Digger is the first movie for Tom Cruise following the Mission: Impossible franchise. He’s been more or less stuck (for lack of a better term, because he’s been crushing it) in the action world for the better part of the last decade. This is a trip back to his roots, sort of. He’s working with an auteur as he did in the 1990s and 2000s, and he’s doing a role that would sound implausible to those accustomed only to his action work.
There is a wild disparity that you just don’t see too often for Digger. It’s sitting at 3.7 on Letterboxd right now, which is a very solid score. The 54% on Rotten Tomatoes does not match the Letterboxd rating. For reference, Primetime also has a 3.7 on Letterboxd, and it has an 87% on Rotten Tomatoes. Generally, movies with high Letterboxd scores are well-received elsewhere, too.
Put simply, it’s been a polarizing film, and it’s impossible to determine what to make of Digger before going to see it. Tom Cruise being a megastar helps, but it’s on track to flop at the box office and come off as a relative misfire with critics. Audiences, for what it’s worth, are enjoying it a little more (65% on Rotten Tomatoes). But is it any good?
Digger Review
It is impossible to accurately review Digger without getting into spoiler territory, so this is your full spoiler warning. The movie features a few twists, but one of them changes the entire dynamic of the film. The marketing and synopsis position this as a satire about global warming and big-time CEOs. It is, but that part of the movie is actually a play being produced in the movie.
There are three main plots or subplots working together (and sometimes against one another) in Digger. The main plot is the political satire in which Digger Rockwell (played outstandingly by Tom Cruise) has to save the world from a climate crisis he started with his company. Northern Europe (and later Alaska) are at risk of being smashed into by massive icebergs that broke off after methane explosions, and Rockwell must find a way to fix things.
The second plot is the production of that tale, a satire produced by a member of the Rockwell family and starring an aging but devoted actor, Curtis Markson (Cruise). The third plot is the family drama Markson is involved in. While he’s trying to act in this play, his daughter’s flight goes missing in a Category 6 (yes, a fictional Cat-6 hurricane) storm.
All of this is both to the film’s benefit and detriment. The multi-layered storyline works to relay a theme and provide a message to the audience. What is satire? How much responsibility do we bear as an audience? As consumers, are we also partially responsible for the situation the world is in? Is perception more important than reality? These things all go hand in hand thanks to the play-within-a-movie structure.
It’s a lot for one film to juggle, though. It is to Digger‘s detriment because at times, it labors under the weight of its own ambition. This is a lofty swing for Alejandro G. Iñárritu, and it misses sometimes. It struggles to hold up all the plotlines and thematic elements at once for decent stretches of the two-hour runtime. This is especially true right before the climactic ending of the play.
The reactions to this have been very split, and it’s easy to see both sides. At times, Digger is a wonderful, multi-layered satire about the very nature of satire itself, and it raises a ton of valid, interesting questions. At other times, it is absolutely the indulgent, over-the-top, self-important, trite movie some people have argued it is.
Cruise is excellent, as he plays the bombastic Digger Rockwell to perfection while also balancing the dedicated actor who’s grappling with the nature of what they’re doing. Jesse Plemons doesn’t have to pull double duty like that, but he is also very good. John Goodman struggles with the ridiculous nature of his character sometimes. Sandra Hüller doesn’t deliver her best performance. Riz Ahmed, on the other hand, pulls off his satirical character quite well.
The score vacillates between excellent scene-backing and a cacophony of distracting, loud noises. In some scenes, the score is pitch-perfect, but at times, it is painfully distracting. Much like the movie itself, there are hits and misses all wrapped up in one. The cinematography by Emmanuel Lubezky is good, and Innaritu’s framing and camerawork are good.
The satire here is not subtle. The themes are bashed over the audience’s heads. It’s not difficult to understand the movie, and part of the reason the reaction has been so varied is because of that. Satire is truly at its best when it’s subtle, and this, perhaps intentionally so, is not.
So, yes, Digger is self-important. It is indulgent. It is ridiculously bombastic. Digger is clunky. It drags at times. But it’s also poignant and well-produced. It’s funny, too. It’s endlessly creative. This all makes it easy to see both sides of the argument surrounding a surprising candidate for the most controversial movie of the year and come down somewhere near the middle.
Score: 3.5/5
