Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueA man joins a game show in which contestants, allowed to flee anywhere in the world, are pursued by "hunters" hired to kill them.A man joins a game show in which contestants, allowed to flee anywhere in the world, are pursued by "hunters" hired to kill them.A man joins a game show in which contestants, allowed to flee anywhere in the world, are pursued by "hunters" hired to kill them.
- Réalisation
- Scénaristes
- Vedettes
6,725.8K
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Avis en vedette
Entertaining - but with a lazy, irritating end
This is, for 90% of the film, entertaining stuff, but without spoilers, why oh why do so many films feel the need to make endings so poor? I appreciate that for a lot of viewers good v bad is a pure binary, and that an ending has to be clear - but it makes for poor story telling. I think I am part of the target audience for this film, but I wish the film makers would credit us with being able to deal with nuance and ambiguity. The ending felt ridiculously contrived and, almost, abbreviated - for me it undermined what was a rollicking, fun, action film.
Having said all of that, it worth saying I'd still recommend this movie, Glen Powell clearly has fun in the title role. I saw the original when it came out in the late 80's - and this version is nothing like the original, other than very superficially. This film does, however, have a number of references to the first version - not least the picture of Arnold on the currency.
This is well Directed, if somewhat predictable and cliched. The action is unrelenting, and enjoyable. The script doesn't get in the way. Inevitably, one can look at the current state of politics and transpose this dystopian story onto current events - there did appear to be a deliberate slant in this film.
An entertaining movie - mostly.
Having said all of that, it worth saying I'd still recommend this movie, Glen Powell clearly has fun in the title role. I saw the original when it came out in the late 80's - and this version is nothing like the original, other than very superficially. This film does, however, have a number of references to the first version - not least the picture of Arnold on the currency.
This is well Directed, if somewhat predictable and cliched. The action is unrelenting, and enjoyable. The script doesn't get in the way. Inevitably, one can look at the current state of politics and transpose this dystopian story onto current events - there did appear to be a deliberate slant in this film.
An entertaining movie - mostly.
Ran out of steam by the end
Really wanted to love this. I'm a big Stephen King fan and was curious how they would carry out an updated version of the movie. They had me all the until the last quarter of the movie where it felt like they just didn't know how to end it. Scarf girl wasn't necessary and better use of Lee Pace could have made the ending better.
A guaranteed good time at the movies!
The Running Man is a lively, vibrant, and in your face blockbuster that is sure to entertain
The story takes place in a dystopian future, where desperate protagonist Ben enters 'The Running Man', a life or death game show that sees him hunted for sport. Winning means he can lift his family out of poverty with untold riches. Failure means death. It's a good concept and it is executed well. Edgar Wright immerses us in the world very easily from the outset, getting us up to speed with some slightly clunky but effective exposition. From then on, the film maintains a vicious pace, as the title suggests. It has a fierce momentum thanks to plenty of great and varied action sequences. It's a highly entertaining piece and has a few good twists and reveals, with some nice creative flourishes too. The whole world feels gritty and lived in, and is designed really well.
I must say though, the film doesn't wield any subtlety with its themes. Everything is very on the nose and obvious, and I think there was scope to add a bit more depth here. A conversation late in the film with Powell's Ben Richards and Emilia Jones' Amelia showed what the script could have been, but ultimately the social commentary was a bit one dimensional unfortunately. I also thought there was scope, given the current climate, to comment a bit more on technology and media which again, felt slightly one dimensional. At the end of the day though this is a big blockbuster movie, so maybe I am expecting too much. This was never to the detriment of the film as it was, it just felt like a slightly missed opportunity.
What really can't be faulted though are the performances. Glen Powell is a proper movie star and he shows it once more with another fantastic leading role. He is so magnetic and extremely likeable which works so well for this role as it so easy to root for him. Supporting cast members like Colman Domingo and Josh Brolin were brilliant. Domingo in particular brought such a fun flamboyance to his character which made for a great watch. Michael Cera had a great role which he ekes every bit of comedy and drama out of. It's a really fun cast and they all rise to the occasion.
