The premise makes no sense - Batoru rowaiaru (2000) Discussion

[–] The_Zig 10 years ago

Do they explain this?

Explain it? Yes.
Explain it well? ... 

Personally I think the film did a fairly good job of skipping over the premise. The more you focus explaining the premise, the more obvious it is that the premise is flimsy. Even rabid dictatorships wouldn't have a random lottery draw like this - what's the point of supporting The Party if your kids could be slaughtered just the same as the spawn of all these traitorous unpatriotic dogs huddling in the streets.
The novel and manga waste a lot of pages proving that this premise doesn't really work convincingly.

reply

[–] MrZAP 10 years ago

To me this is a serious problem for the film. If you don't have a believable premise, then everything else falls apart. You need a solid foundation for anything else to make sense. This doesn't mean aspects of the story aren't interesting and compelling when looked at individually, and it doesn't mean you can't feel sympathy for the characters, but for me all of those things are tainted by the fact that it just doesn't make sense for any of it to be happening in the first place. That's not something I can get over.

You're a totalitarian regime who needs to keep the populace under control. And you think "Hm... well, our youth aren't toeing the line. We should do something about that. I guess death matches are the logical course of action!" No. None of it makes sense. Random selection doesn't make sense if you're trying to punish delinquents, and WILL foster feelings of ill-will. Are you trying to turn the "winner" into a productive member of society? That doesn't seem cost-effective. As it is the ones most likely to win are the ones who are already more violent and sociopathic, and will be harder to control. The ones who will grow up to be future leaders probably aren't among that group... you're killing off potential assets. Well, I guess it isn't about the individual classes at all. It's to set an example, right? Except this law doesn't seem terribly well-known. Is it even public? And once again, killing off people's kids will probably make them afraid, sure, but it will likely be a secondary reaction after anger. I guess the government can just kill dissenters, but then what's the point of having the BR act at all? And after a point this will cause enough ill-will that the regime won't be able to handle it... and a point in time will come that killing people will become economically unviable, as well.

Even if you accept the premise behind why it's done, how it's handled is still ridiculous? Randomized weapons for "fairness"? I think you're looking for a different word, like "lopsidedness". Not that they really care who wins, of course, or about being fair, but at this point there's no point in putting up a show about it. And when the game is over, all of the troops just leave the island early? That sounds sloppy. All kinds of things could happen that they don't take into account (case in point: two unknowns escape on a boat). Admittedly these are nit-picky, but it just helps illustrate that the entire thing isn't really well thought out.

It's an interesting premise, sure. But it completely breaks willing suspension of disbelief, at least for me. It's a shame because I love dystopian fiction when it's done well, since it always makes me think. But for it to work you need to make it believable, and you need to use realistic psychology.

I REALLY want to like the film. I don't deny it has an interesting allure. But I can't accept it as anything other than a farcical excuse for random violence with such a weak premise. I don't think that's what the story was supposed to be.

reply

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Towelie_Towel (1773) a year ago

I agree with your point.
I had to rate the movie 1 or 2 points lower because the premise is pure nonsense.
Works like the The Squid Game made it work better... Desperate people in an underground game that everyone participates willingly.

But the movie, after the premise, is still interesting and cool.
So it's still a good movie.

reply

[–] ragingdemon 10 years ago

The winners ended up back in the game at a later date anyway. The only way to escape was suicide, die in the game or flee the country.

reply

[–] Mr-mojo-risin 9 years ago

No.

reply

[–] mevmijaumau 10 years ago

This isn't the type of film you should look for realism in. I guess you could explain this by saying the future government is completely clueless and incompetent. But really, I don't think the film focuses on establishing a detailed portrait of dystopian Japan, and that's okay.

reply

[–] Robert_222 9 years ago

It really doesn't matter who the winner is at all. The point is, the government hates young people and this is just a way to start getting rid of them....letting them just kill each other off.

