Directed by Alejandro G. Iñárritu
Where & When: Fox Studios, West Los Angeles, CA. September 27, 2026 1:00 PM
Like most actors, Tom Cruise worked his way up the career ladder, appearing in brief supporting roles in low budget films before breaking out with a starring role in the teen sex comedy, "Risky Business" back in 1983. Determined to prove he had more to offer than just a handsome face, Cruise was very selective in the following films he would make: compelling dramas (often pairing up with established actors with prestige and history like Paul Newman, Dustin Hoffman and Jack Nicholson), thrilling action movies and connecting with intriguing indie-minded filmmakers. And this calculation worked out very well for Cruise and helped make him a true movie star.
After spending over the last ten years sticking largely with making action-adventure movies (which included a "Top Gun" sequel and five "Mission: Impossible" films), it seems like Cruise must be ready to push himself further once again as an actor. He has teamed-up with Alejandro González Iñárritu, the two-time Oscar-winning director who has a history of making intense and complex dramas on the human condition, and has brought us "Digger", a pitch black satire on climate change and the wealthy and powerful who have more control over this situation than we realize.
Buried under elaborate make-up to make himself appear older and out-of-shape, Cruise delivers an energized performance that blazes with brilliance as "Digger" Rockwell, an oil scion filled with Texan bluster and capitalist arrogance. And there is absolutely no denying that Iñárritu has made a film that is beautifully rendered, expertly performed and intellectually stimulating. Yet narratively the impressive results of "Digger" still end up being clunky and a bit confounding with the crucial messages being muddled through a story made far more convoluted than is probably necessary.
Our story begins with Digger (Cruise) waking up one morning in his palatial estate sleeping next to his beloved cat, Maggie. That this cat is seriously ill and looks near death is besides the point as Digger, with his vast resources, is doing all he can to keep her breathing. His day is interrupted with a video call from an operator (Danny Kirrane) from one of his oil fields in Greenland, explaining to him that there are dangerous levels of methane leaking through the ice. Just demanding that he take care of it, Digger is later surrounded by a group of scientists including his environmental safety chief, Dr. Nirav Ganesh (Riz Ahmed) informing him that there was a major explosion at his Greenland oil refinery. This has caused a massive ice glacier to break off and slowly drifting towards Norway where in three days there will be a collision that will cause incredible destruction and many will be killed due to this horrific impact.
In a panic, Digger has a meeting with the US president (John Goodman), vice-president (Michael Stuhlbarg) and members of his cabinet to discuss how to possibly stop this disaster and to delay Europe from finding out about this approaching catastrophe.
But everything we have seen so far is not what it appears to be, leading to a considerable plot twist that I will not spoil here. Let's me just say that everything we are seeing in this story has actually happened but not actually as we are seeing it. Does that sound a bit confusing? Well, that isn't exactly Iñárritu intention but he also had no real interest in constructing this narrative in a conventional manner. The director came up with a clearly defined idea of this character, Digger Rockwell about ten years ago yet struggled with a compelling way how to tell his offbeat story. He worked with several screenwriters, Sabina Berman and his "Birdman" co-writers, Nicolas Giacobone and Alexander Dinelaris Jr, for a number of years before settling on this unusual story structure.
The focus of "Digger", in a far from subtle way, is on the impending crisis that the planet is experiencing with a rapidly and undeniably changing of the climate. And it is a politically charged film yet it's not a judgement call on any one particular legislative party. The blame has been placed squarely at the feet of a largely indifferent global society. We have a very small number of wealthy people in power who have far too much say in universal decisions, always seeming to put profits over the continued health of the planet. And then we have the average citizen who is either gravely concerned or living in complete denial about what is happening with our climate yet very few really want to be inconvenienced in any significant way by having to alter their lives from the comforts of modern living.
Taking this opportunity to remind audiences that he's capable of doing more than just running fast and throwing himself into dangerous, high-flying stunts (and now that he's sixty-four, it might be time for him to do less physically challenging activities on screen), Cruise largely succeeds in transforming himself into Digger. Losing his glossy, Hollywood sheen and taking on a lumbering, paunchy, middle-aged Texan oil man, the actor easily captures our stereotypical ideas of a business man with his repellent nature driving him to win (or at the very least "look" like a winner) at all costs. Never for a moment does he make Digger remotely likable or appealing. Despite being directly responsible for many of his employees being killed during the oil site explosion and the impending doom to thousands of Europeans, the most Digger can muster over all of this tragedy is perfunctory concern, saving most of his actual distress and sympathies for his dying cat. And due to the plot twist, Cruise even gets to play another character, one that probably more closely resembles the actor.
No expense seemed to be spared on this film (at a reported of at least one and fifty million dollar budget) and it really shows up on screen with exquisite production design from Dennis Gassner and Richard L. Johnson and the masterful work of cinematographer, Emmanuel Lubezki, with the three time Oscar-winner shooting on 35mm film using the widescreen technique, VistaVision, creating beautifully expressive imagery in a muted color palate. But after seeing the film, I'm not sure how they thought this would appeal to the casual movie-going audience. Much like Maggie Gyllenhaal's "The Bride!", the big-budget, Warner Bros. release from earlier in the year, "Digger" is an artful, experimental movie, visually and philosophically expansive, that is just too out there to have broad appeal to anyone but discerning cinephiles to justify such an elaborate investment.
I think the issue with "Digger" is less that it is poorly conceived and more that it's themes are not communicated in a way that is easily digestible, challenging some viewers far more than they would like. While watching the film, I was feeling more intrigued than fully engaged in this story. I understand completely how some can view "Digger" as gimmicky, overblown and extremely strained. And yet days after seeing "Digger", I am still thinking about what I witnessed, a daring film that provokes and engages, not entirely successfully yet still in a bold way that will stimulate passionate debates and contrasting reactions. In this age of sequels and remakes, "Digger" is a much needed jolt to the system that will help keep cinema alive and vital.
