Dr. Strangelove's Shadow: Why Hollywood Won't Make a WWIII Movie

In an era of heightened global tensions, one might expect to see filmmakers grappling with the specter of a third World War. Yet, Hollywood's slate seems largely devoid of such narratives. An online discussion delved into the complex reasons behind this absence, questioning the initial premise that such a film could even serve as a deterrent.

The Long Shadow of Classic Cinema

A primary argument is that the definitive works on the subject have already been made. Stanley Kubrick's 1964 masterpiece, Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb, is frequently cited as the ultimate exploration of nuclear annihilation. Its blend of dark comedy and genuine horror is considered by many to be an untouchable achievement. Similarly, Peter Watkins' 1965 pseudo-documentary, The War Game, presented such a brutally realistic depiction of a nuclear attack on Britain that the BBC, its commissioner, refused to broadcast it for 20 years. These films set a high bar, leaving modern creators to wonder what new perspective they could possibly offer.

Escapism Over Uncomfortable Reality

The modern blockbuster landscape is dominated by fantasy and superhero franchises. Commentators noted that audiences typically go to the cinema for escapism, not to be confronted with a mirror held up to their deepest real-world fears. War films are expensive to produce, and unlike a superhero movie with its vast potential for merchandise and all-ages appeal, a realistic WWIII film presents a grim and commercially risky proposition.

A Political and Narrative Minefield

Crafting a WWIII story today is fraught with political peril. Which real-world nation would be the antagonist? A film depicting a conflict over Taiwan or an escalation in Ukraine would be immensely controversial and could have real diplomatic repercussions.

One analysis pointed out that while the war in Ukraine has seen many hypothetical "red lines" crossed without nuclear escalation, a potential conflict between the US and China over Taiwan remains a terrifyingly plausible scenario for a world war. Creating a film around such a sensitive and volatile topic is a challenge most studios are unwilling to take.

Beyond politics, there's the narrative challenge. What story would you tell? And could it truly act as a deterrent? Some argue that a deterrent only works on those who fear losing, and war films often become propaganda designed to assure a nation of its strength, thereby having the opposite effect. The very purpose of such a film is contested.

Are They Already Here in Disguise?

An alternative view is that WWIII films are being made, just not explicitly. The Terminator franchise, with its post-apocalyptic war against machines, can be seen as a sci-fi proxy for total war. More directly, films like Top Gun: Maverick depict large-scale conflict with a technologically advanced, but deliberately unnamed, enemy. This allows the film to deliver the spectacle of modern warfare without stepping on any political toes. In the end, the absence of a movie explicitly titled "World War III" may be a complex symptom of market demands, artistic challenges, and the terrifying proximity of the subject to our current reality.