Overall then I had a really good time with this movie. The story is fun, and while I feel it was ripe for more impactful social commentary, it still did a very good job of entertaining. The action is lively, the direction solid, and the cast really fun. A guaranteed good time at the movies!
The story takes place in a dystopian future, where desperate protagonist Ben enters 'The Running Man', a life or death game show that sees him hunted for sport. Winning means he can lift his family out of poverty with untold riches. Failure means death. It's a good concept and it is executed well. Edgar Wright immerses us in the world very easily from the outset, getting us up to speed with some slightly clunky but effective exposition. From then on, the film maintains a vicious pace, as the title suggests. It has a fierce momentum thanks to plenty of great and varied action sequences. It's a highly entertaining piece and has a few good twists and reveals, with some nice creative flourishes too. The whole world feels gritty and lived in, and is designed really well.
I must say though, the film doesn't wield any subtlety with its themes. Everything is very on the nose and obvious, and I think there was scope to add a bit more depth here. A conversation late in the film with Powell's Ben Richards and Emilia Jones' Amelia showed what the script could have been, but ultimately the social commentary was a bit one dimensional unfortunately. I also thought there was scope, given the current climate, to comment a bit more on technology and media which again, felt slightly one dimensional. At the end of the day though this is a big blockbuster movie, so maybe I am expecting too much. This was never to the detriment of the film as it was, it just felt like a slightly missed opportunity.
What really can't be faulted though are the performances. Glen Powell is a proper movie star and he shows it once more with another fantastic leading role. He is so magnetic and extremely likeable which works so well for this role as it so easy to root for him. Supporting cast members like Colman Domingo and Josh Brolin were brilliant. Domingo in particular brought such a fun flamboyance to his character which made for a great watch. Michael Cera had a great role which he ekes every bit of comedy and drama out of. It's a really fun cast and they all rise to the occasion.
Overall then I had a really good time with this movie. The story is fun, and while I feel it was ripe for more impactful social commentary, it still did a very good job of entertaining. The action is lively, the direction solid, and the cast really fun. A guaranteed good time at the movies!
Stumbles and falls.
Glen Powell stars as Ben Richards, who signs up for a TV show where contestants are hunted by killers; if they can survive for 30 days, they win a fortune in prize money. Josh Brolin is the villain of the piece -producer Dan Killian - who will go to any lengths to ensure the show's popularity and high ratings.
The 1987 adaptation of Stephen King's The Running Man, starring everyone's favourite Austrian bodybuilder, is a lot of cheesy '80s action fun, but it's far from my favourite Schwarzenegger movie. That said, I'd rather rewatch Arnie dropping corny one-liners while battling cartoonish, colourful, over-the-top villains than sit through Edgar Wright's version for a second time. The tone of the new film feels all wrong - Wright attempts to combine satirical humour with hard hitting violence, but fails to pull off the trick: he's no Verhoeven. He should have either leaned into the campiness, as per the original film, or gone serious and super dark and ultra violent - in attempting to do both, he merely succeeds in making his film feel very uneven.
This new adaptation is also unnecessarily long (2 hrs and 13 mins), losing a lot of steam in the second half. I was willing to give the film a fair crack of the whip, 'cos when Wright is on form he is great, but I really found my mind wandering once the film passed the hour and a half mark. The action scenes fail to get the adrenaline pumping - I felt no jeopardy for Ben Richards whatsoever - and the humour doesn't land (only the Y/Why? Gag made me laugh). I really wanted this to be good, so it pains me to say that The Running Man is far from Wright's best work and will probably be forgotten about fairly quickly (unlike Arnie's film, which is a cult classic).
4.5/10, generously rounded up to 5 for IMDb.
The 1987 adaptation of Stephen King's The Running Man, starring everyone's favourite Austrian bodybuilder, is a lot of cheesy '80s action fun, but it's far from my favourite Schwarzenegger movie. That said, I'd rather rewatch Arnie dropping corny one-liners while battling cartoonish, colourful, over-the-top villains than sit through Edgar Wright's version for a second time. The tone of the new film feels all wrong - Wright attempts to combine satirical humour with hard hitting violence, but fails to pull off the trick: he's no Verhoeven. He should have either leaned into the campiness, as per the original film, or gone serious and super dark and ultra violent - in attempting to do both, he merely succeeds in making his film feel very uneven.
