Decide for yourself. DIGGER – in theaters and IMAX FRIDAY. Tickets on sale now. https://t.co/Z1IpSpFnXd pic.twitter.com/e5ID4WUxbL
— Warner Bros. (@warnerbros) September 29, 2026
They appear to be leaning into the polarization
*** DIGGER *** (Tom Cruise)
14,803 Views |
128 Replies |
Last: 6 days ago by Jugstore Cowboy
They appear to be leaning into the polarization
You guys know better than me, but a polarizing, preachy movie seems an odd choice for Cruise, particularly after the reception of Maverick.
Is it as funny and insane as Dr Strangelove. Clearly that's what they were trying to do
Could be polarizing by sucking as well
The Hollywood Reporter: "A climate crisis satire so smug and bombastic it makes Adam McKay's Don't Look Up seem almost innocuous. Digger is basically what happens when you put two outsize egos together with nobody holding the reins to keep their most self-indulgent impulses in check … so meta that you watch in excruciating weariness as [the film] disappears up its own ass and then realize to your dismay that there's another eardrum-shattering hour left to endure … It's difficult to imagine mainstream audiences ever wanting to be a part of this bludgeoning ordeal."
IndieWire: "Digger is a mega-budget Dr. Strangelove riff so detached from human truth that its most believable character is a one-eyed animatronic cat named Maggie a VistaVision satire so high-concept that it would be more accurate to measure its running time in altitude than minutes … Digger is a hat on a hat on a hat on a hat, with Iñrritu frantically hoping to pile them tall enough that they stand on their own without tipping over … If Digger bombs as hard as I fear it will, it may prove to be a more damning portrait of self-delusion than Iñrritu ever intended."
New York Post: "[Cruise'] first real stinker in nearly 10 years … Audiences will urgently want to leave after the first five minutes … this is not simply a case of poor Tom being trapped in a lousy movie. He's just not very good, even as a cartoony caricature with no depth. Cruise did this kind of thing vastly better when he played Les Grossman in Tropic Thunder. I would've rather seen Nicolas Cage or Woody Harrelson as Digger."
Empire: "This is the film's chief problem that it appears more concerned with itself than with the audience. Its apparent message that the planet's dying and we're complicit, as much as we crave villains to blame is delivered in almost hectoring terms, often in loud monologues … If the whole isn't successful, elements are. Emmanuel Lubezki's cinematography and Dennis Gassner's production design achieve the Kubrickian grandeur Iñrritu clearly intends. Cruise emerges with a win, reminding us how riveting he can be as an actor, not just as a movie star."
Deadline: "For me it is like a return to the kind of adventurous films in cinema's groundbreaking era of the 1970s, but it isn't easily defined … [Cruise's] range is undeniable but here it is off the charts, especially in a stunning 10-minute monologue Digger delivers that admits guilt but seeks to place the blame collectively on all of us … Iñrritu again proves he is one of the most original and fascinating filmmakers working today. Digger is the kind of movie we don't see often on this scale, an ambitious satire that entertains, takes chances, sparks arguments, but is thrillingly alive as cinema designed to make us look at ourselves, hopefully wake up before it is too late, and ask the question: 'What the hell are we doing?'"
BBC: "Most people won't go to see it and some people who do will walk out halfway through. But that doesn't mean that Digger is a failure … Personally, I loved it. Some of its excesses are, well, a bit too excessive, and most viewers will wish it was shorter. After about 90 minutes, you get tired of close-ups of Goodman yelling while snake-sized veins bulge out of his forehead. But when Cruise is clambering all over the set, delivering thunderous lectures on the oil industry, I couldn't help grinning at the gargantuan scale of his performance, the conviction of the script's grim environmental message, and Iñrritu's antic style."
The Wrap: "Digger is what happens when you give the week's worst Saturday Night Live sketch an inexplicably large budget and delusions of grandeur … In Digger, Tom Cruise also plays a villainous Foghorn Leghorn, but his version is a seductive, intriguing enigma that takes center stage. It's the kind of movie about evil billionaires that evil billionaires would enjoy, which makes it the worst kind of movie about evil billionaires."
The Los Angeles Times: "Alejandro Gonzlez Iñrritu's Digger is a bizarre stunt made on a big studio budget, a climate change satire that's a self-conscious hybrid of Stanley Kubrick and Bertolt Brecht … But the horrible hijinks in Digger are so close to reality that, exiting the film, I was less sure than ever that humanity will still be around. There's no hope in Digger, only a seductive, mischievous malevolence that, by design, feels empty as soon as the end credits … while I don't entirely love this strange comedy, I'm giddy that it's lurched into existence."
