Ain't It Cool News: The best in movie, TV, DVD, and comic book news.

ReShoots On ROLLERBALL

Fuck this. Give me Series 7 by Jungle-face-jake	Jul 18th, 2001 11:18:22 AM
Since i will never see this on the big screen, does anyone know when it will be released on video/DVD? I've heard mixed things on Series 7, but no one makes it out to be the shitstorm that this Rollerball re-make. It was a mistake to cast LL Cool J when you know they should have gotten Ice-T
The only thing that can get asses in seats now . . . by RenoNevada2000	Jul 18th, 2001 11:20:05 AM
. . . Is to just release this film under a different title. By now, even the general public is getting a malodorous whiff of the turd that is "Rollerball" and is planning on cleaning the groat in their bathtubs whatever weekend this stinkburger opens. Normally, I try to reserve judgement on a film that has bad buzz untill I get to see it myself, but with wastes of celluloid like Battlefield:Earth and Lucky Numbers still swimming around in my noggin, its hard to remain objective anymore. . . SIGH How much longer until Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back?
WHO will pay to see this? by brianim8	Jul 18th, 2001 11:20:46 AM
I'd be willing to bet that the same audience that pays to see Ghosts of Mars will plop down their loot to view this steaming pile of dung.
I said it before and I'm gonna say it again! by Uncle Jay	Jul 18th, 2001 11:38:09 AM
THIS MOVIE IS GONNA SUCK!!! My only question is, didn't they realize this when it was pitched as an idea to the studio? "Let's remake 'Rollerball'", you gotta be fuckin' kidding me. Then, they cast Chris Klein and that awful LL Cool J? There's no way in hell, that they can top the genius James Caan and John Beck gave us! And John McTiernan.....he better get his shit together, because this is gonna make his "Medicine Man" and "Last Action Hero" look like "Citizen Kane" and "The Godfather". Burn the film now!
just saw the original... by gyalwa	Jul 18th, 2001 11:43:09 AM
and if ever a film cried out for a remake it's this one. One of the worst executions of a cool concept ever. This is a totally justified remake, unlike Planet of the Apes. However bad this one may be, it can't possibly be worse than the mumbling, incoherent, dull, lifeless original (although Caan was great). If I was the screenwriter I would be very, very grateful.
Jungle-face-jake by L.B. Jefferies	Jul 18th, 2001 12:29:59 PM
Considering that I'm probably the only person outside of the cast and crew that saw Series 7 in the theatres, I gotta tell you, it's one of the best movies I've seen this year. Even though it was produced before Survivor even hit the air, the best way to describe it is that it is to Survivor what "This is Spinal Tap" is to Black Sabbath. Its humor isn't as broad as Spinal Tap; it plays itself out as a knowing satire the whole way through ('cause that's what it is) and considering that reality shows are all the rage these days, this movie should've been picked up on. I hope that it was a lack of money that kept this one from a wide release because there's no other excuse; it was as timely a tie-in to TV as 'Cast Away' was and was even more "real-feeling" than... well, any mockumentary made in recent years. And sorry to say that there's no word on the DVD release as far as I know... let's hope they remember that it's out there. Just keep looking for it; it's more than worth it. But since this is a Rollerball talk back, let me just say that cutting out RR-S' frontal to increase interest in it is like taking the homo-erotic aspect out of 'Rocky Horror' to make it more palatable for Mr. and Mrs. John Q. Public... exactly.
Can I get a signed affidavit that states... by L.B. Jefferies	Jul 18th, 2001 12:54:56 PM
that the "Last Action Hero" playa-hating will stop?!!! It was a good movie! All the "stupid," "cheesy" stuff that went down in that movie... it was intentional... to make fun of stuff like that. And who better than Mctiernan to direct it? The guy who made 2 of the 3 Seminal Big Balls Action Flicks of the 80s (Die Hard and Predator... the other is Rambo). Leo the Fart? An animated cat? The Lethal Weapon saxophone riff when the house blew up? Come on! Anyway... just had to get that off my chest.
Actually, releasing it as PG13 may be the wisest thing the studi by Huneybee	Jul 18th, 2001 01:08:04 PM
can do to earn a decent return on this movie. By cutting the full frontal and the gore and marketing it to all the kids who have NOT seen the original and have no idea that this IS a remake, they could probably do well enough in the money department. Add in merchandise sales and a Mickey D's marketing campaign, I bet it would work. I know all of you fanboys have been waiting for that full frontal of Rebecca but I bet it will wind up on the internet anyhow...Hell, for all I know it might be there already! I'm just speaking about this from a business angle because it looks pretty bleak right now. Even if opening week-end is good, it will most likely plummet afterwards ...
Bass Ackwards by Rogman	Jul 18th, 2001 01:27:35 PM
Should be filming more gore, more ultra-violence, more sex, more nudity. Then get some holier-than-thou newspaper columnist to say, "the general public must be protected from this filth"...and you've got a sure fire box-office smash on your hands. Result!
Crying out for remake?!? by Dr. Channard	Jul 18th, 2001 01:46:49 PM
Ah, kids....sigh....whattya gonna to do with 'em? Yeah, yeah, the original is a lot of bell-bottomed pantsuits with zippers down to the navel, I'll give ya that. But the miracle of the original is in how prescient it was. We're over halfway to the world that movie was about - a LOT closer than "2001". The corporate takeover is well underway, and THAT'S the underlying theme of the movie. The remake, well, as far as I can tell, it's about some kind of game, this time with women, and a lot of noise, but plot? Heyyyyy, this is the 21st century, we don't neeeeeeed no steeeeeekin' plots!!
MGM, it was nice knowing you. by The Gline	Jul 18th, 2001 02:13:57 PM
MGM has criminally mismanaged everything it's gotten its hands on, except maybe the Bond franchise -- and even that's getting stale. Lookit: They tried to appeal to the "youth" market with "Mod Squad" (most of the kids the movie was marketed at didn't even know about the damn TV series); that failed. They're now trying to get the older SF aficionado crowd, it seems, with "Rollerball", and they're screwing that up horribly too. MGM needs to have a cleaning of house.
WOOHOO! Cant wait for "Jeepers Creepers" to come out on DVD... by Mayhem Ensues	Jul 18th, 2001 02:19:42 PM
