A Stephen King adaptation is a loaded statement. Depending on the filmmaker, we could get something amazing like Carrie (1976), The Shining (1980) or The Shawshank Redemption (1994). However, there are other King adaptations that aren't as great. Most have been television productions, but even some that have made it to the big screen. The success of It (2017), which is one of King's most iconic horror stories, in theaters has reinvigorated King's works. In fact, a big-budget remake of The Running Man (1987) is coming this year. The Running Man is set in a dystopian world where people are on an endless chase who are killed one by one all for the benefit of a televised program. It was based on a book King wrote in 1982. This film, directed by Francis Lawrence, involve young men on an endless walk who are killed one by one, again for the benefit of a televised program.
The tone here is not like The Running Man. That Arnold Schwarzenegger vehicle was typical of 1980's action flicks, entertaining but on a very cheesy scale. Lawrence's film is simply depressing. This perhaps matches the tone of the book, which would have been fine, if the film had incredible drama or compelling visuals to go with it. This film is mainly medium shots of the guys walking with not much variety. If one considers this as akin to a slasher flick, then watching one kill after the other will probably be a draw. That kind of slasher flick thrill doesn't excite me, mainly because it feels repetitive here.
Cooper Hoffman (Saturday Night and Licorice Pizza) stars as Raymond Garraty, a young man from the country who chooses to be a part of this program in which 50 men have to go on an endless walk and much like the film Speed (1994), if the pace of their walking dips below 3 miles per hour, they will be shot and killed. The question becomes why would they agree to such a program? Raymond has a specific reason, but he argues that most of these men had no choice. It's stated that financial situations nationwide have forced most men into desperate actions, such as this program.
Once inside the program, the only way out is to win. Otherwise, you will be killed. Given the task is virtually impossible and will result in the majority of the people dying, it's a great stretch of credulity that anyone would enter the program willingly. One must highly suspend their disbelief. The program is called a lottery and the story could be severely satirizing the idea of nationwide lotteries. It's fine to suspend disbelief and accept the situation as presented. More world-building would have been preferred. The mystery of Raymond's reason for doing this becomes teased and eventually exposed, but the outlook of the greater world becomes a mystery that remains one and that mystery didn't help with my engagement here.
David Jonsson (Alien: Romulus and Industry) co-stars as Peter McVries, a Black guy who quickly befriends Raymond and becomes a motivator for him to keep going, even when things get really rough. I don't know if his character is African American in the book, but his character here comes close to the magical negro trope. There are other Black characters or people of color who aren't perfect or perceived as such. There literally is a Black character who defecates on himself. Yet, Peter is perceived as perfect and he's perceived as saintly. We never see Peter get tired. He does take a piss, but it's not like the others who lose control of their bowels. We barely see him break a sweat even after walking for days. He's practically perfect. The fact that's he invested in Raymond, the white character, beyond pretty much everyone else is also frustrating and pushes him more toward the magical negro trope. We never really see him cozing up to the other characters like he cozies up to Raymond. There's more to him than that, but it's weird how he latches onto Raymond so much and really no one else. There's some intimation that Peter is gay and has possibly fallen for Raymond, but that aspect isn't really explored at all.
His reasons for entering this program also feel a little thin. It's also a little convenient because he's the one who's basically an orphan with no other family or friends, which would explain him latching onto Raymond but not necessarily why him. There are other people of color that he could assist and latch onto. There are other people who could use his support and motivation. Peter has a more positive outlook and more love-of-life than most of the others. His brand of positivity could have benefited those other people of color, but it gets to a point where it's all about Peter and Raymond, so it becomes obvious who the final two characters will be. Like any horror film, especially a slasher, it comes down to a final girl or final person. Because the premise of this film is a competition, it's obvious it will come down to a final two. The ensemble nature could've obscured who the final two will be, but this film really underlines that the final two will be Raymond and Peter.
Mark Hamill (The Life of Chuck and Star Wars) also co-stars as the Major, the tough and brutal, military soldier who is the one overseeing this deadly competition. He's there basically to bark orders or jingoistic statements at the guys walking. He's supposed to broadly represent the fascistic nature of the government that exists in this narrative. Otherwise, the film rather wastes him as a character. At no point does the film explore or delve any further into his character. His character could've been a window into the world at large. Otherwise, we don't get any more into the Major's backstory or how he came to be in his current position. He's simply coded as a right-wing patriot who seems to be a less interesting version of the Richard Dawson character from The Running Man.
There's a slew of other young characters who get moments to shine here and there. The two that stood out for me were Hank Olson #46, played by Ben Wang (Karate Kid: Legends and American Born Chinese), an Asian American who isn't the smartest and is also the most superstitious, and Collie Parker #48, played by Joshua Odjick, a Native American actor. Both those characters had the opportunities to bring different perspectives and different cultures into this story. At one point, the film decides to inject a flashback for one of the characters, but no flashbacks for any of the others. This film could've functioned similarly to Clint Eastwood's Letters From Iwo Jima (2006), which is also about a group of young men in an impossible situation that will likely result in most of their deaths. Eastwood's Oscar-winning epic was able to involve us into the lives of these young men and flesh them out more so than Lawrence does here.
Going back to the cinematography and the depiction of the action, which is simply these guys walking, it's not all that interesting. Recently, Mark Wahlberg was in a film called Joe Bell (2021), which is about a father who decides to walk across the country in honor of his dead son. That film probably realized it would be boring if it was just about the walking. That film is also mainly built on flashbacks as well. Reese Witherspoon in Wild (2014) was about a woman on a seemingly endless hike and that film benefited from her hike being along a very scenic trail through a lot of diverse and beautiful landscapes. Peter Weir's The Way Back (2010) manages to do the same. Raymond and Peter along with the other guys walk along mostly a flat, barren road with nothing interesting to see. In a lot of ways, this is purposeful because the film is practically depicting an almost post-apocalyptic world, but even something like The Road (2009), which is about a father and son on a tireless trek, manages to present post-apocalyptic images that were more impressive.
Rated R for strong bloody violence, grisly images, suicide, language and sexual references.
Running Time: 1 hr. and 48 mins.
In theaters.