“A House of Dynamite” follows the president and his entourage, who must use the limited time they have to try and shoot down a nuclear missile before it reaches the United States.
The film attempts to cover a lot of different bases in its opening minutes, going through the various sectors that are involved in the situation. With the introduction of so many characters so quickly, “A House of Dynamite” is immediately engaging. It’s a lot of information for general audiences to grasp, making for a gripping start that’s hard to look away from.
It’s a chaotic introduction – one that mirrors the story that follows.
Controlled Chaos at the Brink
Amid all the insanity, there are still attempts at developing the characters. While the focus constantly shifts from one individual to another, the film adds small quirks that make specific people stand out. This adds a layer of humanity to an out-of-control situation.
“A House of Dynamite” takes 19 minutes of time and spans it into 112 minutes. Its nonlinear approach shows shades of brilliance in moments, while resulting in overindulgence in others. While it’s intriguing to see many different angles of the same story, it also becomes redundant at a point.
This excessiveness eventually translates to the characters as well. There can be too much of a good thing – and “A House of Dynamite” introduces too many characters. Never providing enough screen time to any single one of them, the humanity-focused side of the story begins to suffer. While this would naturally be an ensemble effort in reality, it doesn’t necessarily translate well to a movie format.
A Stacked Cast Fighting For Space
The list of talent is endless in “A House of Dynamite” – Rebecca Ferguson (Olivia Walker), Idris Elba (POTUS), Anthony Ramos (Major Daniel Gonzalez), Jason Clarke (Mark Miller), Greta Lee (Ana Park), Gabriel Basso (Jake Baerington) and more.
The stacked cast plays a part in this problem, as a large quantity of actors have to fight for screen time.
Prior to the start of the final act, “A House of Dynamite” begins to lose steam. Even with the charismatic Elba finally brought to the screen, the story itself loses focus. While a rush of thrills quickly follows to end the film with a bang, it doesn’t diminish the fact that it’s at times uneven – and overlong.
Power and Precision Without the Impact
Director Kathryn Bigelow has masterful control over “A House of Dynamite.” From the cinematography to the score to the sound design, every technical element is top tier. These three aspects combine to create an experience that is truly intense from beginning to end.
Despite feeling as timely as ever, the film still can’t escape the clichés that plague these types of movies. Instead of going for a straightforward political thriller, “A House of Dynamite” throws in stereotypes that immediately pull it out of the realm of reality.
For a film that wants to provide a warning to viewers, it ultimately becomes a bogged-down, Hollywood-laminated experience.
“A House of Dynamite” will undoubtedly spark dialogue with its ending. Ambiguous and vague by design, the film succeeds at leaving many question marks. There are no answers in this story. Who fired the missile? What is the United States’ response? The film doesn’t give these answers – making it both haunting and also frustrating at the same time.
With no resolution to the story, “A House of Dynamite” leaves a sour taste. On a pure cinematic level, it feels incomplete. The story itself is more equipped to work in a TV show rather than a feature film.
“A House of Dynamite” had the potential to be a timely warning. Instead, it’s an over complicated mess with no real answers. The direction from Bigelow and a stacked cast make this an engaging experience, but it doesn’t pack the explosives needed to leave any lasting impact.
Rating: 2.5 out of 5
