Differences between Rollerball (1975) & (2002). - Science Fiction Fantasy Chronicles: forums

Dave · 3rd July 2002, 01:07 PM

Having read some reviews (all bad) on the new Rollerball (2002) I doubt I'll be seeing it. It sounds as though they have ruined a reasonable idea, and turned it into "Starlight Express". Even a MGM executive is quoted as saying "It sucks..."

The original film wasn't a great film, but it did make a political statement about Corporate power, and about aggressive anti-social behaviour in society. Statements that many films have followed and copied since. The year was 2018 (43 years in the future.) There is no crime and there are no more wars. Corporations are now the leaders of the world. The film, and the short story it was based on (Roller Ball by William Harrison in Esquire magazine) extrapolated the violent tendancies in 1970's society (before the advent of WWF wrestling and video console games) into the future.

The new version sidelines any political statements for more amazing rollerblading stunts than plot. No mention of the Corporate Wars is made now; it is set in 2005 (why would such a violent game be developed and allowed in only 3 years from now?) The films explains this by Rollerball not yet being a worldwide phenomenon, but something that's popular in Turkey and Kazakhstan, and expanding elsewhere. Jonathan E is now Jonathan Cross. He is new to the game, not a 10 year veteran, recruited by a Russian Entrepreneur to play Rollerball, instead of being an employee of the Energy Corporation.

In a complete reverse of the story; although audiences and money men love him, he WANTS to get out of the game because the stakes are being raised for more blood and guts. In the original, the game was an unwinable digression for the masses that demonstrated the futility of individuality. It had him trying to stay in the game, while the stakes were being raised in an attempt to force him to retire, or to kill him off, because he had become greater than the game itself.

Did anyone involved in this even understand the original films premises?

Tabitha · 12th July 2002, 01:21 AM

Doesn't sound promising! The remake has just come out on DVD over here in Canada, and as i can barely remember the original film I was thinking of renting them both, not sure which order to watch them in though. I will post my thoughts once I can make a comparison.

Tabitha · 15th July 2002, 01:06 AM

I have just watched the 1975 version and currently have the remake on in the background. I have to say that even though it is only about 30 minutes in, it seems to be the biggest load of pants.
Apparently it tested poorly and was re-edited by the director. I dread to imagine how it could have been any worse

The game of rollerball is described as "sports entertainment" in the remake, and has many parallels with that other "sports entertainment" in the real world, wrestling. This is made even clearer with cameos from prominent WWE celebrities. In fact the entire purpose of the sport in the remake seems to be exactly like that of wrestling, just a little bit more violent.

There are very few similarities between the 1975 version and the 2002 version as far as I can tell. The use of corporate advertising and the basic idea behind the game (they even explain the rules in the the remake!), but beyond that they have little in common.

3rd July 2002, 01:07 PM	#1 (permalink)
Dave Wherever I Am, I'm There Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Greater London Posts: 11,429	Differences between Rollerball (1975) & (2002). Having read some reviews (all bad) on the new Rollerball (2002) I doubt I'll be seeing it. It sounds as though they have ruined a reasonable idea, and turned it into "Starlight Express". Even a MGM executive is quoted as saying "It sucks..." The original film wasn't a great film, but it did make a political statement about Corporate power, and about aggressive anti-social behaviour in society. Statements that many films have followed and copied since. The year was 2018 (43 years in the future.) There is no crime and there are no more wars. Corporations are now the leaders of the world. The film, and the short story it was based on (Roller Ball by William Harrison in Esquire magazine) extrapolated the violent tendancies in 1970's society (before the advent of WWF wrestling and video console games) into the future. The new version sidelines any political statements for more amazing rollerblading stunts than plot. No mention of the Corporate Wars is made now; it is set in 2005 (why would such a violent game be developed and allowed in only 3 years from now?) The films explains this by Rollerball not yet being a worldwide phenomenon, but something that's popular in Turkey and Kazakhstan, and expanding elsewhere. Jonathan E is now Jonathan Cross. He is new to the game, not a 10 year veteran, recruited by a Russian Entrepreneur to play Rollerball, instead of being an employee of the Energy Corporation. In a complete reverse of the story; although audiences and money men love him, he WANTS to get out of the game because the stakes are being raised for more blood and guts. In the original, the game was an unwinable digression for the masses that demonstrated the futility of individuality. It had him trying to stay in the game, while the stakes were being raised in an attempt to force him to retire, or to kill him off, because he had become greater than the game itself. Did anyone involved in this even understand the original films premises?

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

12th July 2002, 01:21 AM	#2 (permalink)
Tabitha Save Angel! Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Edinburgh Posts: 3,638	Doesn't sound promising! The remake has just come out on DVD over here in Canada, and as i can barely remember the original film I was thinking of renting them both, not sure which order to watch them in though. I will post my thoughts once I can make a comparison.

15th July 2002, 01:06 AM	#3 (permalink)
Tabitha Save Angel! Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Edinburgh Posts: 3,638	I have just watched the 1975 version and currently have the remake on in the background. I have to say that even though it is only about 30 minutes in, it seems to be the biggest load of pants. Apparently it tested poorly and was re-edited by the director. I dread to imagine how it could have been any worse The game of rollerball is described as "sports entertainment" in the remake, and has many parallels with that other "sports entertainment" in the real world, wrestling. This is made even clearer with cameos from prominent WWE celebrities. In fact the entire purpose of the sport in the remake seems to be exactly like that of wrestling, just a little bit more violent. There are very few similarities between the 1975 version and the 2002 version as far as I can tell. The use of corporate advertising and the basic idea behind the game (they even explain the rules in the the remake!), but beyond that they have little in common.