Pentagon Challenges โMissile Accuracy Depiction โคin Netflix’s ‘House of Dynamite’
WASHINGTON D.C. – The Pentagon is disputing the portrayal of U.S. missile defense capabilitiesโค in Netflix’sโ new thriller, House of Dynamite, specifically regarding the accuracy of interceptors during a โsimulatedโ attack. The disagreement centers on the film’s depiction of a scenario where interceptors fail to neutralize incoming intercontinentalโ ballistic missiles (ICBMs), a pointโข writer-director Kathryn Bigelow โฃintended to highlight the grave risks of nuclear conflict.
The debate arrives as global anxieties surrounding nuclear weapons remain โคheightened, โwith an estimated 12,300 nuclear โคweapons โheld by the U.S. and eight other nations – a stockpile capableโข of catastrophic global โdestruction. House of Dynamite aims to force a renewed conversation about โคthe normalization โof nuclearโ threat, but โthe Pentagon’s responseโข underscoresโค the sensitivity surrounding public perception of U.S.defenseโค systemsโ and โpreparedness.
According to the film,a testโข depicted โmirrors a potentialโฃ real-world โฃscenario where U.S.โ interceptors โstruggle against a coordinated ICBM attack. The โPentagon, however, asserts that the film’sโ depiction is inaccurate. Currently, โขthe U.S. โขmaintains approximately 44 ground-based โinterceptors โคstationed atโฃ Fort greely in Alaska and Vandenbergโ Space Force Base in California.
An upgrade to the system, featuringโ the Nextโ Generation โคInterceptor, โฃis slated forโ completion around 2028. The plan includes an initial deployment of nearlyโฃ half a dozen NGIs, followed by approximately 40โ additional interceptors. โ
“I feel โlike nuclear weapons, โthe prospect of their use, has become normalized,” Bigelow recently told โฃ Awardsline’s โฃ Antonia Blyth. “We don’t think about โit, we don’t talk about it. Andโ it’sโข an โunthinkable situation. โคSo, my hope was to maybe move it to the forefront of our lives.”
Neither the โคPentagon norโ Netflix responded to Deadline’s requests โฃfor comment regarding theirโข specific assessments of the โfilm. The controversy raises questions about the balance between dramatic license and factual representation when depicting complex national security issues, and whetherโข the film will succeed in its goal of โฃsparking a broader public dialog about the โdangers of nuclear โweapons.
