🤖 AI Summary
Overview
This episode critiques Kathryn Bigelow's film House of Dynamite, a technically proficient yet narratively hollow exploration of America's response to a potential nuclear strike. Despite its strong cast, realistic portrayal of military systems, and tense opening, the film fails to deliver meaningful resolutions or insights, leaving viewers frustrated and questioning its purpose.
Notable Quotes
- How about we make the ultimate war movie that has absolutely nothing to say about war, our misplaced faith in the systems that safeguard against it, or the flawed human nature which enables it to happen in the first place?
- The Critical Drinker, on the film's lack of thematic depth.
- Story resolutions are for winners and you're not a winner, you're a loser. You bastard.
- The Critical Drinker, on the film's refusal to provide narrative payoff.
- It’s a movie that leaves you with lots of questions. And the biggest one being, why the [__] did I just waste two hours on this?
- The Critical Drinker, summarizing his frustration with the film.
🎥 The Premise and Execution
- The film begins with a tense scenario: a missile detected over the Western Pacific, presumed harmless but later confirmed to be targeting Chicago.
- Military leaders face high-stakes decisions—whether to retaliate or wait—but the narrative repeatedly resets to retell events from different perspectives.
- The Critical Drinker criticizes this approach, noting that the multiple perspectives fail to add depth, context, or understanding to the story.
🎭 Performances and Technical Skill
- The cast, including Idris Elba, Rebecca Ferguson, and Jared Harris, delivers grounded and believable performances. Even Moses Ingram is praised for her tolerable portrayal.
- Kathryn Bigelow's direction is lauded for its ability to balance tension and human drama, reminiscent of her work on The Hurt Locker and Zero Dark Thirty.
- The film's attention to detail in depicting military systems and protocols is impressive, maintaining immersion throughout.
💣 Lack of Narrative Payoff
- Despite its promising start, the film fails to resolve key questions: the missile's origin, the possibility of sabotage, or the broader geopolitical implications.
- The repetitive structure stretches 30 minutes of plot into a two-hour runtime, frustrating viewers with its lack of progression or resolution.
- The Critical Drinker argues that the film ultimately has nothing to say
beyond the obvious message that nuclear war is bad.
🤔 Thematic Void
- The film misses opportunities to critique flawed systems, explore nuclear brinksmanship, or delve into human nature under pressure.
- Its technical competence and realism are undermined by the absence of a compelling overarching theme or purpose.
- The Critical Drinker concludes that the film's lack of direction is its greatest flaw, leaving audiences questioning its point.
AI-generated content may not be accurate or complete and should not be relied upon as a sole source of truth.
📋 Video Description
Its Kathryne Bigelow's first movie in almost a decade. An epic multi-front examination of America's response a possible nuclear strike, with an all-star cast and superb performances. And its a massively frustrating experience that ultimately goes nowhere and has nothing to say for itself. So join me for my review.