...but I doubt they could edit THAT down to a PG-13 huh?
Amen, gyalwa by wash	Jul 18th, 2001 02:45:30 PM
If there ever was an overrateted film (besides Magnolia), then it would be ther orginal Rollerball. What a freakin' yawnfest.
Wouldn't it be better if.... by Houmatt00	Jul 18th, 2001 02:45:43 PM
The money was used to help promote the next James Bond film? I mean, come on, should MGM REALLY promote a film written directed by a convicted child molester? Why are they even distributing the piece of shit anyway? AND BY THE HARRY, WHY THE SILENCE ON THIS? IS IT BECAUSE YOU DON'T WANT TO MAKE IT LOOK LIKE YOU ARE SUPPORTING PEDOPHILES? PEOPLE ARE ALREADY LOOKING FOR EXCUSES TO SLAM THIS SITE. DON'T GIVE THEM ANOTHER ONE. DISTANCE YOURSELF FROM THIS FILM NOW!
I want to see Rebecca full frontal!!!! by Darth Silent	Jul 18th, 2001 02:54:00 PM
Hey, without this scene inn there is no reason to watch this movie.
Harry, you compromised prick by AssEyes	Jul 18th, 2001 05:11:47 PM
Your "review" of what you ate, er, Rollerball just made me think you wanted to see the original again. Your taste is questionable at best. Quit trying to cram it down our throats!
Rollerball is this year's Supernova by Projectordust	Jul 18th, 2001 07:03:09 PM
I've said it before and I said it again.
MY THOUGHTS: "Rollerball" --->NO! ......."Rollergirl"---> YES!.. by Mayhem Ensues	Jul 18th, 2001 07:05:18 PM
Wasnt Rebecca Romijn-Stamos's "full frontal nudity" and the "ultra-violence" the only redeeming qualities this movie had going for it? Get rid of those and whats the point?
Rollerball 2001 by RaelofNY	Jul 18th, 2001 07:17:56 PM
When it was announced that John Mctiernan was directing a remake of Rollerball I had great hopes for it. I'm still a fan of Norman Jewison's film, but upon viewing it a couple of years ago, I thought a new version could be done. The original is all but a classic, but it is dated in some ways, and it lags too much in spots. The idea behind it is gripping and dead on. Jewison's commentary on the DVD is worth listening to in regards to that. With 25 plus years of hindsight, a take on a future society, mega corporations and professional sports it has great potential for today's film audience. Judging from all reports and Harry's sneak peak, Mctiernan totally missed the boat and has a complete disaster on his hands. Tis a shame, I loved Mctiernan's take on The Thomas Crown Affair (ironically both originals directed by Jewison) It seems that this new version is a wretched attempt at capturing and exploiting the currant extreme sports angle.. in other words the antithesis of the original. It's too bad that this upcoming mess can't be shelved (ala The Fantastic Four) and get this film made the right way. Paul Verhoeven would have been a great choice to remake Rollerball for the 21st century.
Fire these idiot MGM dudes out of a big circus cannon into the o by Bari Umenema	Jul 18th, 2001 07:18:06 PM
And let them be eaten by a hungry great white shark. But I did enjoy Legally Blonde as did my girlfriend so props to them for that at least. Problem with Roller Boogie Ball is Chris Klein. Reshoot his part entirely and maybe this thing could work. Then again, maybe it should just go straight to video in time for Christmas. They'd save money and also avoid embarrassing themselves again with another floperoo.
Yay! Blurred gender roles! by Chesty LaRue	Jul 19th, 2001 07:51:29 AM
Chris Klein's problem is that he isn't effeminate enough. Get Moby's ass in there, or Emo Philips, David Spade- or even Prince! And everyone has full frontal all the time on rollerskates! Uhhhh....too excited....must lie down.
Rollerball NYC reshoots by optimist008	Jul 19th, 2001 10:27:42 AM
I work as a film extra and would deeply appreciate any further info on the Rollerball reshoots--how many days, where, what type of scenes, etc. Thank You in advance. Tom e-mail: optimist008@yahoo.com
shit-for-brains MGM by football	Jul 19th, 2001 03:14:30 PM
I don't mind a remake if it can be improved on, but there was really no point in trying with Rollerball. The orginal had its moments, but it never really went anywhere. I agree that Paul Verhoeven would've been ideal, surely a missed opportunity by some pea-brained execs. Maybe we're best left with what might have been. The problem is in the casting: Chris Klien being too effeminate. Well, surely the same could be said of POTA's "bland-effeminate" Marky Mark. He might be yoof, but he's no modern day Chuck for christsake!! And there lies the problem: too many of today's actors are just pretty-boy pin-ups with little in the physical stakes. That's why we go nuts when a gravel-voiced Van Deisel comes along. Trouble is all the studios are trying to ape the success of Titanic. Get a baby-faced male in the lead and you're guaranteed to get those cultureless kids out there parting with their well-earned drug money on the next big hype. From what I've read, I think POTA's will look great, but be formula driven rather than original story. In other words a shabby vehicle to sell a few toys and posters of Marky Mark in his torn space suit. I hope I'm wrong and the film delivers, but part of me has seen what the studios have done to the Golden Classics far too recently to be comforted. That aside, I look forward to Spiderman (trailer looks great) and Sam Mendes/Hanks flick. And of course, LOTR. Nuff said.
Why are remakes necessary? by DarrylRevok	Jul 20th, 2001 12:37:41 AM
As William Goldman wrote in his book, "Which Lie Did I Tell?", all remakes and sequels are solely about the money(He cites George Lucas as an example). There is absolutely no creative thought among studio executives, and there is none among the movie-going public, either. The people that pay to see this shit are just as guilty as the fucks that dream up a "re-thinking" of Rollerball. Hence, Rollerball 2001 has been made(with the mannequin Chris Klein), because the powers that be know you sheep will pay to see it(Harry will get flown into another private screening and rave about it next time around) even if the original was boring, too. It's not surprising, considering we also have the worst year of movies I can remember(Memento, AI, and Chopper excluded). There really are people who can say with a straight face that they loved Swordfish, Pearl Harbor, Tomb Raider, and The Mummy Returns? How our standards have dropped, right through the floor. The worst part is, ANY movie matters here at AICN, no matter how ridiculous or undeserving it is(see The Scooby Doo Movie). C'mon, Harry, turn this ship around.
test by Huneybee	Jul 20th, 2001 02:41:22 AM

