Directed by Kathryn Bigelow — Screenplay by Noah Oppenheim.
For most of this young century, Point Break director Kathryn Bigelow has dedicated her filmmaking career to these intensely political thrillers that have sparked a lot of discussion at the time of release (e.g., The Hurt Locker, Zero Dark Thirty, Detroit). Now, eight years after the release of Detroit, Bigelow is back with another political thriller with its finger on the pulse of America and the world with Netflix’s A House of Dynamite, an occasionally thrilling and terrifying apocalyptic triptych about a fictional immediate panicked response to a single nuclear missile headed for America.
The triptych structure of Kathryn Bigelow’s A House of Dynamite divides the film into three neat sections that, when they’re each complete, then sees the film rewind back and tell another story or show another perspective during the same period of time. Although the film’s three sections jump around between characters and locations, you can sum it up like so: the first section is focused on Rebecca Ferguson’s character in the White House Situation Room and various soldiers in Alaska at the Fort Greely military base, where anti-ballistic missiles are launched. The second section focuses on Tracy Letts’ STRATCOM general and Gabriel Basso’s Deputy National Security Advisor, as we follow the decision-making among top officials. While the final section, or act, zooms in on Jared Harris’ Secretary of Defense character and Idris Elba’s underprepared President of the United States, who was taking part in a basketball-focused PR event when all hell broke loose.
A House of Dynamite is a great example of a couple of things. For one, it is a great example of how a film can have all the right ingredients but still not come together in the right way. This is seen in how this film has the right director, a fairly strong cast, and yet I don’t think it reaches its potential. The reasons why that is can be summed up in the forthcoming second and third examples. Because, secondly, the film is a great example of the fact that a project can have some of the most thrilling, propulsive, and horrifyingly realistic scenes and yet somehow not ultimately come together. In A House of Dynamite, you have three individual sections, but the second and, especially, the third sections fail to live up to the edge-of-your-seat filmmaking that the opening section showcases. It ultimately feels like the second and third sections are delaying the inevitable, halting progress, and showing new perspectives without really deepening your understanding. You never get past the initial read of the film, because there isn’t some deep realization that parts two and three reveal, which weren’t already fairly evident from part one. Finally, and while I think there’s some excellent filmmaking to show off here (plus, I think especially Rebecca Ferguson, but also Tracy Letts turn in highlight performances), the way the film ends will be the final nail in the film’s coffin for most people. It’s an unsatisfying cut to credits that leaves the film feeling incomplete and like it was building up to something it didn’t have the guts or the money to show, which, despite that feeling, probably wasn’t the case. Now, I do think it’s relatively clear what the point of the ending was, but it doesn’t quite have the effect that it ought to have.
I think some will also have issues with the film’s ambiguous non-committal approach to who actually launched the missile. Also, I think that, beyond our collective unpreparedness for the ‘next steps’ if an apocalyptic event like this took place (or the step-by-step process it lays out), this isn’t really saying anything new of note. And, frankly, despite the show not looking as great or being as realistic, the Hulu series Paradise executed this kind of scenario in a more emotionally engaging and satisfying way earlier in the year with its standout episode titled “The Day.” Because of all of this, the moments of excellent filmmaking in Kathryn Bigelow’s highly anticipated comeback are ultimately drowned out by an unwise structure and an ending that is not quite as thought-provoking as it is unfulfilling. At the same time, I do want to highlight that had the film been released as a 30-40 minute short film, it would’ve probably been incredibly effective, because the opening act is sensational. But, as a whole, the film is at best ‘okay.’
6.5 out of 10
– Review written by Jeffrey Rex Bertelsen.
I'm Jeffrey Rex 