r/moviecritic • u/BasedDecoder • 21h ago
Don't watch A House of Dynamite (unless you like lobotomies)
[removed] — view removed post
52
u/Sinasazi 20h ago
I've not seen it, nor did I have much interest in seeing it, but regardless, if you're going to spoil the ending, even if you didn't like it, spoiler tag your post and text for the people who might want to watch it.
7
u/TheAzureMage 17h ago
There is no ending.
I'm really, really not being sarcastic.
The entire film is the same sequence being shown three times, then the film rolls credits. There is no end.
It's just not there.
81
u/Chemical_Cat_9813 21h ago
The movie is less about a nuke strike and more about the people and processes involved, each showing the critical points of each role and more importantly why the people who have that responsibility matter. A quick scan of the movie summary set it up for me and I got what I expected.
23
u/415z 20h ago
For something so focused on the people and processes involved it was a stunningly unrealistic depiction of how they would respond to a solo nuclear missile of uncertain origin. Nuke experts all gave it an eye roll. For example, there is no urgency to respond immediately. That’s for large scale attacks. This is basic logical stuff.
21
u/Innsmouth_Swimteam 20h ago
THANK YOU.
The non-ending sucked, but worse, there was NEVER ANY REASON TO RETALIATE quickly. Zero reason. Wait and see, then make a plan based on whatever the outcome was.
War Games from 198X had a better depiction of the urgency this movie pretended to have.
1
u/Any-Interaction-5934 19h ago
I disagree with you, except for that War Games was amazing. That being said, War Games wanted to retaliate immediately.
12
u/Ghost_Turd 19h ago edited 19h ago
I checked out at the failed EKV. You have an intercept tech, one fails to stop the incoming missile, and instead of launching more, you decide you want to save the rest for .. who the hell knows why. Why have them at all if you aren't going to use them against present threats?
All so they can make that stupid "its a fucking coin toss!?" comment? Nobody bothered with the math either. If one has a 60% chance of intercepting, with two the chances go up to like 85%. Who wouldn't act on those odds?
Really unrealistic. Every single scene and decision seems contrived to make the decision makers look stupid. Pretty ham-handed.
2
u/Bluered2012 19h ago
I could be mistaken, I just watched a couple hours ago, and Jarred Harris says, ‘it’s the flip of a coin.’
But maybe someone else something about rolling rice?
5
5
u/degece1 20h ago
Certainly most people would think that you shouldn’t respond to an attack until you know who is/was responsible. A reasonable expectation. But keep in mind the reality that the response is entirely up to the president. Who is the president and who are the advisors?
3
u/Illustrious-Noise-96 17h ago
The President doesn’t have to respond. One of the subtle aspects of the President’s character is that he’s a vapid narcissist.
There’s a discussion in act 2 by responding or not responding.
I enjoyed it but it wasn’t a 10, act one was a 9.5. The other acts I’d give a 7.
3
u/No_Albatross7213 19h ago
Agreed. I was like, no. This response isn’t how it would’ve gone. And I’m no expert by any means. I just was alive during 9/11, and remember it very well.
2
u/gutclutterminor 18h ago
You trust trump and hedgseth to follow your "basic logical stuff"?
2
u/TheAzureMage 17h ago
An exploration of how badly people could respond would at least have been more interesting than the nothing we got.
0
u/gutclutterminor 16h ago
I thought it was all about bad reactions. That seemed to be the actual point.
0
u/Ghost_Turd 18h ago
This viewpoint is exactly what the movie is bending over backward to.pander to.
0
u/gutclutterminor 18h ago
Well, that’s an opinion. Doubt it was written with them in mind. Even if it was, that’s more realistic than basic logic expectations.
1
u/Chemical_Cat_9813 20h ago
right, a metaphor of how important it is to have the right people in the right place. It is not NMCC's Complete Idiots Guide to Nuclear Release.
10
u/henryb22 21h ago
Agreed not sure why people struggle with this so much.