reply

[–] ColinChapman 9 years ago

Actually it does make sense if you don't try to look too far into it and superimpose some Hunger Games dystopia into it.
In Battle Royale NONE of the students actually know there even is a thing called Battle Royale or that they can be chosen for it by virtue of being a particularly bad class full of immoral delinquents. BR is actually devised as a *test* by the Japanese government to study the effects on totally unprepared young people suddenly thrown into a game. It is NOT some political game in order to strike fear into people all over the nation and force them to comply. I can't believe you don't understand this. "Why not just execute the class as an example to the other students in the nation? Same chilling effect, less risk to the regime, and it's a lot easier. " Because the Japan of BR is NOT the same as Panem in the Hunger Games, get it? It's not a wealthy pyramid type dictatorship and economy where propaganda works like in Nazi Germany.

It's also clear only a selected few in this semi-dictatorship - which apparently has little *real* control over the minds of the youth as it is implied Japan is economically bankrupt and in a cultural decline - know about the existance of Battle Royale. Much like "The Cabin in the Woods" it's an illegal activity known only to the people involved in it. Is is NOT some gladiator game devised to strike fear into people as it is forced viewing by everybody in Panem.

Stop looking at Battle Royale with Hunger Games eyes. The Japan of BR conducts illegal research and devised the BR program much like the government of Great Britain tested the Ludovico Technique in A Clockwork Orange. Neither Alex nor most of the people have any idea what this will EVENTUALLY be used to. Brainwashing people into becoming incapable of using force against their oppressors - hence why Alex the psychopath was the ideal test person.

reply

[–] NickiDrea 9 years ago

1. In the book the students did know about Battle Royale, they saw it in news broadcasts and even had classmates lose family or friends in the fighting. Chapter three of the book starts out with "every junior high school student in the Republic of Greater East Asia knew what the Program was. It was even covered in school textbooks from the fourth grade on." I figure the movie made them clueless about the program to cut down on time and to make the situation more shocking.

2. The classes are chosen to fight by random lottery and it doesn't matter if it's a class of delinquents or a class of perfect kids. Being particularly good or bad makes no difference in your class' chances of being selected.

3. The purpose of Battle Royale is not to test people by throwing them into an unknown game. The movie specified that life is a game, and the point is to see if you are willing to fight to survive under any circumstances. Meaning, do you value your life enough to do whatever it takes to stay alive? The book has some weird non-explanation (the "April Speech") about how the Program is more like a draft and that it presumably exists to protect the country by showing other nations how willing people are to fight and survive at all costs, even young people.

That hexagon-face bitch, she's so passive-aggressive.

-SpencerFan

reply

[–] movie_nazi 8 years ago

It's also clear only a selected few in this semi-dictatorship - which apparently has little *real* control over the minds of the youth as it is implied Japan is economically bankrupt and in a cultural decline - know about the existance of Battle Royale. Much like "The Cabin in the Woods" it's an illegal activity known only to the people involved in it. Is is NOT some gladiator game devised to strike fear into people as it is forced viewing by everybody in Panem.

What are you talking about? The film starts off with a media circus covering the winner. EVERYONE knew about it.

My Vote history: http://www.imdb.com/user/ur1914996/ratings

reply

[–] tedsar 9 years ago

This might just be because I have Tony Abbott for a Prime Minister, but I can totally buy a government doing something that appears completely illogical and detrimental for the sake of it.

I think that's part of the appeal of the story. There's this whole generational gap where you have the older people struggling to comprehend teenagers, hence they demonise them and try to deal with them in a way that they see fit, even if that way doesn't make sense.

reply

[–] www-sri 9 years ago

"The premise makes no sense"

yes because it's a stupid movie.

I think the main premise is- the government want to get rid of the children who doesn't respect elders so they decided to kill them. Don't you think its stupid.

reply

[–] acemcgaffrey 9 years ago

I think something here is stupid.

reply

[–] www-sri 9 years ago

and yeah and it is a stupid butt hurt fan girl who calls every other guy stupid who didn't like her favorite movie.( sorry for my English)

reply

[–] caissas_deathangel 9 years ago

Apologise for your ignorance rather than your English. The premise itself makes no sense when thought about too much...who cares? In the film, the premise only matters for about 30 seconds in the intro, beyond that, the characters and action are what matter and they are done far better.

