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 
My wife and I were perplexed both during, and after, watching this movie.
I think it portrayed the character interactions well. I liked that it showed how getting into the Whitehouse would actually be (except during a crisis).
It also cleverly portrayed an air of authenticity through its narrative style told from the different key players.
However, if such a premise did occur, there are a range of factors this film played absolute licence with.
First, they would know where the missile came from. The monitoring equipment in place around the world now would certainly detect its point of origin.
Second, I’m not convinced the current day minute men portrayed in this film would be that inept.
Thirdly, I’m sure there are further redundancies built into the defence system. Leaving it to two missiles seems a little far fetched. We see in at least two wars presently effective defence systems.
Fourthly, there is no way that such an important phone call with the Deputy Director on the way into the Whitehouse would play out like that during the security screening system process.
Perhaps the film’s premise really is about what would happen if we really are this inept and underprepared.
I wanted to like this movie more than I did.
Me gustaLe gusta a 1 persona
You bring up good points but we really don’t know if the systems can or are so accurate or if the minutemen (as you call them) are inept or not, or if the defence system is better than two missiles… all those are unknowns although we would like to think that they all are better, more effective and more accurate. Yet, your viewpoints are possible too. The premise may be about what would happen if the US is as inept as portrayed, although I do not believe it was ineptitude they portrayed but reality. But if it was, then why did they end it the way they did?
Me gustaMe gusta