Un hombre se une a un programa de juegos en el que los concursantes, a los que se les permite ir a cualquier parte del mundo, son perseguidos por «cazadores» empleados para matarlos.Un hombre se une a un programa de juegos en el que los concursantes, a los que se les permite ir a cualquier parte del mundo, son perseguidos por «cazadores» empleados para matarlos.Un hombre se une a un programa de juegos en el que los concursantes, a los que se les permite ir a cualquier parte del mundo, son perseguidos por «cazadores» empleados para matarlos.
- Director/a
- Guionistas
- Estrellas
- Premios
- 5 nominaciones en total
- Director/a
- Guionistas
- Todo el reparto y equipo
- Producción, taquilla y más en IMDbPro
Resumen
Reviewers say 'The Running Man' is lauded for its action, performances, and adherence to Stephen King's novel. It explores themes of class divide, media manipulation, and corporate greed. Critics highlight issues with pacing, a weak final act, and shallow character development. Some find it lengthy and convoluted, while others appreciate its satire and relevance. Glen Powell's performance is generally praised, though some note a lack of emotional depth.
Reseñas destacadas
It didn't make a lick of sense, the addition of running in the world and the hunters being just dudes in camo and ski masks, the girl only exists for a minute around an hour and half into the movie...
It was worse by far in every respect than the Arnie movie, it felt an hour too long, it was dumb rather than a romp or farcical l.
It was too silly to be serious, scenes were too long-winded to be fast-paced, the action existed and were fine for what they were, but it was too many plot points and too many subplots, and too many focus-shifting, the producer and host being different people was messy, and the last couple of scenes after the plane fight were moronic.
It just felt like a bunch of poor to average fight and action set pieces and the movie was just there to put them in order and give them an excuse to happen.
It wasn't fun, compelling or interesting at all, but it wasn't actively bad.
It was too silly to be serious, scenes were too long-winded to be fast-paced, the action existed and were fine for what they were, but it was too many plot points and too many subplots, and too many focus-shifting, the producer and host being different people was messy, and the last couple of scenes after the plane fight were moronic.
It just felt like a bunch of poor to average fight and action set pieces and the movie was just there to put them in order and give them an excuse to happen.
It wasn't fun, compelling or interesting at all, but it wasn't actively bad.
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.
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.
People might say that it's a good popcorn movie, but I gotta say that a good popcorn movie is still a good movie. Glen has done a great job on acting.
As you know, the story is from Stephen King so it has some sort of guarantee that the plot wasn't gonna be that bad. In fact, i view that it is quite good even though there is a lack of depth in some part. Still, for a two hour movie, it has done a pretty great job on capturing the story. Although in some scenes, it's quite prolonging.
This movie is surely fulfilling the criteria of whatever action movie should have. There's an excitement as it will make you rooting for the runners. Some scenes may be predictable, but it is not easy as it seems. So just go watch it, it won't disappoint you.
As you know, the story is from Stephen King so it has some sort of guarantee that the plot wasn't gonna be that bad. In fact, i view that it is quite good even though there is a lack of depth in some part. Still, for a two hour movie, it has done a pretty great job on capturing the story. Although in some scenes, it's quite prolonging.
This movie is surely fulfilling the criteria of whatever action movie should have. There's an excitement as it will make you rooting for the runners. Some scenes may be predictable, but it is not easy as it seems. So just go watch it, it won't disappoint you.
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.
Glen Powell and Lee Pace Worship Edgar Wright
Glen Powell and Lee Pace Worship Edgar Wright
Big Screen Berkan (@bigscreenberkan) catches up with Glen Powell, Lee Pace, and director-writer Edgar Wright to learn more about their stylish adaptation of Stephen King's classic novel.
¿Sabías que...?
- CuriosidadesTom Cruise called Glen Powell, with whom he co-starred in Top Gun: Maverick (2022), to give him advice before shooting this movie. Powell recalled, "Tom rang me to give me the low down and, what I thought would be a ten min call, lasted two and half hours - he basically told me how not to die! He also gave me running lessons. He said, 'You should film yourself running because you don't look as cool as you think you do.' He was so right!"
- PifiasOn 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.
- Créditos adicionalesThe Domain Entertainment logo takes the form of a lit sign.
- ConexionesFeatured in The Movies That Made Me: Trailer Show: Edgar Wright (2025)
- Banda sonoraUnderdog
Written by Sly Stone (as Sylvester Stewart)
Performed by Sly and the Family Stone
Courtesy of Epic Records, a division of Sony Music Entertainment
Selecciones populares
Inicia sesión para calificar y añadir a tu lista para recibir recomendaciones personalizadas
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.
Detalles
- Fecha de lanzamiento
- Países de origen
- Sitios oficiales
- Idioma
- Títulos en diferentes países
- El Sobreviviente
- Localizaciones del rodaje
- Empresas productoras
- Ver más compañías en los créditos en IMDbPro
Taquilla
- Presupuesto
- 110.000.000 US$ (estimación)
- Recaudación en Estados Unidos y Canadá
- 37.815.641 US$
- Fin de semana de estreno en EE. UU. y Canadá
- 16.495.564 US$
- 16 nov 2025
- Recaudación en todo el mundo
- 68.615.641 US$
- Duración
- 2h 13min(133 min)
- Color
- Mezcla de sonido
- Relación de aspecto
- 2.39 : 1
Contribuir a esta página
Sugerir un cambio o añadir el contenido que falta






