My interpretation has always been nearly the exact opposite.

As I understood it, Roger was consumed with guilt over what happened to Ben in Viet Nam, feeling responsible for what happened to Ben because he wasn’t enough of a “man” in the mold of Ben to kill him before the Viet Cong took him. And the titular House was able to feed on Roger’s psychic turbulence, sapping more and more energy from his guilt, and pain and feelings of isolation and growing ever stronger with each loved one it took from his life (his son, his wife, his aunt) and the more isolated it made him feel, each lost loved one causing him yet even more pain for it to feed upon.

Yet when Roger tried to confront the House in the stereotypical way he thought he should, by emulating Ben and gearing up for a “manly” confrontation through war, it accomplished nothing but ending up actually *empowering* the House even further until it was nearly able to pull him in as well. It wasn’t until he went deep inside the House/his own mind and finally realized what was truly giving the House all its power: the guilt from his memories of what had happened to Ben in Viet Nam and the feelings of isolation from his family that it caused. And when he finally confronted those feelings of guilt and isolation and the toxic masculinity that were causing them, as represented by the loud, boorish, macho undead Ben, he finally realized what he really had to do… he had to let go of all the things he had been holding onto that were feeding the House his psychic energy, let go of the guilt he felt about what had happened to him and the wall those feelings had built between him and his family. Because what happened to Ben hadn’t been his fault. It was the toxic masculinity of the idea that he should have been a “real man” and killed Ben before the Viet Cong got him that was fueling his guilt, and it was only after he was able to finally accept that and let go of the idea and the guilt that went with it. Only then was he able to get his family back by allowing the wall of guilty isolation that had been keeping him from accepting the love of his family. (His wife clearly still loved him as shown by the concern and consternation she felt when she called from the award ceremony, and he also clearly knew it, but was unable to accept her love and berated himself for it, but he felt he wasn’t worthy of her love because he had failed Ben by not being enough of a “man” to kill him.)

So, the message I got from the movie was pretty much the total opposite of what you got (you saw it as wholeheartedly embracing the idea of the macho manliness of war with Roger winning his family back by accepting his role as a macho warrior, I saw it as completely rejecting the idea of macho manliness with Roger learning to accept his family back by realizing that he wasn’t guilty of “failing” Ben and that he really *was* worthy of his family’s love.) If you go into the movie assuming it’s all about reinforcing stereotypical ’80s macho masculinity I guess it can look like that on the surface, but I’ve loved it as both a very un-macho boy and as an un-macho man, and I never carried that notion into the movie with me.

So, I guess the message you take *from* House really depends on the baggage you take *into* it… which is kind of what the House is ultimately all about, isn’t it?