Kathryn Bigelow’s latest film, A House of Dynamite, delivers a gripping and explosive political thriller that explores an urgent and terrifying scenario: the United States response to an incoming nuclear missile with less than 20 minutes before it strikes Chicago. With limited intelligence, the US government must confront a frightening ambiguity—uncertainty over which nation has launched the missile, and thus who to retaliate against. The film, masterfully paced and tension-filled, offers a sobering reflection on the precariousness of modern global security.

Bigelow, renowned for her Academy Award-winning film The Hurt Locker, brings her signature intensity and precision to this film, which is structured in three acts presenting the same event from differing viewpoints. Idris Elba’s portrayal of the President only appears in the third act, at a moment reminiscent of George W. Bush's historic reception of news on 9/11, underscoring the weighty decision before him. Faced with potential annihilation, the President must weigh advice that ranges from aggressive military action to cautious restraint, with the fate of millions hanging in the balance. Jared Harris delivers a compelling performance as the Secretary of Defense, his personal connection to Chicago adding poignant depth to the narrative.

The screenplay, crafted by Noah Oppenheim—a former NBC News executive—adds an authentic White House atmosphere without ever diluting the film’s urgency or gravitas. The dialogue eschews glibness in favour of a realistic portrayal of crisis decision-making, avoiding the clichés often found in political dramas. Supporting performances, including Rebecca Ferguson as Captain Olivia Walker commanding the White House Situation Room, contribute to the film’s overall sense of immediacy and emotional engagement.

Critics have widely praised A House of Dynamite for its nerve-wracking plausibility and masterful construction, reflected in its strong critical acclaim and high rating on Rotten Tomatoes. It stands as a chilling reminder that despite technological advances, the world remains perilously close to nuclear catastrophe—aptly summarised by the film’s metaphor: “We all live in a house filled with dynamite.”

In stark contrast to Bigelow’s taut thriller, Benny Safdie’s The Smashing Machine takes a deeply personal and gritty look at the world of mixed martial arts. Starring Dwayne Johnson in a transformative role, the film chronicles the tumultuous career and struggles of MMA fighter Mark Kerr. Unlike Johnson’s typical larger-than-life action roles, this biopic reveals the human cost behind the sport, delving into Kerr’s fears, steroid abuse, and complex relationship with his partner, played by Emily Blunt. The film’s raw, intimate portrayal of personal battle and sporting ambition is underscored by Johnson’s committed performance, garnering solid critical acclaim for breaking new ground in his acting repertoire.

While The Smashing Machine focuses on individual hardship, Bigelow’s A House of Dynamite contemplates a global-scale crisis, yet both films share a thematic undercurrent of pressure and the consequences of split-second decisions. Both have been praised for their depth and strong performances, with A House of Dynamite noted for its meticulous depiction of the machinery of state in peril, and The Smashing Machine for its unflinching honesty in portraying a fighter’s inner world.

Together, these films underscore the power of cinema to navigate both the intimate dimensions of human struggle and the vast, unsettling anxieties of geopolitical tensions, offering audiences compelling stories that resonate on multiple levels.

📌 Reference Map:

Source: Noah Wire Services