Qten-eight years after the glitzy SF drama with Arnold Schwarzenegger in yellow leotards, Hollywood is catching up Running Man. What a hilarious franchise… Originally created by Stephen King in a novel published in 1982 under the pseudonym Richard Bachman, this dystopian adventure concept then imagined an American totalitarian society with crowds of people hypnotized by cruel and barbaric TV games.
Titled Running Manthe live-streamed event consists of sending a group of assassins after the candidate responsible for preventing them from achieving their goal. To the fugitive who managed to escape the shooters, glory and a billion dollars. For others… coffins! Therefore, in 1987, Fox studios made a very mediocre yet hilarious mid-budget adaptation of King’s book, a pure kitsch and a flashy guilty pleasure with “Schwarzy” in the role of hero Ben Richards.
Both the critical and public failure of the film at the time, and the victory of a plagiarism lawsuit brought by Yves Boisset against Fox (the French filmmaker considered Running Man like plagiarism of the film itself, Price of dangerreleased in January 1983) did not appear to cool Paramount’s major heads. Therefore, this November 2025, we offer the second version of King’s bestseller, this time revised and improved by the talented Edgar Wright (Shaun the dead, Baby Driver, Last Night in Soho…).
This British director clearly does better work than his eighties predecessor, Paul Michael Glaser, the first director Running Man and Starsky’s former translator on the legendary series Starsky and Hutch. Handsome man Glen Powell (Maverick Best Weapon) replaced Arnold Schwarzenegger in the role of Ben Richards and, in the end, this new futuristic blockbuster full of black humor and spectacular action combines entertainment and social satire more skillfully than the 1987 series B. Unfortunately for all these beautiful people and for Paramount, the film, despite its quality and resonance with the present, has been trudging along at the American box office since this weekend. Or even trip badly.Its imminent failure, the reasons for which were recently outlined in an edifying article on the website Deadline Hollywood, confirms that the public is definitely in no mood to rush another one. Running Man in cinema, despite the director’s skill and the beautiful face of his new star. No problem: we do not shy away from our pleasures and still want to meet, during his visit to Paris, the always lively and chatty Edgar Wright to hear his own vision of Stephen King’s work, his opinion about the film very French de Boisset and his artistic intentions.
The main thing is : When did you find the book Running Man for the first time?
Edgar Wright : When I was a teenager, around 14 years old. I then watched the 1987 film which I really liked. But I am well aware that this is not the right adaptation. As a Stephen King fan, I always thought there was room to make another film, one that was closer to the original text. By overcoming Running Manso I started straight from the book. There were a few nods to the 1987 version though, I couldn’t help myself!
Your film is set in the future, but the technology on screen seems outdated like in the book which depicts the future with the technology of its time. Why do you retain this aspect?
When you reread the book, you actually find envelopes, letter boxes, cassettes, magnetic tapes… The most obvious option is to replace them all with smartphones. But honestly, what’s more boring than a smartphone? I like the idea of slightly parallel worlds where, in rich neighborhoods, technology has advanced rapidly, while elsewhere it has regressed.
However, today, there is a real interest in analogue formats. Keeping all this in mind, we find it more interesting to stock the equipment described in the book. I can tell you that everyone who showed up on set wanted to play with “Running Cam.” It looks like an old handheld camera from the 1990s, as thick as a sandwich. Everyone wants to manipulate him!
Do you intend to address contemporary social or political issues by re-adapting the novel?
Yes, to some extent. Stephen King’s proposed vision on the 21ste this century turned out to be very accurate. It is quite worrying if the same problem continues to occur. Michael Bacall and I started writing the script in 2021 or 2022, and at times it felt like reality was catching up to fiction.
We have integrated more cutting-edge elements, such as artificial intelligence and deepfakes. But there is already a scene in the novel, written in 1972 and published in 1982, in which the hero Ben Richards records a tape that is then doctored to distort the words. This is the type of media manipulation we see today.
Dystopias are always warnings: they show the worst possible scenario.
As is often the case in your films, the direction is excellent, especially in the action sequences. Which was the most difficult to design and direct?
All of them! Undoubtedly, the most difficult are those that occur in some locations. For example, the shootout scene on a plane is complicated, but still limited to one room. On the other hand, the chase scene set in Boston, in the foyer where Ben Richards is hiding, includes several settings: his room, the elevator, the roof, the exterior, the basement… all with fire and water.
It was very complex and was filmed over several non-consecutive weeks. During filming, my screenwriter told me how confusing it would be to follow the sequel! But this ultimately fits the spirit of the novel: Ben Richards moves on. Therefore, this film must translate this circumferential dimension.
The film was released in 2025, but the novel is set precisely in that year. Is this a coincidence or a marketing decision?
More like a coincidence. After a writer’s and actor’s strike, production was behind schedule, and Paramount was looking for a major film to be released in late 2025. The studio president told me, “We have to make Running Manit could be ready by the end of 2025.” Little did he realize that the novel took place that year! The original 1982 book cover read: “Welcome to 2025, where the best people run not to be president… but to save their skins.” » Annoying, isn’t it? So yeah, it was a happy coincidence and I’m very happy about it.
It builds a bridge between fiction and reality.
Very. Science fiction, at its best, acts as a distorting mirror of our society. Here, the line between fiction and reality becomes blurred. Dystopias are always warnings: they show the worst possible scenario.
I deliberately chose not to watch The Price of Danger before filming, so as not to be influencedEdgar Wright
Did you know French films Danger Price by Yves Boisset, which covers a very similar subject, and whose Running Man in 1987 accused of plagiarism?
Yes, I’ve heard of it, but I deliberately chose not to watch it before filming, so as not to be influenced. Moreover, the trial was initiated by Yves Boisset – who ultimately won the case. I know there are similarities, but this is not the only film in this genre. There was one before Punishment Garden (2007) or Tenth Victim (1965). Maybe I’ll watch it now that I’m done with the movie!
You still work regularly with the studio. The bitter experience you have had Ant Man (Edgar Wright and screenwriter Joe Cornish left the production of this Marvel blockbuster in 2014 just before filming, after spending eight years on the project, following creative differences with the Disney company) isn’t he standing in your way?
To find
Kangaroo today
Answer
I work with studios very often. However, Shaun of the Dead distributed by Universal, Baby Driver by Sony, and this one by Paramount. It’s not about the studio, it’s about the context. On Ant Manthere was an established universe, a continuity to respect and my scenario was a bit of a departure from what they were expecting. But keep going Running ManI never feel like I have to compromise. I am very grateful for this freedom and I feel very lucky to be able to make this film for theatrical release. Running Man is a film to watch on the big screen.
Running Man by Edgar Wright (2:13). National release November 19.