The premise is a Macguffin; it doesn't matter. Like what caused the plane crash in Lord of the Flies, the fact that the titular Maltese Falcon is a fake, or what was in the cases in Pulp Fiction and Ronin. These things don't matter and don't/shouldn't impact on our enjoyment of the film (for what it's worth with the last two my preferred theories are "Marsellus Wallace's soul" and "Details of undercover MI6 operatives" respectively).

I'm Addy. Just Addy. From God, to Kane, to Addy.

reply

[–] www-sri 9 years ago

Okay you're right, premise in this movie doesn't matter but what about other things such as direction, acting, screenplay, cinematography etc. I think this movie is like a b-grade Japanese movie if i compare it with other movies like 13 assassin, zotoichi etc. Those movies are great, but this movie is like it was written by a five year old. The concept is rubbish, and it has more holes than you can find on sponge bob's body. the girl get shot by a rifle several times but she didn't die, high school students who never picked a gun in their entire life suddenly becomes skilled marksmen, do you really think a teenager who haven't seen a dead body can be a serial killer and can you tell me the main reason why the government organize battle royale and what is the main purpose of battle royale? Come on man,believe me this movie is a crap, it's like a live action version of Japanese anime. May be i would've liked this movie if it was made into the anime format.(sorry of my English)

reply

[–] Dessek 9 years ago

If you didn't like the movie, there's nothing we can do about it. A lot depends on whether you're able to relate to the characters and empathise with them. If you're watching it and you find yourself thinking too much about whether it all makes sense, it probably just isn't the movie for you.

That said, you really have to be fair on it. You have a problem with the directing? See this? http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0297935/?ref_=fn_al_nm_1 That's the director of Battle Royale. His credentials include a few other movies you may have heard of, like Tora! Tora! Tora!.

The concept is rubbish? Sure, but tell that to all those other people who wrote similar plots. The fact that the basic concept gets recycled again and again, from The Running Man to The Condemned to The Hunger Games, shows how much appeal it has. It never makes any sense, yet millions of people worldwide are apparently perfectly able to ignore that troublesome fact and just enjoy these works of fiction.

The girl gets shot but didn't die? In fact I'm pretty sure she dies. Just not right away. If you don't think that's possible, you need to read up on the level of injury a human can sustain without dying, especially someone young and full of adrenaline.

High school kids become skilled marksmen? Hardly. Characters like the smart and collected Shinji Mimura are shown to be terrible shots. Shuya only hits Kiriyama because he's a few metres away from him. Most of the kills by gunfire are with spray-and-pray weapons like the Uzi or the Mac-10.

A teenager can't become an instant serial killer? Well, indeed; none do. There are only two characters who hunt: Kiriyama, who is a plot device (a weakness of the story, but at least not as weak as his original incarnation in the novel), and Mitsuko, who is deeply traumatised by a long history of violence and sexual abuse, and possessed of a powerful urge to survive. She's never a serial killer, just a person who kills several times because she hasn't won the game yet. Those are kind of the rules.

Long story short, the movie isn't crap, it just didn't work for you. Go hate on something that's actually bad.

reply

[–] www-sri 9 years ago

okay, first of all, i am sorry that i said this movie is a crap because i myself rated this movie a 7 but still this movie is pretty weak at direction, plot and acting.

Yeah, i've heard of the movie Tora!Tora!Tora!, but i didn't know it was directed by the same director who directed battle royale. And i haven't seen that movie either but heard it was a great movie. Maybe he is a good director but i found his direction very weak in this movie not because he lack skills but the budget of this movie is somewhat lower that of other Japanese blockbusters i've seen.

