Badmovies.org Forum

Movies => Bad Movies => Topic started by: mr. henry on December 10, 2002, 06:39:42 PM

Title: the horror that is ROLLERBALL (2002)...
Post by: mr. henry on December 10, 2002, 06:39:42 PM
if you have been subjected to the horror that is ROLLERBALL (2002), then you know...if you are lucky enough to have NOT seen it, be warned...it is even worse than you think...

this car wreck of a movie was delayed in its original theatrical release for retooling...god only knows how bad it was to begin with...

Rollerball - 2002 (R version) - (DVD). Directed by John McTiernan. The man behind "Die Hard" and "Predator" is responsible for this completely idiotic and painful remake based on "Rollerball" (1975). To call this flick a turkey is an understatement; it's a putrid regurgitated mound of gangrenous turkey remains. First of all, the futuristic rollerball "game" doesn't make any sense. Secondly, the plot surrounding the senseless game doesn't make any sense either. For instance, in the heat of battle a player loses his helmet and is smashed in the face. Later, Chris Klein's character discovers the player's chin strap had been cut in an act of sabotage. This doesn't make any sense since Klein doesn't even bother to buckle his own chin strap for the entire movie and suffers no ill affects. Need another example? Rollerball TV ratings are tabulated instantaneously and rise whenever there is an act of extreme violence. How can this be? How do people know to tune in at the precise moment that the violence occurs? With ESP? Intuition perhapse? To make matters even worse, Klein fails miserably as an action hero and appears to be doing a poor Keanu Reeves impersonation circa "Point Break." Without a doubt, LL Cool J is the best actor in the entire incoherent flick and that says it all. This mess should be destroyed alongside "Battlefield Earth." NOT RECOMMENDED.


-mr. henry

Title: Re: the horror that is ROLLERBALL (2002)...
Post by: Neville on December 11, 2002, 12:56:13 PM
Jeezz.. Can't believe both John McTiernan and Jean Reno got involved in this... And now the bad news: Despite your warnings, I'm going to rent it sooner or later, at least to see by myself if it is that bad. Don't worry, it's not your fault, others have warned me before, but when somebody tells me a film sucks, I am attarcted to it as a moth to the flame.
Title: Re: the horror that is ROLLERBALL (2002)...
Post by: mr. henry on December 11, 2002, 02:26:20 PM
Hey Neville, to make it worse Jean Reno plays A RUSSIAN...and you can't even understand what he's saying half of the time...this movie is like a train wreck in the same was as Battlefield Earth...it just drops your jaw that such rubbish can be made AND cost so much...

-mr. henry

Title: Re: the horror that is ROLLERBALL (2002)...
Post by: J.R. on December 11, 2002, 06:55:57 PM
And they even downgraded the R rating to a PG-13 to follow the "all big successes are PG-13" rule by cutting out the Rebecca Romijn nude scene. I guarantee you that if they yelled during every ad, "Rebecca Romijn nude scene!" it would have made more money.

Title: Re: the horror that is ROLLERBALL (2002)...
Post by: Neville on December 13, 2002, 11:21:35 AM
You'd better stop this, I'm getting hot!
Title: Re: the horror that is ROLLERBALL (2002)...
Post by: Funk, E. on December 13, 2002, 05:47:09 PM
Rollerball the remake is proof that there is a god if only because it itself is the anti-christ.
;-)
Title: Re: the horror that is ROLLERBALL (2002)...
Post by: Mofo Rising on December 13, 2002, 09:46:46 PM
J.R. wrote:
>
> And they even downgraded the R rating to a PG-13 to follow
> the "all big successes are PG-13" rule by cutting out the
> Rebecca Romijn nude scene. I guarantee you that if they
> yelled during every ad, "Rebecca Romijn nude scene!" it would
> have made more money.
>


I don't know, how much is that FEMME FATALE movie making?
Title: What you do is...
Post by: Tor on December 15, 2002, 01:36:37 PM
What my friends and I  did when we rented this, was we got the original as well, and watched them back-to-back. The original was bad, but seems like a masterpiece compared to the 2002 edition., which was one of the worst things I'd seen in ages.  Apparently, when the film was originally to hit theaters, the studio found it to be in bad shape, so they delayed its release an pumped another $30 million dollars into it in a  last-ditch attempt to save the film. I figure it must've made it worse. The whole long-extended night vision scene, what the hell was up with that? Horrible, simply horrible...
Title: Re: What you do is...
Post by: mr. henry on December 15, 2002, 05:30:34 PM
TOR--- i agree the first Rollerball is a "masterpiece" when compared to the 2002 "remake." i wrote a quick blurb on the original 1975 version...for what it's worth, here it is...:

Rollerball - 1975 (R) - (VHS) Directed by Norman Jewison. A young James Caan stars as Jonathan, the star player in a futuristic sport called rollerball. Rollerball is played on a giant roullette-looking wheel and is a ridiculous combination of roller derby, motocross, ultimate fighting, and pinball (with a king size ball bearing). Problems start for Jonathan when the league's executives want him to retire as the game becomes more brutal due to a new "no penalty" rule. This sporting 70s sci-fi is dated and surprisingly slow by today's standards but it still makes more sense than the majorly senseless 2002 "remake." Only RECOMMENDED over the 2002 version.

-mr. henry

Title: Re: What you do is...
Post by: Neville on December 16, 2002, 12:12:50 PM
Mmm... It would have made more money with Rebecca's nudity on? I doubt it, she's not that famous, and, anyway, you can found as many pics of her as you want on the net.