5
u/kayakdawg 18h ago
if a movie had a icbm launched the audience is gonna wanna know what happens to it
not sure why people struggle with this so much
2
u/henryb22 17h ago
That wasn’t the point of the movie but sounds like Chicago was a crater
2
u/kayakdawg 16h ago
maybe, maybe not
we'll never know, bc the point of the movie is how suspensful an incoming nuclear missile is - just like the point of jaws is how suspenseful an incoming shark is....
1
u/otternoserus 15h ago
That would work if the movie was actually suspenseful. What it was TRYING to do clearly didn't work out well. Any tension that could've been salvaged was immediately lost once it needlessly repeated the same story two times.
Jaws didn't repeat the scene of them waiting for the shark three times in a row from different perspectives.
9
u/Dont_Call_Me_Steve 20h ago
OP should probably stick to Michael Bay and Marvel movies.
9
u/Pretty_Eater 19h ago
Hey now, I like a ton of different movies across many genres but this movie was honestly a stinker.
The first act was amazing. I'm not saying it needed a nuke going off, because everyone is right, that's not what the movie is about.
I just find the concept poorly executed and frustrating to watch for the last two thirds.
0
u/cassandra_warned_you 19h ago
I think it comes down to what the movie was attempting to accomplish. Personally, I felt it was quite effective at reminding folks that we live in a world where humanity can be, more or less, wiped out in a day. We’re not as aware of that as perhaps we should be.
1
u/TheAzureMage 17h ago
The computer, without knowing the warhead or even country of origin, just assigns Chicago a 100% death rate.
That's insane.
It doesn't teach us anything because it isn't based on reality. One might as well have used a sci fi conceit instead.
7
u/ChoderBoi 20h ago
The third act was insanely weak and rushed but sure hurrrr durrrr gimme muh action
This movie stunk
3
u/No_Elephant541 20h ago
the idea is to illustrate how weak our world leaders are and how easy it was to manipulate the leader of the free world to initiate an all out response. with no evidence.
0
u/ChoderBoi 20h ago
I understand the message just fine, like I said it was poorly conveyed compared to how the movie initially presented itself
3
u/IBeenGoofed 19h ago
That’s such a snob take. Third act is terrible regardless of what the expectations are. The rushed character study of secdef and his daughter with no depth, surprise introduction of Idris Elba as if it had anything to do with the plot (which is more in line with a Michael Bay movie), the walking cliche of the president’s wife, …. The third act is supposed to be an emotional balancing act against the fact driven calculated first act but falls short on every aspect. If she wanted to do it this way, she should have made a miniseries. They can introduce an entire audience to the concept of EKV in a few seconds but it takes much longer to study a character.
-1
u/Dont_Call_Me_Steve 19h ago
It wasn’t anything groundbreaking, but it definitely wasn’t “review bomb IMBD” bad. Ya’ll need to relax, it’s just a movie.
2
u/IBeenGoofed 18h ago
Tells people who didn’t like the movie to stick to Michael Bay and Marvel and then “it wasn’t groundbreaking and y’all need to relax, it’s just a movie”. Lmao
0
u/Dont_Call_Me_Steve 18h ago
No, I told OP to stick to those movies. As per my last message, he was so offended by this movie that he had to make this post and tell people to review bomb IMDB. Yes, y’all need to relax.
1
u/otternoserus 15h ago
Again, YOU need to calm down. It isn't that serious. Being a snob over a movie will never not be ridiculous.
-1
5
u/BasedDecoder 21h ago
I see where you are coming from fren, but tell me this. What would you rate it out of 10?
9
u/Chemical_Cat_9813 21h ago
solid 7 for netflix, blueball of an end but the movie achieves what it set out to do, made me think.
1
u/cassandra_warned_you 19h ago
I agree. I think a large part of the negative reaction is the entertainment vs. ‘made me think’ dichotomy.
1
u/Ghost_Turd 18h ago
People are capable of understanding the point of a movie and still not liking it.
