Now acclaimed director Kathryn Bigelow has responded to the MDA’s criticism. Her response takes place against the background of her debut Netflix thriller ‘House of Dynamite’. The movie powerfully portrays government leaders grappling with the horrific possibility of a nuclear attack on Chicago. It underscores the desperate inadequacy of existing U.S. missile defense systems revealed during this crisis. Bigelow claims that the film “simply tells the truth,” in hopes of starting conversations about existing and emerging nuclear threats and our current defense policy.
House of Dynamite climaxes with a chilling sequence in which ground-based interceptor missiles, fired from Alaska, miss their target and are unable to stop an incoming, full-scale nuclear attack. The film’s cheery portrayal of U.S. missile capability has been criticized by the MDA. On October 16, they published an internal memo explaining what their concerns were. The memo claimed that results from real-world testing “tell a vastly different story” than what is depicted in the film, asserting that U.S. missile interceptors “have displayed a 100% accuracy rate in testing for more than a decade.”
She insists that the movie is a fiction film that is very rooted in the reality of nuclear apocalypse.
“I just state the truth. In this piece, it’s all about realism and authenticity.” – Kathryn Bigelow
The MDA was smart enough to see that the first fictional interceptors in the film fail to hit anything. This decision injects drama and entertainment into the narrative rather than a true depiction of military success.
Furthermore, the film dovetails with current conversations about protecting national security and reforming the defense strategy. In 2020, the Pentagon awarded Northrop Grumman a huge $13.3 billion sole source contract. They will produce a next-generation long-range ground-based strike missile, the first of which is due by 2029. Furthermore, former President Donald Trump proposed a “Golden Dome” missile system in May, introducing space-based weapons designed to intercept strikes against the U.S.
Bigelow draws parallels between “House of Dynamite” and her previous films, “Zero Dark Thirty” and “Hurt Locker,” which explored themes of war and conflict through a lens of realism. She illustrates why it is more pressing than ever to focus on halting nuclear armament given our current global climate.
“It’s grappling with the idea that we’re surrounded by 12,000 weapons. We live in a really combustible environment, hence the title – we live in A House of Dynamite. The unthinkable – it’s time to address it and, in a perfect world, begin discussions about reducing the nuclear stockpile.” – Kathryn Bigelow
Nuclear physicist Laura Grego of the Union of Concerned Scientists couldn’t be more enthusiastic about this view. She insists that the danger portrayed in the movie is one of the most basic hurdles to U.S. security we’re up against today.
Bigelow hopes that “House of Dynamite” will encourage conversations within both government circles and among the public regarding nuclear weapons policy. Catherine Tracy is passionate about how cultural discourse can drive policy change and greater public conversation around nuclear proliferation.
“In a perfect world, culture has the potential to drive policy, and if there’s dialogue around the proliferation of nuclear weapons, that is music to my ears, certainly.” – Kathryn Bigelow