‘Digger’ Movie Review: Alejandro G. Iñárritu’s Postmodernist Exploration of Humanity’s Flaws

With a budget of $125 million, “Digger,” directed by Alejandro Gonzáles Iñárritu, presents itself as a postmodernist fever dream that challenges the viewer’s understanding of both narrative and morality. The film, which features a stellar cast including Tom Cruise, Riz Ahmed, and John Goodman, has stirred a divisive discourse among audiences, with opinions about its themes and execution varying widely. Initially, one might find themselves bewildered by Iñárritu’s artistic choices, but as the story unfolds, it becomes apparent that the film aims to serve as a critique of contemporary societal norms—specifically those surrounding climate catastrophe and corporate greed.

Background and Overview

“Digger” opens with the character of Digger Rockwell, portrayed by Tom Cruise, a Texas oil billionaire whose opulent mansion is a testament to his wealth and self-indulgence. Within the walls of his estate, characterized by taxidermied animals and lavish ornamentation, lies an unsettling truth about his character—he is more attached to his bedraggled cat, Maggie, than to the catastrophic consequences of his actions. Maggie’s deteriorating health takes a backseat to the explosive political landscape when a disaster strikes at one of Digger’s drilling sites in Greenland, unleashing deadly methane gas and threatening to precipitate a global crisis.

Key Developments

As the narrative progresses, Digger’s initial reaction to the tragedy is not one of accountability but rather an urgent meeting with political figures, including a grotesquely portrayed American President by John Goodman. The arrival of Goodman, alongside Vice-President Michael Stuhlbarg and other officials, sets the stage for a farcical examination of power and responsibility. Riz Ahmed’s character, Nirav Ganesh, attempts to convey the gravity of the situation, adding a note of urgency to the unfolding absurdity.

As the film develops, viewers are given a profound insight into Digger’s character. Far from being merely a caricature of corporate greed, Cruise’s performance captures a multifaceted character engulfed in his delusions, which culminates in a standout confrontation during a meeting with European leaders. This scene showcases Digger’s inflated self-worth as he argues that society cannot condemn his actions while simultaneously relying on the fossil fuels he provides. The raw physicality and vocal intensity of Cruise’s performance in this sequence are indicative of the complexity Iñárritu imbues in the character.

Context and Themes

However, just as the audience begins to acclimate to the absurdity, Iñárritu flips the narrative. Approximately 30 minutes in, it is revealed that the events on screen are part of a stage play titled “Fossil Fools,” with Digger Rockwell being a character created for this exaggerated production. This Brechtian twist adds layers to the narrative, prompting questions about the nature of performance and reality. The artificiality of the film’s sets and the characters’ actions, directed under the shine of Emmanuel Lubezki’s cinematography and Dennis Gassner’s production design, suggests a world overly composed—a deliberate choice that adds to the film’s satirical tone.

Statements and Reactions

Critically, “Digger” invites viewers to grapple with themes of existential despair amid societal collapse. Iñárritu does not shy away from portraying the emptiness within the spectacle of modern life. The film echoes the absurdity of humanity’s current trajectory, leaving audiences with a sense of ironic disillusionment. Through the eyes of Riz Ahmed’s character, who serves as a beacon of rationality amid the chaos, viewers witness the struggle between wealth, power, and moral responsibility.

One of the pivotal moments in the film arises when Jesse Plemons’ character introduces a monologue that interrogates the ownership of art and the narrative it imparts. This assertion resonates deeply, offering a reflection on the blurred lines between creator and creation, especially as it pertains to celebrity culture encapsulated by Tom Cruise’s late-career revival narrative.

What Happened Next

In embracing the duality of entertainment and critique, Iñárritu cleverly positions “Digger” as a product of the very industrial forces it seeks to satirize. The film revels in its own spectacle, often eliciting laughter amidst the grim realities it depicts. Despite the overwhelming nature of the story, the undercurrent of sadness provides a poignant contrast to the absurdity on display.

Conclusion

“Digger” provides a complex and layered satire that, while it may not have unanimous appeal, succeeds in prompting vital conversations about humanity’s systemic issues—most notably climate change and the moral ramifications of wealth. The film’s ornate presentation may risk overshadowing its critical message, leaving audiences to ponder the interplay between spectacle and substance. As Iñárritu challenges us to reconsider our relationships with the narratives we consume, “Digger” ultimately leaves us reflecting on the absurdities of our current world, a narrative that may be as perplexing as it is profound.

“Digger” is currently running in theaters.