Hideo Kojima’s defense of Digger draws a specific comparison to Metal Gear Solid 2 and its story about networked information shaping what people believe. For the creator of Metal Gear and Death Stranding, Alejandro G. Iñárritu’s latest Tom Cruise film is a warning about power and the perception of reality, not just a reason to go to the cinema.
Digger has sharply divided viewers. Polygon’s Willa Rowe describes the competing assessments: a bloated, self-aggrandizing mess on one side, and one of the most insightful and relevant films in years on the other. It has also become a major box office flop, an unusual outcome for Cruise. Still, prominent artists across different mediums have defended it, forming what Rowe calls Digger nation. Kojima, a noted cinephile, is its latest supporter.
In a lengthy post on X, Kojima praised the film directly: “Digger is a film that all of us living in today’s world should see. It is a work that remains with the audience, provoking reflection and sounding alarms.”
A conversation between Kojima and Iñárritu published by Gizmodo Japan explains the thinking behind that endorsement. The two connected their work through concerns about social media, its influence, and how those in power can use it to alter people’s understanding of reality.
“In 2001, I made a game called Metal Gear Solid 2,” Kojima said, according to the machine translation cited by Polygon. “At that time, social media didn’t exist yet, but I created a story where social media had a kind of life of its own. That has now become a reality, and it’s the same with Digger.”
His comparison centers on information networks becoming forces that help determine what people accept as real. Iñárritu described the same unease. “We are living in a new reality imposed upon us by things we cannot actually experience. And I think we share that feeling. It’s scary, isn’t it? Really scary. It’s terrifying.”
There’s another connection, though Kojima and Iñárritu didn’t discuss it directly in the interview. Rowe argues that both works use narrative misdirection to unsettle their audiences, making their structure part of their argument about reality. Spoilers for Digger and Metal Gear Solid 2 follow.
Digger’s trailers suggest a Dr. Strangelove-style comedy of errors about the end of the world. The film partly delivers on that premise, but an early reveal reframes it: the story is a play being performed. In Rowe’s reading, that shift makes Digger more than a story about environmentalism and the absurdity of the systems that govern people. It also becomes a commentary on the value of art in a world that so often feels hopeless.
Metal Gear Solid 2 pulls a different switch. Players begin the opening mission as Solid Snake, only to take control of newcomer Raiden afterward. The change of protagonist is one of gaming’s most famous misdirections, but the game’s tricks don’t stop there. Its story unfolds through fabrications and lies, repeatedly overturning what the audience thinks it knows.
Rowe sees both approaches as rooted in Brechtian theater: narrative disruption makes audiences reconsider the story they thought they were receiving. She argues that these devices advance broader themes of environmentalism and the fragility of perceived reality, rather than simply surprising viewers.
Her final interpretation gives Kojima’s defense a sharper edge. Both works push against the social media bubble he and Iñárritu describe because they require discussion. Their misdirection leaves a question beyond what happened in the story: who established the version of reality the audience initially believed?