And yeah, the concept is rubbish and the movies you mentioned with similar concept weren't blockbuster either. And you know what? the concept of the movie wasn't bad at all, "bunch of people left alone in the island and were to told to fight against one another" is actually a cool plot. But the way the concept was executed is pretty bad. in the movie like condemned, hunger games the plot was same but in condemned there was a group of criminals who fight against each other and in hunger games,it was the group of assassins. But in battle royale i found a whole class of 9th grade students were fighting, which wasn't believable. Sure those movies are worse than battle royale but execution of the plot in those movies are somewhat more believable than in battle royale.

Yeah, the girl did die, but i think she was shot several times by that other guy and even after that she was standing on her two legs, you know how many times she was shot? I think it took at least 20 bullets to kill that girl, i don't know anything about the level of injury the human body can sustain, but i do know that a man(or a 14year old girl) who was never shot before shot with a rifle and more than 10 bullets penetrate his chest will die.

And now about highschool students suddenly becomming skilled marksmen. This time i've to agree with you and you are right and i was wrong.

and do you really think a kid who has experienced sexual abuse in her childhood can become serial killer? May be i've wrongly used the word "serial killer". She wasn't a serial killer but she do has a great urge to kill and i don't think no matter how bad someone's past is, he can't become a murderer instantly. But what about the girl who has stun gun, she killed 3 students before this Mitsuko girl killed her.

Well i can say that i can overlook all those flaws i've mentioned above but what about the main theme of the movie? What is this battle royale is all abou? why government has started those idiotic games? If it's just because they want to fill some manners into the brains of some highschool kids than i was right about the movie and i am not surprised that i am not the only one who don't think this movie is epic. (sorry for my English)

reply

[–] The_Zig 9 years ago

I think it took at least 20 bullets to kill that girl

Its unclear what you are talking about here.
I think you're talking about Mitsuko v Kiriyama scene.
In that case, he sprayed a wide area with fire, hitting her maybe 1-4 times, most likely below chest, judging from his angle and the splashes. She got up. He then shot her with a pistol four times, taking her straight down.

Or you could be talking lighthouse scene?
Chisato was hit with sustained rifle fire at close range for about 1 second iirc, but then she died near instantly.
Satomi seemed to be hit at least twice at range with handgun fire (hard to tell, she moves a lot - at least one hit was to the shoulder). Then jumped on the table, and took some more inaccurate body hits, raged back to her feet and then was shot again and died right away.
Yukie and Haruka were hit with sprayed rifle fire and died in a few seconds.

They're about the only ones I can think of - I wouldn't say they are massively implausible. Like you say, the kids aren't marksmen, and a lot of their fire completely misses.
It isn't so much that they take an inhuman amount of damage, it's more that they waste a lot of bullets.

But what about the girl who has stun gun, she killed 3 students before this Mitsuko girl killed her.

Huh?!
Megumi had the stun-gun. She didn't kill anyone. She hid out in a house until Mitsuko came and cut her throat.
Hirono - the tampon-fixated girl with the gun - didn't kill anyone either. She confronted Mitsuko about killing their classmates. Then Mitsuko zapped Hirono with Megumi's stun-gun. From this, Mitsuko managed get Hirono's gun and shot her in the back as she tried to run away.
Mitsuko is the only killer here.

Can I suggest, maybe part of the issue is that you didn't understand the film as well as you think.

reply

[–] www-sri 9 years ago

Okay, maybe i exaggerated the facts by saying that Mitsuko took 20 bullets to die( i was talking about the scene where Mitsuko died), but i think when that guy(i don't remember his name exactly) with the gun shot her first time she was down, but then again she stood up try to attack him and then again he shoots her and this time bullet actually penetrates her chest, and the girl is down but she still back on her foot and tries to attack then she was shot again but she didn't die until he shoot her the third time and i think logically speaking the girl should've died(or momentarily paralyzed) when the first time the boy shot her.

And yeah, the girl with the stun gun did kill two students. When Mitsuko attacked her she said that she saw the dead body of two students hung up next door.(correct me if i am wrong).

