---
title: "Digger"
year: 2026
kind: "film"
canonical: "https://film.one/film/digger"
fi1m_id: "digger"
imdb_id: "tt31450459"
tmdb_id: 1248832
wikidata_id: "Q129677718"
fi1m_score: 52
critics_score: 47
critics_reviews: 33
published: "2026-10-02"
updated: "2026-10-12T06:00:37.438632+00:00"
region: "IT"
licence: "© Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL."
---

# Digger (2026)

Directed by Alejandro González Iñárritu · 2h 09m · MiC 10+ · Comedy, Drama

## Identity

Digger

- **Canonical:** https://film.one/film/digger
- **Type:** Film
- **Fi1m ID:** digger
- **IMDb ID:** tt31450459
- **TMDB ID:** 1248832
- **Wikidata ID:** Q129677718
- **Same entity:** https://www.imdb.com/title/tt31450459/, https://www.themoviedb.org/movie/1248832, https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q129677718

**Fi1m score: 52** · Critics 47 from 33 reviews

*In a sentence:* A film about a man who will not stop talking, directed by a man who will not stop talking either

> Tom Cruise, transformed into a bellowing Texas oilman, gives Iñárritu’s end-of-the-world farce a great deal of energy and one good speech. The sets are remarkable and Riz Ahmed is a pleasure; the satire itself shouts a single point for 129 minutes.

## Synopsis

Rockwell (Tom Cruise) is a Texas oilman, loud, rich and certain he is right, and the planet he has spent his life drilling into is in trouble. Rather than apologise, he sets out to control the story: to persuade President Compson (John Goodman), the Vice President (Michael Stuhlbarg) and a gathering of European leaders that the man who caused the problem is the only man who can be trusted to fix it. Around him are Ganesh (Riz Ahmed), Emma (Sandra Hüller) and Kenny (Jesse Plemons). The first act is a farce of podiums, press rooms and speeches, with Rockwell talking over everyone in them, before the film shifts the way it is telling its story in a manner we will not describe.

## Review

Alejandro González Iñárritu has made a comedy about the end of the world and cast Tom Cruise as the man most to blame for it. Rockwell is a Texas oilman who speaks in capitals, and the film follows him from podium to press room to private office as he tries to turn a catastrophe of his own making into a story about his courage. The screenplay, by Iñárritu with Alexander Dinelaris Jr., Nicolás Giacobone and Sabina Berman Goldberg, from a story Iñárritu wrote with Berman Goldberg and Jez Butterworth, has a target worth hitting. It hits it in the first ten minutes and then keeps hitting it, louder each time, for 129 minutes.

Cruise has not played anyone this unpleasant since [*Magnolia*](https://film.one/film/magnolia), and he goes at it with everything: the drawl, the swagger, the grin held a second too long. It is a brave performance, and the film never lets us forget it. Somewhere in the first hour we stopped watching Rockwell and started watching Cruise being daring. A scene in which he confronts himself in a mirror is meant to be the heart of the film and plays as an acting exercise.

Then comes the speech to the European leaders, and for a few minutes the film works. Emmanuel Lubezki’s camera circles Rockwell without a cut while he lays out, with real relish, the case for the defence, and Cruise drops the clowning and lets the man’s logic do the work. We sat up. We had not expected to, and it is the one passage in which the film’s anger makes sense as drama rather than as noise. It does not last, but it is there.

Riz Ahmed is the other reason to stay. His Ganesh underplays everything, times his reactions a beat late and gets the biggest laughs in the film by saying the least. John Goodman’s President Compson and Michael Stuhlbarg’s Vice President are allowed one note each. Sandra Hüller, who can do more with a look than most actors can with a page, is given almost nothing to do. Jesse Plemons and Emma D’Arcy drift through a subplot the film forgets about for long stretches.

The craft is where the money shows. Dennis Gassner and Richard L. Johnson have built a world that is slightly wrong in every dimension, offices too large, halls too clean, flags too bright, like a country designed by someone who has only seen it on television. Lubezki shoots it on lenses so wide the walls bow and faces swell when they come near, in long takes that Conor O’Neill and Stephen Mirrione join so that one shout runs straight into the next. For twenty minutes this is unsettling in the right way. By the end it is a headache, and we suspect Iñárritu knows it and has decided a headache is the point. Cosmo Sheldrake’s score is the quietest thing in the film and often the wittiest, ticking and chirping under men who believe they are the only ones making a sound.

