I’ll admit, I might be predisposed to like this film because I’m a big fan of 70s rock, especially female artists. However, as a movie reviewer, I also try to be critical, and *The Runaways* left me feeling conflicted. I enjoy musical biopics as much as the music itself, and since this one falls squarely within my favorite genre, I expected it to be a real winner. But I was quickly disappointed by how the story unfolded. When portraying true events, I feel it’s important to establish who these people are, what's happening, and most importantly, why. These were real individuals, and I wanted to understand their motivations and what shaped their paths in life. The film begins with disconnected scenes of Joan Jett and Cherie Currie doing things that aren't particularly revealing. It doesn’t tell us much about them beyond a fondness for punk rock and David Bowie. Honestly, after just the first 15 minutes or so, that’s all I could recall. And so the film progresses. The band forms, is taken under the wing of the eccentric record producer/manager Kim Fowley, achieves fame, and eventually breaks up. The director, Floria Sigismondi, presents this as if it were a simple process, which is precisely where the problems lie: poor direction, likely compounded by bad editing and a weak screenplay. We’re given almost no background on these young women's lives, and surprisingly, nothing at all about Joan Jett’s personal life. It’s strange that the real Joan Jett served as an executive producer because her character is so underdeveloped; she comes across more like an observer in her own story. At least we get some glimpses into Cherie Currie’s background – she came from an unstable family, and her twin sister is the closest person to her. However, it's strange that the film omits the fact that she was raped at age 14—an incident which significantly impacted who she became. It seems the rest of the band didn’t grant permission for their stories to be used, and it shows. While it's unfortunate because their backstories are already so lacking, I can’t fault them; this film doesn’t do them justice. The story is rushed, presented as if everything happened in a single year—formation, fame, breakup—when they actually released four albums, three with Cherie. The screenplay is truly awful. Thankfully, the actors aren't to blame. Kristen Stewart perfectly embodies Joan Jett, capturing her look, voice (she sings all of her parts), and attitude. Dakota Fanning does a commendable job as Cherie, even if she doesn’t entirely resemble the real Currie; her acting skills compensate for it. The other band members are largely forgettable, much like their characters in the film. Michael Shannon's portrayal of Kim Fowley is divisive—people either love or hate it. I found him to be a scene-stealer (though that’s not necessarily positive since the film isn’t about him), acting over the top, crude, and inappropriately behaved. While some viewers might find his character unlikeable – because he's an unpleasant person – Shannon clearly had fun playing the role, which made it entertaining to watch. The actors elevate *The Runaways* considerably. All of the performances are well-executed and enjoyable. But when the technical aspects are so flawed, even talented actors can’t save a film. There’s virtually no story, minimal character development, clumsy editing, and shockingly little music! It's almost unbelievable that a movie about The Runaways would feature so few original songs—we hear "Cherry Bomb" repeatedly, with only snippets of their other tracks. *The Runaways* might not have been the most revolutionary band in history, but they were a cool group of young rock musicians who deserved a better film. It’s worth watching once if you enjoy this type of music, and that's about it—what a shame.

Source on TMDB