Come on man i didn't say that this is a bad movie, considering the fact that this movie released in 2000 under small Japanese production with low budget. I don't know why people are comparing this movie to hunger games. When i saw hunger games people said it was the rip-off of BR,but i liked that movie and after that i saw BR, thought it was an OK movie i rated it a 7(i should've rated it a 5). I am not a hunger games fan but don't you think it is slightly unfair to call HG a rip-off. Sure there are similarities but i think even though HG is a mediocre movie it is far superior to BR in terms of story, direction and acting. Still i rated HG lower than BR just because it was loosely inspired from BR, it came from a big Hollywood production house and it has a huge budget.

I am saying it again, BR is not a bad movie but it sure is an overrated movie. But BR fanatics didn't answer my questions, Why govt conducted these stupid games? just because the kids are ill-mannered? Come on man, if that's the answer then i was right about the movie. Please BR fans do not blindly support this movie. Battle royale and Hunger games both are mediocre movies, but they are entertaining and i think you guys should stop dissing hunger games. And may be you should be happy for the publicity the battle royale franchise got( though the part 2 movie was a flop ) by claiming that HG being copy of BR.( sorry for my bad English).

reply

[–] caissas_deathangel 9 years ago

And yeah, the girl with the stun gun did kill two students. When Mitsuko attacked her she said that she saw the dead body of two students hung up next door.(correct me if i am wrong).

Those two girls hanged themselves. Their bodies were hanging from the ceiling It was obviously suicide. She said she saw them, she did not accuse the stun gun girl of killing them.

You really don't understand the film, I'm afraid.

I'm Addy. Just Addy. From God, to Kane, to Addy.

reply

[–] www-sri 9 years ago

First of all ,thanks for correcting me. I am really sorry, i thought the girl with the stun gun killed them and hanged them. So,my doubt is clear.But what about the other flaws i pointed out such as, How can a girl after getting shot by a gun several times, has the power to stand up on her feet and attack and what is this stupid battle royale game any way and why are these games are conducted? Okay maybe i was wrong about the girl with the stun gun, it doesn't mean i didn't understand the movie. Maybe i didn't understand the movie because there is nothing to understand, this is a plain stupid movie with an idiotic premise.And only thing good about this movie is its unique subject of survival of the fittest. I think this movie is the first to introduce that kind of subject and for that i rated this movie a 7. Other than that there is nothing special in this movie. And for god's sake please stop blindly praising this movie just because it was your favorite movie when you were a teenager.(Sorry for my English)

reply

[–] The_Zig 9 years ago

please stop blindly praising this movie just because it was your favorite movie when you were a teenager

See apart from this undertone, I generally accept your point of view.
Annoyingly, you seem under the impression you are schooling a bunch of 'fanboys' here. Grow up. No one is 'blindly praising' it. People here are well aware of its faults.

Long before you breezed through I've argued that the plot doesn't make much sense. I've also argued that it is also self-contradicting - in that [A] at the start BR seems to be a major media event, but later [B] the class react exactly like they've never heard of it. Why?
(Answers: [A] It's displayed as a major media event so that we get an utterly chilling opening to the film. [B] The film need to tell us, the audience, what is going on, and this is a way to do it without wasting ten minutes on flashbacks/exposition.)

I've also argued that the whole program is flawed. It doesn't work as any kind of deterrent, as it is applied (seemingly) at random. It doesn't work as a fascist government quashing resistance (as the novel/manga suggest), if anything this would incite wider rebellion. It doesn't work as a scientific/military/psychological experiment, as the initial conditions are far too random to draw out any kind of meaningful data.
The novel wastes pages (and the manga wastes about a book) trying to explain and justify the setting, and ultimately they end up highlighting that the setting is unworkable.
And you know what? Many of the 'blind movie-praising fanboys' you're arguing with totally agree on this.

What most also agree on is that this doesn't matter to us. It isn't the point. There is a basic agreement when you watch any film. If you watch Transformers, but won't accept sentient robots, it's gonna be a really bad film for you. Same for physics-defying superpowers for just about anything Marvel. Complete psuedo-tech rubbish in any film that features 'hackers'. You know this: films aren't real. With films, there are bits you just accept and get over - it's an agreement you make when you watch a film.

