Film: Deepwater Horizon
With a focus on the man-made nature of disaster, Deepwater Horizon attempts to grapple with humanity but loses touch with its characters

Disaster movies are a staple of modern cinema; evolving with advances in practical and computer technology, films like the Poseidon Adventure in 1972 and Titanic in 1997 produced spectacle on an almost unprecedented scale. The problem disaster movies always face is rising above the explosions and destruction to find meaning in the chaos. The Deepwater Horizon oil spill is already a defining moment of the 21st century. Images of the burning rig and the release of almost five million barrels of oil into the Gulf of Mexico – at the cost of 11 lives and vast environmental damage – are burned onto our collective consciousness. In Deepwater Horizon, Director Peter Berg has created a picture which revolves around humanity’s place in the oil rig’s explosion, focusing on the terrible cost of unchecked human greed – an ambitious goal subverted at every step by BP.
As the film opens we are introduced to Mike Williams (played by Mark Wahlberg), Andrea Fleytas (Gina Rodriguez), and Jimmy Harrell (Kurt Russell) as they prepare to return for a three-week stay upon the rig. It is here where the film is at its most effective, establishing a tight character-driven insight into the stresses of this very modern industry – ranging from Wahlberg’s sadness at his absence from his family to Russell’s difficulties with oil executives.
It is when the viewer is greeted with the rig itself that the film loses ground. The initial group of characters is lost in an overwhelming 20-minute section which suddenly expects us to absorb a cavalcade of characters from every part of the operation. This is all conducted in the context of thick Texan accents and anecdotes about the oil industry – effective for American oil technicians, but it hardly has mass appeal. Amid this mess, a scene in which Russell and Wahlberg confront BP executives (led by John Malkovich with his usual relish) over safety records aboard the rig is a rare moment of clarity for the viewer about the problems which Deepwater Horizon faced.
Moreover, at times the picture seems to be in a constant rush to build up signs of coming destruction. At times it works. Deft camerawork ensures that we linger just for a second longer on exhaust valves on a motorbike and helicopter vehicles as we head for Deepwater Horizon. The viewer is unsettled, building up this sense of the dangerous omnipresence of oil in our daily lives. Yet Berg loses this subtlety in his push to drive the film to its dramatic final minutes, leading him to simply ram basic signals down the viewer’s throat. A scene with Wahlberg’s daughter injecting maple syrup into a can of coke to replicate his work – only for it to suddenly explode – felt horribly forced.
When it becomes a conventional disaster picture, Deepwater Horizon at last comes into its own. Enrique Chediak’s cinematography is allowed to dominate, creating stunning shots of the rig as a sole pyre against the blackness of the Gulf of Mexico. Dialogue is stripped away as we are totally absorbed in the incarnate devastation of men almost drowning in the oil. The film becomes horrifically tangible, with injuries from fire and projectiles thrust constantly before the viewer. Berg delves into the human tragedy, allowing Wahlberg and Rodriguez’s characters to really shine; their moment of serene humanity against the fiery chaos is a highlight of the film.
Detail is rarely a problem in cinema. In Deepwater Horizon, Berg has a near-reverential regard for the details of every problem of a modern oil rig. I certainly left the film more knowledgeable about the mechanics of drilling, but this layering of information distances the viewer from the emotional trauma of the film’s second half. Wahlberg, Rodriguez, and Russell all put in strong performances, but Berg seems unwilling to let them grow onscreen, focusing on the far more intangible bureaucracy and logistics of the oil industry. As a result, we are left with a stunningly visceral disaster movie which captures the brutal trauma of the 2010 disaster. It fails, however, to hold onto its human actors. Depth and nuance are sadly lost amid the burgeoning machinery of this ill-fated and truly modern vessel.
Comment / Cambridge students are too opinionated
21 April 2025Interviews / Meet the Chaplain who’s working to make Cambridge a university of sanctuary for refugees
20 April 2025News / News in brief: campaigning and drinking
20 April 2025Comment / Cambridge’s tourism risks commodifying students
18 April 2025Comment / Cambridge’s gossip culture is a double-edged sword
7 April 2025