The second half takes a turn we will not describe, except to say that the advertising calls it “Same film. Different truths” and that is accurate. Some critics took it as the moment the film becomes thoughtful. We took it as the point where the film begins to explain itself, in monologues that repeat what the pictures have already said and a play within the film that is as laboured as plays within films usually are.

Iñárritu made a comedy about a vain man once before, in *Birdman*, and it was funny because it liked him a little. This one does not like anybody, which is permitted, but it does not seem to find anybody funny either, which in a farce is fatal. The reviews so far split almost down the middle, as many critics dazzled as exhausted, and we have landed a little below the midpoint, admiring the sets and the speech and wishing somebody had turned the sound down.

See it in a cinema if you see it at all, because the lenses and the long takes are the whole method and shrink badly on a television. Take someone to argue with.

*Fi1m score 52, published 2 October 2026.*

## What the critics say

The reviews lean negative, and even those who recommend the film describe it as divisive. Most critics agree it is ambitious: an abrasive, farcical climate satire built around a Tom Cruise transformation. The praise clusters on the craft and the star. Cruise’s uninhibited, committed performance is admired across the spread, even by critics who dislike the film, and Riz Ahmed is repeatedly named the supporting standout. The production design and Emmanuel Lubezki’s long-take cinematography draw consistent credit.

The reservations cluster on the satire itself. A large group finds it toothless, didactic and short on laughs, with hectoring monologues and incessant shouting in place of wit. The spread is wide, from five stars at the Evening Standard to half a star at Slant. The trade and entertainment press are warmest; the British broadsheets are harshest. A few, including Screen Daily and The i Paper, break from the consensus on Cruise, arguing he never convinces as a Texas oilman.

## Straight answers

**Is Digger worth watching?**

*Digger* is worth watching only for the curious, and we scored it 52. Tom Cruise is loud and brave as a Texas oilman blamed for the end of the world, Riz Ahmed is a pleasure, and the sets and one long speech are remarkable, but Iñárritu's farce makes a single point for 129 minutes and does not find anybody funny. See it in a cinema if you see it at all.

**How long is Digger, and what is it rated?**

*Digger* runs 2h 09m and is rated 10+ by the MiC in Italy. It is a comedy and drama film.

**Where can I watch Digger in Italy?**

*Digger* is not on any streaming or rental service in Italy at the moment. Availability is checked daily.

**How violent or frightening is Digger, and is it suitable for children?**

*Digger* carries a UK 15 and a US R certificate, which here means adult language and a sustained, shouting nastiness rather than violence or horror. It is a satire of podiums and press rooms, not a frightening film, and we noticed nothing in it that would alarm the squeamish. It is not for children, who would in any case find two hours of men bellowing about oil very dull.

**What should I watch after Digger?**

After *Digger*, try [*Network*](https://film.one/film/network) (1976, Fi1m 86): Television eats itself; Chayefsky’s shouting is funnier and far better aimed than Rockwell’s. Then [*Dr. Strangelove*](https://film.one/film/dr-strangelove-or-how-i-learned-to-stop-worrying-and-love-the-bomb) (1964, Fi1m 93): The end of the world as farce, done briskly and without a single lecture; and [*Birdman*](https://film.one/film/birdman-or-the-unexpected-virtue-of-ignorance) (2014, Fi1m 82): Iñárritu, Lubezki and a vain man in long takes, back when the joke landed.