The film maker IMO made the right decision on the setting: i.e. that it doesn't matter. The movie waves its hands at some vague hint of a justification, and then gets on with the real business: the story of the kids in the program.

People that can accept and ignore the setting in BR tend to get wrapped up in the characters and carried away by the story. And they see the real point of the movie: they feel the threat, the intimacy of it. They leave trying to answer the questions this movie asks about friendship and trust, survival and mortality and what really matters. They come out the other end quite affected by it.
People that get hung up on the plausibility of the setting tend to miss all of this and call it a cheap slasher flick.
Sadly I can't change that for you.

Perhaps you're new to the internet. But seriously, just because you're a smart guy and this is the internet, don't assume everyone you talk to is a moron.

reply

[–] www-sri 9 years ago

aaw... did i hurt your feelings? if i did, sorry man. First of all Transformers is a sci-fi, and when it show a giant robots are trying to invade the earth, i believe it by keeping in mind that anything thing can happen in a sci-fi. But there are some limits, when they show optimus prime fighting with megatron and defeating him, it seems believable but if they show a tiny human took the gun and defeated the megatron by himself it is rubbish, Same happened in battle royale, a 14 year old girl shot by a rifle several times but she didn't die, the govt came out with a stupid idea of battle royale just to show kids some manners, these things are too much to ignore. And if you think the movie show a bond between friends,i have to disagree with you, the only thing the movie show is how friends start to kill each other once their lives are on the line and how middleschool teenagers feels that they can share the eternal love at the age of 14, for me only friendship i saw in this movie is between the lead character and his friend. And that thing stood just because the hero was a nice guy.

See man, i know you feel bad when someone criticize the things you love and I don't think i am smarter than you, i am just a normal guy who watch a movie for some entertainment but i cannot ignore flaws in this movie, sure the movie is not based on facts but it shoudn't be meaningless. and no, iam not new to the internet and if you have the right to praise a movie you like then i think i have the right to criticize it and that's why IMDB is created in the first place,so that people can convey their thought regarding a movie fearlessly.(Sorry for my English).

reply

[–] Dessek 9 years ago

aaw... did i hurt your feelings?

Clearly you didn't get the message. Your opinions are not bothering anyone; your attitude is. We're not fragile princesses here who can't stand to hear a bad word about Battle Royale. We know this movie's flaws better than you do. Stop acting like you're talking to a crowd of gormless idiots who need to be told what to think.

Suspension of disbelief works in different ways. Zig's examples were all of cases where we as viewers are asked to accept something that is scientifically impossible. This really should be a harder thing to do than accepting something that is merely politically implausible. Like I already said, though, if you can't accept the premise, it's your loss. Nothing we can say will fix that.

Then again, you keep saying things about this movie that are plain untrue. "A 14 year old girl shot by a rifle several times but she didn't die"? That's not in the movie. If you mean a 15-year-old girl shot by a machine pistol and pistol several times and died, then yes. Is that so odd? The point is not that she managed briefly to regain her balance; the point is that she totally died.

for me only friendship i saw in this movie is between the lead character and his friend.

Seriously? Were you not paying attention? What about the girls in the lighthouse who decided to stick together and even patch up a wounded classmate until they were betrayed? What about the three kids who worked together to build a bomb? What about the boy who went looking for his best friend (the girl in the tracksuit) and who helped out several of his other friends on the way?

I could go on pointing out where your criticism falls down, but I fear I'm wasting my time. The movie didn't work for you; that's too bad. I can never convince you that it was a good movie. I just wish you'd stop trying to convince yourself it was a bad movie.

reply

[–] www-sri 9 years ago

First of all, i never said it is a bad movie, yeah, but it sure is one of the most overrated movie i've ever seen.

"What about the girls in the lighthouse who decided to stick together and even patch up a wounded classmate until they were betrayed?"

