# Rollerball (1975)



## Dave (Mar 23, 2001)

Rollerball (1975) 129 minutes. 

Directed by Norman Jewison  

Writing credits William Harrison  

http://uk.imdb.com/Title?0073631

The year is 2018. Countries no longer exist and the world is ruled by large corporations such as Energy and Food. There is no crime and there are no more wars. A ultra-violent futuristic game known as Rollerball is now the recreational sport of the world. It controls the populace by demonstrating the futility of individuality, since no one can ever become good enough at it to become a star. It also gives a vent for the violent tendencies and anti-social feelings of the masses. The defending championship team, the Houston team, led by the determined ten-year veteran Johnathan E., are looking to repeat as champions. However, Bartholomew, the sinister corporate head, wants Johnathan to retire, even though he is the most respected athlete of his time. Johnathan's rebellious quest will not come out with complications, both for him and his teammates, after he decides to continue playing despite Bartholomew's threats.

A one-point parable, and an obvious one at that. The game sequences are good and the ideas are interesting, and before their time, but some of the rest of the dialogue and action is boring. The game itself is rather confusing, the rules are never explained. Stretched out to over two hours of violence it becomes unlikeable.

Interesting that they still listen to the Rolling Stones 'Satisfaction' in 2018.


----------



## Dave (Apr 5, 2001)

*Rollerball (2001).*

Not another remake! Jean Reno is the 'Rollerball' Heavy.

Jean Reno (co-star of John McTiernan's upcoming Rollerball remake) told SCI FI Wire that his character is hero Chris Klein's nemesis. "I'm the villain," Reno said during a press tour to promote his new fantasy film Just Visiting. "[He] is a crazy guy (a monster) owning the rights, owning the teams, owning lives. And having the possibility to kill you."

Reno co-stars with Klein, X-Men's Rebecca Romijn-Stamos and LL Cool J in the remake of Norman Jewison's 1975 SF movie of the same name. Reno said he was attracted to the SF film (about a shadowy league of motorcycle-riding skaters) by the chance to work with the Die Hard director, whom he described as a "very good director, very good guy."

Primary filming on Rollerball has been completed, but the tentative August release date could be pushed back by the impending writer's union strike.

http://uk.imdb.com/Title?0246894

Credited cast overview: 
Chris Klein ....  Jonathan Cross  
Jean Reno ....  Alexi Petrovich  
LL Cool J ....  Marcus Ridley  
Rebecca Romijn-Stamos ....  Aurora


----------



## Dave (Jun 15, 2001)

*Jewison Blasts New Rollerball*

Norman Jewison, who directed 1975's cult SF movie Rollerball, told the New York Post that John McTiernan's upcoming remake glorifies violence, which he satirized in the original. "They sent me a script to see if I was interested in directing," Jewison told the newspaper. "But I passed on it, because it was clear they were embracing the violence, which I used in the original to comment on the activities of multinational corporations."

Jewison added, "They've invited me to a screening, but I'm not sure I even want to see it." The remake stars Chris Klein and takes place in the near future, where the organizers of a violent arena sport use deaths to boost TV ratings, the Post reported. The new Rollerball opens August 17th. 2001


----------



## Koala (Oct 6, 2001)

*Induvidual vs "the Corporation"*

A good movie as long as you aren't expecting a lot of special effects.  With how special fx were done when this movie was made be glad they left them out.  It makes it so that the movie is still good today.

Primarily a social commentary : individual refusing to conform and knuckle under to the rich guys (the "Corporation.")  Somewhat typical for the time it was made.  Acted well by key characters.  Well done scenics and support facilities.

Lots of action.   (How can you have Roller Derby on skates and motorcycles with spiked gloves and a metal ball shot out of a cannon and not have action?)

As a social commentary of the individual refusing to surrender his soul for "the good of the Corporation" it makes a series of powerful statments.  A solid caste and acting, as well as the plot and dialog, keep this social commentary from becoming over powering and keeps it a good viewing.  Have seen too many others where everything else (plot, dialog, action, cinematogrphy, etc) are sacrificed or ignored for the "message" to get across.