USA Today: "Digger crafts an unorthodox, complicated narrative with colorful archetypes that reflect the power players in our own world, so their goofy semi-villainy leans amusing and a little depressing. It might also prove divisive for audiences, which could keep a deserving Cruise out of an ultra-competitive Oscar race … Iñrritu does give the movie heart, however, and with his star really going for it in a fashion he hasn't in quite a while, one can at least appreciate its earnest aims."
The Guardian: "As with Adam McKay's Don't Look Up, there may be a tacit consensus, understandable at some level, that at least we have a big mainstream movie which is talking about the biggest issue of our time, and we have a duty to suspend critical objection. Digger certainly resonates with Donald Trump's greedy urge to despoil the Arctic and everywhere else. Yet there is something glib and overblown here. This film finds itself in a postmodern hole. And what do you do when you're in a hole?"
The London Evening Standard: "Tom Cruise is back with a bang in the Oscars ring in his best performance since 1999's Magnolia … There are beautiful aftershocks to Iñrritu's cinematic coup as this gallops towards a heartbreaking warning about where the real world is right now with fossil fuels and climate change … Audacious, risky, terrific fun and for at least half the planet the wildest ride you'll get this year."
The Austin Chronicle: "Ever heard that old saying, this meeting could have been an email? Similarly, rather than being a film, Digger could have been a burning bag of dog poop delivered to Adam McKay's doorstep … A seeming broadside at heavy-handed Hollywood advocacy flops like Don't Look Up, it's a scathing pastiche of everything that makes such movies insufferably sanctimonious. Yet Birdman director Alejandro G. Iñrritu's obvious technical genius as a filmmaker cannot overcome the plain fact that Digger is both insufferable and sanctimonious."
The Globe and Mail: "All these preening, obnoxiously self-satisfied moments, and so many more, add up to a movie so convinced of its own brilliance that it cannot see it is in fact the most banal variety of idiot: loud, ugly and forever oblivious to its own shortcomings … There is no overarching strategy to Digger, just endless scheming from a cinematic charlatan who should have been buried by Hollywood two or three movies ago."
Slant: "… a film of ideas, a rambunctious gathering of mostly talented people doing the worst work of their careers … Digger is Gonzlez Iñrritu's purported cri de coeur against our wealth-and-resources-hoovering overlords, but somehow it still manages to be a shameless Tom Cruise ego stroke. The actor shrieks, preens, and postures. He spits bilious remarks at anyone in his line of sight, particularly during a gaseous monologue about mankind's reliance on fossil fuels. And, of course, true to both Digger and the man playing him, everyone but himself is the problem … Digger's teeth are about as sharp as a decades-old pair of dentures."
IndieWire: "Digger is a mega-budget Dr. Strangelove riff so detached from human truth that its most believable character is a one-eyed animatronic cat named Maggie a VistaVision satire so high-concept that it would be more accurate to measure its running time in altitude than minutes … Digger is a hat on a hat on a hat on a hat, with Iñrritu frantically hoping to pile them tall enough that they stand on their own without tipping over … If Digger bombs as hard as I fear it will, it may prove to be a more damning portrait of self-delusion than Iñrritu ever intended."
New York Post: "[Cruise'] first real stinker in nearly 10 years … Audiences will urgently want to leave after the first five minutes … this is not simply a case of poor Tom being trapped in a lousy movie. He's just not very good, even as a cartoony caricature with no depth. Cruise did this kind of thing vastly better when he played Les Grossman in Tropic Thunder. I would've rather seen Nicolas Cage or Woody Harrelson as Digger."
Empire: "This is the film's chief problem that it appears more concerned with itself than with the audience. Its apparent message that the planet's dying and we're complicit, as much as we crave villains to blame is delivered in almost hectoring terms, often in loud monologues … If the whole isn't successful, elements are. Emmanuel Lubezki's cinematography and Dennis Gassner's production design achieve the Kubrickian grandeur Iñrritu clearly intends. Cruise emerges with a win, reminding us how riveting he can be as an actor, not just as a movie star."
