Tuesday 1 October 2013

REVIEW - RUNNER RUNNER


It's hard to write a review for a film I can barely remember. At the time of writing, it's roughly 12 hours since I saw Runner Runner, or at least I think I did. I possess less a memory of it than a vague recollection of something resembling the suggestion of a film, and even then not a very good one. Like the feeling you get after watching a trailer, one devoid of humour and tension and sex appeal and anything else that might a memorable film (or trailer) make. Dumbfounding how the casting directors bagged such a trio as Justin Timberlake, Ben Affleck and Gemma Arterton to assume their lead roles. Affleck and Arterton are too good for such measly roles, mere vestiges of characters from better films - the crumbs at the bottom of the biscuit tin in comparison to the extra-chunky cookies that resided there once upon a time. We're not even talking Robert De Niro and Vanessa Redgrave here or anything - this is Ben Affleck and he's above this shit just by existing. Timberlake has been bequeathed just about the blandest, dourest part in film history, sure, but that's free reign the likes of which many actors would murder for, an opportunity to run riot with characterisation. JT just sits on it, displaying not even a trace of the charisma that has made him, and kept him, such a star in the entertainment industry. The simplistic script is peppered with gambling jargon that's baffling to the nescient ear but probably laughable to the educated ear. The worst thing about it is that it's desperate trash, yet it truly thinks it's a work of major importance. sdkhhaefwlusdh,jtrdfkjrdsihlkjrdfshukjl.ewjdfk <- how I feel about Runner Runner.

No comments:

Post a Comment