The Running Man and the Critics Who Forgot How Movies Work
You know, usually I talk about the movies — right? 🎥 The acting, the directing, the explosions. But this time… for The Running Man… I wanna talk about the critics. Yeah — I’m flippin’ it. I’m reviewing them. 🎤 Because if there was ever a movie that exposed how blind critics can be to who actually makes a film work, it’s this one.
So I’m watching that old Siskel & Ebert clip — Gene’s sittin’ there all smug, goin’, “Well, it’s just another Schwarzenegger movie.” 🙄 Like, what does that even mean, Gene?! You think Arnold’s storyboarding chase scenes between bicep curls? 💪🎬 No! It’s not a “Schwarzenegger movie,” it’s a Paul Michael Glaser movie — you know, the guy from Starsky & Hutch! You don’t get Predator or Terminator without James Cameron, John McTiernan, Joel Silver, or Steven E. de Souza. Those guys were the brains behind the brawn — they’re the ones who made those things cinema, not just product.
But no — critics in the ’80s see Arnold on a poster and they’re like, “Ah, another dumb action flick.” 🤦♂️ Meanwhile, The Running Man doesn’t have any of his usual heavy hitters.
Then Ebert jumps in, right? He’s like, “But Richard Dawson! Brilliant performance! A biting satire of television!” 📺👏 Dude… he’s literally playing himself. The guy was a smarmy game-show host — they just told him to keep doing it while people die in the background! 😆 Yeah, it’s funny, sure, but come on — he’s not channeling Network, he’s just finally saying the quiet part out loud.
And that’s the thing that drives me nuts: these critics — supposedly trained, thoughtful, analytical people 🧐 — completely ignore the machinery behind the movie. They act like every film with Schwarzenegger is cut from the same steroid-soaked cloth. Meanwhile, every fan back then could tell you: when he’s with Cameron or McTiernan, it’s art of the pop-culture variety. 🍿 When he’s not, it’s television with abs. 💪📺