Deadline: "For me it is like a return to the kind of adventurous films in cinema's groundbreaking era of the 1970s, but it isn't easily defined … [Cruise's] range is undeniable but here it is off the charts, especially in a stunning 10-minute monologue Digger delivers that admits guilt but seeks to place the blame collectively on all of us … Iñrritu again proves he is one of the most original and fascinating filmmakers working today. Digger is the kind of movie we don't see often on this scale, an ambitious satire that entertains, takes chances, sparks arguments, but is thrillingly alive as cinema designed to make us look at ourselves, hopefully wake up before it is too late, and ask the question: 'What the hell are we doing?'"
BBC: "Most people won't go to see it and some people who do will walk out halfway through. But that doesn't mean that Digger is a failure … Personally, I loved it. Some of its excesses are, well, a bit too excessive, and most viewers will wish it was shorter. After about 90 minutes, you get tired of close-ups of Goodman yelling while snake-sized veins bulge out of his forehead. But when Cruise is clambering all over the set, delivering thunderous lectures on the oil industry, I couldn't help grinning at the gargantuan scale of his performance, the conviction of the script's grim environmental message, and Iñrritu's antic style."
The Wrap: "Digger is what happens when you give the week's worst Saturday Night Live sketch an inexplicably large budget and delusions of grandeur … In Digger, Tom Cruise also plays a villainous Foghorn Leghorn, but his version is a seductive, intriguing enigma that takes center stage. It's the kind of movie about evil billionaires that evil billionaires would enjoy, which makes it the worst kind of movie about evil billionaires."
The Los Angeles Times: "Alejandro Gonzlez Iñrritu's Digger is a bizarre stunt made on a big studio budget, a climate change satire that's a self-conscious hybrid of Stanley Kubrick and Bertolt Brecht … But the horrible hijinks in Digger are so close to reality that, exiting the film, I was less sure than ever that humanity will still be around. There's no hope in Digger, only a seductive, mischievous malevolence that, by design, feels empty as soon as the end credits … while I don't entirely love this strange comedy, I'm giddy that it's lurched into existence."
USA Today: "Digger crafts an unorthodox, complicated narrative with colorful archetypes that reflect the power players in our own world, so their goofy semi-villainy leans amusing and a little depressing. It might also prove divisive for audiences, which could keep a deserving Cruise out of an ultra-competitive Oscar race … Iñrritu does give the movie heart, however, and with his star really going for it in a fashion he hasn't in quite a while, one can at least appreciate its earnest aims."
The Guardian: "As with Adam McKay's Don't Look Up, there may be a tacit consensus, understandable at some level, that at least we have a big mainstream movie which is talking about the biggest issue of our time, and we have a duty to suspend critical objection. Digger certainly resonates with Donald Trump's greedy urge to despoil the Arctic and everywhere else. Yet there is something glib and overblown here. This film finds itself in a postmodern hole. And what do you do when you're in a hole?"
The London Evening Standard: "Tom Cruise is back with a bang in the Oscars ring in his best performance since 1999's Magnolia … There are beautiful aftershocks to Iñrritu's cinematic coup as this gallops towards a heartbreaking warning about where the real world is right now with fossil fuels and climate change … Audacious, risky, terrific fun and for at least half the planet the wildest ride you'll get this year."
The Austin Chronicle: "Ever heard that old saying, this meeting could have been an email? Similarly, rather than being a film, Digger could have been a burning bag of dog poop delivered to Adam McKay's doorstep … A seeming broadside at heavy-handed Hollywood advocacy flops like Don't Look Up, it's a scathing pastiche of everything that makes such movies insufferably sanctimonious. Yet Birdman director Alejandro G. Iñrritu's obvious technical genius as a filmmaker cannot overcome the plain fact that Digger is both insufferable and sanctimonious."
The Globe and Mail: "All these preening, obnoxiously self-satisfied moments, and so many more, add up to a movie so convinced of its own brilliance that it cannot see it is in fact the most banal variety of idiot: loud, ugly and forever oblivious to its own shortcomings … There is no overarching strategy to Digger, just endless scheming from a cinematic charlatan who should have been buried by Hollywood two or three movies ago."
Slant: "… a film of ideas, a rambunctious gathering of mostly talented people doing the worst work of their careers … Digger is Gonzlez Iñrritu's purported cri de coeur against our wealth-and-resources-hoovering overlords, but somehow it still manages to be a shameless Tom Cruise ego stroke. The actor shrieks, preens, and postures. He spits bilious remarks at anyone in his line of sight, particularly during a gaseous monologue about mankind's reliance on fossil fuels. And, of course, true to both Digger and the man playing him, everyone but himself is the problem … Digger's teeth are about as sharp as a decades-old pair of dentures."
interesting take as always jeremy jahns for those down on the film here's a positive take on it worth listening to no spoilers
So I got bored and looked up the "twist" thing that happens that's seeming to be pissing a lot of people off….