----------



## Dave (Jan 29, 2002)

Rollerball Ads Challenged 

Universal is protesting MGM's advertising for the upcoming Rollerball movie, which MGM touts as coming from the "filmmakers that brought you The Fast and the Furious and Die Hard," according to The Hollywood Reporter. In particular, Universal takes issue with the Furious claim.

John Pogue, one of the two credited writers on Rollerball, was an uncredited writer on Universal's Furious, for which he received an executive producer credit, the trade paper reported. Neither Furious producer Neal H. Moritz nor director Rob Cohen had anything to do with Rollerball. In high-level discussions between Universal and MGM last week, MGM refused to back off its advertising, the trade paper reported. Universal is currently exploring its legal options. Rollerball opens Feb. 8. 2002.


----------



## Dave (Jan 29, 2002)

*Re: Induvidual vs "the Corporation"*



> _Originally posted by Koala _
> *Primarily a social commentary : individual refusing to conform and knuckle under to the rich guys (the "Corporation.")  Somewhat typical for the time it was made.  Acted well by key characters.  Well done scenics and support facilities.
> *



I would disagree! If it were 'primarily a social commentary' and they had further explored this theme, then I think it would have been a much better film. The future that it predicted is even closer today due to globalisation.

Instead, I think that the film spends too much time on the Rollerball game, without adequate explanation of the rules, so it is a great spectacle, but totally confusing, and in the end, rather boring (you know that he won't die!).

I've heard that the new film (out Feb 8. 2002) spends even more time on the game, so that the social commentary bit is largely ignored. I think that's an even bigger mistake. Maybe the WWW fans will get up off the sofa and go, but I won't, and I predict a huge box-office flop. Definitely, a remake that was not needed.


----------



## Chilly (Jan 30, 2002)

*hey*

im scared to ask but isnt this the one with dean cain? if i remmerb there was a movie with him about a violent game and the name sounds familira.........


----------



## Dave (Jan 30, 2002)

No, it was James Caan, similar names, but you must know who they both are:

Dean Cain is Superman, and far to young to have been in it, James Caan was in lots of movies including 'Alien Nation'.

You must be thinking of this:
http://uk.imdb.com/Title?0158409

'Futuresport' -- I'd never heard of it, but it sounds like a rip-off.

was that it?


----------



## tokyogirl (Feb 7, 2002)

ok, first of all i think the first movie wasn't all that great.  now they're remaking it.  and they used the same director from the fast and the furious, and all the trailers look like it's the same thing.  don't get me wrong, i LOVED the fast and the furious, but this is supposed to be a different movie.  i'm just waiting for the scene where l.l. cool j and rebecca romaijn stamos are sitting at a stop light on their rollerblades saying, "when that light turns green, i'm goin".....


----------



## Dave (Feb 7, 2002)

There is going to be a court battle over that promotion! I forget the two film studios involved, but as you say they are trying to link it with the 'fast and furious' and it really looks like a desperate attempt at publicity to me.

I did like the original, but as I've already said it went to long on the game aspect. It also had a place in its own time (in 1973), I just don't see a reason for remaking it in 2002 and adding nothing extra. I won't be going to see it, too many other good movies out this year.


----------



## tokyogirl (Feb 8, 2002)

i know!  i'm struggling to keep up with all the ones i want to see.  it's not working.


----------



## Chilly (Feb 8, 2002)

*lol*

thats the one dave!
thanks for the clear up!im getting old.........lol

thats just sda
trying to link the remake with one of vins best movies! lol
desperate or wat?


----------



## tokyogirl (Feb 8, 2002)

they really really want the remake to do well.  even though most movie-goers knew fast and the furious would be a big hit, the critics predicted it would be a big flop.  no one would go see it.  but instead it was one of the summer's highest grossing movies.  They're kind of hoping they can recreate that same kind of success with rollerball.  but if there's anything the movie industry has taught us it's that you can't recreate an unexpected success.  it just doesn't work.  it's the same reason blair witch 2 failed so misserably.


