Rollerball Review
by Tim Wick
I knew this film was going to stink before I walked in to the theatre. I
had read tons of advance word that the film was incomprehensible (thank you
Aint-it-cool-news) and amateurish. I knew the film had been pulled from a
summer 2001 release date to a February 2002 release date - a sure indication
the studio had no confidence in the project. I knew that it's rating on
rottentomates.com was a dismal 3% - worse than Glitter. I had been told
by friends who saw the film Friday night that it was worse than I could
possibly imagine.
I knew all of this and I went anyway. Why?
Because I can't resist a compelling train wreck. Also because I think there
is a lot to learn about good film by watching bad film. When I watched
Jurassic Park III last year, I was really dissatisfied with the film. A
few days later, I watched Jurassic Park and the comparison of the
disappointing film to the strong film really helped me understand why
Jurassic Park III was a let down. In Rollerball you can see how a movie
can be made worse by a director, by an editor and by a studio. You can see
everything that is wrong with many of the films being produced today.
Not that I am suggesting you waste your money on this film for an education.
I'm just telling you why I did.
Rollerball tells a story that was told far better (in a relative sense) in
The Running Man. A violent sport is used to placate the masses so they
are blind to all the injustice and tyranny around them. The film takes
place in an Easter European break out republic that certainly had a name -
although I couldn't tell you what that name might be. In his review, Roger
Ebert called it many different things but my favorite is "Podunkistan."
But that location is really arbitrary. Face it, we have a TV viewing public
that is gobbling up shows like Temptation Island, Fear Factor and
Professional Wrestling. Is it so hard to imagine that a violent pseudo
sport could capture our imagination? Is it so hard to imagine that as our
country is engulfed in a war, the government would look to keep us focused
on just about anything else? I don't care what anyone believes about the
war on terror by the United States. My point here is not weather that war
is right or wrong, but on the fact that by keeping us focused on the war,
our politicians can make other decisions we might not agree with if we were
actually paying attention.
Given that we see these things happening right in front of us, this movie
has the chance to be rather topical and relevant.
Instead, it is an incoherent mess.
The film begins with Chris Klein, who has rocketed to fame on the strength
of American Pie and American Pie II engaging in a street luge race down
the hills of San Francisco. His hairdo and expression look so much like
Keanu Reeves in The Matrix that I will henceforth refer to him as Neo.
Neo is engaging in this race for money - we think - and it is apparently
illegal. He wins (sorry if I gave anything away) and is picked up by his
friend LL Cool J before the cops can catch him. J - or should I call him LL
- is making serious money doing something we assume to be Rollerball given
the title of the movie and he encourages Neo to join him. I will refer to
Mr. Cool as Dead Meat from here on in because there is never any doubt
that he will not live to see the final reel.
So Neo and Dead Meat go to Podunkistan (thanks, Roger) to become Rollerball
stars. What follows is a twenty minute sequence intended to introduce us to
the game of Rollerball and here is where our film education begins.
Who are these people? What are they doing? I know Neo and Dead Meat but the
rest of the team are a bunch of no name characters that I can never care
about. The editing and direction leave little doubt that the only people
less aware of the game rules than the players are the people who wrote the
film. Did I say write? That wording was generous. I would suggest this
script sprang fourth from the belly of it's host.
This sequence, which could only be twenty minutes long because the film
needed some padding, told me nothing about the game. There are a certain
number of people on each team. A couple of them are on motorcycles. The
goal is to take a ball and hold on to it while the other team is trying to
beat the crap out of you. After a while, you can score by throwing the
ball at a scoring thingamajig. The crowd roars and it starts all over. The
whole time there are quick cuts and blurred shots to give you the idea that
the game moves really really really really really really fast!!!!!!!!
The central point of ANY sports movie is to make sure the audience
understands the sport. How the heck am I supposed to get excited about the
game when I don't know the score and I don't really know why any specific
player is important? I know Neo is important because he doesn't wear pads,
doesn't fasten the chin strap on his helmet and wears a shirt with the
Statue of Liberty on it because he is from America. So is Dead Meat but
he's going to die so why waste a good Statue of Liberty Shirt on him?
This film raises a lot of important questions such as:
Why edit out Rebecca Romijn-Stamos' naked chest just to get a PG-13 rating
when this is in no way a film 13 years olds should be watching given how
much it glorifies violence?
If you are a criminal mastermind who brags about controlling the men who
control government and you want to kill Neo, would YOU trade his girlfriend
to the opposing team so she could be in the locker room when you make your
diabolical plan?
If you were directing an action movie, would you shoot a ten minute action
sequence with night vision cameras, giving the whole thing a grainy green
look for no discernable reason? Discuss.
How, exactly, can an instant global rating skyrocket every time someone is
killed? This assumes all potential viewers across the world become
instantly aware something violent happened and change channels to watch the
replay.
As a corollary - after they watch the replay, why do they continue to watch?
Are they hoping it will happen again?
How, exactly, did Chris Klein manage to exhibit less emotional range than
Keanu Reeves? "Whoa" indeed.
If you were Rebecca Romijn Stamos, would you go for Chris Klein? I didn't
think so.
Rollerball is every bit as bad as you have heard. The movie tries to
moralize about the responsibilities of the mass entertainment industry, but
it does so by showing action sequences that are little more than an excuse
to watch people beaten to a pulp over and over again. The ultimate
solution, we learn, is for the proletariat to rise up and beat the crap out
of the bourgeoisie. Perhaps this message is true, but is sure isn't very
encouraging.
|
