‘A House of Dynamite’ Starts Explosive but Ends a Dud

A throwback apocalyptic thriller with great highs and greater lulls, “A House of Dynamite” is a conundrum. The film is able to both excite and bore audiences in equal magnitudes, resulting in a mangled, unfulfilling story. 

Kathryn Bigelow’s film is set in motion when an unattributed missile is sent towards the United States, unleashing panic from leaders across the U.S. as they try to figure out where the missile came from and how to stop it. 

The audience is thrust into the tense action right away, following Maj. Daniel Gonzalez (Anthony Ramos) and other military members as they discover the missile, causing a predictable frenzy in the room. Across the country, Capt. Olivia Walker (Rebecca Ferguson) and her co-workers learn of the missile strike and mirror a panic similar to what Gonzalez was going through just moments before. 

The following 30 minutes or so are electric, as workers spew jargon-filled dialogue across a noisy war room, fully immersing the audience in the ratcheting stakes and chaos of the life-or-death situation.  

The camerawork is almost entirely hand-held, adding to the instability and energy of the film. It’s a shrewd choice from Bigelow (“Point Break,” “Zero Dark Thirty”), a director who captures freneticism like no other. 

In the midst of all this, Walker joins a conference call where she meets with other leaders around the nation — among them are President (Idris Elba), Gen. Anthony Brody (Tracy Letts) and Deputy National Security Advisor Jake Baerington (Gabriel Basso). 

Over the final hour of the film, perspective shifts to all three of these characters throughout the day — first with Baerington and Brody, then ending with the president.  

While the choice to shift perspectives is effective initially, it ultimately undermines the rising stakes of the film. This is especially evident in the final act focused around the president, where some indefensible — even laughable — decisions are made.

There’s a twist or two that are somewhat effective — in large part due to Bigelow’s confident framing — but once the script reveals its tricks, the tension present in the first hour of the film completely subsides into a lethargic, uninteresting mess. 

Even outside of the final 30 minutes, Noah Oppenheim’s script is a mess. The characters are more akin to 2D cutouts of government officials than real people, despite incessant attempts at humanizing them through prolonged interactions with loved ones. 

These faults, however, aren’t on the actors. The supporting performances are the highlights of the film, with Bigelow succeeding in giving her talented actors room to work within the all-too-broad script to create an interesting character. 

Letts (“Lady Bird,” “Ford v Ferrari”) adds humor and levity to the film — his moments obsessing over Mets SS Francisco Lindor to entirely uninterested co-workers are a particular highlight.

Basso (“Juror No. 2,” “Hillbilly Elegy”) is a revelation as Baerington, bringing a youthful nervousness balanced with a touch of inner confidence essential to his character. 

In many ways, Baerington’s character mirrors Johnny Utah, the protagonist of Bigelow’s 1991 thriller “Point Break.” Both share an underdog spirit and a desire to prove themselves among more accomplished counterparts that’s undermined by their youthful stupidity. 

Rather than politics, the film centers on leadership. With almost every key character being a leader or an aspiring leader, the story examines how leaders interact in times of great distress

The results of these narrative choices are mixed. While they allow Bigelow to focus her feature more on the nauseating experience of leading a nation than political ideologies, this leaves many moments feeling hollow and uninteresting. 

“A House of Dynamite” is a political thriller almost entirely apolitical. Nothing in this movie really speaks to or resembles the current political climate, making it seem more like a feel good ‘80s movie than overtly partisan films audiences are accustomed to today, like “Eddington” or “Mickey 17.”

The apolitical nature of the film is a fascinating choice in the current political landscape. Resulting eye rolls from many critics are sure to come. 

The movie could be a nice escape from the harsh realities of American politics — an escape to a time when competency and leadership were expected from American officials, even in the worst of situations. 

While Bigelow deserves much credit for making a bevy of bold choices throughout, the film ends up being a bit of a drag on the whole — so close to achieving something interesting but never materializing into the great film the first hour promises. 

“A House of Dynamite,” rated R, is streaming on Netflix beginning Oct. 24.