Review: Runaway

Set in a future where robots have become common in just about every facet of society (including the home), Tom Selleck is a cop on the Runaway Squad, a unit in the police department created to deal with robots gone haywire. When he notices a higher number of robots gone wild than usual (and gone wilder than usual), Selleck starts to wonder. His investigations led him to electronics genius Gene Simmons (!) who has found a way to override robots’ usual commands and has turned them into literal killing machines. When Selleck obtains the templates Simmons needs to mass produce the chips he uses to override the commands, Simmons specifically targets Selleck. Cynthia Rhodes is Selleck’s perky new partner, Joey Cramer is his kid, G.W. Bailey is his boss, and Stan Shaw plays another Runaway expert on the force. A chain-smoking Kirstie Alley plays a young woman who works for Simmons, whom Selleck tries to make an ally out of.

 

Sometimes the very central concept of a film (or at least great chunks of it) is so monumentally stupid or offensive that the film has absolutely no hope of being any good. “Big Stan” (Rob Schneider learns martial arts to avoid prison rape), “Journey to the 7th Planet” (Work out the problem with that one yourself), “Equus” (about a psychiatrist whose patient loves riding horses naked), and “Knock Off” (casting Jean-Claude Van Damme as an unscrupulous clothing designer/importer!) are but a few ridiculous premises I could name. This dud from hack writer-director Michael Crichton (author of the overrated “Jurassic Park” and director of “Looker” and “Westworld”) definitely joins that list and is one of the worst films I’ve seen in my entire life. It’s also more horribly dated than the unrelated cheesy pop-rock Bon Jovi song of the same. And believe me, that song is awfully cheesy (yet catchy).

 

Tom Selleck is a genuinely likeable presence on screen (and largely seems that way in real-life, Republican or not) but not even cool and laidback Magnum PI and his fantabulous moustache can save this turkey. It’s got the kind of story that I would’ve come up with as a kid (‘coz robots are like totally cool!), but as an adult would recognise as a piece of shit. Still, Selleck (too good for the film) at least manages to not look embarrassed under some very trying circumstances and his overall not very appropriate casting. I mean, does Selleck look like a tech-savvy guy to you? I dunno about that. Mind you, he’s a lot better than KISS bassist (and massive egotist) Gene Simmons, cast here as...someone with alleged acting ability. Let me tell you something. Gene Simmons may have the perfect face for a villain, but what he does not have is acting ability. None. Zero. Zilch. Personally I thought “KISS Meets the Phantom of the Park” was enough evidence of this, but apparently Crichton missed that movie gem from 1978. I’ve read that Crichton only hired Simmons due to his ability to stare blankly, which is just ridiculous. There’s a difference between glowering menacingly to good effect and glowering menacingly because that’s either the one and only facial expression you have, or because you’re exceedingly bored with the script you are acting out (I don’t blame him, we’re talking about a script where the main character’s name is uttered at least once every two minutes, according to the IMDb!). Simmons most certainly does not glower menacingly to any good effect. His character is also made to look incredibly stupid at times. At one point he calls Selleck and wants Alley delivered to him, and yet if Selleck doesn’t turn her over to him, he’ll killer her. What? Having said all that, I must admit that this film wouldn’t be any better if the villain were played by Michael Ironside, Rutger Hauer, or Tim Curry.

 

Look, I won’t deny that bomb disposal units use technological means for their job (and Selleck’s character isn’t too far removed from a ‘bomb expert’ guy I guess), but outside of that, this film’s view of robotics and technology is incredibly juvenile and laughably absurd. Crichton is trying to predict a future where robots play a huge part in society, and it plays out dreadfully unconvincingly. A society that becomes reliant on technology is one thing, but robots? Not so much, at least not like it plays out here. Crichton takes his tech obsessions (which seem to stem from a fear of technology running amok or being utilised far too greatly) way too far. The idea that society requires a special branch of the police force to tackle haywire robots (and their often evil makers) is laughable. This is not helped by the film’s FX. The design of the robots is cheesy and cheap, instantly dated to the 1980s. And not in a good way, but a “Tron” way. I guess I could say that these little robots are slightly more plausible threats than the ‘face-hugger’ aliens from “Aliens”, but the fact is, they don’t look like it. I didn’t buy these robots being tools for murder, let alone did I find the idea interesting or entertaining. It’s just too goofy and it never convinces. I mean, it’s Magnum P.I. chasing killer robots that are programmed by Gene Freakin’ Simmons. Who has a laser gun, by the way (‘Coz it’s the future, y’know). How can one really swallow such nonsense?

 

If you want to see this kind of thing done right, you only need to look at another film from 1984 about killer robots: “The Terminator”. I could rest my case right there, really (“Robocop” fits the bill too, especially with its law enforcement angle, and that film was smart enough to play things satirically). It gets everything right that this awful film gets so horribly wrong (It’s weird given that Crichton did rather OK with killer robots before with “Westworld”). Most damagingly, the whole thing is played deadly seriously, and deadly boring as a result. Meanwhile, when Selleck’s robot maid shows up, the film really does jump the shark. Unless it’s “The Jetsons”, robot maids are just plain stupid. In this film, apparently single dads get the robot maid to do the cooking. In reality, single dads get Col. Sanders to do the cooking. Maybe this was Crichton’s one attempt at humour, but it ain’t funny, it’s just moronic and dates the film to the Atari era (Despite Crichton wisely not giving us a specific futuristic date for the world he’s created here. He has thankfully avoided that pitfall). I will say though, that as much as I wish a great composer like Jerry Goldsmith (“The Omen”, “Planet of the Apes”, “A Patch of Blue”) wouldn’t go the electronic/synth route, this film is one of those rare movies where such a cheesy score is probably required. So I’ll leave Jerry alone this time. Besides he can do no wrong in my eyes anyway.

 

The cast really is a fantastic collection of 80s cheese, even beyond Selleck and Simmons. I mean, you’ve got the kid from “Flight of the Navigator” (Joey Cramer, in his debut), and Capt. Harris from “Police Academy” (G.W. Bailey) for starters. Cynthia Rhodes (“Flashdance”) is cute and likeable, but not much more than that. Kirstie Alley, meanwhile, was good on “Cheers” (and maybe “Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan”) but nothing else. Here she’s all shouting and chain-smoking, a far too ‘actory’, mannered performance. Stan Shaw (“TNT Jackson”) is an actor I rather like, but he comes off as even less likely to be a tech-savvy guy than Selleck, it’s not one of his more memorable parts.

 

I’m sure there’s a small cult following out there for this film, but I think it’s one of the worst movies ever made, and although being dated isn’t always a killer for a film, it certainly buries this relic of the early-to-mid 80s.

 

Rating: F