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.A man joins a game show in which contestants, allowed to flee anywhere in the world, are pursued by "hunters" hired to kill them.
- Director
- Writers
- Stars
- Director
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
6.725.8K
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Featured reviews
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.
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.
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 Great Film Delivered in an Average Way
I've never read The Running Man novel, and I thought the 1987 Schwarzenegger film was a fun but forgettable piece of cheesy sci-fi. That's why I was genuinely excited for a new take-especially with Edgar Wright directing. I adore Baby Driver and Hot Fuzz, and I've never disliked anything he's made. While his 2025 version doesn't break that streak, it's easily my least favourite of his films, though still an enjoyable watch overall.
Glen Powell steps in as Ben Richards, a desperate father who agrees to compete on the deadly TV show The Running Man to save his seriously ill child. The month-long hunt for a billion-dollar prize sets up plenty of opportunities for standout supporting roles, and the cameos are a lot of fun. My favourite stretch involves Michael Cera, whose scenes with Powell have great energy and chemistry.
Where the film let me down was in its pacing and surprisingly heavy exposition. For a director known for sharp, kinetic action, Wright delivers a film that feels a bit low-energy and light on set-pieces, especially for a 2-hour-13-minute runtime. The action that is there works, but the storytelling feels too spread out, and the script over-explains things instead of trusting the audience. It also lacks the usual Edgar Wright stylistic punch, which made something feel slightly off.
Even so, Powell gives a committed performance, and the supporting cast-especially Coleman Domingo-brings a lot to the table. The action is fun when it arrives, and despite some characters needing more screen time, everyone makes their moments count. The 2025 Running Man is a great film delivered in an average way, but it's still entertaining and absolutely worth a look, even if it falls short of greatness.
Glen Powell steps in as Ben Richards, a desperate father who agrees to compete on the deadly TV show The Running Man to save his seriously ill child. The month-long hunt for a billion-dollar prize sets up plenty of opportunities for standout supporting roles, and the cameos are a lot of fun. My favourite stretch involves Michael Cera, whose scenes with Powell have great energy and chemistry.
Where the film let me down was in its pacing and surprisingly heavy exposition. For a director known for sharp, kinetic action, Wright delivers a film that feels a bit low-energy and light on set-pieces, especially for a 2-hour-13-minute runtime. The action that is there works, but the storytelling feels too spread out, and the script over-explains things instead of trusting the audience. It also lacks the usual Edgar Wright stylistic punch, which made something feel slightly off.
Even so, Powell gives a committed performance, and the supporting cast-especially Coleman Domingo-brings a lot to the table. The action is fun when it arrives, and despite some characters needing more screen time, everyone makes their moments count. The 2025 Running Man is a great film delivered in an average way, but it's still entertaining and absolutely worth a look, even if it falls short of greatness.
Edgar Wright delivers again
When I heard Edgar was making this movie I watched the original, read the book, and got thoroughly excited for 6 months. I wasn't disappointed, for those who've read the book you'll get a lot more of that classic Richard Bachman (Steven King) classic, but perfectly streamlined and some nice changes.
For those who haven't, throw away the original movie, this isn't that, it's even better! Get to the cinema, watch it. Cracking fun.
For those who haven't, throw away the original movie, this isn't that, it's even better! Get to the cinema, watch it. Cracking fun.
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.
Did you know
- TriviaThe 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 The World's End (2013) that carelessly gave away the ending.
- GoofsOn 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.
- Quotes
Ben Richards: [to the camera] Stop filming me!
- Crazy creditsThe Domain Entertainment logo takes the form of a lit sign.
- ConnectionsFeatures Skyjacked (1972)
- SoundtracksUnderdog
written by Sly Stone
performed by Sly and the Family Stone
courtesy of: Epic Records, a division of Sony Music Entertainment
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.
Details
- Release date
- Countries of origin
- Official sites
- Language
- Also known as
- El Sobreviviente
- Filming locations
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Budget
- $110,000,000 (estimated)
- Gross US & Canada
- $31,935,275
- Opening weekend US & Canada
- $16,495,564
- Nov 16, 2025
- Gross worldwide
- $53,235,275
- Runtime
- 2h 13m(133 min)
- Color
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 2.39 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content






