BY ROGER WATSON
This apocalyptic film is entirely about the journey and most certainly not about the ending; there isn’t one. That isn’t a spoiler, but established common knowledge from existing reviews. A House of Dynamite (2025) adopts a familiar theme: an ‘incoming’ threat.
An unidentified aggressor—presumed to be North Korea, though China and Russia are considered and dismissed—launches a suspected nuclear missile from somewhere in the Pacific. The target is initially unknown, but it is soon confirmed to be heading for the United States, and more specifically, Chicago.
The film stars Idris Elba, eventually, as the President of the United States, though he does not fully appear until the third act. Among other notable performances is Jared Harris, whose remarkable physical and stylistic resemblance to his father, Richard Harris, is arresting.
The film feels unnervingly authentic in its portrayal of what might unfold in such a crisis: the escalating tension in command centres, Alaskan missile bases on high alert, and key staff hurried into bunkers. The frantic online conferences to share information and make decisions are particularly well-rendered. The President himself is initially hard to reach, attending a ball game; when he does join the calls, he is largely silent and off-camera, his identity only clarified later.
The narrative is not chronological. Instead, the same chain of events is depicted three times from different perspectives, each act bearing its own title like a trilogy: Inclination is Flattening; Hitting a Bullet with a Bullet; and A House Filled with Dynamite. The structure is initially disorienting, and the titles—the first especially—are somewhat oblique.
The first sequence, Inclination is Flattening, tracks the military response as the DEFCON level ratchets upward. It cuts between a Washington command centre, an Alaskan missile base, and a scrambling US Air Force base, where the announcement “This is not an exercise” focuses every mind. The human cost is underscored by cutaways to photos of loved ones pinned to monitors and quiet reflections on a world that may be ending.
The second, Hitting a Bullet with a Bullet, focuses on the political layer. Here, Jared Harris’s Secretary of Defense takes centre stage, grappling with a personal dilemma: his daughter lives in Chicago. He must warn her without breaching official secrecy—a thread left hauntingly unresolved before his own abrupt exit from the story.
Finally, in A House Filled with Dynamite, we meet President Idris Elba, who is rushed from a basketball game by the Secret Service. With him is a relatively junior adviser, and here the film exposes the brutal flaw in the US political system: a civilian leader, devoid of military experience and bombarded by conflicting counsel, must decide whether to retaliate and potentially plunge the world into an ultimate war.
But we never learn his choice.
In each sequence, as Chicago is confirmed as the target, casualty estimates flash on screens. The central moral question is laid bare: is the loss of one major city worth triggering a global nuclear exchange? It is a superb question, and one we hope remains theoretical.
The film earns its 75% Rotten Tomatoes score, but likely no higher. Despite the deliberate lack of resolution, the tension is gripping, the acting is superb, and while the premise is well-trodden, it is executed here with greater authenticity and intelligence than in many comparable films.
Roger Watson is a Registered Nurse and Editor-in-Chief of Nurse Education in Practice.