House of Dynamite is already as old as milk – for one major reason

Pannik rules a house of dynamitenew netflix thriller hurt locker Director Kathryn Bigelow. Or at least it should be so. The film is set in the minutes before the mainland US is attacked by a nuclear missile of uncertain origin. It’s a terrifying proposition, and through the scattered viewpoints of characters – security officials, military experts, and even the US President himself – we see how quickly a nation can be shaken to its core. However, in the face of this disaster, we see a world of enormous potential, of intellectual seriousness: complex infrastructures developed to deal with exactly this kind of crisis. As they say, adults do whatever’s good for them In-charge.

Yet there’s a bright hole at its center a house of dynamiteBigelow’s film is apparently based on a kind of logical surrealism – somewhat plausible (It depends on who you ask) Nuclear scenario. And yet it all remains a completely absurd fantasy. Told in a triptych, the film re-examines the same chunk of time – the half-hour or so when the missile takes off – from multiple perspectives, the last focusing primarily on the President, played by Idris Elba. Referred to only by her job title, Elba’s character is hardly movie potes for ages: He is conflicted and overwhelmed by the situation, a fallible but mostly rational leader. And he’s notable because he bears little resemblance to his real-world counterpart. Because America does not have Idris Elba as President. They have Donald Trump.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying that a house of dynamite Should have been established during Trump’s presidency. It’s hard to imagine Trump’s fiery, irascible and – let’s face it – grimly comical image existing within Bigelow’s true reality. That scenario would encourage satire more than political intrigue. (It is telling that critics have drawn parallels between a house of dynamite And Stanley Kubrick’s iconic satire Dr Strangelove – That film, made and set amid the rising nuclear tensions of the Cold War, was initially conceived as a straightforward thriller, only for Kubrick to conclude while writing it that the only appropriate tone was farce.) And yet, this is our reality: If a missile were launched at America, it would be the former apprentice Star who will be tasked with retribution questions.

From a storytelling standpoint, it’s completely understandable why Bigelow, or the film’s writer, Noah Oppenheim, would shy away from even including a character like Trump. (President Ronald Rump, oh, let’s say… played by Jim Belushi?) Trump is a man known not only for his belligerent and juvenile personal behavior, but also for his impulsivity; Not only should the tone of the film suit their personality, but the narrative as well. But what is the alternative? In situating ourselves within this sanitized, Trump-less reality, a house of dynamite Fundamentally fails in its attempt at realism. The whole thing seems to be stuck in a political moment that no longer has any physical existence. In other words, it feels just like the Obama-era. (Although it should be said that the President of Elba is clearly not Obama stand-in in characterization or framing.)

A generous reading might reveal that this is the entire point. a house of dynamite It is a fantasy, and its deviations from reality only serve to enhance the film’s messages about nuclear threat. This is the best case scenario for a worst case scenario. “If this kind of mess would happen with perfectly capable, determined people at every level of command, what on Earth would happen without them?” But such thought experiments have limited value. In the end, it serves only to euphemize the surreal political reality of modern America—even if the conclusion it reaches is one of fateful defeat.

there is a reason for this Dr Strangelove It remains a classic today, long after the Cold War has become a lukewarm memory. And this is the reason a house of dynamite Less than a week after coming out, still feels old. Even in the best of times, there is no balanced, sensible response to the idea of ​​a nuclear arsenal: the idea that millions or billions of lives are just a few button presses away from oblivion is too shocking for most of us to even contemplate. But Trump, a boorish, vain ex-reality TV star, has brought the absurdities of modern politics to the surface, and made them impossible to ignore. He is the man behind the nuclear arsenal. This is the world we live in. a house of dynamite Lives somewhere else entirely.

‘A House of Dynamite’ is available to stream on Netflix