The Reviews are in on RollerBall

aria

Former Moderator
Joined
Dec 4, 1977
Posts
39,546
And it majorly sucks (just as Harry Knowles warned back in August after a much-publicized pre-screeing-gone-wrong):

Here's Ebert's take (pretty damn funny, btw that's half a star):

ROLLERBALL / 1/2*
February 8, 2002
BY ROGER EBERT

"Rollerball" is an incoherent mess, a jumble of footage in search of plot, meaning, rhythm and sense. There are bright colors and quick movement on the screen, which we can watch as a visual pattern that, in entertainment value, falls somewhere between a kaleidoscope and a lava lamp.

The movie stars Chris Klein, who shot to stardom, so to speak, in the "American Pie" movies and inhabits his violent action role as if struggling against the impulse to blurt out, "People, why can't we all just get along?" Klein is a nice kid. For this role, you need someone who has to shave three times a day.

The movie is set in 2005 in a Central Asian republic apparently somewhere between Uzbekistan and Mudville. Jean Reno plays Petrovich, owner of "the hottest sports startup in the world," a rollerball league that crowds both motorcycles and roller skaters on a figure-8 track that at times looks like a Roller Derby crossed with Demo Derby, at other times like a cruddy video game. The sport involves catching a silver ball and throwing it at a big gong so that showers of sparks fly. One of the star players confesses she doesn't understand it, but so what: In the final game, Petrovich suspends all rules, fouls, and penalties. This makes no difference that I could see.

Klein plays Jonathan Cross, an NHL draft pick who has to flee America in a hurry for the crime of racing suicidally down the hills of San Francisco flat on his back on what I think is a skateboard. His best friend is Marcus Ridley (LL Cool J), who persuades him to come to Podunkistan and sign for the big bucks. Jonathan is soon attracted to Aurora (Rebecca Romijn-Stamos, from "X-Men").

"Your face isn't nearly as bad as you think," he compliments her. She has a scar over one eye, but is otherwise in great shape, as we can see because the Locker Rooms of the Future are co-ed. Alas, the Women Athletes of the Future still turn their backs to the camera at crucial moments, carry strategically placed towels, stand behind furniture and in general follow the rules first established in 1950s nudist volleyball pictures.

I counted three games in the rollerball season. The third is the championship. There is one road trip, to a rival team's rollerball arena, which seems to have been prefabricated in the city dump. The games are announced by Paul Heyman, who keeps screaming, "What the hell is going on?" There is no one else in the booth with him. Yet when Aurora wants to show Jonathan that an injury was deliberate, she can call up instant replays of all the cameras on equipment thoughtfully provided in the locker room.

The funniest line in the movie belongs to Reno, who bellows, "I'm this close to a North American cable deal!" North American cable carries Battling Bots, Iron Chefs, Howard Stern and Monster Truck Rallies. There isn't a person in the audience who couldn't get him that deal. Reno also has the second funniest line. After Jonathan engages in an all-night 120-m.p.h. motorcycle chase across the frozen steppes of Bankruptistan, while military planes drop armed Jeeps to chase him, and after he sees his best pal blown to bits after leaping across a suspension bridge that has been raised in the middle of the night for no apparent reason, Reno tells him, "Play well tonight."

Oh, and I almost forgot Aurora's breathless discovery after the suspicious death of one of the other players. "His chin strap was cut!" she whispers fiercely to Jonathan. Neither she nor he notices that Jonathan makes it a point never to fasten his own chin strap at any time during a game.

Someday this film may inspire a long, thoughtful book by John Wright, its editor. My guess is that something went dreadfully wrong early in the production. Maybe dysentery or mass hypnosis. And the director, John McTiernan ("Die Hard"), was unable to supply Wright with the shots he needed to make sense of the story. I saw a Russian documentary once where half the shots were blurred and overexposed, because the KGB attacked the negative with X-rays. Maybe this movie was put through an MRI scan. Curiously, the signifiers have survived, but not the signified. Characters set up big revelations and then forget to make them. And the long, murky night sequence looks like it was shot, pointlessly, with the green-light NightShot feature on a consumer video camera.

One of the peculiarities of Television of the Future is a device titled "Instant Global Rating." This supplies a digital readout of how many viewers there are (except on North American cable systems, of course). Whenever something tremendously exciting happens during a game, the rating immediately goes up. This means that people who were not watching somehow sensed they had just missed something amazing, and responded by tuning in. When "Rollerball" finally does get a North American cable deal, I predict the ratings will work in reverse.

<a href="http://www.suntimes.com/output/ebert1/wkp-news-roller08f.html" target="_blank">http://www.suntimes.com/output/ebert1/wkp-news-roller08f.html</a>

Incidently, Ebert gave Arnie's Collatoral Damage 3 stars.
 

aria

Former Moderator
Joined
Dec 4, 1977
Posts
39,546
The other good RollerBall review quote I read:

"What it might look like if Vince McMahon were to direct "Starlight Express" "
 

FeelGood

So Many Posts
No Time
For Games.
Joined
Aug 18, 2001
Posts
17,794
Ebert is funnier to read than he is to listen to, that's for sure.
 

