Directed by John McTiernan ("Die Hard").
Written by Larry Ferguson and John Pogue. Based on the 1975
film of the same name.
Starring Chris Klein, LL Cool J, Rebecca Romijn-Stamos and Jean
Release Year: 2002
Review Date: 2/11/02
This film was supposed to be released last
August, but the studio that released it decided it would be better
if they released in February. Why would this be better? Because
this film sucks, too. Directed by the usually reliable John
McTiernan ("Predator", "Die Hard",
"The Thomas Crown Affair"
remake), "Rollerball" is a futuristic action film set in a world
where a brand new sport, the creatively-named Rollerball, is drawing
the biggest TV audience in the world. How, you ask? With corrupt
officials (including Jean Reno, taking a break from doing *good*
films like "Ronin") and bankable, attractive stars (including Chris
Klein, LL Cool J, and Rebecca Romijn-Stamos), this sport seems like
a home run. Until the sport's stars figure out the methods behind
"Rollerball" is incredibly boring, given the
amount of overediting, loud music, and louder hitting in the sport's
rollerskating arenas. Most important, though, is that LL isn't
given nearly enough to do. Look, let's be honest: the guy's name
is motherfuckin' Ladies Love Cool James. So, make sure you put him
in enough scenes so that the ladies can find a way to love him!
Take his shirt off, put him in an in-movie rap video, have him hum
"Phenomenon" while he is putting on his skates...anything! Because
that way, we get to see more hot women parading around him, and much
like the women in San Francisco, "Rollerball" features women that
are only so-so. This is where a film like "The Fast and the
Furious" is such great fun, because it doesn't hide the fact that it
is shameless entertainment...and, as such, provides plenty of eye
candy for dudes like me. Jeez....
Comments? Drop me a line at
Bellview Rating System:
"Opening Weekend": This is
the highest rating a movie can receive. Reserved for movies that
exhibit the highest level of acting, plot, character development,
setting...or Salma Hayek. Not necessarily in that order.
"$X.XX Show": This price
changes each year due to the inflation of movie prices; currently,
it is the $9.50 Show. While not technically perfect, this is a
movie that will still entertain you at a very high level.
"Undercover Brother" falls into this category; it's no "Casablanca",
but you'll have a great time watching. The $9.50 Show won't win any
Oscars, but you'll be quoting lines from the thing for ages (see
"Matinee": An average movie
that merits no more than a $6.50 viewing at your local theater.
Seeing it for less than $9.50 will make you feel a lot better about
yourself. A movie like "Blue Crush" fits this category; you leave
the theater saying "That wasn't too bad...man, did you see that
Lakers game last night?"
"Rental": This rating
indicates a movie that you see in the previews and say to your
friend, "I'll be sure to miss that one." Mostly forgettable, you
couldn't lose too much by going to Hollywood Video and paying $3 to
watch it with your sig other, but you would only do that if the
video store was out of copies of "Ronin." If you can, see this
movie for free. This is what your TV Guide would give "one and a
"Hard Vice": This rating is
the bottom of the barrel. A movie that only six other human beings
have witnessed, this is the worst movie I have ever seen. A Shannon
Tweed "thriller," it is so bad as to be funny during almost every
one of its 84 minutes, and includes the worst ending ever put into a
movie. Marginally worse than "Cabin Boy", "The Avengers" or
"Leonard, Part 6", this rating means that you should avoid this
movie at all costs, or no costs, EVEN IF YOU CAN SEE IT FOR FREE!
(Warning: strong profanity will be used in all reviews of "Hard