Digger Looks Like the Kind of Tom Cruise Gamble Hollywood Needs

I’ve watched Tom Cruise save the world enough times that, at this point, if somebody told me he was actually an IMF agent in his spare time, I’d probably believe them. That’s part of what made Digger such an interesting watch.

Directed by Alejandro G. Iñárritu, Digger takes Cruise away from the motorcycles, airplanes, impossible missions, and last-second world-saving we’ve become accustomed to and puts him into something considerably stranger: an R-rated environmental satire about a wealthy businessman whose company causes an environmental catastrophe. Instead of preventing the disaster, Cruise is part of the reason it happened. And you know what? I really enjoyed seeing him do something this different.

Digger isn’t going to be for everyone. It’s weird, uncomfortable, funny in some very dark ways, and occasionally feels like it enjoys making the audience squirm. But I’d much rather watch a talented filmmaker and one of the biggest movie stars alive take a chance like this than sit through another safe movie assembled by committee.

Tom Cruise Playing Against Type Is the Best Part

The biggest reason Digger works for me is Tom Cruise. We’re so accustomed to seeing him play incredibly capable characters that there’s something fascinating about watching that familiar confidence used in a completely different way. Cruise isn’t the guy running toward the catastrophe to save everyone this time. He’s the wealthy businessman whose company helped cause it. That’s a pretty significant difference. His character still carries that classic Cruise confidence—the feeling that no matter how bad things get, he believes he can somehow regain control. Except here, that confidence sometimes comes across as arrogance rather than heroism. And that’s where things get interesting.

Watching someone accustomed to controlling practically everything discover that money, influence, and confidence can’t necessarily fix the consequences of his actions gives Cruise something different to play with. There were moments when I couldn’t decide whether I wanted his character to succeed, fail, learn something, or simply stop talking. That’s a compliment. He’s complicated enough that the movie doesn’t give you an easy answer about how you’re supposed to feel about him.

Digger Is Funny, But It’s Definitely Not a Traditional Comedy

Alejandro G. Iñárritu was probably one of the last directors I would’ve expected to pair with Tom Cruise. After watching Digger, I understand why that unusual combination was appealing. This is a strange movie. The environmental catastrophe provides the framework, but the film is really interested in power, ego, responsibility, wealth, and our incredible ability as humans to convince ourselves we’re doing the right thing.

The humor comes from those contradictions. Some situations are so ridiculous that you laugh, only to realize what’s happening underneath them isn’t particularly funny at all. That’s the satire working.

Iñárritu also doesn’t seem particularly interested in making Cruise’s character easily likable. That’s important because a safer movie probably would’ve spent half its runtime trying to convince us that he was secretly a great guy who simply made one unfortunate mistake. Digger is more complicated than that.

The Tone Won’t Work for Everyone

That said, the movie occasionally pushes its weirdness a little too hard. There were moments where I felt like I understood the point and the movie continued underlining it anyway. Satire works best when the audience gets to connect some dots themselves. At times, Digger trusts us to do that. At other times, it practically grabs a marker. Still, I’d rather complain that a movie has too much personality than none at all.

The Supporting Cast Makes the Story Much Better

Cruise is obviously the main attraction, but Digger would’ve been much less interesting without its supporting cast. Riz Ahmed, John Goodman, and Sandra Hüller bring different perspectives and personalities into the chaos, which is important because this story could have easily become two hours of everyone simply reacting to Tom Cruise. Thankfully, it doesn’t.

Goodman was particularly enjoyable for me because he’s so good at occupying that space between friendly and intimidating. A conversation can start completely normally, and somehow you’re still wondering whether you should be nervous.

That’s one of the things I appreciated about the film. There isn’t a giant cartoon villain standing in the corner explaining the evil plan. Everyone has an agenda. Everyone has something to protect. And practically everyone can justify their behavior to themselves. That makes the corporate and environmental conflict considerably more interesting than a simple rich-people-are-bad message would’ve been.

The Movie Actually Has Something to Say

The environmental disaster is obviously central to the story, but I don’t think Digger is really asking whether destroying the environment is bad. That’s not exactly a difficult philosophical question. What’s more interesting is what happens afterward. Who takes responsibility? Can money repair everything? How much of corporate crisis management is genuinely about fixing damage, and how much is about controlling how the public perceives the people responsible?

And what happens when someone with enormous power encounters a problem that doesn’t care how wealthy or influential they are? Those questions give the movie some teeth. There were scenes that made me laugh and then think about why I was laughing, which is exactly what good satire should do. The film also doesn’t provide a comfortable answer to everything. I appreciated that.

Sometimes movies become so determined to deliver “the message” that characters stop behaving like people and start sounding like competing PowerPoint presentations. Digger occasionally gets close to that line, but its performances usually pull it back.

I’m Glad Movies Like This Still Get Made

Here’s something I kept thinking about after leaving the theater. This movie is a huge risk. Not because it’s bad. Because it’s weird. It’s an original, adult-oriented environmental satire with a major movie star and blockbuster-level production behind it. When was the last time that combination sounded normal?

We constantly complain that Hollywood only makes sequels, reboots, remakes, cinematic universes, and adaptations of things people already recognize. Then something like Digger comes along and reminds you why original movies are risky.

There isn’t decades of built-in fandom. There aren’t superheroes. There isn’t a number after the title. The movie itself has to be the selling point. I respect that.

Not every creative swing is going to become a home run, and Digger certainly has moments that didn’t completely work for me. But I’ll take a movie that occasionally misses because it’s trying something unusual over another perfectly acceptable sequel I’ve forgotten about three days later.