A House of Dynamite

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No such thing as a "chemtrail" -- they were "contrails": there is a difference. Only chemtrails I know of are over the country club.

On a more serious note, since the missile was on a ballistic trajectory, it should have been possible in the 15 minutes they had to determine with decent accuracy where it was launched from. It is solving an equation very similar to the one Katherine Johnson solved in "Hidden Figures."

Thank you for that correction.

Well, while I hated the movie, this criticism isn’t correct. They determined it was launched from the ocean, hence all the discussion regarding whether certain nations had a sub launch capability or not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Welp. That's absolutely horrifying.

How are we not talking about this already?!

I’ve already watched it twice. It’s exactly the type of What if? that I get a little obsessed with. Great blend of little personal stories and major stakes. I only wish it was longer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: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.

I don’t need resolution, but I did crave a bit more context at times.

[Anonymous]

I did not finish it, so that I won't read all of the comments, but where I stopped, it was strange that it started being Rebecca Ferguson's story, and then she disappears forever, or at least for an hour where I stopped.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Awful and made the country look inept especially the military al the stuff looked fake. I doubt they will be allowed to use the military agajn

No, this is how the country really is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: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.

So you're cool with all of Chicago being blown up?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The multiple viewpoints of the same event were well done.

It was satisfyingly technical, which I love.

But there was no end! And I get that this is a dissection of people's reactions before the actual outcome, so the outcome is in itself not the goal of the story, but still! Very frustrating!

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.

But the decision will always be messy, and you cannot change the fact that people will always fight. So in the end, there is nothing to change.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The multiple viewpoints of the same event were well done.

It was satisfyingly technical, which I love.

But there was no end! And I get that this is a dissection of people's reactions before the actual outcome, so the outcome is in itself not the goal of the story, but still! Very frustrating!

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.

But the decision will always be messy, and you cannot change the fact that people will always fight. So in the end, there is nothing to change.

+1. Even if Americans were the best people in the world, if this scenario happened, this is how it would go down. There is nothing that can be changed.

[Anonymous]

I like director Kathryn Bigalow. It’s a great movie. A couple of things made DH and I chuckle like the car driving next to the motorcade and someone using the personal cell phone in public on a national security call. But it was a great movie!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I read that the 60% success rate is fact. It literally is a coin toss.

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

He was NSC, not NSA.

[Anonymous]

One little tidbit that I picked up on that they never came back to...

It was suggested that the cloaking of the launch pointed to an inside job in the US. That the satellite didn't pick it up, I mean.

Agree basic math probably could have figured it out. But they dangled that possibility of an inside job out there ... and never came back to it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

So you're cool with all of Chicago being blown up?

?

There was no way to stop that once the interceptors missed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The multiple viewpoints of the same event were well done.

It was satisfyingly technical, which I love.

But there was no end! And I get that this is a dissection of people's reactions before the actual outcome, so the outcome is in itself not the goal of the story, but still! Very frustrating!

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.

But the decision will always be messy, and you cannot change the fact that people will always fight. So in the end, there is nothing to
change.

We can change the caliber of leaders we grant this power to.

We could also, as a species, work towards nuclear disarmament.

[Anonymous]

I just watched this kind of randomly and it is really sticking with me. Never seen anything like it. Wow. Made me think our military is amazing. Made me weep that Hegsweth is now our SecDef. What a loser that guy is- to be over all our super amazing, smart, talented, diverse career military women and men.

SPOILER

Are we to understand that the SecDef in the movie walked off the rooftop rather than get in the helicopter? That was sad.

The director Bigelow must have military family- she is so great with this topic!

[Anonymous]

I enjoyed this movie, but there were many inaccuracies about how a situation like this would actually go down. Gift link:

https://www.wsj.com/opinion/the-netflixing-of-nuclear-war-4e3b1ac2?st=L1tRRQ&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink