All of this was foreseen and ignored by fossil fuel corporations and the governments they methodically bribed, manipulated and lied to. The men at the top had the figures and the research - they knew this would happen and did nothing to stop it.
Sound familiar? Well, this cheery state of things is where Digger Rockwell (portrayed by Tom Cruise) finds himself at the beginning of the film.
As the biggest oil magnate on the planet — and thus the biggest single contributor to the collapse of the ice sheet — Rockwell takes it upon himself to manage the situation as best he can. His journey to prevent (or profit from) this looming disaster will put him into conflict with a dizzying array of characters. From presidents and scientists to legislators and furious juries, Rockwell will find that the result of his life's work is difficult to discuss, no matter the company.
Another thing that's difficult to discuss? The film itself.
...before the full weight of the situation can set in, the tension is often undercut by a joke that seems discordant with the tone set by its premise...
Digger is determined at every moment, no matter how important or insignificant, to be doing several things at once. It initially plays out as a blackly comedic satire of the climate crisis, with ruthless corporate executives and oft-ignored scientists. However, before the full weight of the situation can set in, the tension is often undercut by a joke that seems discordant with the tone set by its premise.
The film is shot beautifully, capturing the breathtaking sets with skill and panache but is also processed to appear lifeless; colours are often washed out, lending a grey pallor to the faces of most characters and sapping environments of their grandeur. The satire bumps up against the humour, while the amazing production design jars against the post-processed greyness of the final visuals.
One might argue that these clashing elements acutely highlight both the absurdity and blunt ugliness of the time we find ourselves in. Another viewer might reply that, regardless of intent, all this tonal whiplash makes for an experience that simply isn't very enjoyable or cohesive.
The closest comparison one might draw is to 2025's Mickey 17: both films star handsome leading men in unconventionally comedic roles and were helmed by renowned, Oscar-winning directors (Robert Pattinson and Cruise, Bong Joon Ho and Iñárritu). Both films had a mixed critical reception and are, even to their admirers, admittedly jumbled at times, tonally speaking. (It's also worth mentioning that both are satires about the climate crisis!) But where Mickey's slapstick satire eventually pulls back midway through its runtime to reveal a powerful, hopeful emotional core, Digger reveals… something else. Something stranger, more challenging and decidedly not crowd-pleasing.
Digger is a big swing... It's topical, politically motivated and plays with audience expectations in a way no Cruise project has in decades...
But of course, not all films need be crowd-pleasers, even if they feature a man who has starred in almost nothing but big-screen blockbusters for the last two decades of his career. Digger is a big swing, for both Cruise as an aging icon and Iñárritu as a respected director. It is topical, politically motivated and plays with audience expectations in a way no Cruise project has in decades. Laughter, derision, frustration, shocked silence - these are all appropriate reactions to what Iñárritu has orchestrated.
Put simply, Digger knows you want a good time - it just isn't especially interested in providing one.
For those who go to the cinema to engage with artistic messages that are unique, relevant to the times and interesting - even if they aren't pleasing to hear - Digger is a worthwhile watch. For those who prefer Cruise's more action-oriented work, the film may not satisfy. In any case, it is the most interesting project Cruise has been attached to so far this decade.