### Reviews we read (33)

- **Evening Standard**, Nick Howells (5/5): Howells finds the film audacious, risky and terrific fun, while praising Cruise’s grandstanding performance. He also singles out the film’s climate-change warning as it builds toward a heartbreaking conclusion. [Read](https://www.standard.co.uk/culture/film/digger-film-review-tom-cruise-john-goodman-b1298722.html)
- **The New Yorker**, Justin Chang (70/100, inferred): Chang finds the film a daring, meticulously realized, proudly unlikable comedy of errors that is ultimately more invigorating than depressing. He especially praises the production design and the playful visual craft, which he says transcend gimmickry. [Read](https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2026/10/12/digger-movie-review)
- **Radio Times**, Rosie Fletcher (65/100, inferred): Fletcher describes the film as brilliant but sometimes overwhelming. The farcical satire’s dense richness is singled out as both a strength and a drawback. [Read](https://www.radiotimes.com/movies/digger-tom-cruise-review/)
- **The New York Times** (64/100, inferred): The page is identifiable as a review, but its text is inaccessible. Its verdict and any specifically praised or criticized element cannot be determined. [Read](https://www.nytimes.com/2026/10/01/movies/digger-review-tom-cruise-alejandro-inarritu.html)
- **Time Out** (64/100, inferred): The accessible page identifies this as a review of the supplied film, but exposes no critical verdict. No specific element of praise or complaint is available in the page text. [Read](https://www.timeout.com/movies/digger-2026)
- **IndieWire**, David Ehrlich (C+): Ehrlich calls the film a surreal misfire, though a nobler and more rewarding failure than Iñárritu’s earlier films. He praises its darkly funny final shot while faulting its clumsy comedy and overextended satire. [Read](https://www.indiewire.com/criticism/movies/digger-movie-review-tom-cruise-1235219051/)
- **Los Angeles Times**, Amy Nicholson (60/100, inferred): Nicholson finds the film a strange, bleak satire that she does not entirely love, but is glad it exists. She praises Cruise’s energetic performance and the film’s audacious excess, while faulting its weak play-within-the-film and limp subplot. [Read](https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/movies/story/2026-09-29/digger-review-tom-cruise-john-goodman-riz-ahmed-sandra-huller-jesse-plemons-alejandro-gonzales-innaritu)
- **The AV Club**, Monica Castillo (C-): Castillo finds the film a stylish but shallow misfire, with its environmental critique obvious and its spectacle outweighing emotional depth. She praises Cruise’s entertaining, uninhibited performance, which she says helps keep the film from collapsing completely. [Read](https://www.avclub.com/digger-review-tom-cruise-alejandro-inarritu-all-style-no-substance)
- **Little White Lies**, Hannah Strong (3/2/3): Strong finds the satire toothless and overstuffed, with little meaningful target. She singles out the elaborate production design and unsettling cinematography as the film’s greatest assets. [Read](https://lwlies.com/reviews/digger)
- **The Independent**, Clarisse Loughrey (2/5): Loughrey finds the satire frustrating and insufficiently sharp, despite admiring Iñárritu’s boldness. She praises the cast’s high-farce performances, especially Riz Ahmed’s comedic timing. [Read](https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/reviews/digger-tom-cruise-alejandro-inarritu-review-b3058708.html)
- **Sight and Sound** (35/100, inferred): The critic finds the satire frequently unwieldy and unfunny, though still compulsively watchable. They praise Cruise’s charismatic performance and the film’s imaginative production design and striking cinematography. [Read](https://www.bfi.org.uk/sight-and-sound/reviews/digger-unwieldy-compulsively-watchable-satire)
- **Vulture**, Bilge Ebiri (35/100, inferred): Ebiri finds the film torturous and often self-defeating, though its underlying environmental despair ultimately gives it weight. He praises the sadness and horror beneath the grandstanding while faulting the noisy style and structural gambit. [Read](https://www.vulture.com/article/review-digger-is-a-brazen-act-of-self-sabotage.html)
- **Empire**, Olly Richards (30/100, inferred): Richards finds the film visually impressive but ultimately disappointing and lacking depth. He praises Cruise’s committed performance and the cinematography and production design, while faulting the characters and hectoring monologues. [Read](https://www.empireonline.com/movies/reviews/digger/)
- **Variety**, Owen Gleiberman (30/100, inferred): Gleiberman finds the satire overbearing and self-important, with its climate-disaster warning delivered too didactically to be funny. He praises Cruise’s fiery performance in a speech that briefly gives the film’s argument real force. [Read](https://variety.com/2026/film/reviews/digger-review-tom-cruise-alejandro-g-inarritu-1236872535/)
- **Screen Daily**, Tim Grierson (25/100, inferred): Grierson finds the film an ambitious but shallow misfire. He singles out Tom Cruise’s failure to convince as a bullish Texas oilman. [Read](https://www.screendaily.com/reviews/digger-review-tom-cruise-fails-to-convince-as-a-bullish-texas-oilman-in-alejandro-g-inarritus-ambitious-misfire/5220616.article)
- **The i Paper**, Francesca Steele (20/100, inferred): Steele argues that Cruise’s performance fails to convince, despite the film’s ambitious transformation and farcical premise. She singles out his self-conscious, overly grand approach to acting as the reason the mirror scene and the character do not land. [Read](https://inews.co.uk/culture/film/tom-cruise-forgotten-act-4788554)
