Marche ou crève

If you film a much loved book, say Lord of the Rings for this example, and, at the council of Elrond, Gandalf says "Oh, you want to take the ring to Gondor Boromir? OK then", fans of the book are going to be disappointed. And that's how I feel right now. Unlike LOTR, The Long Walk does not have a great deal of action in the traditional sense, so why remove what important moments there are: an adolescent who's never had sex risking everything for a kiss? The barbaric nature of huge crowds gathered to cheer on boys about to die? Or to gamble what small funds they have on who will survive? Why remove all the things that made a novel so special and decide your scriptwriter knows best?

The ending is changed and not convincing and while I can imagine Hollywood require more resolution than the original text, I don't think this was the way to go personally.

Apart from the changes, I thought most of the cast did well but were a bit too well fed and healthy for the supposed economic misery this US faced.

It was an ok movie, too much missed potential as they could have done so much more. More talking than action. There was no moments that really hit you and it felt kind of repetitive and you could see how the story would go from the beginning. A lot of things were out of nowhere, ofcourse people die but some of them the way they go out just has no substance, and there's no real twist that takes place. You know how most movies have a crisis in the middle that needs to be overcome? This movie doesn't have that. The ending was super annoying also and contradicts what was preached throughout the movie. I watched this based on the 7*+ ratings, but in my opinion it doesn't match up to any 7* movie I've ever seen, hence the rating.

I recently watched this movie, and to be honest, I'm struggling to understand the purpose behind it. From start to finish, it felt like the entire experience was built almost entirely around dialogue, yet those conversations rarely carried any real weight or depth. A film can absolutely thrive on dialogue alone when it's sharp, meaningful, or layered with subtext, but here it felt shallow, repetitive, and ultimately unconvincing.

The characters spend so much time talking, but what they're saying doesn't seem to move the story forward or reveal anything profound about who they are. Instead, it feels like words for the sake of words-long exchanges that might have been aiming for philosophical or emotional depth but fell flat. Without strong dialogue, the movie doesn't have much else to lean on, because there isn't really a compelling plot, standout visuals, or a strong atmosphere to carry the gaps.

Movies built around minimal action and heavy dialogue can be powerful when done well, but this one left me unmoved. It's not that I expect explosions or constant action, but I do expect substance. Unfortunately, this movie just didn't deliver, and I walked away more frustrated than entertained.

In the book the horror of watching young men get shot is highlighted by the unfeeling, voracious crowds lining the street, the betting rings encouraging people to gamble their savings on their favourite, the desperation of some ghouls for a ticket where they sit. This is left out of the movie and, given the lack of action in the conventional sense, I don't see why. What we get instead is a long chat.

The ending is also rewritten and is unsatisfactory in my opinion. It is an ultimately disappointing movie despite the strong cast.

The Long Walk is one of my favorite books and I have been dreaming of a movie adaptation. I felt it was promising for the first 30 minutes, mostly due to wonderfully brutal cinematography. However, as soon as the drama ramped up, actors started to overact and the whole script all of a sudden derailed into Hollywood cliche land. I felt like the movie pretty much cut out all the parts of the book I loved the most and butchered the final scenes into something completely different than the subtle but powerful book ending intended to convey.