A One Mann’s Movies review of “The Long Walk” (2025, 3.5*, 15).
“The Long Walk” was one of the first books published by the great Stephen King at the tender age of 19, so it is quite surprising that it has never seen a movie version. But now it has been brought to the screen by Francis Lawrence, director of the last four “Hunger Games” films as well as “Red Sparrow“. I noted the latter for its ultra-violent content, which applies equally here. Since this is a pretty relentlessly grim documentation of a gladiatorial walk to the death.
It’s another film that I’ve struggle to rate. It’s a well made film with two stunning – possibly Oscar nomination-worthy – performances at its heart. But, dystopian as it is, it never felt terribly realistic to me. And it is so relentlessly bleak and brutal that I can’t say I really enjoyed myself. It’s not one I really have much desire to rewatch. I’m never sure how I should rate such fare.
One Mann’s Movies Rating:
Plot:
In a non-specific time in America, but following a major civil war, the country is in a parlous economic state. To provide incentive for ‘hard work’, ‘The Major’ (Mark Hamill) oversees a nationally televised event that pits a representative from every US state against each other. The rules are simple: walk through rural America, never leaving the asphalt, at a rate of 3 mph or more and be the last man standing. Fail and you “get your ticket”.
Certification:
UK: 15; US: R. (From the BBFC web site: “Strong violence, injury detail, language”.)
Talent:
Starring: Cooper Hoffman, David Jonsson, Garrett Wareing, Tut Nyuot, Charlie Plummer, Ben Wang, Jordan Gonzalez, Joshua Odjick, Mark Hamill, Roman Griffin Davis, Judy Greer.
Directed by: Francis Lawrence.
Written by: JT Mollner. (Based on the book by Stephen King).
Running Time: 1h 48m.
Summary:
Positives:
- Cooper Hoffman and David Jonsson both deliver absolutely superb, gut-wrenching performances.
- The concept is simple and compelling and the film is delivered with brutal efficiency.
- The special effects are well-delivered.
Negatives:
- Given that they KNOW that they are competing with all other 49 walkers, the pally relationships developed within the group didn’t seem very realistic.
- The film is so interminably brutal, in an endlessly repetitive way, that it leaves you feel wrung-out.
- The finale veers towards the predictable.
Full Review of “The Long Walk”:
“The Hunger Games” meets “Speed”.
It’s tempting to comment that this film plagiarises the concept of “The Hunger Games”, except of course Stephen King’s book was written many years earlier (perhaps Suzanne Collins has something to confess?!).
The concept is much the same…. in this dystopian future (or past? all the cars look to be from the 60’s?) a ‘tribute’ is selected by lottery from each of the US states, although – as the film references, in a somewhat confused manner – the submission of names into the lottery doesn’t seem to be much of a choice. Then we drop into the concept of “Speed”… but instead of 50 mph the ‘bomb’ goes off if the pace drops below 3 mph for three consecutive times. (The word “Warning!” rings out like the grim reaper’s personal alarm tone throughout this film.) It’s a stunning and simple concept.
Delivered brutally.
The delivery is brutal. Muscle cramps; sickness; diarrhoea (messy and horrible!): nothing is an excuse for a pause. And when the violence happens, it is delivered with some impressive shock-and-awe special effects that sometimes turn the stomach.
Worst of all, since it is the most shocking, is the death of Curley – walker number 7 – played by Roman Griffin Davis of Jojo Rabbit fame. Curley has clearly lied about his age to get into the ballot. To see such a young and desperate youngster dispatched so brutally (with some great special effects) is devastating and made me sit up with a start. So THIS is where we are going with this is it?
Then it is a case of rinse and repeat in different variations. I’ve seen some comment that this is boring and repetitive, but I didn’t particularly find that to be the case.
Anchored by two phenomenal performances.
This really is a pretty strong ensemble cast. But heading up the story is the developing relationship between Raymond Garraty #47 (Cooper Hoffman) and Peter McVries #23 (David Jonsson) and both actors knock it out of the park. I would not be disappointed to see both get Oscar nominations.
Cooper Hoffman, son of Philip Seymour Hoffman, made his debut in the very enjoyable Paul Thomas Anderson film “Licorice Pizza” in 2021 and was also Dick Ebersol in the disappointing “Saturday Night“. But neither of those roles gave him the scope to flex his acting talents like this role. Shock, grief, rage all etched on his face. It’s a superb performance and shows that the talent is clearly in the Hoffman genes.
David Jonsson also cements his position as one of the great new acting talents of the times and, in my book, the Oscar win is not an “if” but a “when”.
His debut performance was in the wonderful “Rye Lane“, but he was also the heart and soul of last year’s successful return to the Alien franchise in “Alien Romulus“. Here, sporting a terrific scar, he has the supporting role but is sometimes in danger of overshadowing Hoffman during some of their scenes together. The public were spot on in voting him into the top spot for last year’s BAFTA ‘Rising Star’ award. It’s not typical awards fare, but I’d really love to see both BAFTA and Oscar nominations for him for this.
Mark Hamill also makes his second appearance of the month, but has less to do in this than in “Life of Chuck“. In fact, it took me until the end titles to actually realise the Hamill was playing The Major.
Judy Greer is also good as Raymond’s mother Ginnie. A roadside scene where Ginnie sees Raymond walk past is heart-breaking.
Unrealistic.
What I did struggle with was the bonhomie developed between the participants in general. Everyone starts the film like it’s some sort of boy-scout field trip. One bespectacled guy is taking notes and joking about the book he will write afterwards (which obviously never gets written). None of this really rang true: they’d bought their ticket; they knew what was in store.
The finale as well, which I’d already spec’d out in my head from about an hour before, plays out rather predictably and, in my mind, not terribly realistically.
It left me feeling completely wrung out.
But did I enjoy it? I struggle with my answer to that. Did I ‘enjoy’ “Schindler’s List”??
I can recognise that it is very well made. The shots of the staring yokels looking at the unfolding spectacle with dead eyes as the walkers pass are well done and quite chilling. A one-legged war victim watches from a shop doorway. A blind cat sniffs the air as they walk past. It’s all very atmospheric.
But the film is so interminably bleak and brutal that it is hard to really warm to it. This wasn’t helped by my mind repeatedly going to the historical reality of the ‘death-marches’ in WW2 where the Germans emptied the concentration camps ahead of the advancing allied forces and made the emaciated prisoners march for hundreds of miles, brutally shooting any man, woman or child who couldn’t keep up. I left the cinema feeling a bit down and emotionally wrung-out.
Summary Thoughts:
After the preview feedback I’ve seen, some are calling this their ‘film of the year’. I can’t really do that, but I will acknowledge it’s a well-made and impressive piece of work. But it’s definitely a ‘Father Ted‘ sort of film.
Where to watch?
Trailer:
The trailer is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAtUHeMQ1F8.
As was the case for “Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning“, this is a trailer that I’ve had my eyes clamped shut to for weeks. Since I very quickly figured out that as the trailer went on it would increasingly spoil who made it and who didn’t. And having now watched the trailer, I realise I was 100% right to do that. So, if you’ve managed to avoid it, I suggest you NOT watch this trailer before seeing the film.
Subscribe
Don’t forget, you can subscribe to One Mann’s Movies to receive future reviews by email right here. No salesman will call!
