Key Highlights
- The Pentagon’s Missile Defense Agency is concerned about a depiction in the movie “A House of Dynamite” where ground-based interceptors miss their target twice.
- A memo from MDA suggests they are worried about being caught off guard by discussions on the film’s accuracy regarding missile defense systems.
- MDA claims that today’s interceptors have a 100% success rate in testing for over a decade, but experts dispute this claim.
- The movie presents the U.S. interceptors with only a roughly 61% chance of shooting down an enemy missile, which aligns more closely with real-world expectations.
Introduction to “A House of Dynamite”
The film “A House of Dynamite,” directed by Kathryn Bigelow, is a thrilling narrative about civilian and military leaders’ efforts to manage a surprise missile launch against the United States. The movie’s depiction of ground-based interceptors (GBIs) missing their target twice has caught the attention of the Pentagon’s Missile Defense Agency (MDA).
The Pentagon’s Concerns
According to a mid-October internal memo obtained by Bloomberg, MDA is concerned about the movie’s portrayal of missile defense systems. The agency felt compelled to send around talking points so that its leadership would be prepared for potential discussions or meetings regarding this topic. This anxiety arises from the film’s depiction of GBIs missing their target twice and a discussion about the overall chances of these interceptors shooting down enemy weapons.
Accuracy Controversy
MDA is particularly concerned with the film’s portrayal that U.S. interceptors have only a roughly 61% chance of hitting an incoming missile—a figure described by the film’s deputy national security adviser as “hitting a bullet with a bullet.” This statistic prompts the movie’s secretary of defense to exclaim, “So it’s a fucking coin toss? This is what we get for $50 billion?”
However, experts, including Tom Nichols and Joe Cirincione, have questioned this claim. They argue that MDA’s 100% accuracy rate claim is based on selective testing data from the past decade. A recent analysis by scientists at the American Physical Society showed that if the Pentagon had included earlier failed tests, the success rate would drop to about 57%.
Historical Context and Future Implications
The MDA’s insistence on a 100% success rate is seen as part of a broader trend in the missile defense world. For instance, former Pentagon official Edward Aldridge once claimed an earlier version of the interceptors would be 90% accurate against North Korean missiles. MDA’s internal memo suggests they are anticipating funding from the Trump administration for a “Golden Dome” system, which is described as a hypothetical shield over the entire United States.
The military was not involved in making “A House of Dynamite,” and Bigelow emphasized independence: “I felt that we needed to be more independent.” Nevertheless, MDA’s concerns about the film’s accuracy reflect broader debates about the reliability and effectiveness of U.S. missile defense systems. These discussions are crucial as they impact public perception and funding for such critical national security measures.
Overall, the movie “A House of Dynamite” raises important questions about the accuracy and reliability of America’s missile defense systems, highlighting a contentious issue between Hollywood portrayals and official claims.