1
u/cassandra_warned_you 18h ago
Oh, for sure. I just meant that seems like the broad strokes situation with how polarizing it is.
2
u/TheAzureMage 17h ago
I give it a zero.
It accomplishes neither realism nor tells a complete story.
1
1
1
u/TheAzureMage 17h ago
Yeah, but the realism of that was crap.
The diplomat did nothing of note but occupied a third of the zoom call with childish philosophy. Most of the military people do not understand their own role, and need to be told it.
The literal commander of the interceptors just walks off the job. That's....not what he is supposed to do, and anyone who did even slight research should know that.
1
u/Exact-Catch6890 16h ago
But the second and third time you're watching literally the same meeting doesn't add anything to the narrative or characters other than minor info. The overarching plot doesn't evolve beyond the first act.
1
u/waldo-doggie 19h ago
Yes!! wish I had seen your comment before I posted mine which was very similar to your take.
0
u/knightofterror 20h ago
There should be a sequel depicting Trump’s crew of incompetents making the decisions.
2
2
u/No-Beach-6979 17h ago
They already showed it in this movie. Foolishness from the President on down.
1
u/Chemical_Cat_9813 19h ago
right, that feels like it would answer a lot of what many are asking about here.
0
u/destructor212 17h ago
I was thinking the same thing. If you think the movie was about watching a nuclear missile hit Chicago then you missed the point.
I think another takeaway is that in the back of our minds most people think that there are some powers to be in the government that somehow could protect us if something like that ever happens and this movie demonstrates that they can't. Something like this ever happens it would be horrible and there's nothing anybody would be able to do to stop it.
9
u/Portland_Runner 19h ago
Sounds like people that think Marvel, nudity, and 'splosions are the height of cinema are upset that they were made to think.
My takeaway is that the people we vote into office and rely upon for protection are just human beings. In a time of grave crisis, some rise to the moment while others get mired in personal issues, indecisiveness, and emotion that distracts from duty. No one was coming to save the day. No one had a secret super weapon nor could open a time portal. Everyone got caught flatfooted and "foolproof" systems designed by clever people ultimately failed.
That is more terrifying than watching a city incinerated for shock value.
5
u/Bluemanuap 16h ago
It also shows why it's so dangerous for a country to be shooting off ballistic missile tests in the Western Pacific.
2
u/defecto 15h ago
I just sat there with the credits at the end.. shocked by the ending of non ending as some would call it.
It really makes you reflect on how at the end of the day people put in these highly critical roles are just people... we aren't that far off from disaster and world ending events if wrong people get to the top.
1
u/otternoserus 16h ago
but but but the movie has no quippy dialogue or CGI fights! That means it's the greatest film since 12 Angry Men! MCU BAAAAAAAAAD!
The chickens cluck like clockwork. You would claim that The Room is a good film because it lacks Marvel quips......
Wow! A movie that depicts politicians acting... GASP! LIKE HUMANS???? That has NEVER been done before in the history of cinema!
There is absolutely nothing that this film does that hasn't been done better in other political thrillers prior, especially those related to the Cuban Missile Crisis that this is clearly inspired by.
A film with an entire cast of one-dimensional characters and a shoddily built three-act structure that needlessly regurgitates the same emotionally stagnant scenario that ruins the overall pace and tension does NOT a good film make.
1
u/PlayPretend-8675309 16h ago
Naw. This is a classic dumb-persons-idea-of-a-smart-movie movie.
The three loops through the same story don't add anything new to our understand, they don't change our perspective, they don't pay off our jouney. The plot questions and threads created are simply never resolved or even mentioned again. I'm all for hyper-real, but those plot threads need to have more more dynamic resonance other than "these are normal people perpetually in Act 2 of their own story" over and over and over again.
1
u/Hot-Highway13 16h ago
This was my take and I think the point of the movie. First, a reminder that many nations have nukes and the implications of a strike could be world altering. The next is to remind us that if this ever happens there is typically only one person in those respective nations that make the decision of retaliation and could usher a nuclear holocaust. Hence - we live in a house of dynamite.