Yeah….i can see why. For the sake of those interested in this thing I won't even post it here with spoiler tags.
Obviously there's some folks that liked it too….but this is one of those that….man…..yeah I likely wouldn't have liked it.
It is a bold move though…you want something different? Go see this.
Yeah….i can see why. For the sake of those interested in this thing I won't even post it here with spoiler tags.
Obviously there's some folks that liked it too….but this is one of those that….man…..yeah I likely wouldn't have liked it.
It is a bold move though…you want something different? Go see this.
I went so you don't have to.
Made it thru 45 minutes then left.
The theme: Powerful white men are sadistic, racist, mentally unstable, overly religious in a weird way - and are a threat to humanity because they are climate deniers. IOW, Hollywood is rehashing the same story it's been selling for 60 years. It's lazy. Am I the only one who's bored with this?
In the last 30 years, the same people who made this movie (the Left) have provided more scary-hilarious material for political satire than ever...but not one producer will touch it.
This movie is fishing for Oscars - and might get a few because Hollywood is filled with left wing lunatics who'll eat this **** up.
0/10 wnb.
Made it thru 45 minutes then left.
The theme: Powerful white men are sadistic, racist, mentally unstable, overly religious in a weird way - and are a threat to humanity because they are climate deniers. IOW, Hollywood is rehashing the same story it's been selling for 60 years. It's lazy. Am I the only one who's bored with this?
In the last 30 years, the same people who made this movie (the Left) have provided more scary-hilarious material for political satire than ever...but not one producer will touch it.
This movie is fishing for Oscars - and might get a few because Hollywood is filled with left wing lunatics who'll eat this **** up.
0/10 wnb.
Ooof.
Even I don't understand why Hollywood is still trying to make climate change/denier movies. Let's pretend, for a second, that climate change is indeed the world-ending threat the left thinks it is (or, rather, thought it was, as I don't hear anyone really talking about it anymore)... even then, what else is there left to say / warn about? What's the fresh take at this point? It's just so... cliched and, yeah, lazy as a movie subject/theme now. Especially in a post-Covid era, where pandemics, AI, biohacking, UAPs, etc are the global issues du jour now.
Even I don't understand why Hollywood is still trying to make climate change/denier movies. Let's pretend, for a second, that climate change is indeed the world-ending threat the left thinks it is (or, rather, thought it was, as I don't hear anyone really talking about it anymore)... even then, what else is there left to say / warn about? What's the fresh take at this point? It's just so... cliched and, yeah, lazy as a movie subject/theme now. Especially in a post-Covid era, where pandemics, AI, biohacking, UAPs, etc are the global issues du jour now.
The Tim Robinson sketch(?) where he's talking to a climate scientist should be all it takes to scare people straight, not insanely over the top caricatures of what feels like old content.
jokershady said:
So I got bored and looked up the "twist" thing that happens that's seeming to be pissing a lot of people off….
Yeah….i can see why. For the sake of those interested in this thing I won't even post it here with spoiler tags.
Obviously there's some folks that liked it too….but this is one of those that….man…..yeah I likely wouldn't have liked it.
It is a bold move though…you want something different? Go see this.
After reading your comment I read an article with full spoilers about some plot twists and it actually made it sound kinda interesting. Agree it's pretty bold.
Full spoilers in this article:
https://www.polygon.com/digger-ending-explained-spoilers/
bagger05 said:jokershady said:
So I got bored and looked up the "twist" thing that happens that's seeming to be pissing a lot of people off….
Yeah….i can see why. For the sake of those interested in this thing I won't even post it here with spoiler tags.
Obviously there's some folks that liked it too….but this is one of those that….man…..yeah I likely wouldn't have liked it.
It is a bold move though…you want something different? Go see this.
After reading your comment I read an article with full spoilers about some plot twists and it actually made it sound kinda interesting. Agree it's pretty bold.
Full spoilers in this article:
https://www.polygon.com/digger-ending-explained-spoilers/
That actually did make it sound interesting. Thanks for sharing that.
I honestly was planning on skipping it, but I'll probably catch it when it comes to streaming. Hopefully by then, I'll have forgotten the twists.
What I had read didn't really put things in order as well as that article. That seems to make it flow a tad bit better than the way I read it.
