Dig (2015) | How Woke Is It?

Our VerdictNot Woke

12%

Dig2015

In a free society the right to critique art is essential and protected speech. These reviews reflect personal opinions and not statements of fact.

What We Think

'Dig' avoids most of the typical Hollywood wokeness, focusing on classic thriller elements and religious intrigue. It’s much more interested in storytelling than ticking ideological boxes. Refreshingly low on forced representation, moralizing, or revisionist history.

Score Breakdown

Compromised:Narrative Integrity

Not Woke

What is this?

In our view, 'Dig' keeps its focus on mystery, intrigue, and religious conspiracy, rather than shoehorning in modern identity politics. Characters are primarily motivated by plot and personal stakes rather than surface-level representation points. No evidence of forced casting or unrealistic empowerment tropes popping up in this one.

Compromised:Cultural Foundations

Not Woke

What is this?

While 'Dig' deals with religious history and symbolism, it mostly treats those themes with seriousness and avoids undermining traditional values for the sake of modern sensibilities. Any critique of religion or authority is rooted in plot, not ideology. Traditional archetypes aren’t radically overturned here.

Compromised:Ideological Monoculture

Not Woke

What is this?

The show depicts a clash of worldviews around faith, prophecy, and conspiracy, offering a rare diversity of perspectives. Alternative beliefs aren't dismissed or cartoonishly villainized, if anything, they’re explored as genuine human motivations, giving the series a fairly non-woke profile in this department.

User Reviews

No user reviews received yet.

Please leave a review and let the world know what you think.
Your review will be kept completely anonymous.

Your Review

Comments

Users Also Viewed

Disclaimer: In a free society the right to critique art is essential and protected as a form of free speech and freedom of expression. The reviews and commentary on this site represent personal opinions and interpretations. They are not statements of fact and should not be taken as factual claims about any individual, company, or creative work.