Ben Affleck Says Bullying ‘Digger’ Will Only Lead Studios to Make More ‘S—ty Homogenized Movies’: Don’t ‘Punish Movies That Take Risks’
Ben Affleck has defended Tom Cruise’s film “Digger”, arguing that celebrating its poor box office performance could encourage studios to avoid ambitious projects. He says films that take risks will sometimes fail, but punishing them may lead to more formulaic, similar-looking releases.
Directed by Alejandro G. Iñárritu, “Digger” stars Cruise as an oil tycoon facing an environmental catastrophe after an Antarctic rig malfunctions. It has a 53% Rotten Tomatoes score and has taken $15 million domestically since opening on 2 October. With production costs above $160 million and marketing estimated at $100 million, it would need about $350 million to break even; a report cited in the article estimates Warner Bros. could lose around $245 million. Other public supporters include Neil Young, Mandy Patinkin and Anne Hathaway.
- Affleck says “Digger” should not be judged only by its box office failure.
- The film has earned $15 million domestically against high costs.
- He warns that punishing risky films could encourage studio formula.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Affleck’s case is that ambitious films need room to fail: if studios and audiences treat every costly misfire as proof that risk is unwise, investors may favour safer, more familiar projects. Supporting films that attempt unusual ideas can help preserve variety and give filmmakers space to take creative chances.
The case against
The case for treating Digger’s poor performance as a cautionary signal is that a film costing hundreds of millions of dollars carries substantial financial risk, and studios have responsibilities to investors, staff and other projects. Box-office results can inform decisions about what audiences will support; expecting studios to overlook repeated costly failures could leave less money for a wider range of films.