The Long Walk Review

Chad Marriott
Sep 16
3 min read

The Long Walk, based on Stephen King's 1979 novel of the same name, follows young men grappling with nihilism in a contest of futility for the "betterment" of their country. Only one can win the prize at the end, which is whatever they want. The "walkers" form bonds to survive, even though it is futile. The film grinds its audience to varying levels of effectiveness. If you enjoyed the film, please disregard what is featured in Off the Field & Screen's The Long Walk review.

The Long Road — Photo by Clément Duguerre on Unsplash

The Positives

This The Long Walk review doesn't have much positive to say. This film features some strong performances and cinematography. Cooper Hoffman, David Jonsson, and Ben Wang carried the film with their performances. Jonsson's performance is particularly noteworthy. He elevated what otherwise featured college-aged worldviews with some Kurt Cobain vibes into something closer to the transcendent. His earnestness and quick yet believable emotional shifts helped me enjoy this otherwise messy film.

The Negatives

The thinly veiled criticism of capitalism in America falls short in its attempt to convey anything poignant due to its incoherent cynicism. The source material from the 70s made sense, but the film's underlying contempt for anything beautiful is consistently undercut by its strained metaphors. The characters have a limited understanding of life's beauty, relying on empty clichés. The script suffers from a lack of cohesive criticism, losing its rhetorical effect by kitchen-sinking the complaints about existence instead of finding a singular point to make.

The film lacks a cohesive story, instead offering a series of vignettes about "brotherhood, vengeance, and purpose," with nothing of substance to say on any of them. It relies heavily on excessive and nonchalant violence to try to support its message, but again, that message isn't really clear. The film argues, "murder is messed up, man, but also it's okay sometimes, you know, like when power structures, or whatever."

If you enjoy being clocked over the head with a rubber mallet, stating, "Life has no meaning, and if you think it does, it's only a matter of time before you don't," this film is for you.

This film features some strong performances and cinematography. Cooper Hoffman, David Jonsson, and Ben Wang carried the film with their performances. Jonsson's performance is particularly noteworthy. His performance elevated what was otherwise a featured college-aged worldviews with some Kurt Cobain vibes into something closer to the transcendent.

Unfortunately, the film ultimately argues that the Nietzschean aspirations of the characters are fool's gold. The empty "look at the pretty rainbows" positivity and obsession with "power structures" lack the psychological depth to sustain the audience's interest for nearly two hours. Nothing in the film surpassed the dry analysis of an average Philosophy 101 discussion led by first-year college students.

The whole film is predictable within the first five minutes. The plot reveals itself almost instantly. The "reveals" ring empty because they are apparent. The archetypes for different parts of America are also tiresome. Every character concludes that overcoming nihilism means controlling how they die (even though it's apparent that they have no control), missing the entire point.

Stephen King is one of the best writers of the last century. So, the expectations were relatively high. It feels wrong to criticize something he wrote. Perhaps the book has more to say. The film argues for cynicism but tries to fight it with a mix of Pollyanna positivity and a pro-suicide ethos. The point of the film is lost in its obsession with trying to grind the audience.

Mark Hamill's performance is particularly disappointing, relying on cliches. His character, the Major, is less fleshed out than his portrayal of the Joker on Batman: The Animated Series. If the point was to create a caricature, then he did it perfectly. It just seems like a waste of his talent.

Overall, the film disappoints. It has moments that prompt the audience to think, but like a poorly constructed devised theatre piece, it gets lost in trying to convey something profound and ultimately says nothing. And much like that type of theatre, it grinds its audience by hitting the same point over and over and over.