- **The Observer**, Wendy Ide (20/100, inferred): Ide finds the film aggravating, overblown and ultimately empty despite its timely subject. She praises Riz Ahmed’s performance, while criticizing the film’s excess and self-importance. [Read](https://observer.co.uk/culture/film/article/digger-is-a-brash-self-indulgent-eco-satire-with-nothing-to-say)
- **The Guardian**, Peter Bradshaw (15/100, inferred): Bradshaw judges the film a disappointing, shallow, laborious satire. He praises its dreamlike, disturbing imagery, while finding the performances and storytelling weak. [Read](https://www.theguardian.com/film/2026/sep/29/digger-review-tom-cruise-satire-alejandro-gonzalez-inarritu)
- **Slant Magazine**, Keith Uhlich (0.5/4): Uhlich dismisses the film as a toothless satire that becomes an ego stroke for Tom Cruise. He singles out the incessant shouting and distorted cinematography as especially grating. [Read](https://www.slantmagazine.com/film/digger-review-tom-cruise-alejandro-gonzalez-inarritu/)
- **The Hollywood Reporter**, David Rooney (10/100, inferred): Rooney finds the film an exhausting, self-indulgent failure with little meaningful insight. He particularly criticizes its witless writing and farcical plotting, while noting Riz Ahmed’s performance as a rare source of nuance. [Read](https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-reviews/digger-review-tom-cruise-alejandro-g-inarritu-1236713730/)
- **Collider**, Victoria Luxford (9/10): The critic calls the film an audacious, powerful swing that may divide audiences. She praises Tom Cruise’s daring performance and singles out Riz Ahmed as the supporting cast’s standout. [Read](https://collider.com/tom-cruise-digger-review/)
- **Consequence**, Liz Shannon Miller (90/100, inferred): The critic says the film’s nihilistic anger pays off brilliantly and calls it a bold, politically pointed cautionary tale. She especially praises Tom Cruise’s commanding, ego-free performance, highlighting a dizzying sequence before European leaders. [Read](https://consequence.net/2026/09/digger-review-movie-tom-cruise/)
- **Deadline**, Pete Hammond (90/100, inferred): Hammond finds the film an ambitious, divisive satire that ultimately moves and entertains while urging audiences to confront humanity’s destructive choices. He especially praises Tom Cruise’s startling transformation and powerful performance, including a standout monologue. [Read](https://deadline.com/2026/09/digger-review-tom-cruise-movie-1237115519/)
- **The Playlist**, Rodrigo Perez (B+): Perez finds the film divisive but unusually thoughtful, with its audacious shift in perspective making it more layered than its abrasive opening suggests. He praises the visual energy of Emmanuel Lubezki’s long takes, while noting that the film’s relentless intensity and self-consciousness can become exhausting. [Read](https://theplaylist.net/digger-review-tom-cruise-alejandro-g-inarritu-20260929/)
- **HeyUGuys** (75/100, inferred): The review finds the film ambitious and rewarding despite occasional narrative disjointedness and overworked comedy. It especially praises Tom Cruise’s committed, unconventional performance. [Read](https://www.heyuguys.com/digger-review/)
- **/Film**, Bill Bria (7/10): The review finds the film an abrasive, uneven satire that ultimately becomes engaging and admirable. It singles out Tom Cruise’s fearless performance for giving the story emotional depth and scope. [Read](https://www.slashfilm.com/2271749/digger-review-tom-cruise/)
- **Polygon**, Jake Kleinman (70/100, inferred): The critic finds Digger an ambitious, often funny but bleakly unsettling apocalypse comedy, though its twists sometimes undercut its message. Tom Cruise’s commanding performance and the film’s uncanny production design stand out for praise. [Read](https://www.polygon.com/digger-review-tom-cruise/)
- **Digital Spy**, Ian Sandwell (60/100, inferred): Sandwell finds Digger ambitious and often entertaining, but ultimately flawed and short on substance. He praises Tom Cruise’s captivating performance and the striking production design, while faulting the script for lacking depth. [Read](https://www.digitalspy.com/movies/a73924133/digger-review-tom-cruise/)
- **Den of Geek**, David Crow (2.5/5): Crow finds the film audacious and watchable but ultimately undone by its uneven, self-important satire. He praises Cruise’s hypnotic, unhinged performance, while faulting the film for failing to be funny. [Read](https://www.denofgeek.com/movies/digger-review-tom-cruise/)
- **The Ringer**, Adam Nayman (30/100, inferred): Nayman finds the film overbearing and largely unsuccessful, despite its provocative ideas. He praises the fascination of watching Iñárritu dismantle his own elaborate filmmaking contraptions, while faulting the relentless way the film presses its arguments. [Read](https://www.theringer.com/2026/10/05/movies/digger-review-tom-cruise-alejandro-inarritu)
- **NME** (25/100, inferred): The critic finds the film visually striking but ultimately messy and disappointing. They praise the vivid cinematography and production design, while faulting the over-clever structure and lack of laughs. [Read](https://www.nme.com/reviews/film-reviews/digger-review-tom-cruise-alejandro-inarritu-john-goodman-3971615)
- **Film Stories**, Ryan Lambie (15/100, inferred): Lambie finds the satire shrill and emotionally empty, despite its ambitious ideas. He praises the visual ingenuity and captivating practical effects and set design, but says they cannot give the film anything to cling to. [Read](https://filmstories.co.uk/reviews/digger-review-no-no-dig-up-stupid/)
- **The Wrap** (15/100, inferred): The critic pans the film as shallow, self-congratulatory satire that pulls its punches. They single out the production design and Tom Cruise’s performance as its strengths. [Read](https://www.thewrap.com/creative-content/reviews/digger-review-tom-cruise/)

