term possible). But until now I'd never gotten around to this one, which... I guess this is significant? I mean, it spawned multiple sequels, it's supposedly being remade AGAIN, and NECA made an action figure of the killer a few years ago, which... Honestly, I bought it for a custom project I just haven't gotten around to yet. The point is, this must have a fan base. I'

I have no recollection of this movie ever existing, and honestly that surprises me. It's not so much that this deserves to be remembered - aside from a few solid performances, a couple decent moments, and a score from Danny Elfman, it's got very little going for it - but it's kind of amazing a Christmas movie starring Nicholas Cage, Téa Leoni, and Don Cheadle could gross more that 100 million dollars then just get swallowed up and forgotten. It makes a little more sense when we enter the director into the equation: this was made by Brett Ratner, whose reputation as Hollywood's least interesting filmmaker has been overshadowed by numerous accusations of sexual assault and harassment. The Family Man is the story of Jack (Nicholas Cage), a successful businessman who broke up with Kate (Téa Leoni) years before in a formulaic prologue set in an airport. Jack thinks he's happy, and he seems to have everything. That's until Christmas Eve, when he witnesses Don Cheadle

In a Holidaze Christina Lauren, 2020 I saw this listed in a few places as THE holiday romance novel of 2020, so I decided to see what all the fuss was about. And ... it was pretty good. Easily as good as a surprisingly high quality made-for-tv movie, maybe a bit better.  The premise is classic: Maelyn Jones is trapped in a holiday time loop until she can fix her life. But the execution is not only charming, it's surprisingly thoughtful. For her entire life, Maelyn and her parents have been getting together for the holidays with a chosen family consisting of her parents' closest friends from college and their assorted partners and kids. Since she was a teenager, she's had a crush on Andrew, one of said kids. Unfortunately, when the book opens, she's just had an unsatisfying drunken makeout session with Andrew's brother Theo. (Maelyn and Theo/Andrew aren't related at all, but I was very confused at the beginning until I figured out they aren't cousins; their p

The bare premise of this film - two couples in crisis nearly separate on Christmas Eve but finally reconcile - could be a Hallmark movie. In practice, it's something much more unusual and uneven.  The movie is based on a play by Tennesee Williams. A bit of research tells me that he wrote it as a "serious comedy," partially in response to criticism that his works were too dark. It's been a while since I've studied any of his plays, but the man isn't exactly known for happy endings, and it shows here. These are deeply unhappy people, each with their own neuroses, and it seems unlikely that these "happy-ending" reconciliations are for the long term.  The movie opens with a montage without dialogue showing the whirlwind romance of a nurse (Isabel) and one of the young veterans under her care (George). She realizes that she has made a terrible mistake when a hearse (a "great car" according to George) appears as their honeymoon vehicle, and thing

Roy Rogers starred in more than a hundred movies, so I guess the laws of probability dictate at least one would be a Christmas flick. That brings us to "Trail of Robin Hood," a movie I wish I could discuss without first going through the exercise of explaining who Roy Rogers was, what his movies were, and why you should care. Actually, I'll field that last one now: you shouldn't. While this is sort of interesting as a cultural artifact, it doesn't hold up 71 years after its creation. In fact, I'd call it a stretch to refer to this as a movie at all. Which brings us back to who Rogers was and why his "movies" are somewhat distinct. I doubt anyone will be shocked to learn that Roy Rogers was a stage name, but if (like me) you've never subjected yourself to any of his movies, you might not realize Rogers is also the main character in the majority of them. You could look at this as an actor playing a fictionalized version of himself, but I honestly d