To hell with a test and your nudity... by Huneybee	Jul 20th, 2001 02:43:05 AM
Okay, I know I don't know a lot about movies but I do know business and I still say that this movie can make a lot of money. Actually, it can make a lot of money if marketed correctly. You fanboys are saying add more gore and show the nudity...WRONG you sorry degenerates! Cut all that out, focus on the "rollerball", and make every 9-14 year old want to be the person in the movie. You may lose the blood and guts corps but you will gain all the inline skaters and those shoe skater people (yes, too old to know what they are called) and if you edit it correctly, you could build an entire franchise here. Including an animated series. ____A business minded Bee
McT's problems.... by CDBates	Jul 20th, 2001 11:01:06 AM
Easy solution to avoid things like Rollerball. Just don
Rollerball marketing by bluewolf	Jul 21st, 2001 08:20:10 AM
Umm, if this film is done badly, which unfortunately a lot of them have been recently, then the only saving grace would be the nudity of RRS. A supermodel nude, can all you naysayers say Swordfish? I mean that movie, in my opinion, sucked! The only thing that made it worthwhile was Halle Berry, Hugh Jackman is always cool, but he didn't have anything to work with. That topless scene and the hype about it added major bucks to the film's box office moola. Sure many people may not know the original Rollerball, but if a movie is bad, it's gonna be bad if anyone knows it's a remake or not. Plenty of movies have catered to PG-13 audiences and they still did poorly. Without that pool scene by Phoebe Cates in Fast Times, do you think as many people would be interested in the film? Not saying that nudity is everything, but if it helps, why not?

Talkbacks

ReShoots On ROLLERBALL

User login

Quick Talkback

Talkbacks