Tom Cruise gives a brilliant performance in this ambitious mess.
One of the most ambitious movies of the season is “Digger,” which is the first collaboration between Tom Cruise and director Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu. I was really looking forward to this movie, because of how Cruise worked with Paul Thomas Anderson on “Magnolia,” Ben Stiller on “Tropic Thunder,” and the late Stanley Kubrick on his last movie “Eyes Wide Shut.” So, working with the filmmaker who gave us “Amores Perros,” “21 Grams,” “Babel,” “Birdman,” and “The Revenant” should provide an exhilarating motion pictures experience.
Unfortunately, as brilliant of a performance that Cruise brings with a certain “Dr. Strangelove” approach, the movie “Digger” is an ambitious mess that doesn’t speak for the targets as much as it should and gets upstaged by the excellent production designs. Roger Ebert said the same thing about the excellent NYC sets overshadowing the characters in “The Hudsucker Proxy.” And I often say that a movie that looks great should be great, but “Digger” isn’t, and I’m quite disappointed.
Cruise plays an oil tycoon named Digger Rockwell, who loves his terminally ill cat with the film’s obligatory pee humor, his money, and his mansion with hidden doors and a mirror having more antlers than Gaston does in his tavern (you know the verse: “I use antlers in all of my decorating”). In fact, he doesn’t care about the common decency of people nor their warnings of a crack at one his oil companies in Greenland. He should care, because a glacier breaks off and maybe be headed to Eastern Europe with a tsunami attack. But that’s just the beginning of what may be the end.
And what turns out to be a play within a movie, a new version of the cult classic “Fossil Fools,” Cruise plays Curtis Markson, the actor playing Digger. He has conflicts with the director (Sophie Wilde), worries about his daughter whose plane goes missing, and talks with an eager producer (Jesse Plemons). This goes back and forth with green screens, miniature effects, and props, which convinces us that this is an expensive play. But the narrative doesn’t justify its own existence, as it claims it’s celebrating its 25th anniversary on what was based on a true story.
The supporting cast also includes John Goodman as the Trump President Compson, who literally has a pain in his ass; Riz Ahmed as the scientist trying to warn Digger and the government officials of the imminent danger; Sandra Huller as Digger’s half-sister and business partner, whom he argues with; and Michael Stuhlbarg as the meek VP, who has to be the one to puke and get coffee sprayed on himself. And all of their characters are badly defined with over-the-top performances that probably would have been rehashed on “Saturday Night Live.”
“Digger” has the moxie to make itself like a climate change version of “Dr. Strangelove” and Cruise has his speeches and dialogue to make his character zany fun. He has the old make-up and Woody Harrelson accent of sorts, and he delivers on his looks and words. But why can’t the humor and supporting characters be as elevating as Digger Rockwell? They all seem derivative and typical on what is supposed to be a satire. Even the play director admits that the story is supposed to be funny and crazy and doesn’t make sense.
This is the latest movie to be filmed in VistaVision after “One Battle After Another,” “The Brutalist,” and “Bugonia,” and this looks great in IMAX. Capturing the angles of the characters and sets, this format continues to bring on the style that “White Christmas” and “Vertigo” specialized. But it’s a shame that “Digger” has to have its characters and story upstaged by the ambiance.
Gonzalez is a brilliant filmmaker and he should collaborate with Cruise again. And Cruise should be given more credit as an actor, instead of just being Ethan Hunt. But “Digger” doesn’t strike oil or save their environment.