Kathryn Bigelow has been away from movie theaters since 2017’s criminally underrated Detroit, but the acclaimed, Oscar winning director has finally returned to the big screen with a deliciously thrilling film about a disastrous event with A House of Dynamite. In the film, the day begins just like any other in Washington, DC and Fort Greeley, Colorado as Olivia Walker (Rebecca Ferguson) and Major Daniel Gonzalez (Anthony Ramos) begin their respective workdays, but all that quickly changes when a single nuclear missile from an unattributable location is launched from the Pacific Ocean at the United States. Soon the military, the President (Idris Elba), and his cabinet race to determine who is responsible and how to respond.
Bigelow is known for her mastery of tension and she ramps this special skill up to 11 in A House of Dynamite. The film establishes its intensity pretty quickly and never takes its foot off the gas for most of its runtime, becoming the most nail biting film of the year. The sense of tension and dread as we watch the countdown until impact of the missile aids the film’s pacing, making for a watch that demands constant engagement and investment all the way up to its ending. The film shifts perspective of the national crisis throughout, moving from a more on the ground, civilian staff and military grunt point of view, to the defensive point of view of military generals and Presidential cabinet members, and ending with the perspective of the President. At each turn, the gamut of emotions is shown while highlighting the difficult and tense procedural questions simultaneously, making for an immersive look at the psychological elements that would be involved in such a calamity alongside the machinations of our government and its potential response. The two elements combine to keep the audience on the edge of their seats and fully invested in watching the situation unfold. On the one hand, you worry as the characters worry about what the outcome of the missile’s trajectory will be while also nervously observing the outcome of each debate and institutional step that must be taken as the highest level of defensive decision making in the country’s history is made. As we watch the characters balance their jobs and concern for their families and futures, the consistent tension and dread inspires viewers to consider the same things should life ever imitate art.
The stakes of this world are effectively set for the entire apparatus of the United States government, on both an institutional and personal level. While the point is well made on the lower staffer level throughout, where A House of Dynamite most potently makes this point is during the time the audience spends alongside the President as he weighs the costs and benefits of a potential response to an imminent nuclear strike. Through the eyes of the most powerful man in the world, we see the full extent of said power pushed to its limits as he weighs his own personal feelings and responsibility of the weight of the potential cost of millions of lives with his professional need to lead and show strength as his military leadership presses him to respond swiftly and decisively in order to deter any potential future attacks or perception of weakness amongst the country’s enemies. This push and pull amidst a ticking clock of less than ten minutes highlights the immense pressure that Presidents face in an intense and real way that the audience can feel and Elba effectively delivers through his performance. It’s a heavy responsibility to figuratively become Atlas and hold the fate of the world on your shoulders as the US government and governments around the world wait to see if you decide to shrug.
Utilizing the Presidency to drive home the human element of imminent destruction and death is a brilliant choice that maximizes the emotional impact of A House of Dynamite. Seeing him weigh the opinions of his advisors, the lives at stake, and have to make the ultimate choice, the stakes are perfectly set while advancing the story and solidifying the film’s tone and atmosphere. Bigelow wants the audience to not only consider the consequences of the world we’ve built, one where we’re always on the precipice of conflict while also being armed with world-ending weaponry, a proverbial house filled with dynamite as the film’s namesake refers to, but to also feel the consequences of the decisions that have led us here and where those could ultimately end up. The film’s ending is sure to be the subject of debate and disagreement as not all of the questions that it raises are answered. It is clear however, that Bigelow is less concerned with tying up loose ends on mystery than interrogating the aforementioned larger issues of how our world interacts internally. The point of A House of Dynamite isn’t a war between nations, but the war within the human soul when it comes to how we socialize with one another and how we value human lives. In that regard, this is a brilliant film that entertains as strongly as it examines the human condition.
Image: Netflix