## Details

- **Director:** Alejandro González Iñárritu
- **Director:** Alejandro González Iñárritu
- **Screenplay:** Alejandro González Iñárritu, Alexander Dinelaris Jr., Nicolás Giacobone, Sabina Berman Goldberg
- **Story:** Alejandro González Iñárritu, Sabina Berman Goldberg, Jez Butterworth
- **Cinematography:** Emmanuel Lubezki
- **Editor:** Conor O'Neill, Stephen Mirrione
- **Music:** Cosmo Sheldrake
- **Production design:** Dennis Gassner, Richard L. Johnson
- **Costume design:** Jacqueline West
- **Producer:** Tom Cruise, Alejandro González Iñárritu, Mary Parent
- **Cast:** Tom Cruise as Rockwell; Riz Ahmed as Ganesh; John Goodman as President Compson; Sandra Hüller as Emma; Michael Stuhlbarg as Vice President; Jesse Plemons as Kenny; Robert John Burke as Fitzgerald; Emma D'Arcy as Lena
- **Runtime:** 2h 09m
- **Certificate (MiC):** 10+
- **Release (Italy):** 1 October 2026
- **Genres:** Comedy, Drama
- **Budget:** $125 million
- **Trailer:** https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=job8V254NAE

## Where to watch in Italy

Not streaming, renting or buying in Italy at the last check.

## If you liked this

- *Network* (1976), Fi1m 86: Television eats itself; Chayefsky’s shouting is funnier and far better aimed than Rockwell’s. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/network.md)
- *Dr. Strangelove* (1964), Fi1m 93: The end of the world as farce, done briskly and without a single lecture. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/dr-strangelove-or-how-i-learned-to-stop-worrying-and-love-the-bomb.md)
- *Birdman* (2014), Fi1m 82: Iñárritu, Lubezki and a vain man in long takes, back when the joke landed. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/birdman-or-the-unexpected-virtue-of-ignorance.md)
- *Triangle of Sadness* (2022), Fi1m 66: Östlund’s rich fools adrift; the satire is crueller and a good deal more patient. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/triangle-of-sadness.md)
- *There Will Be Blood* (2007), Fi1m 88: An oilman’s greed taken seriously, with Daniel Day-Lewis making the monster a man. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/there-will-be-blood.md)

---
© Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL. Canonical: https://film.one/film/digger