A mysterious title is circulating in cinephile circles: “Digger”. The name keeps getting linked to director Alejandro González Iñárritu, a filmmaker whose projects rarely appear without a storm of attention. Here is the key fact users look for first: there has been no official announcement by Iñárritu, his long-time producers, or a major studio confirming a feature titled “Digger”. That absence drives the buzz as much as any whisper.
Context matters. Iñárritu’s last feature, “Bardo, False Chronicle of a Handful of Truths”, premiered at the Venice Film Festival in September 2022. Before that came the one-two of “Birdman” in 2014 and “The Revenant” in 2015, a streak that earned him Best Director at the Oscars in 2015 and 2016. With that track record, any hint of a new film draws immediate clicks, and the “Digger” chatter taps directly into that anticipation.
“Digger” and Alejandro González Iñárritu: status, timing, signals
As of December 2025, neither a trade announcement nor a public filing has identified an Iñárritu feature called “Digger”. No cast lists, no union production codes, no distributor notes under that name. When his projects are real and ready, they do surface in predictable places: festival lineups, trade exclusives, or guild schedules, then the filmmaker himself steps in with precision.
Timelines help set expectations. The gap between “The Revenant” in 2015 and “Bardo” in 2022 stretched seven years, while the window from “Birdman” to “The Revenant” was roughly one year. Iñárritu alternates phases of quiet development with intense, visible production. If “Digger” exists, the first reliable proof tends to be casting breakdowns or location permits, followed by a fast bridge to principal photography.
Another signal to watch is festival positioning. “Bardo” bowed at Venice in 2022, “Biutiful” premiered at Cannes in 2010, and “Babel” competed at Cannes in 2006. A new Iñárritu feature often homes in on top-tier European festivals, which means announcements usually arrive months ahead of an August or September launch.
What an Iñárritu film usually involves: scope, crews, and the money question
Expectation setting needs numbers. “Birdman” was produced for about 18 million dollars in 2014 and went on to win 4 Oscars in 2015, including Best Picture and Best Director. “The Revenant” required a far larger canvas at roughly 135 million dollars and grossed about 533 million dollars worldwide in 2016, while giving Leonardo DiCaprio his first Academy Award.
Scale affects pace. When Iñárritu pushes form, the run-up gets longer. “The Revenant” favored natural light and remote locations in Canada and Argentina, a creative choice that extended logistics and time. “Bardo” took him deep into Mexico City and into a dreamlike visual grammar, another sign of a director who refines for months before locking picture.
So if “Digger” is shaping up behind closed doors, early clues would likely include returning collaborators. Emmanuel Lubezki photographed “Birdman” and “The Revenant”. Darius Khondji shot “Bardo”. A confirmed director of photography aligns the aesthetic and signals schedule. Then come permits, casting confirmations, and regional film commission notices. These steps rarely stay hidden for long.
How to separate rumor from fact on “Digger”: credible sources and next steps
Fans and industry watchers want a straight path to clarity. The reliable pattern is simple. First, look for a trade report in outlets such as Variety or The Hollywood Reporter followed by confirmation on the social channels of the filmmaker or the production company. Second, check guild databases once a project receives a production code, which often happens weeks before filming. Third, festival press offices publish selection lists with dates that lock in premieres.
Career rhythm also frames the rumor. Two Best Director Oscars in back-to-back years, 2015 and 2016, raised expectations that every new Iñárritu film will arrive fast. Yet the seven-year span before “Bardo” shows he takes time when a story demands it. If “Digger” is real, the visible pipeline would likely echo that rhythm, with development noise first, then a burst of tangible paperwork.
One last point for those tracking the title itself. Working titles often change between development and release. A project whispered as “Digger” could surface under a different name, or the reverse. The practical move is to follow the paper trail: casting calls, location clearances, distributor slates, and festival submissions. That is where a rumor stops being thier rumor and becomes a film on the calendar.