Can definitely see why it would be hard to market that movie.
not based on the reviews. This movie is gonna bomb critically and commerciallySid Farkas said:
I went so you don't have to.
Made it thru 45 minutes then left.
The theme: Powerful white men are sadistic, racist, mentally unstable, overly religious in a weird way - and are a threat to humanity because they are climate deniers. IOW, Hollywood is rehashing the same story it's been selling for 60 years. It's lazy. Am I the only one who's bored with this?
In the last 30 years, the same people who made this movie (the Left) have provided more scary-hilarious material for political satire than ever...but not one producer will touch it.
This movie is fishing for Oscars - and might get a few because Hollywood is filled with left wing lunatics who'll eat this **** up.
0/10 wnb.
From the spoilers I read, I'm not sure you made it to the true twist in the movie plot if you only stayed for 45 minutes. I haven't seen it and i'm not arguing that the full movie is good. I'm simply pointing out that apparently at a certain point in the movie, not just the plot but what the movie actually is dramatically shifts. At that point, some of the people who disliked it up to that point have changed their opinions. But regardless, the movie overall is still divisive and apparently either loved or hated.
Quote:
Even I don't understand why Hollywood is still trying to make climate change/denier movies.
Does a director like Inarritu get a blank check to do whatever he wants after his Oscar wins?
I read he wrote the script along with a few others.
IMO, it's hubris.
Yikes. This was hyped up so much and has 54% on RT right now.
Sid Farkas said:
I went so you don't have to.
Made it thru 45 minutes then left.
The theme: Powerful white men are sadistic, racist, mentally unstable, overly religious in a weird way - and are a threat to humanity because they are climate deniers. IOW, Hollywood is rehashing the same story it's been selling for 60 years. It's lazy. Am I the only one who's bored with this?
In the last 30 years, the same people who made this movie (the Left) have provided more scary-hilarious material for political satire than ever...but not one producer will touch it.
This movie is fishing for Oscars - and might get a few because Hollywood is filled with left wing lunatics who'll eat this **** up.
0/10 wnb.
Stopped reading after you said you left after 45 minutes
cr0wbar said:
In a world of regurgitated IPs (how many spidermans can yall stomach?) and countless reboots, I'll definitely see something original, weird, and new opening weekend.
Digger is love. Digger is life.
I like supporting original IP, I even saw The Lobster in the theater, but after seeing Digger's trailer three times I have no desire to watch this movie.
This turd had flop written all over it from the jump.
PatAg said:Sid Farkas said:
I went so you don't have to.
Made it thru 45 minutes then left.
The theme: Powerful white men are sadistic, racist, mentally unstable, overly religious in a weird way - and are a threat to humanity because they are climate deniers. IOW, Hollywood is rehashing the same story it's been selling for 60 years. It's lazy. Am I the only one who's bored with this?
In the last 30 years, the same people who made this movie (the Left) have provided more scary-hilarious material for political satire than ever...but not one producer will touch it.
This movie is fishing for Oscars - and might get a few because Hollywood is filled with left wing lunatics who'll eat this **** up.
0/10 wnb.
Stopped reading after you said you left after 45 minutes
I could've written the ending after 45 minutes.
I'll bet you think good comedy is a pie to the face.
Sid Farkas said:PatAg said:Sid Farkas said:
I went so you don't have to.
Made it thru 45 minutes then left.
The theme: Powerful white men are sadistic, racist, mentally unstable, overly religious in a weird way - and are a threat to humanity because they are climate deniers. IOW, Hollywood is rehashing the same story it's been selling for 60 years. It's lazy. Am I the only one who's bored with this?
In the last 30 years, the same people who made this movie (the Left) have provided more scary-hilarious material for political satire than ever...but not one producer will touch it.
This movie is fishing for Oscars - and might get a few because Hollywood is filled with left wing lunatics who'll eat this **** up.
0/10 wnb.
Stopped reading after you said you left after 45 minutes
I could've written the ending after 45 minutes.
I'll bet you think good comedy is a pie to the face.
Hey Sid, i'm legit curious if you made it to the big twist in the movie before you left.
I don't know if this makes sense to anyone else but it's actually kinda nice to have a major movie that just isn't for everyone. Feels like too many movies now are focus-group-ed to death and we end up with too many movies that are just "fine."
bobinator said:
I don't know if this makes sense to anyone else but it's actually kinda nice to have a major movie that just isn't for everyone. Feels like too many movies now are focus-group-ed to death and we end up with too many movies that are just "fine."