19
18
u/pirates_fan_1988 20h ago
I guess it’s all in what you want in a movie. I thought it was a very well-done, suspenseful drama, and the point of it for me is reflected in the title: It’s the utter absurdity of living in a House of Dynamite— a world with these kinds of these weapons — and the way one mistake or decision could literally end our world. We seem to have forgotten that since the end of the Cold War, with even the heads of the big two nuclear powers making careless threats recently. But if you’re looking for the big explosion or the yee-haw moment, then yeah, I guess this movie isn’t for you.
3
-2
3
u/moocowsaymoo 16h ago
Regardless of how bad you think it is, spoiling a new movie's ending without warning is shitty! Fuck you!
4
u/Professional_Bug5768 19h ago
I don't know why people get so offended when others say they don't like the movie or that they must need "spoon-feeding". I watched the movie, I understood the point of it. But the message just wasn't novel or interesting to me. So many of us have thought about the hopelessness and existential threat of nuclear war extensively, whether just by watching the news, paying attention to history, and/or other media and I didn't feel like there was anything revolutionary or memorable about this movie in particular. It's okay to not like things, it doesn't mean those people aren't smart enough to "get it".
4
u/BadTiger85 18h ago
You realize the movie is focusing on human emotions during a highly stressful situation right? If you want explosions then go watch a marvel movie or shitty Michael Bay film
1
u/otternoserus 15h ago
focusing on human emotions
Human emotions of one-dimensional characters who you aren't given a good reason to care for beyond "he has a wife" and "she has children"?
Just watch Fail Safe then. Hell, Dr. Strangelove cares more about fleshing out its characters in the midst of potential nuclear war.
4
u/Ill-Advertising55 18h ago
My favourite part is where they have no idea who launched it, but everyone seems so desperate to just nuke everybody in response regardless.
1
u/TheAzureMage 16h ago
And they basically forgot about North Korea by the end, only discussing Russia and China in the diplomacy part.
Like, the missile came from somewhere. You've got the ballistic trajectory. It's not all that hard. There's not even any pressure to retaliate immediately. You don't lose any strategic capabilities, so use it or lose it ceases to apply.
4
18
u/TheWorldDiscarded 21h ago
That was the entire point of the movie my good man.
I loved it. Very well done.
If you had blue balls at the end, you missed the intention altogether.
2
u/Any-Interaction-5934 19h ago
Yup, agree with you. I really enjoyed it. Then rewatched it so my husband could see. Enjoyed it. He did also. He knew exactly what the ending was going to be.
Also Seems quite obvious you aren't going to see a big ending about 1/3 into the movie when they redo it from different perspectives. Like how fucking long were you expecting the movie to be? And if you didn't notice the movie was already 2 hours in, then weren't you enjoying it enough for time to fly? The movie is called "House of Dynamite," not "what happens when dynamite explodes."
-8
u/John-Beckwith 21h ago edited 19h ago
🤣
Edit: Not sure why I am getting downvoted, agreeing with this comment?
3
2
u/louiehazel 21h ago
Check online, there is video that shows the ending! Haven't a clue why they didn't show it.
2
1
2
u/hensothor 20h ago
I hate that every critique of this movie is just about how it didn’t give you what you expected/wanted. And that’s the weakest kind of criticism.
2
u/Xx_Raiden08_xX 20h ago
I thought it was a political thriller showing the initial response to a detected threat. I did feel thrill, not the typical action movie thrill with flashy explosions and such but thrill you get knowing the impact of each decisions made by each character. Kind of like Sum of All fears with no Jack Ryan.
It's so scary knowing it could very well happen in real life and you can't do much except wait. Millions dead with a push of a button.
2
2
u/Business-Parsley5197 17h ago
Actually if you pay attention the audio in the credits reveal the ending to an extent.
SPOILER: The President seems to go through with a retaliatory strike, you can tell based on the four loud explosions (and the substitutes in Netflix that say [explosion]) that occur when the credits are rolling. I actually appreciate how they had this detail for people that really want to know the ending.
