Pentagon Critiques A House of Dynamite’s Factual Accuracy

Warning: Some SPOILERS lie ahead for A House of Dynamite!While Kathryn Bigelow has a history of grounded, fact-based filmmaking, her latest thriller, A House of Dynamite, is already being targeted for critiques over its accuracy. The Netflix movie revolves around different branches of the US government as they learn that an intercontinental ballistic missile is heading towards the country and race to determine how to stop it, and what their global response should be.

Led by Rebecca Ferguson, Jared Harris and Idris Elba, A House of Dynamite debuted to largely positive reviews from critics in October, with audiences similarly proving hooked as the film secured 79% and 77% approval ratings on Rotten Tomatoes, respectively. The movie also became an instant streaming hit for Netflix, still maintaining the No. 1 spot on their streaming charts as of the time of writing.

However, one group that does not appear to be fans of A House of Dynamite is The Pentagon, as an internal memo acquired by Bloomberg reveals the government agency is feeling “angst“ over the movie’s reported inaccuracies. The document indicates that the government was in preparation to “address false assumptions, provide correct facts and a better understanding” of the country’s ground missile defense system, as seen in the Netflix thriller:

[The film] highlights that deterrence can fail, which reinforces the need for an active homeland missile defense system. The fictional interceptors in the movie miss their target, and we understand this is intended to be a compelling part of the drama intended for the entertainment of the audience, [but results from real-world testing] tell a vastly different story.

One detail the memo does not mention from the film is the cost of the ground-based interceptors, in which Harris’ Secretary of Defense, Reid Baker, memorably questioned having spent $50 billion on “a f—-ng coin toss”. Instead, the document states that the real cost “is high” for the defense system, but is “not nearly as high as the cost of allowing a nuclear missile to strike our nation“.

Another element of the missiles in A House of Dynamite that the Pentagon took to disputing in their memo is the mention that they are only accurate 61% of the time, with the document stating that the movie is inspired by “earlier prototypes” and that modern GBIs “have displayed a 100% accuracy rate in testing” for over a decade. However, Union of Concerned Scientists figure Laura Grego argued against the Pentagon’s figures, even while pointing out a slight unlikelihood in the movie’s plot:

A robust defense should anticipate facing multiple incoming ICBMs and credible decoys, and direct attacks on missile defense elements, but none of those were part of the story in this film. The fictional threat is arguably about as easy as they come.

In a statement directly to the publication, the Pentagon stated it was not consulted by Bigelow or anyone else on the House of Dynamite creative team for the movie’s depiction, and that the Netflix thriller “does not reflect the views or priorities of this administration“.

Interestingly, though, this was also disputed by the film’s screenwriter, Noah Oppenheim, in an interview with MSNBC, in which he assured he “did talk to many missile defense experts, who were all on the record“. Recalling asking said experts and former White House and Pentagon officials “a ton of questions” regarding the “processes” and “procedures” of how the defense system works, and the plans in place for responding to an ICBM threat, he expressed that “what you see on screen is hopefully a fairly accurate portrait“. Check out the rest of Oppenheim’s response below:

Unfortunately, our missile defense system is highly imperfect. If the Pentagon wants to have a conversation about improving it or what the next step might be in keeping all of us safer, that’s the conversation we want to have. But what we show in the movie is accurate.

With the two-time Oscar winner often telling stories based on true stories, or set in real-world situations, this isn’t the first time Bigelow’s work has found itself critiqued for its facts. The Hurt Locker was appreciated by veterans as a solid action movie, though its depictions of their teamwork and wartime conditions were torn to shreds for their falsehoods. Zero Dark Thirty was similarly condemned for its depictions of torture and underplaying the role of the Obama administration in taking down Osama bin Laden.

The movie also isn’t the first Netflix title to come under fire recently from the US government, as Boots was similarly criticized earlier this month for its supposed inaccuracies. Again from the Pentagon, the coming-of-age series was called “woke garbage” by the agency for its depiction of secretly gay Marines and the illegality of their being in the military, something that was not only true in the show’s 1990s setting, but also in its source memoir’s 1970s setting.

Given the Pentagon’s response to the acclaimed show further bolstered its streaming success prior to Nobody Wants This‘ return, it seems likely that A House of Dynamite will see its Top 10 dominance continue after this. However, as to the actual factual nature of the film’s depiction of the US’ missile defense system, the more incisive film could not only spark bipartisan discussions of the real-world version, but also a defense from Bigelow herself.