This new adaptation is also unnecessarily long (2 hrs and 13 mins), losing a lot of steam in the second half. I was willing to give the film a fair crack of the whip, 'cos when Wright is on form he is great, but I really found my mind wandering once the film passed the hour and a half mark. The action scenes fail to get the adrenaline pumping - I felt no jeopardy for Ben Richards whatsoever - and the humour doesn't land (only the Y/Why? Gag made me laugh). I really wanted this to be good, so it pains me to say that The Running Man is far from Wright's best work and will probably be forgotten about fairly quickly (unlike Arnie's film, which is a cult classic).
4.5/10, generously rounded up to 5 for IMDb.
Solid, but surprisingly average...
The movie is definitely not a disaster. You're not sitting there thinking "wow, what a trainwreck." The action hits, a few set pieces are genuinely exciting, and technically the movie is solid. But by the time the credits roll, it all feels surprisingly generic, especially considering who directed it.
Edgar Wright is usually a guy with a really recognizable style; very sharp editing, playful visual flair, a real sense of personality. But here it honestly feels like the studio sanded most of that off. The whole thing comes across weirdly safe and standard, like a "we don't want to scare anyone" studio project. If his name wasn't on it, I'm not sure you'd even guess it was him. It feels more like work-for-hire than something he was burning to make.
The good stuff first: when the movie goes into full action mode, it works. The chases and fights are shot clearly, you can tell what's going on, there's some good impact, and it's rarely boring while bullets are flying. The other big positive is Glenn Powell as Ben Richards. He really carries the film. He sells that mix of desperate dad who just wants to save his family and slightly unhinged guy who actually stands a chance in this rigged death game. You do end up wanting him to make it through and at the same time enjoy watching him tear into the hunters and this messed-up system.
The world itself is also cool in theory: a dystopian future where a media mega-corporation basically runs the country, a show called 'The Running Man' where three contestants are turned into public enemies through AI-generated videos and propaganda so the whole world hates them and wants them dead, and they're hunted by both regular citizens and professional killers. If they survive a month, they get a billion dollars and a new life. Ben signs up because his daughter is sick, he got blacklisted from every job for trying to do the right thing, and now he can't even afford basic medicine. The media/propaganda angle is not subtle at all - it's very on-the-nose; but that's fine, the concept can handle being blunt.
On top of that, the tone is all over the place. The world they're showing here really calls for a more serious, heavier approach: poverty, desperation, public executions as entertainment, a father throwing himself into a death show to save his kid... it's dark stuff. But the movie keeps dropping in jokes and light banter. It's not full-on Marvel quip spam, but it's enough to keep undercutting the seriousness. And the problem is, most of the jokes aren't even that funny.
You can also feel the strain of trying to stay closer to the Stephen King book. On paper that's a smart move and it definitely has nothing to do with the cheesy 80s Schwarzenegger version beyond the basic premise. But on screen it sometimes plays like they tried to cram in as many book elements as possible without giving them enough time to breathe. That leads to some bloat, weird pacing, and a general sense of "there's a better, tighter version of this story hiding in here somewhere."
As a straightforward action movie, it's watchable and even pretty fun in parts. You get good action, a strong lead performance, and an interesting world that's at least engaging on a surface level. But if you walk in expecting a new Edgar Wright classic, you're almost guaranteed to walk out disappointed. As a random action flick, it's "okay to good." As an Edgar Wright movie, it's firmly on the weaker end of his filmography. For me, it is entertaining enough for one viewing, but nowhere near as good as it could've been.
Edgar Wright is usually a guy with a really recognizable style; very sharp editing, playful visual flair, a real sense of personality. But here it honestly feels like the studio sanded most of that off. The whole thing comes across weirdly safe and standard, like a "we don't want to scare anyone" studio project. If his name wasn't on it, I'm not sure you'd even guess it was him. It feels more like work-for-hire than something he was burning to make.
