Expecting a big bang and cities laid to waste, many critics were left disappointed by Kathryn Bigelow's latest cinematic offering. Instead of a post-apocalyptic landscape, A House of Dynamite delivers a tense, real-time thriller set in the agonising 18 minutes between a nuclear missile launch and its potential impact.
Critical Backlash and Pentagon Dispute
The film, released on Netflix, has faced a wave of negative reviews from major publications. The New Yorker labelled it a "major misfire," while Rolling Stone chided that it "leaves you feeling like you're buried in a hovel of disappointment." This sentiment is echoed by online audiences, with the movie garnering a dismal 1.9-star rating on Google.
Even the Pentagon entered the fray, with its Missile Defence Agency publicly disputing the film's accuracy. The agency claimed the interceptors, which fail in the movie, have a tested accuracy of 100 per cent—a statement that independent experts have challenged.
A Different Reaction from the Burrow
Despite the critical panning, the film found an appreciative audience with this reviewer. Inspired by a powerful piece on Hiroshima, the nuclear thriller served as a perfect, thought-provoking sequel. The film is broken into three distinct parts, exploring the weight of impossible decisions from different perspectives as a menacing red triangle appears over the Pacific.
What first appears to be a billionaire's forgotten satellite launch quickly reveals itself as a direct threat. With the clock ticking down from detection to the target city of Chicago, key figures must grapple with unthinkable choices: attempting to shoot the missile down, ordering a city evacuation, or deciding on a retaliatory strike that could end human civilisation.
The Power of the Unseen Cataclysm
The film's most striking departure from genre norms is its conclusion. There is no mushroom cloud and no missile exchange. The story ends with the president verifying the nuclear codes, leaving the final, devastating outcome to the viewer's imagination—a choice that makes the film's tension all the more potent.
Bigelow masterfully captures the terror of decision-making under extreme pressure with incomplete information. These are not just strategic military decisions; they extend to the deeply personal, such as whether to use precious seconds to warn loved ones.
While some critics argue that 18 minutes is not enough time to fully develop each character, this critique arguably misses the film's central point. The entire structure is built around the relentless, real-time countdown—less time than it takes to boil a large pot of water.
A House of Dynamite is not a rehash of the traumatising 1980s film The Day After, but it carries a similarly urgent warning. In an era where nuclear weapons are in the hands of nihilistic despots, the film reminds us that global cataclysm can be triggered in a matter of minutes.