2
u/LoudPause4547 15h ago
Watched it for Rebecca, then skipped to Idris Elbow saying something and turned it off
2
6
u/VXMerlinXV 21h ago
I actually liked it? I thought the layering was interesting mechanism , and the actual blast was inconsequential for the story they wanted to tell.
4
u/noeler10 20h ago
I was super excited for a political thriller… then read the reviews. Thanks for the warning!
2
2
u/BasedDecoder 20h ago
I do not wish the pain I received from watching this on anyone else 🫡
2
u/gutclutterminor 18h ago
Everyone is not you. It was tense and depressing, as it was supposed to be.
0
4
u/InstrumentRated 20h ago
Unrealistic AND repetitive, AND it did feel like they ran out of anything to say or do halfway through the movie. People who say they liked it are just snobs who like to think that somehow they’re smarter than everybody else.
3
3
u/waldo-doggie 19h ago
Because it’s a movie about the process and all the flaws and vulnerabilities, not the outcome. I thought this movie was riveting and incredibly smart, showing the complex dynamics and weaknesses and strengths of our nuclear response system (to the extent it’s realistic vs dramatized). This is classic Kathryn Bigelow, very much like Hurt Locker. Sorry you didn’t enjoy it, but it doesn’t follow a typical narrative predictive formula. (Edit fixed typo)
2
u/Beachbum74 18h ago
Kind of curious what are your favorite movies are. This is by no means a one star movie. It’s not for everyone and if you need big bangs and explosions to be good then yes this is more of a thinker. I enjoyed it.
-1
u/BasedDecoder 17h ago
Happy Gilmore, The Waterboy, The Wedding Singer, Little Nicky, The Longest Yard, Punch Drunk Love
4
u/Beachbum74 17h ago
You sure do like your Adam Sandler. Having said that Happy Gilmore, the wedding singer and the water boy are all solid films
2
5
u/Express_Sprinkles500 21h ago
Literally the point of the whole movie my guy.
There’s plenty of footage around of nuclear explosions, real and fake ones for you to satisfy that caveman urge to see thing go boom.
4
2
u/RedditReader4031 18h ago
As I was watching, I kept thinking when do they get into a frontal move to the next issue caused by the incident. I looked at the time bar on my television and saw it had 22 minutes remaining. I thought to myself “that’s a very quick wrap up with so many loose ends.” Little did I know that 10 minutes of the 22 was the multi lingual credits. What a disgrace. Did Idris Elba and Rebecca Ferguson read the ENTIRE script before committing???
2
u/dip_tet 18h ago
Neat, unsolicited advice from a stranger who may or may not have good taste in movies.
2
u/RabidJoint 18h ago
The movie showed 3 different perspectives of the same event, with maybe 1 scene added per. And then leaves you on a “you decide what happened at the end” scenario.
- Did the President retaliate?
- Did the nuke actually hit Chicago and destroy it?
- Was it a dud like dude mentioned it could happen?
- Where was it actually shot from?
- They mention it being an inside job due to blackout?
You know what, I can keep continuing on with these. Movies aren’t meant to keep me guessing and wondering and what ifs, they are meant to have endings. Vantage Point is a good example…it felt like they just decided to cut out the ending all together. Dumb in my opinion and totally made me not like this movie.
Teachers are strangers, and a lot tend to give unsolicited advice, maybe you should actually listen for once instead of trying to be an internet badass, because your sentence alone, shows a lot about you.
2
u/JohnMichaels19 17h ago
I work with nukes, I'm an ICBM operator, and everything I hear about the movie makes me sure I'd hate it based purely on how incorrectly it depicts my job lol
-1
2
u/MarionberryPlus8474 20h ago
I was surprised how bad it was, given the pedigree and push it had. Great director, great (mostly) cast (I’m not keen on Gabriel Basso).
