Reviews
A House of dynamite
In a world where the Doomsday Clock is closer than ever to striking midnight, and the possibility of mutually assured destruction looms larger with each passing day, a film like A House of Dynamite feels both topical and inevitable. It is perhaps surprising that Netflix is the first studio to venture into a political thriller of this nature, one that, while undeniably entertaining, carries sharp and timely commentary throughout.
The premise of A House of Dynamite is fairly simple. A nuclear warhead has been launched towards the mainland United States, and it soon becomes apparent that Chicago is the target. Ten million people are about to perish. If that is not bad enough, the launch point of the warhead remains unknown, meaning it could have been fired by any of the nation’s adversaries. From launch to impact, a group of high-ranking officials has just eighteen minutes to decide what to do next.
Oscar-winning director Kathryn Bigelow and writer Noah Oppenheim have been entrusted with bringing this enthralling storyline to life, and they have chosen to do so in a distinctive and unconventional way. The film is divided into three sections, each retelling that critical eighteen-minute window from a different perspective. As the story unfolds, audiences piece together just how complex the decision-making process truly is.
Replaying the same event multiple times could easily become repetitive, but as with the 2011 film Source Code, the shifting perspectives keep it engaging. Each retelling feels distinct, allowing the audience to keep guessing and questioning the eventual outcome.
The first two acts of A House of Dynamite are truly gripping, filled with anxiety and overwhelming tension. Much of the credit for creating that atmosphere belongs to the star-studded cast. With so many characters, each actor has limited screen time, yet nearly all of them rise to the challenge, delivering memorable and emotionally charged moments throughout. Standouts include Rebecca Ferguson as Capt. Olivia Walker, who brings quiet determination and resilience; Tracy Letts, who conveys an aura of experience and authority as Gen. Anthony Brady; and Jared Hess as Defence Secretary Reid Baker, who portrays a broken man coming to terms with the fact that his daughter is in the direct path of the warhead’s destruction zone. It is perhaps Gabriel Basso, however, who leaves the strongest impression, offering an authentic and wonderfully chaotic performance as an NSA analyst suddenly thrust into a position of power when his superior is unavailable.
As the clock keeps ticking and the countermeasures in place begin to fail, A House of Dynamite brilliantly captures the panic and, more importantly, the human nature of those experiencing a catastrophic event. The fear of the unknown creates an atmosphere so tense it feels almost unbearable, and unlike many films that rely on ill-timed comedic relief, A House of Dynamite allows its audience to sit in that discomfort. The result is a relentless build-up of anxiety that feels raw and real. I found myself genuinely empathising with the characters and the impossible situation they faced.
As strong as the first two acts are, the final act leaves a lot to be desired. There are multiple moments that, while minor in isolation, collectively pull the viewer out of the immersive experience. Small details, such as the Secret Service sprinting to extract the president from a basketball camp packed with hundreds of people, feel implausible. An event like that would almost certainly cause mass hysteria, yet in reality the removal of a president during a crisis is handled calmly and discreetly to avoid panic.
There are also moments where seasoned military personnel abandon their posts, and the president (Idris Elba) calls his wife, who is on safari in Kenya, to ask whether he should launch a counterattack with only two minutes left before impact. Then there are characters who somehow manage to travel from Gettysburg to a bunker that appears to be in Washington DC within the same timeframe. Covering eighty miles in eighteen minutes seems rather preposterous. Each of these moments on their own would be forgivable, but when they occur in such quick succession, they combine into a larger distraction that undermines the carefully built tension of the earlier acts.
The ending, particularly the final scene, may not be to everyone’s taste, and that is entirely understandable. Nevertheless, the film’s underlying message about the devastating potential of nuclear weapons and the reality of mutually assured destruction will undoubtedly linger in the minds of its audience. While a geopolitical thriller of this nature will not appeal to everyone, it is sure to resonate with many.