BioMotor_Unitron

Global Moderator,
20 Year Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2000
Posts
6,160
Damn, I might have to see this movie just to give it the MST3K treatment. :D
 

Wolf

Collectasaurus,
20 Year Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2001
Posts
2,007
Can anyone tell me how many stars is the maximum? I'm considering going to go see Collateral Damage
 
Joined
Oct 9, 2001
Posts
1,530
Somehow I knew Rollerball was going to suck. It's a movie about a rollerblading sport, taken to the EXTREME (the big buzzword of the day). How can it not be terrible? I'm sure that the person who came up with this idea was thinking only about money, and how much of it he'd make (right now, I'd love to see the reaction on his face when he discovers that his genius creation is making him LOSE money).

Coming soon: Death Polo! Starring Mario Lopez, Britney Spears, Mandy Moore, the cast of N' Sync, and L'il Bow-Wow.
 

GregN

aka The Grinch
20 Year Member
Joined
Dec 16, 2000
Posts
17,570
you know what?
[soapboxrant]
Fuck this re-make.

You want the real deal, do yourself a favor and go rent (or buy on DVD, it's 9.44 @ Wally World) the ORIGINAL Rollerball starring James Caan.

Yea, I know.. It was made in the 70's, so it has cheezy costumes, crusty visuals, but it was a REAL movie.

Movies on Pseudo sports have generally been good.. Just look at Running Man ... That was a nice film.

The thing is, Rollerball circa 197X had something to say.. There was some social commentary there about one-world governments (Now known as globalization), society's general decline, the acceptance of blood and violence for violence sake. All this wrapped up in a package that was watchable, exciting, and made you think.

What do we get here? Hollywood trying to score a quick buck with sensationalism and violence. A fast and furious on rollerblades. Did they watch the first film? Sounds like they totally missed the point of the original.

I'm surprised Ebert didn't even mention the original in the review. Maybe he will on his TV show...
[/soapboxrant]

This will be a rental for me. Too bad, too.. I was hoping for a homage to the original..

What's next? A dodgeball flick with Nicholas Cage and Rap video sluts?

[ February 08, 2002: Message edited by: GregN. ]

[ February 08, 2002: Message edited by: GregN. ]</p>
 

aria

Former Moderator
Joined
Dec 4, 1977
Posts
39,546
Originally posted by EvilWasabi:
<strong>Ebert is funnier to read than he is to listen to, that's for sure.</strong><hr></blockquote>


Oh yeah, I never watch his show. But ever since I dug up a book full of his old reviews years ago at the library I got a kick out of reading them (and I disagree about 40% of the time).
I 'm also not a fan of TV review shows (Ebert & Co. included) -it's hard to be as efficient with time and space, especially since reviewers are allowed to write about a key scene that bothered them, but not show an example of a bad shot/script/etc (what studio would send them the clip of it?).
 

aria

Former Moderator
Joined
Dec 4, 1977
Posts
39,546
Originally posted by Wolf:
<strong>Can anyone tell me how many stars is the maximum? I'm considering going to go see Collateral Damage</strong><hr></blockquote>

Generally, four stars in maximum. ebert uses four. The best review page I've seen (it has just about every review for a movie) is Rottentomatos.com
 

Ducky

Haomaru's Blade Shiner
Joined
May 27, 2001
Posts
690
Yes, please, everyone stay away from this movie. The original with James Caan was recently released on DVD and is great. Buy that instead and maybe this re-make will flop horribly. That way we don't have to see any more movies starring LL Cool J.
 

Neo Rasa

Whip's Subordinate
Joined
Mar 26, 2001
Posts
1,771
Yea, I know.. It was made in the 70's, so it has cheezy costumes, crusty visuals, but it was a REAL movie.

The ironic part is that, compared to this remake, the original's team costumes, etc. look much better. :eek:

The worst aspect of this remake is I still have no idea how this version of "Rollerball" is played.

Going by the original, I could get some friends together and we could play Rollerball right now if we wanted to because we had a solid idea of what the rules were and what not, in the remake it's just that final "fight scene" from First Knight only in the future. :mad:

What the fuck?

Why on earth did they choose to make this The Fast and the Furious with some sports scenes interjected into it?
 

Loopz

Formerly Punjab,
Joined
Aug 16, 2001
Posts
12,871
Man, they haven't been able to do this story right yet. Back in high school I stole a book from the Tucson High library that has the original story both these movies are based on, called "Roller Ball Murder." My main problem with the first attempt (besides the 70-era production cheese) is the fact that the main chracter, Jonathan E, is supposed to be 6'3", 240 lbs, a grizzled veteran of the sport, a description which James Caan does NOT fit. I knew from day one that this new flick would suck big nuts because the people responsible would entirely miss the point of what this story was supposed to be about. John McTiernan hasn't directed a decent flick since the original Die Hard.
 
Top