This weekend’s box office will be topped by “Now You See Me, Now You Don’t” ($24M), with “Predator: Badlands” ($17M) and “The Running Man” ($16M) battling it out for second place.
Now, I’ll just lay down what my biggest issue was with “The Running Man”: it didn’t feel like an Edgar Wright movie. Whether you like him or not, he has maintained a distinctive style defined by rhythmic, fast-paced editing, energetic camera movement, and storytelling via visual jokes and precise choreography.
That voice isn’t present in this film, lost amidst a barrage of slick, almost muddled action. His fans won’t recognize him in any of the frames. Now, don’t get me wrong — the film entertains for the first hour or so, but it should never have clocked in at 2 hours and 13 minutes. That’s too much for a film with such a simple premise. At some point, you just check out, uninterested in how the story will end.
While the film attempts social satire and dystopian commentary, the critique comes across as superficial, and there’s zero character development — no matter how hard Glen Powell tries to flesh out his character. The whole thing has been “watered down” into a conventional, safe action film that lacks any originality.
Still, that $17M opening is not good. The film cost $110M. Why such low numbers? The marketing has been off — I’m not exactly sure why. It also doesn’t help that it’s rated R, which is bad for mass-audience receipts. Regardless, Paramount is looking at heavy losses on this film.
What’s next for Edgar Wright? That’s the main question. He was given a huge budget for “The Running Man,” the biggest of his career by far, and delivered an oddity that’s a disservice to his fans and has been met with a shrug by moviegoers. Does his Sydney Sweeney–starring “Barbarella” remake go on as planned? Should he reunite with Simon Pegg and Nick Frost?
I’ve given my thoughts — how about you, readers; what did you think of “The Running Man”? Did it live up to the hype, or did it leave you wishing for the Edgar Wright we know?