A House of Dynamite
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
They showed the FEMA woman getting to Raven Rock as well but she wouldn't have been able to get there from DC in 18 minutes, right? I assumed all the people they showed were getting there after the detonation (assuming there was a detonation). |
Anonymous
I think the ending is intentionally ambiguous and leaves it up to the viewer to decide. It would be too easy to show a bomb going off. |
Anonymous
Yeah - everyone knows this. I am in favor of a constitutional amendment allowing him to be President. |
Anonymous
|
Anonymous
The emphasis was on the decision PROCESS. The human element. How messy it is, with so much incomplete information. They wanted us to see and consider that. So we can change what makes us uncomfortable, while there is still time. |
Anonymous
|
Wow I too thought this movie was so well done. I’m now interested in watching Hurt Locker and Zero Dark Thirty.
I was ok with the ending and agree with pp that the minute to minute process was the point. Anyone else surprised/not surprised that the President’s nuclear decision options were kept in a three ring binder with the paper protectors - probably some highlighting and post-it notes in that binder. I guess if there’s a massive cyber attack, the three ring binder is critical. |
Anonymous
He's one of my favorite actors. There's something about him that just elicits such strong empathy toward his characters. Loved him in Chernobyl and The Terror. |
Anonymous
| I work in this field and was pretty underwhelmed. There are a lot of experts oohing and awwing about how realistic some of the scenes were - that's great. But retelling the same developments from multiple perspectives got old and the lack of a clearly defined outcome was frustrating. Also, GMAFB at the premise that a single missile, payload unknown, would have forced a do-or-die decision within 20ish minutes on whether and how the USG responds. |
Anonymous
|
The more I thought about it, the more I liked the ending. Yes, as PP said, the movie was about the process. Showing the impact/result would only distract from the film's purpose.
More than that, though, I think my take away was that there is no option that would avoid catastrophe. For that reason, I found it actually a bit comforting-- Doesn't matter that Trump and Hegseth are morons, since even a competent and wise president probably couldn't save us. |
Anonymous
I did at first think the idea we’d retaliate without a known aggressor absurd, BUT then I remembered the argument that we needed to ‘project strength after an attack’ is the same one that was used to justify randomly invading Iraq after 9/11 so I guess it’s not so absurd after all .. I do agree they made the ‘minutes to decide’ factor for purely dramatic effect |
Anonymous
When it has 60% success rate, you need to shoot more than 2. I thought that was dumb. Also the officer who carried the nuclear football, dont they use wrist chain?? I thought it was okay. Young Deputy NSA actor was not believable |
Anonymous
|
The last time I saw a film with that kind of ending was in France, a French film (no longer remember the title). The final scene cut to text: "Sans fin."
Gee, thanks. A giant cop-out. I need resolution. |
Anonymous
| I let the credits roll after watching and there were eery explosion sounds. |
Anonymous
| I hated the ending. We’re supposed to believe that there is high drama in the choice between the President pushing the Big Red Button at T-2 minutes before impact vs. T+2 minutes after impact. Obviously you wait and see if there is an impact at that point. One nuke in Chicago would have zero impact on our second strike capability. |
Anonymous
In that last scene with evacuees entering Raven Rock, there were two large chem trails streaking across the sky. |