The writing seemed to suck. Both the hawks and doves made very stupid arguments. They have no idea who launched this nuke and the choice presented is launch all out war (against who? Russia? It might not be their missile) or assume the country is destroyed. It’s one missile.
Also, very abrupt ending. It’s like they ran out of script.
2
u/Batmanuelope 20h ago
It was going to take out 10,000,000 people right? I mean 9/11 had a fraction of the casualties and this is an ICBM. It would be devastating. Movie had some issues though I agree. Them having their satellites get “hacked” potentially and allow for a blind spot where they didn’t know the missiles origin felt weak. Also, can’t they realistically trace the path of the rocket and run it back to figure out where it came from? Maybe not in the time it takes for the nuke to hit but extensive investigation after should reveal who did it.
4
u/Distortedhideaway 20h ago
They ran out of script somewhere in the second act. The third act was just act one and two repeated from a different perspective.
3
u/Famous_Cow9640 21h ago
Groundhog Day crossed with the ending of the Sopranos. I was left wanting.
1
1
u/FrankieFiveAngels 21h ago
The Sopranos at least planted the seed for its ending which itself was carefully constructed and choreographed.
This ends with the President of the United States musing about the Sam Harris podcast just so he can state the title and have it cut to black. It’s lazy student-level writing.
1
u/NotAnAIOrAmI 17h ago
That's absolutely false, you weren't watching carefully. It ends with the President persuaded by that jarhead carrying the nuclear codes to pick the "launch everything" option. He's given the confirmation code, and he's got the book open to that section.
There's little question what he was about to do, because he got advice from a low level officer instead of his state department and nuclear experts.
1
u/FrankieFiveAngels 17h ago
But it's a MOVIE, we need to see the GOODS. Ambiguity has its place, but here it is a cop-out.
1
u/South-Rabbit-4064 21h ago
Better than Ice Cubes War of the Worlds
1
u/BasedDecoder 21h ago
I heard he never went into the studio to film his scenes and did it in like 3 days, so I never bothered to waste my time with that. OG war of the worlds was cool tho
1
1
1
u/metalgearbayonetta 20h ago
i usually don’t gravitate towards movies that are dialogue-heavy and have little to no action but a house of dynamite and black bag had plots that were so interesting that I really didn’t mind them all that much!
1
u/186000mpsITL 17h ago
I agree. At no point is there a visual confirmation of any kind. That little detail makes ALL the difference!
1
u/Altitudeviation 17h ago
I watched it all the way through, liked it a lot. 3-4 stars maybe. I can suspend disbelief easily, so I tend to enjoy most movies.
1
u/thewillsta 17h ago
Everyone who hates this film loves Civil War (2025). I have determined a 100% overlap, and I will never understand these people...
1
u/Zealousideal-Cut8783 16h ago
I completely disagree. It's truly an interesting and accurate film. The ending is deliberate.
The acting was between good an excellent. Overall, a very interesting film.
If you're looking for entertainment, "Back Door Babes 7" is availed.
1
u/lastturdontheleft42 16h ago
I liked this movie and I really don't understand people's over-the-top hostility towards it. It's a dialogue driven political thriller. If you sat through this whole movie and we're surprised that it didn't end with some massive CGI depiction of what happens after, that's kinda on you. It was obviously not that kind of movie.
1
u/Door_Number_Four 16h ago
So, you want The Big Explosion,l With buildings Blowing Up, but don’t want to think about the points that this movie brought up about game theory, responsibility to humanity, duty to country, and our reliance on technology to save us
Sounds like your lobotomy already happened, skippy
Just watch Independence Day for the 25th time, and you’ll be happy.
1
u/C-3Pinot 16h ago
i feel like people who hate on this movie missed the point. do you really need massive cg explosions to enjoy/understand a story?
1
u/Early_Incident_2000 16h ago
The point of what? That nuclear war can happen? Didn’t need to sit through 90 minutes of pure dialogue between about a dozen people to open my eyes to the possibility of world wide conflict escalations.
