Netflix viewers have one major complaint about “horrifying” A House of Dynamite ending

by

The new movie, ‘A House of Dynamite,’ quickly climbed to the top of Netflix’s most-watched list, but its shocking ending is sparking debate among viewers. Be warned: spoilers follow!

Everyone’s talking about what’s coming to Netflix soon! Season 4 of The Witcher arrives later this month, and the highly awaited Season 5 of Stranger Things will premiere in November. Plus, there are some great new movies available, like the suspenseful political thriller, A House of Dynamite.

The film, directed by Kathryn Bigelow (known for ‘Point Break’), features Idris Elba, Rebecca Ferguson, Gabriel Basso, Jared Harris, and Tracy Letts. It tells the story of the US government’s efforts to figure out how to react to a potential nuclear attack from an unidentified enemy.

The film ‘A House of Dynamite’ depicts a frightening scenario – a nuclear attack on the United States – and explores how the country might respond. However, the way the film is structured has led to online discussion and disagreement.

Why Netflix fans are criticizing A House of Dynamite ending

A House of Dynamite tells the same 18-minute story of a nuclear threat to Chicago three different ways. It shows what’s happening in the White House Situation Room, at the missile defense base, and from the perspective of the President.

As a fan, I always felt the way the story handled the crisis was really interesting. Instead of neatly wrapping everything up, it showed how each group reacted as time ran out, leaving a lot of character stories open-ended. We never actually see the missile hit, and honestly, we never find out who launched the attack, which is a bit frustrating but also keeps you thinking about it long after it’s over.

Many Netflix viewers found the show’s ending unsatisfying because it didn’t offer a clear resolution. One viewer expressed their disappointment on Reddit, calling the ending “anti-climactic” and saying it felt like the story was simply pausing instead of concluding.

One viewer exclaimed they audibly said, “Oh, forget this!” after having the story restarted multiple times to reach the conclusion. Another commented it was the first movie they’d seen that felt like it had three different starts but no real resolution.

Someone else added that they had just finished watching and their immediate reaction to the ending was shock. They admitted they don’t usually enjoy movies that don’t tie things up neatly, and while they understood the film’s intention, they ultimately felt let down.

A common criticism is that viewers felt the first part of the series was the best, and the following episodes didn’t live up to that initial quality, which was disappointing.

One reader described the beginning as gripping, but found the middle confusing and questioned some of the plot choices. By the end, they weren’t interested in the president as a character anymore, just frustrated by the repetitive nature of the story.

Another viewer felt the movie was good, but not exceptional—especially considering the director’s usual high standard. They thought the ending fit the film’s overall purpose, but the main problem was that the first half was so exciting and energetic that the rest of the movie couldn’t live up to it.

Kathryn Bigelow explains why this isn’t the point of the movie 

Some fans of A House of Dynamite disagree with the criticisms, arguing they misunderstand the film’s intentions, which director Kathryn Bigelow and writer Noah Oppenheim have already discussed.

Following a screening of her Netflix film, director Liz Garbus Bigelow explained (according to Yahoo) that she had always intended to center the story around the 18-minute period from launch until the bomb exploded.

She explained that the estimated flight time—around 18 to 19 minutes, depending on the launch location—came up during their initial conversation with Oppenheim, who had provided the accurate information.

Initially, I envisioned setting the story in the Pacific Ocean and creating a short, live-action film—around 18 minutes long. However, we soon realized our main goal was to place the audience in a high-stakes situation where they’d have to make a critical, potentially disastrous decision within that same 18-minute timeframe.

Bigelow pointed out how brief that timeframe is, and how quickly the chance to act decreases as information reaches the President. Ultimately, the President—in the U.S. and likely elsewhere—is the only one with the power to make that final decision; no one else can.

When he receives the information, he doesn’t have much time to decide – maybe just two or three minutes – and it’s a really important decision.

People have been sharing similar feelings in the comments, even defending the show’s ending. One viewer responded to criticism by saying they were annoyed that the characters were thinking about getting revenge on everyone when they didn’t even know who was to blame.

It all felt far-fetched given how much was unknown. They had no idea where it originated, not even a basic clue. Their explanations didn’t hold up under scrutiny.

This movie really made me think – it highlighted how disastrous things could be if the people currently making important decisions ever actually had to live with the consequences. That seems to be the film’s main message, and despite not enjoying most of it, I appreciate that it made me consider this.

The commenter explained that this is exactly the issue: we’ve created a system reliant on people who won’t be ready for a potential crisis. What happens afterward isn’t the main concern; the point is to question why we’ve built and continue to maintain such a fragile and dangerous system.”

The speakers pointed out that over a third of the world’s population was born after the Cold War ended, meaning the fear of nuclear war isn’t as strong today as it once was. They believe the film emphasizes that this fear deserves to be revived.

Another simply wrote, “I personally loved the ending. It felt horrifying.”

A House of Dynamite Rotten Tomatoes score

Even though it’s received some criticism, A House of Dynamite has a 79% rating from critics and a 77% audience score on Rotten Tomatoes. Ultimately, a film that gets people talking is worth watching, even if just to decide what you think of it yourself.

According to CBR, the Netflix film is a timely and thought-provoking piece, especially with ongoing concerns about nuclear war. However, viewers hoping for a clear and conclusive ending might be disappointed.

Even Rolling Stone admitted they wished director Kathryn Bigelow had given the characters more development. They felt the film moved too quickly, not allowing enough time to connect with them before their fates were sealed.

NPR called the film “thrilling,” praising director Kathryn Bigelow’s masterful and clear direction. They noted her ability to seamlessly move between different characters and time periods.

The new documentary, A House of Dynamite, is now available on Netflix. You can also find a list of other new shows to stream this month, the latest movies hitting streaming platforms, and a preview of what films are coming in 2025.

Read More

2025-10-27 16:20