Oh, absolutely agree.
FL_Ag1998 said:Sid Farkas said:PatAg said:Sid Farkas said:
I went so you don't have to.
Made it thru 45 minutes then left.
The theme: Powerful white men are sadistic, racist, mentally unstable, overly religious in a weird way - and are a threat to humanity because they are climate deniers. IOW, Hollywood is rehashing the same story it's been selling for 60 years. It's lazy. Am I the only one who's bored with this?
In the last 30 years, the same people who made this movie (the Left) have provided more scary-hilarious material for political satire than ever...but not one producer will touch it.
This movie is fishing for Oscars - and might get a few because Hollywood is filled with left wing lunatics who'll eat this **** up.
0/10 wnb.
Stopped reading after you said you left after 45 minutes
I could've written the ending after 45 minutes.
I'll bet you think good comedy is a pie to the face.
Hey Sid, i'm legit curious if you made it to the big twist in the movie before you left.
I think I missed the 3rd twist - where (apparently) Digger/Curtis is revealed to be atoning for the original (real) disaster. i honestly dk if/how that changes my earlier assessment. I'm open for anyone who made it to the end to explain how my take on white guy tropes above is not valid.
Sid Farkas said:PatAg said:Sid Farkas said:
I went so you don't have to.
Made it thru 45 minutes then left.
The theme: Powerful white men are sadistic, racist, mentally unstable, overly religious in a weird way - and are a threat to humanity because they are climate deniers. IOW, Hollywood is rehashing the same story it's been selling for 60 years. It's lazy. Am I the only one who's bored with this?
In the last 30 years, the same people who made this movie (the Left) have provided more scary-hilarious material for political satire than ever...but not one producer will touch it.
This movie is fishing for Oscars - and might get a few because Hollywood is filled with left wing lunatics who'll eat this **** up.
0/10 wnb.
Stopped reading after you said you left after 45 minutes
I could've written the ending after 45 minutes.
I'll bet you think good comedy is a pie to the face.
... not a Mel Brooks fan?
The only thing this has going for it is that it came out of seemingly nowhere and it is so strange that it is generating online conversation.
Sid Farkas said:FL_Ag1998 said:Sid Farkas said:PatAg said:Sid Farkas said:
I went so you don't have to.
Made it thru 45 minutes then left.
The theme: Powerful white men are sadistic, racist, mentally unstable, overly religious in a weird way - and are a threat to humanity because they are climate deniers. IOW, Hollywood is rehashing the same story it's been selling for 60 years. It's lazy. Am I the only one who's bored with this?
In the last 30 years, the same people who made this movie (the Left) have provided more scary-hilarious material for political satire than ever...but not one producer will touch it.
This movie is fishing for Oscars - and might get a few because Hollywood is filled with left wing lunatics who'll eat this **** up.
0/10 wnb.
Stopped reading after you said you left after 45 minutes
I could've written the ending after 45 minutes.
I'll bet you think good comedy is a pie to the face.
Hey Sid, i'm legit curious if you made it to the big twist in the movie before you left.
I think I missed the 3rd twist - where (apparently) Digger/Curtis is revealed to be atoning for the original (real) disaster. i honestly dk if/how that changes my earlier assessment. I'm open for anyone who made it to the end to explain how my take on white guy tropes above is not valid.
Gotcha, just curious since you had such a visceral dislike for it. Depending on further reactions I may try it on streaming.....or maybe not, lol.
WB is drowning in debt and they're making this garbage.
This is a terrible movie. Great Vacheron Constantin watch though.
I'm still here hoping that it gets better
I'm still here hoping that it gets better
Ok I'm not going to lie, the reveal just happened, was awesome, and it did make the entire movie better.
So I'm not going to lie, it was not the easiest movie to watch, or really that entertaining, but it was a work of art.
I am glad I saw it, I will not ever watch it again.
I am glad I saw it, I will not ever watch it again.
My 13yo really wanted to see it for some reason, I was pleasantly surprised. Really creative movie, I can see why some viewers might be turned off on it, but surprised critics are split on this one. Look forward to watching it again when it's streaming.
Twist sounds kinda cool actually. First 45 min sound like a beating but at least that beating has a point?
Featured Stories
See All
50:01
2h ago
1.4k
Texas A&M's quest for a quinquennial event
by Olin Buchanan
3:49
3h ago
1.6k
Key Matchups: Texas A&M at No. 13 Alabama
by Olin Buchanan
23:15
2h ago
519