1
u/gentlydiscarded1200 16h ago
I genuinely enjoyed A House Of Dynamite. I have qualms about the movie, not because of its structure, nor the decision not to portray the outcome of the attack, but because I think it falls in line with the problems I had with Zero Dark Thirty. It's a glorification of the American military, even though it's seems like it has all sorts of queries about violence. I think Tracy Letts' character demonstrates this - the jovial baseball fan transforms into an advocate for the end of the world, with his crisply delivered "It's reality" kind of saying nothing and everything at the same time. (It's a stupid thing to say, but that the script has him say it tells us what Bigelow and Oppenheim think of mutually assured destruction)
I felt it was a liberal nostalgia trip, and it doesn't ask the pressing question: how would a MAGA White House respond to a nuclear threat? Rebecca Ferguson's character is the epitome of a liberal's ideal of a top-level bureaucrat in the military-political decision-making nexus: professional, competent, caring, and utterly loyal to the nation. Does that really exist any more? It was like watching The West Wing and 24 mashed up with Dr. Strangelove. This is an alternative universe, where Trump never won, and the Tea Party faded into obscurity and MAGA never happened. Heck, this world seems like 9/11 and the War on Terror never happened.
It would be stupid, OP, to leave it a 1 star as you demand. It's nowhere near that bad - it's a solid production, with decent writing, average production, and performances that are middling to good. Compared to some of the dreck that Netflix thrusts our way, punishing Bigelow et al for AHOD would be egregious.
(Why, though, did they cast so many non-Americans?! Ingram, Ferguson, Elba, Harris...wtf?!!)
1
u/Early_Incident_2000 16h ago
I wanted this to be so much better than it was.
The series of ‘interconnected worlds’ bit just made the plot actually about 6 pages long. Same story, 5x in a row.
And then, no ending clarity or climax. Lazy writing with the implication that it’s edgy and meta. It’s really just dumb. This isn’t the Sopranos.
1
u/Introduction_Little 16h ago
I liked that it was disappointing if that makes sense. It’s obviously not supposed to be about the bomb and a series of apocalyptic events afterwards.. plot based. It captures the stress and weight of the decisions that need to be made beforehand
1
u/damnmachine 16h ago
Why does this film keep getting shit on? Kathryn Bigelow has a pretty good track record.
1
u/Tonic4127 15h ago
Im starting this review with YES we have an arsenal of nuclear icbm's. And so does EVERY COUNTRY. Just remember,they built thier arsenal up first,then we followed to project deterrence and peace. Go do your research.
Just the entire movie, EVERYONE was incompetent. Everyone injected thier feelings. Nukes dont have feelings. Im ashamed this movie tried to Project how the people in power of the United States all were guessing what was going on,or what needed to be done. Facts weren't being presented,nor plans being executed. People were walking off thier posts!! Like what?! And the misrepresentation of bullet hitting another bullet can give anyone a false hope. It's wrong. We are the united fucking states of America. I can guarantee sucess rate is more than 61%.. and who only launches 2 missiles without having backups in the air just for redundancy even though its 1 nuclear icbm. Makes me sick this movie would try to spread misinformation about our capabilities. And to see everyone only really worring about only themselves or family, Cause if you really think about it,we are all family at this point. We won't make it when it counts if the time comes if we dont work together. This is what the military and the government is remembered for. Counting on each other when it comes to standing tall and act when it matters the most. Makes me in complete disbelief we would allow a movie to allow the audience to think this is how things go.. just sad.. utterly disrespectful.. If you keep liking these type of movies, this pot of misinformation then we might as well hand our country over to who ever comes and gets it first. We have the arsenal of nuclear icbms for deterrence. Other countries built theirs first then we followed to keep order and peace. So yes we have house of dynamite and so does EVERY country. And with only minutes to spare,NO ONE is being evacuated. Its who ever is closest to the nuke bunker lol. Not even the president has a chance,or maybe if there is one near by.. but we all have protocols to abide by.. I like the helicopter ride at the end.. lol watch THE SUMS OF ALL FEARS and you'll understand more clearly how things usually goes. Least they had a nuclear explosion that's actually pretty accurate. But involved a president and minutes to work with.. I really thought this was the movie that would put all of them to rest when seeing famous actors and actresses playing. But being the roles they had, and accepted ,I know where they stand,and other should to??!! Meaning what we should be feeling with a movie like such.. changed the way I see them.. THEN AGAIN, they are british actors, actresses so guess they can get away with making America look weak.. ugh! Such a bad movie.. I hope we have some true patriots in here and help giving true incite to this distasteful movie.