The good stuff first: when the movie goes into full action mode, it works. The chases and fights are shot clearly, you can tell what's going on, there's some good impact, and it's rarely boring while bullets are flying. The other big positive is Glenn Powell as Ben Richards. He really carries the film. He sells that mix of desperate dad who just wants to save his family and slightly unhinged guy who actually stands a chance in this rigged death game. You do end up wanting him to make it through and at the same time enjoy watching him tear into the hunters and this messed-up system.
The world itself is also cool in theory: a dystopian future where a media mega-corporation basically runs the country, a show called 'The Running Man' where three contestants are turned into public enemies through AI-generated videos and propaganda so the whole world hates them and wants them dead, and they're hunted by both regular citizens and professional killers. If they survive a month, they get a billion dollars and a new life. Ben signs up because his daughter is sick, he got blacklisted from every job for trying to do the right thing, and now he can't even afford basic medicine. The media/propaganda angle is not subtle at all - it's very on-the-nose; but that's fine, the concept can handle being blunt.
On top of that, the tone is all over the place. The world they're showing here really calls for a more serious, heavier approach: poverty, desperation, public executions as entertainment, a father throwing himself into a death show to save his kid... it's dark stuff. But the movie keeps dropping in jokes and light banter. It's not full-on Marvel quip spam, but it's enough to keep undercutting the seriousness. And the problem is, most of the jokes aren't even that funny.
You can also feel the strain of trying to stay closer to the Stephen King book. On paper that's a smart move and it definitely has nothing to do with the cheesy 80s Schwarzenegger version beyond the basic premise. But on screen it sometimes plays like they tried to cram in as many book elements as possible without giving them enough time to breathe. That leads to some bloat, weird pacing, and a general sense of "there's a better, tighter version of this story hiding in here somewhere."
As a straightforward action movie, it's watchable and even pretty fun in parts. You get good action, a strong lead performance, and an interesting world that's at least engaging on a surface level. But if you walk in expecting a new Edgar Wright classic, you're almost guaranteed to walk out disappointed. As a random action flick, it's "okay to good." As an Edgar Wright movie, it's firmly on the weaker end of his filmography. For me, it is entertaining enough for one viewing, but nowhere near as good as it could've been.
The Big List of Fall Movies 2025
The Big List of Fall Movies 2025
See a full list of all the movies coming to theaters this fall.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesThe giant 'N' logo above the Network building is coloured red and resembles the Netflix logo (everywhere else in the movie the logo is colored white). This is a subtle dig at Netflix, who director Edgar Wright says ran trailers for his film Le dernier pub avant la fin du monde (2013) that carelessly gave away the ending.
- GaffesOn several occasions, particularly action sequences, Ben's bag containing his gear & recording equipment is nowhere to be seen, then appears again when he gets somewhere to rest.
- Citations
Ben Richards: [to the camera] Stop filming me!
- Générique farfeluThe Domain Entertainment logo takes the form of a lit sign.
- ConnexionsFeatures Alerte à la bombe (1972)
- Bandes originalesUnderdog
written by Sly Stone
performed by Sly and the Family Stone
courtesy of: Epic Records, a division of Sony Music Entertainment
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et surveiller les recommandations personnalisées
Reboots and Remakes
Reboots and Remakes
Get a side-by-side look at some of Hollywood's biggest reboots and remakes in movies and TV.
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Sites officiels
- Langue
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- The Running Man
- Lieux de tournage
- sociétés de production
- Consultez plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Budget
- 110 000 000 $ US (estimation)
- Brut – États-Unis et Canada
- 31 935 275 $ US
- Fin de semaine d'ouverture – États-Unis et Canada
- 16 495 564 $ US
- 16 nov. 2025
- Brut – à l'échelle mondiale
- 53 235 275 $ US
- Durée
- 2h 13m(133 min)
- Couleur
- Mixage
- Rapport de forme
- 2.39 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant






