Runner

Set largely around Queensland’s Gold Coast, this action-comedy brings together Alan Ritchson and Owen Wilson for an unapologetic nod to the buddy films of the 1980s and 90s. It is predictable, excessively violent and regularly ridiculous, but it also happens to be mind-numbingly good fun. The story centres on a seemingly straightforward mission involving the delivery of a donor liver needed to save a seven-year-old girl suffering from a rare disease. Naturally, nothing about the journey remains straightforward for long. What follows is an increasingly improbable collection of fights, chases, gunfire and near escapes as Ritchson and Wilson find themselves trying to complete their mission while staying alive.

Muscle meets mouth

The biggest reason Runner works is its central pairing. Ritchson is perfectly suited to this kind of action role. His physical presence makes even the film’s more outrageous confrontations strangely convincing, while Wilson provides the necessary comic counterweight. His familiar laid-back delivery and constant commentary bounce beautifully against Ritchson’s more imposing screen presence.

Their chemistry gives Runner the energy of those classic mismatched buddy films where the plot was often less important than watching two very different personalities try to survive one another. There are few surprises in where the story goes, but that is almost part of its charm. The film knows exactly what audiences have come to see and rarely pretends to be anything more sophisticated.

Even the villain is so gloriously over the top that he somehow becomes part of the entertainment. Subtlety isn’t really the point here.

Queensland gets the action treatment

For Australian audiences, there is also something wonderfully entertaining about seeing the Gold Coast used as the backdrop for this kind of Hollywood action film. Familiar Queensland locations become part of a world filled with speeding vehicles, gunfire and impossible escapes. Geography, physics and human durability occasionally become flexible concepts, but questioning any of them would probably defeat the purpose. Runner wants to take us back to an era when action movies were allowed to be unbelievable simply because they were fun.

And, for the most part, it succeeds.

More heart than expected

What prevents the film from becoming completely disposable is the seven-year-old girl waiting for the transplant. For all the violence and comedy, the mission ultimately comes down to saving one child. These men aren’t trying to prevent the destruction of the world. They are risking their lives for someone they have never met and who may never know what they endured on her behalf. That simple motivation gives the film an unexpected emotional centre and brings some genuine heart to all the cinematic chaos. It also provides Runner with something many similar action films forget to include: a reason to care whether the heroes actually succeed.

What should parents know?

Runner contains considerable action violence, including gunfire, fighting, threats and some surprisingly brutal moments. Despite the regular humour and the film’s old-fashioned buddy-movie feel, the violence can become intense. The storyline surrounding a seriously ill seven-year-old also introduces some emotional material involving childhood illness and the possibility of death. This may be escapist entertainment, but it is definitely aimed at older viewers rather than younger children.

The bottom line

Runner is hardly groundbreaking cinema, but that may be precisely why it is so enjoyable. Ritchson and Wilson have excellent chemistry, the villain embraces every opportunity to go over the top, and the Queensland setting adds another layer of enjoyment for Australian audiences. More importantly, the film remembers something that many contemporary action movies seem to have forgotten: sometimes audiences simply want to have fun.

It feels like stepping back into an era when action films could be ridiculous, unbelievable and strangely uplifting all at once. And sometimes that is more than enough.

REEL DIALOGUE: What would you sacrifice for the benefit of a stranger?

Beneath all the action, Runner asks a surprisingly significant question.

The person at the centre of this mission is a seven-year-old girl these men barely know. She cannot repay them for what they risk on her behalf, yet her life is valuable enough for them to keep going when walking away would be considerably easier.

Jesus explored a similar idea in the parable of the Good Samaritan. A wounded stranger is lying beside the road when a Samaritan stops to help him:

“But a Samaritan, as he journeyed, came to where he was, and when he saw him, he had compassion.” — Luke 10:33 (ESV)

What makes the Samaritan’s compassion significant is that it costs him something. He gives his time, changes his plans, uses his resources and takes responsibility for someone who can offer him nothing in return. Christianity takes this idea even further. The gospel describes Jesus giving himself not because humanity had earned his sacrifice, but because of his love:

“But God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us.” — Romans 5:8 (ESV)

Runner may communicate its message through muscles, bullets, car chases and Owen Wilson one-liners, but underneath all of that is a worthwhile question:

How much are we prepared to give for someone who may never be able to give anything back?