Runner, Runner

It's rare that I see a film without having first watched the trailer, but Runner Runner was one of those films. My friend assured me that the trailer had been available on IMDB.com, which I realized was true, but I'm not particularly interested in Ben Affleck films, I'm not apt to click on one of his trailers. And for those of us not in the know, what kind of title is Runner Runner anyway? Sounds like a movie about the Boston Marathon, or that tribe of people that run barefoot. Actually, it's a poker term, referencing a hand that makes use of the final two dealer draws to win. I think that's as clear as I can make it without using other, potentially unfamiliar poker jargon... I used Wikipedia to learn that much.

Runner Runner is hardly about poker, though, so if you're there to see Timberlake and Affleck, you'll do fine. If you're there to see Gemma Arterton, you'll do better. She's gorgeous, and infinitely more interesting than the other characters in the film. She's also the one with the least crap dialogue. Somehow, the shoddy script was greenlit, produced by DiCaprio (among others), and handed to relative newcomer Brad Furman for direction. While Furman's Lincoln Lawyer was well received, Runner Runner arrived in theaters with a thud. Big name stars, contemporary premise (online gaming mogul hires young grad student as protege), and an exotic locale (Costa Rica) are not enough to save this tired story.

As a former director myself, I've got lots of ideas for how to improve the film, but most of them would have meant starting from scratch. There are numerous articles perpetuating rumors that the studio pressured Furman to 'soften' Affleck's character, and that Affleck had Argo editor William Goldberg make changes to the final cut of the film - but the real problem is deeper than that. It goes back to the script, some of the choices, and for me, the terrible costuming.

It may sound silly, but I was irritated and distracted by the boring choices that probably came from the actors' own wardrobes. If you're a villain, you wear black. If you're young and innocent, you wear light colors. Plaid stripes to seem boyish, impish, effected by the villain. A green dress for temptation, red dress for seduction. It's boring, textbook, and obvious. It's like watching a moderately assembled student film.

As far as the performance goes, I find Timberlake fun to watch. Most critics fault Timberlake's acting for much of the film's failure, but I beg to differ. He may have picked a lot of terrible projects, but I'm more interested in his films than his music (nothing good since "Sexyback," if you ask me). His character, Richie Furst, is woefully inconsistent (so intelligent, yet so dumb), and I wouldn't know who to blame. Furman? The script writers? Timberlake? The editors - in their choice of which take to use? The doe-eyed surprise he brings to the second act doesn't match the tenacity of the first. As for Affleck, I've never been fan (though I admit I have not yet caught Argo), so it only helped that I wasn't supposed to like him as Ivan Block. Yet audiences seem to have forgiven him for Gigli, so maybe there's hope for Timberlake.

Gemma Arterton plays Block's girlfriend/associate Rebecca, bringing the only real allure to the film, even if the role is contrived. Anthony Mackie is entertaining as the FBI agent pursuing Block, and I rather liked Michael Esper and Oliver Cooper in the thankless roles of Furst's grad school buddies, recruited by Furst to advance the company.

Put any B-list performers in the roles of Furst and Block, and the flop would be less of a surprise. It's mediocre material that will play fine on the small screen, or in a marathon of terrible gambling flicks, but no wonder audiences flocked to Gravity and Cloudy With a Chance of Meatballs 2. Everything about Runner Runner - from the title to the casting to the fact that it starts out in Jersey - is urging you to stay away.