----------



## Chilly (Feb 12, 2002)

*lol*

i guess so! 
i still havent seen vin in TF&TF.................


----------



## tokyogirl (Feb 14, 2002)

you're really missing out.  i think it was the first movie i saw him in.


----------



## Chilly (Feb 17, 2002)

*.*

 not fair

i think wed better get bak on topic,,........dave is gone!!!!!!i think its me drooling over vin!


----------



## Dave (Feb 17, 2002)

I haven't gone!

But what is there to say about a film I'm probably not going to see?  There are already movies I want to see which I haven't managed yet -- Vanilla Sky, Just Visiting.

The original Rollerball was a mould-breaker when it first came out, so I like it for that. But it doesn't stand the test of time IMHO.

Drooling over Vin -- wel no, I'm not likely to be doing that either.


----------



## tokyogirl (Feb 18, 2002)

well you should be


----------



## rde (Feb 18, 2002)

Selected quotes:
Not another remake! ... There are already movies I want to see which I haven't managed yet -- Vanilla Sky, Just Visiting.

S******. Both are remakes y'know. I'm a big fan of Les Visiteurs, and while I haven't seen Abre los Ojos, those who have seem to think highly of it.


----------



## rde (Feb 18, 2002)

WTF? I didn't put any asterisks in there... and it wasn't a rude word (by any standards).


----------



## Dave (Feb 18, 2002)

I knew Just Visiting was a remake, but I didn't know Vanilla Sky was too. Planet of the Apes, Matrix 2, Star Wars, Star Trek X, Time Machine, Farenheit 451. . . . can't they think of anything original then?


----------



## tokyogirl (Feb 19, 2002)

no.  i mean, when you think about it, almost every movie you see takes from another one.  mission impossible 2 was basically a remake of the 1946 Hitchcock film Notorious, except with better special effects.  i mean take this plot: two people meet.  one is naratically planned, sensible and strait.  the other is carefree, reckless, and kind of on the crooked side.  they resent each other at first, but end up needing each other in the end.  can you guess which movie it is?


----------



## Chilly (Feb 19, 2002)

*lol*

phew dave cam bak!!!!!!!!!!!!

vin rules!!!!!!!

this movie was sorta bad.........oh wait ,...........i havent seen it! lol


----------



## rde (Feb 19, 2002)

C'mon. That's every buddy movie ever made. I've no idea which one you're talking about, but whatever it is, it's a terrible movie.


----------



## tokyogirl (Feb 19, 2002)

it's the basic plot for every buddy movie, or every 'cute meet' movie ever made.  a 'cute meet' movie is one where the 2 main characters meet, are complete opposites and hate each other, but end up falling in love.  the one i was talking about was french kiss with meg ryan and kevin kline, but it's really the basic plot to literally thousands of movies.


----------



## Dave (Apr 10, 2002)

This was on TV again last week, and I watched half of it, before I fell asleep. I have to say that there was much more of the social commentary than had I remembered.

But there was just references to 'The Corporate Wars' without any explanation.

The Library scene I had forgotten, and that is pretty poignant.


----------



## Starbeast (May 9, 2011)

Pretty good film still


----------



## Dave (Apr 24, 2012)

I just watched it again, and funny how I find things I never saw before:-

First off, for a film set in 2018  the computers with magnetic tape storage and punched cards just don't do it any more, but then most of the technology looks off - they have tried to make the TVs look like flat screens but you can see the edges of the cathode ray tubes. And why do they all have three smaller screens along the top? An attempt to simulate 3D?

Secondly, why are there no women executives or Rollerball players? Even back in 1973 women were not as sidelined as they are portrayed here. They are completely disposable. They have no value except as sexual objects to hang on the arm of an executive or player. I don't know what the Corporate Wars were, but they were not good for women.

Lastly, the end is rubbish. What happens next? Does the Global Conspiracy now fall apart. Is there a popular revolution against the Corporations. Rollerball cannot continue, or can it? Why don't (didn't) they just quietly assassinate Jonathan E? What could possibly be worse that him being the only player left?


----------

