Is Bigelow’s ‘A House of Dynamite’ Anti-Trump Alarmist Propaganda?

Netflix’s latest nuclear thriller, A House of Dynamite, directed by longtime director and Democratic donor Kathryn Bigelow, and penned by fellow Dem donor Noah Oppenheim, is less a film and more a politically charged scare tactic aimed at undermining America’s missile defense ambitions. With a public agenda in favor of nuclear disarmament, both Bigelow and Oppenheim use their Hollywood influence to push a narrative that runs directly counter to President Donald Trump’s proposed $175 billion “Golden Dome” missile shield, a robust, multi-layered protection plan, including space-based interceptors designed to shield American citizens from nuclear threats.

Bigelow, known for her Oscar-winning military films, and Oppenheim, former NBC News president, have openly lamented the current nuclear landscape, portraying the U.S. missile defense system as dangerously unreliable and ineffective. A House of Dynamite dramatizes an impending nuclear strike and suggests that the missile defense interceptors have only a 50-61% success rate, claims sharply disputed by the Pentagon, which insists their interceptors have demonstrated 100% accuracy in testing over the last decade. The Department of Defense has publicly criticized the film for inaccurately depicting America’s ground missile defense capabilities, charging it with stoking unnecessary fear and mistrust.

Bigelow’s response? She embraces the film’s role as “culture” that should drive policy, calling for urgent discussions on nuclear arms reduction, which conveniently aligns with her and Oppenheim’s political leanings. This is classic alarmist propaganda designed to frighten the public into opposing Trump’s strategic defense proposal—the “Golden Dome”—which aims to make America far safer in an increasingly volatile world. The film’s ambiguous ending leaves viewers unnerved yet uncertain, perfectly crafted to foster skepticism about missile defense rather than support it. It’s pretty clear this was produced with the presumption that Kamala Harris would be Madame President by now.

This cynical tactic, unsurprisingly, mirrors Netflix’s own political alliances, including its ongoing production deal with the Obamas, who are known for their dovish stance on nuclear weapons. Netflix has not shied away from pushing progressive ideological agendas under the guise of entertainment, and A House of Dynamite is a prime example of Hollywood activists masquerading as storytellers. So as Biden donors in Hollywood continue to produce content designed to scare Americans into rejecting bold national defense initiatives, it’s clear the real threat isn’t Russian missiles or nuclear bombs, but rather the relentless left-wing propaganda machine churning out fiction to weaken American resolve and security.

***