Though Ms. Bigelow includes a few humanizing and even humorous touches . . . she is not interested in the imperatives of the action movie or the moral lesson. She simply lays out one nauseatingly possible future, which means A House of Dynamite is one of the most terrifying movies ever made, but not in a fun way.
Bigelow’s explosively entertaining real-time thriller, told from multiple perspectives at various levels of government from situation room deputies to POTUS (Idris Elba) himself, does not mince on hopelessness. Here is a movie that will ruin your day. You’re welcome.
“A House of Dynamite” is an excellent and chilling film that powerfully illustrates the mortal danger posed by nuclear weapons in the context of today’s deteriorating geopolitical landscape. It immediately brings to mind Stanley Kubrick’s 1964 masterpiece Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb—a black comedy and satirical tour de force that exposes the absurdity and madness of the nuclear arms race as a ticking doomsday machine that could annihilate **** where Kubrick’s film leans into irony and farce, A House of Dynamite takes a dead-serious and hyper-realistic approach. It presents a plausible scenario in which the U.S. government must respond to an incoming ballistic nuclear missile that cannot be intercepted. The film traces the escalating tension and psychological pressure in a situation where impossible moral and political decisions must be made within minutes.Structured around three interwoven narrative threads, the movie follows different groups within the American leadership—each responding in real time to the imminent crisis. It is a tightly constructed dramatic thriller that lays bare the terrifying consequences of automated military systems and political doctrines that can spiral out of human control.What’s equally troubling, however, is the way some contemporary audiences—especially those immersed in the aesthetics of superhero franchises and fantasy series like Game of Thrones—seem unable to engage with the film’s sober tone or grasp the urgency of the issue it raises. This generational gap in media literacy and political awareness only adds to the film’s underlying message: that the existential threat posed by nuclear weapons is as real today as it was during the Cold War—and perhaps more so.
With its fast-paced walking, talking and shouting into telephones, A House of Dynamite is a nervy, timely thriller that goes down like Coca-Cola while another US brand – its military – takes centre stage.
It’s a dead-serious cautionary tale and sincere call for de-escalation, dressed like a political thriller by a director who’s aces with action (and whose actual best film, by the way, is Point Break). A House of Dynamite does not always easily straddle the gulf between docudrama and disaster movie conventions.
Despite some white-knuckle moments, Dynamite slackens with each runthrough of its perma-climactic 15 minutes. In the world of global catastrophes, Bigelow increasingly resembles an unwitting tourist, just like the rest of us.
A House of Dynamite is an attempt to make a white-knuckle thriller, but there’s very little suspense to it. We have a pretty good idea of how it’s all going to end even before the first segment is over. And after that, we really know it, as we’re forced to watch the same events play out two more times.
Director Bigelow's greatest success in making this thriller was to present a hypothetical scenario in real life. As the plot unfolds, the suspense builds, reaching a final act that will leave even the most cynical viewer spellbound. The ending calls for Iron Maiden's 2 Minutes to Midnight.
The first 2/3 rds of this movie are "on-the-edge of your seat suspenseful," however, the last 3rd of it goes from boring to BAD.There is NO ending. WTF.
The same film three times over with no ending! Very poor! There's some ok acting throughout, but it's a pretty much pointless film. Direction and score vaguely tries to copy the Bourne films with little success. I wouldn't bother watching it again!