Running Time was filmed in black and white, in real time, and seemingly takes place in one continuous, fluid shot. It's a little like Hitchcock's "Rope," but it's on location! Carl, an ... See full summary »
Running Time was filmed in black and white, in real time, and seemingly takes place in one continuous, fluid shot. It's a little like Hitchcock's "Rope," but it's on location! Carl, an ex-con who sets out to rob the prison laundry system where he worked for 5 years (while in the pen), has spent ten years in prison planning the ultimate heist. Upon his release, he meets up with a high school buddy, who's made all the arrangements for the job, and rented him a hooker for his first encounter in a decade with a real girl. After picking up the safecracker and their getaway driver, they've got twenty minutes to pull off the perfect heist...but soon everything falls apart before Carl's eyes. He might still get the girl, though! Written by
Scary Mary <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Recently released convict Bruce Campbell decides to pull a daring heist with a small group of losers. Their objective is to steal money that is used by the prison for laundry services. Campbell, who learned of this while working the laundry room, is the would-be mastermind of the poorly planned job. Also along for the ride is an old high school love (Anita Barone) that Campbell may still have deep feelings for. "Running Time" was supposedly shot in one continuous take. I really do not believe this could have been made that way looking at the various locations throughout the Los Angeles area that were used. With that said, "Running Time" starts off very well but then just kind of drags its feet as the second half progresses. Campbell, arguably doing the best work of his career, steals the show and Barone's late appearance adds an interesting wrinkle that probably was not needed. Like the film itself, Campbell and Barone look great in this black-and-white product. Ultimately though the substance is lacking and "Running Time" likely would have been better as a short film than a cinematic feature. Highly interesting to an extent, but still not quite a touchdown. 2.5 out of 5 stars.
2 of 2 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?