Alejandro González Iñárritu’s newest movie, Digger, starring Tom Cruise in his first non-franchise role since 2017’s American Made, was at times so on the nose and self-serious and up its own arse that my eyes rolled so far back in my head I ended up hitting one of these:

And yet, its central and supporting performances — Tom Cruise, Riz Ahmed, John Goodman, Jesse Plemons, Sophie Wilde, Michael Stuhlbarg, and Sandra Hüller — stunningly staged design and camera work and occasional sequence of true captivational magic is enough to not only make the film’s existence a net positive, but also to have me hitting one of these from time to time:

It’s one of the most conflicting and surprising theatrical experiences of the year — there’s an added layer to the film, which I won’t get into for spoiler purposes, that elevates Iñárritu’s typical holier-than-thou attitude to storytelling to entirely new heights. There’s an understanding from Iñárittu of what he’s doing and what that means, and if he is actually in on the ‘joke’, it’s rather clever and demonstrates a level of self-awareness that might just endear Digger to those who formerly claimed to be detractors of the Revenant director. Because to say that Iñárritu is a little black liquorice for the movie-going demographic would be an understatement. Some see him as a director immense of virtuosity; others feel they can see right through his self-indulgent bullshit. Birdman is probably the finest of such case studies. It’s a now dated, relatively small-minded film that exists to serve as a great big pat on the back for the artists and an even bigger middle finger to the critics who dare to comment on the art. (It’s no surprise that Tinseltown lapped it up; awarding the film Best Picture, Director, Screenplay, and Cinematography at the 87th Academy Awards.) But the film’s artful richness and influence was irrefutable: The wave of one-shot filmmaking that followed in its wake, the meta commentary on Michael Keaton’s history with the cape and cowl, the generally elite level of craft on display — it’s hard to detract too much from the films’ of an individual so clearly adept at what he does, regardless of whether or not you feel he lands the plane. Digger is a lot like Birdman in many of the same respects — even as far down as the aforementioned added layer — except that, self awareness aside, it also 1) has Tom Cruise, and 2) has its mind set on some bigger ideas than just superhero movies, the internet, and Hollywood at large. And in that way, it certainly opens up the possibility that Digger may even be the more successful movie, and is without a doubt the more important one.

These ideas — the world is doomed and billionaires are to blame (but so are we), powerful white men are racist, misogynistic and incompetent, humans are being replaced and the world is getting warmer — are not always communicated in the subtlest of ways, sure. But they’re also some of the most important and pressing topics in the world, and there’s absolutely nothing subtle about the impact that they’re having on our day-to-day’s. Iñárittu clearly shares my general sense of doom about the world and its future — others should too. He’s unafraid to be loud about it in this movie and that I find rather admirable.

Where the Iñárittu of it all holds Digger back from ever truly staking its claim as one of the great Strangeloveian satirical sign-of-the-times classics is that it just is not that funny. Especially problematic for a movie marketed as “A Comedy of Catastrophic Proportions.” Cruise, Stuhlbarg, Ahmed and Goodman’s natural charisma and commanding screen presences are enough to see some of the jokes stumble across the finish line, but Digger often thinks it’s something it isn’t: Clever. What it really is, is the angry ramblings of a person — or a few people (the screenplay is co-penned by Alexander Dinelaris, Nicolás Giacobone, and Sabina Berman)— who are rightfully concerned about humankind's actions and where the repercussions are taking us. They’re right to take an in-your-face approach to the biggest ticking time bomb in the world. But the Wes Anderson-esque characterisation’s and slapstick-style comedy often undercuts such attempts.

Beyond its hit-or-miss humour and nose-bopping ideas, though, Digger platforms Cruise in particular to provide his most challenging and adventurous work this side of Michael Mann’s Collateral. He’s doing accent work, he’s in the prosthetics, he’s tasked with delivering big, Frank T.J. Mackey-esque levels of magnetisation in his monologues. It’s a fascinating role for Cruise at this stage of his career and a route that would serve him well as he begins to age out of the leading action star persona — despite Days of Thunder 2 being in the offing, for some reason. He brings real gravitas and elevates each scene with his movie star presence and alluring charm. Without him, it’s not out of the question that the film might have been a real dud. But he is there, so. And thankfully so are his wonderful and hugely over-qualified supporting cast, whose roles vary in size but not in impact.

Awards Season

Iñárritu’s been a real Oscar’s favourite over the years: Eight times has his work been subject to winning recognition from The Academy. But Digger might just veer a little too far away from any commercial value to see the same respect awarded. But then again, it’s The Academy; who knows what they’re thinking about literally anything any of the time.

Cruise’s work feels perhaps (?) like the best shot this movie has at receiving any nominations. A competitive Cruise Oscar is long overdue and whilst his battle with Damon for The Odyssey and Malkovich for Wild Horse Nine will be a fierce one, he’s in with a real shot.

Chivo Lubezki, a three-time Academy Award recipient — the most in history for a cinematographer — certainly can’t be considered out of the count either. It’s a showy performance from him and his camera, as well as the film’s production and sound designers whose presence should also be felt come March. 

A Picture nomination feels possible — maybe even likely — but the dust needs to settle a little more to grasp what else looks on the cards.

Box Office Corner

Digger looks to Mike De Luca and Pamela Abdy’s final contributions to the pre-merger Warner era, and it’s set to be a whimpering exit.

Box office projections expecting a pretty dismal $10 million opening return on its reported $125 million budget. But the truth? I’ll leave that to Zack Snyder:

Closing Thoughts

You know, in all the criticism I've engaged with over the weekend about Digger, it's X user @ROMANTICALLYURS invoking Roger Ebert's 1997 review of David Cronenberg's Crash that best encapsulated everything I felt about the Digger dilemma:

Digger will divide opinions. That’s fine. But the opinion of this young man with big worries about whether or not he has a future to grow up in is that it kind of rocks. Unfunny? Yeah, a little. But at times wildly entertaining, unabashedly honest about how imminent our day of reckoning is, supremely crafted and acted, and an all-encompassing theatre experience? Undoubtedly. 

It's a movie that I’m happy exists. And if this Paramount-Warner merger does what we think it might, big-budget original’s driven by the auteur’s of their time such as this, Sinners, Weapons, and One Battle After Another might just be a thing of the past. I hope not.

Trailer Trailer thumbnail
Watch trailer on YouTube