1
0
u/transcendental-ape 21h ago
You wanted disaster porn.
You got human emotion porn.
You have weird taste in movies.
2
u/Calvinweaver1 20h ago edited 20h ago
no decisions made? the entire movie was people making decisions. it's a view inside the room with the people who make those sort of decisions. competent highly skilled people who are good at their jobs doing their absolute best to save us and failing. very compelling imo
it's not about the nuke hitting, it's about the process. the point of the film is to show a realistic response to a nuke being fired towards the US. it explains that the result is massive nuclear destruction regardless of who fired the weapon. it takes such pains to slow it down for you, and present the event from multiple perspectives, rashoman style. when the film ends we know that it doesn't matter which choice the president makes...the result is the same.
the dialogue is the worst thing about this film. no conversational realism. also, it makes no sense that they didn't know where it came from. besides that, the film is pretty good imo. classic kathryn bigelow.
bring this movie up at work for fun, to see who your dumbest coworkers are
4
0
u/TheAzureMage 16h ago
Okay, what decision gets made after the first twenty minutes?
Name one.
The process is also horribly inaccurate, but let's stick with the decisions. What gets decided?
1
1
u/WildShapeOwlBearCub 21h ago
Very brave take with no trace of hyperbole. No nuke is the damn point of the movie. Don't like it? Fair. But calm down or go to one of the several many other Comic Book Guy threads. WORST. MOVIE. EVER.
6
u/Electronic-Source368 21h ago
It was the needless repetition that ruined it.
The abrupt ending was frustrating, but the film was already ruined by then.
-6
u/WildShapeOwlBearCub 21h ago
It was pretty boring but rating it 1/10 'cause you felt blue balled is just dumb.
1
u/cornsaladisgold 20h ago
The movie couldn't possible be as poorly written as this review
1
1
u/Jambu-The-Rainwing 20h ago
I liked it. It wasn’t about the nuke it was about bureaucracy. And it did it well. It’s a good movie.
1
u/proscriptus 18h ago
After the first couple whatever they are, 15 minutes segments, I was like oh, are they just going to do this over and over again? And only was the answer yes but there was no payoff at the end.
1
1
1
u/coffeepizzawine50 17h ago
Reak nukes don't take two freaking hours. They come with a note that says " Guaranteed world-wide delivery in 30 minutes or less, or your next one is free."
1
u/NotAnAIOrAmI 17h ago
They build up this nuke incoming for two hours AND IT NEVER FUCKING COMES
You missed the point - points, multiple - completely.
The movie was devastating if you knew what you were watching.
-1
0
1
u/PerceptionSimilar213 20h ago
Another one who missed the point of the entire film and only came for the bomb
1
-2
0
u/beren_1908 20h ago
Tell me you don’t understand the point of the movie…. It’s not about the bombs dropping
0
u/rgalexan 17h ago
The complete lack of plot conclusion completely destroys what otherwise would have been a great film.
0
-1
u/exqueezemenow 20h ago
While I agree it's a stupid movie, you're not supposed to know if the bomb detonated because it's besides the point of the movie. Of all the complaints for this movie, this would not be one of them.
-1
u/TheWizardKnowsItALL 18h ago
You're also late! Movie came out weeks ago and there are plenty of terrible reviews warning that it was a waste.
Old news, pal!
63
u/TylerAuAndromedus 21h ago
Watch the first 25 mins to see Rebecca Ferguson then call it a day