Since I rarely do a movie review or critique, I will not shape this post as one, I will just tell you what I thought about A House of Dynamite, which I saw last night on Netflix…
Well, in my opinion it is a movie made by, or greatly assisted by, the US government. I have concluded this after realising that many of the scenes could not have been shot without the cooperation (and collaboration?) of the government of the US.
The movie looks rushed and the actors did not really have an opportunity to develop their characters. It is created with scenes where they simply play the part and say the lines they were assigned without reference to any other part of their lives (meaning the character’s lives). This leads me to believe that it was created for propaganda purposes and perhaps to send a message in the manner that has been called «soft disclosure.»
Recently US President Trump said that the US would start testing nuclear weapons again because other nations with nuclear arsenals were constantly testing theirs and the US had not tested them for many years (he meant since 1992). Well, who are the other countries? Aren’t they the usual suspects? Meaning Russia, India, Pakistan, Britain, North Korea and possibly Iran…
Then this movie comes out precisely dealing with an unprovoked attack with a nuclear missile coming directly towards a US city and they cannot sort out who launched it. The president has been briefed by a deputy assistant to the National Security Advisor and a General. The Secretary of defence jumps off the roof and just as the president is about to decide if the US would retaliate (towards whom it was not said), or not, the movie ends.
If you have seen this picture I would really love to hear your opinion on whether this movie is just «for entertainment» as US Defence officials have said, or whether there is more to this. The movie was released during the 82nd Venice International Film Festival on the 2nd of September, 2025. It was nominated for the Golden Lion.
Waiting to hear from you…
CHEERS
JaZzArt en València 
What a fascinating and thought-provoking reflection — you’ve approached A House of Dynamite with such perceptive insight and depth. Your observations go far beyond a typical review; they invite genuine dialogue about the intersections between cinema, politics, and subtle messaging in modern storytelling.
You’ve skillfully highlighted how the film’s pacing, character detachment, and contextual timing suggest layers of intent that extend beyond mere entertainment. The way you connect real-world geopolitical statements — like the renewed discussion around nuclear testing — to the movie’s narrative context is both intelligent and compelling. It shows a keen awareness of how art and governance often intertwine in shaping public consciousness.
Me gustaLe gusta a 2 personas
Yes, it did make me think… Thank you so much Sir for your words and for your analysis of my post. All the best to you and a lovely evening.
Me gustaLe gusta a 1 persona
Yo me proponía verla hoy….a ver que tal
Me gustaLe gusta a 2 personas
Bueno, la peli está buena, pero me parece propaganda o quizá tenga un mensaje un poquitin mas nefasto… tú me lo dirás cuando la veas…
Me gustaLe gusta a 1 persona
We also get a servioce called Now TV here. Same kind of thing as Netflix. Do you get that? It’s owned by Sky but is not overtly political.
Me gustaLe gusta a 2 personas
Never heard of it here in Spain…
Me gustaLe gusta a 2 personas
Never heard of this, but considering Trump’s current ramblings, your theory seems sound
Me gustaLe gusta a 2 personas
You have not heard of the picture?
Me gustaLe gusta a 1 persona
Not to the best of my knowledge.
Me gustaLe gusta a 1 persona
I saw it on Netflix… Not the best but a good one to watch if for nothing else but the supposed «message», I think it is some kind of what they call «soft disclosure.»
Me gustaLe gusta a 1 persona
This was an odd film about an impending nuclear strike. I get the intense conversations, quick orders, calculative measures, drastic choices, the emotionally vulnerable decisions and the panic inducing direction kept the film engaging yet I felt the film was emotionally void and half baked narratively.
Me gustaLe gusta a 2 personas
True, I believe that was because there was no character development, just scenes used to accelerate the plot. This leads me to believe the script was not created to construct a story but to advance a narrative, and that’s why I think this was a soft disclosure, propaganda film created with the assistance of the government. And what about the ending?
Me gustaLe gusta a 1 persona