I think they were supporting each other until the spaghetti was poisoned by the girl and after that they turned against each other. Its just as i said once there is a threat to their lives they started doubting each other. Don't you think the seen in the light house support my point of view rather than yours? Because if they had supported each other as a true friend they would've lived until the next morning instead of that they killed each other and at last nobody lived. And you know what the funny part is? the girl who actually poisoned the food was the only survivor in the shootout.

"If you mean a 15-year-old girl shot by a machine pistol and pistol several times and died, then yes. Is that so odd? The point is not that she managed briefly to regain her balance; the point is that she totally died."

Yeah, you're right she died. But you missed the point here, she died after getting shot several times by the rifle and it is odd. Because she didn't die instantly after getting shot, she stood on her two legs and tried to attack even after the bullet penetrated her chest, I don't know why are you ignoring this point.

You know what? f@*k all the flaws in the movie. I said i ignored all of them, just answer me this, why the govt conducted this stupid game and what is the whole point of battle royale?

I am saying this again, i never said it is bad movie, in fact i supported this movie even how ridiculous the premise is. Its just the movie is too flawed and sometimes its too hard to accept what is happening. And if a guy with sane mind will always support me.

I think you are not used to the idea of somebody hating this movie. and i am not the one who started this post,i am just the one who supported the idea of the premise being stupid and believe me it is stupid and instead of convincing me why don't you accept the fact that this movie is overrated and please stop dissing Hunger games(and i am talking about other BR fans on the hunger games board), it is just a mediocre movie and only reason i am in this board is because i was so disappointing with this movie, i had high expectations for this movie by reading the rave reviews by BR fans

reply

[–] caissas_deathangel 9 years ago

Yeah, you're right she died. But you missed the point here, she died after getting shot several times by the rifle and it is odd. Because she didn't die instantly after getting shot, she stood on her two legs and tried to attack even after the bullet penetrated her chest, I don't know why are you ignoring this point.

That's called "Adrenaline", a chemical that can empower the human body to do extraordinary feats the mind doesn't consciously realise it can, for a short period of time. The truth of the matter is that gunshot victims very seldom die instantly, unless the bullet goes through the brain or heart. And there are numerous cases of people being shot in these places at point-blank range and surviving, living for many years to come. You can even be shot in the head at such distance repeatedly and live, if you're really lucky, and it has happened before. That's in real life, not fiction. Its convenient in films for someone to die instantly because they're shot anywhere, but it doesn't work that way in reality.

You know what? f@*k all the flaws in the movie. I said i ignored all of them, just answer me this, why the govt conducted this stupid game and what is the whole point of battle royale?

This has already been answered. The answer doesn't make a lot of sense but in the above posts you'll see the rest of that freely admitting that! You're not some genius for being the first to realise this.

I am saying this again, i never said it is bad movie, in fact i supported this movie even how ridiculous the premise is. Its just the movie is too flawed and sometimes its too hard to accept what is happening. And if a guy with sane mind will always support me.

You clearly don't accept it, you wouldn't be moaning and whinging so much if you did. Please don't pretend otherwise.

I think you are not used to the idea of somebody hating this movie. and i am not the one who started this post,i am just the one who supported the idea of the premise being stupid and believe me it is stupid and instead of convincing me why don't you accept the fact that this movie is overrated and please stop dissing Hunger games(and i am talking about other BR fans on the hunger games board), it is just a mediocre movie and only reason i am in this board is because i was so disappointing with this movie, i had high expectations for this movie by reading the rave reviews by BR fans

I've been a regular on this board 11 and a half years. I'm perfectly used to seeing people criticise the film. Dessek and The Zig have been here almost as long or longer. None of us are dissing the Hunger Games, which we couldn't care less about. But we are fans, as are people who have posted reviews on the IMDb page. That's what fans do, they talk about how much they like films! Same as with any other film that is popular or has a cult following.

Please, grow up you absolute child.

I'm Addy. Just Addy. From God, to Kane, to Addy.

reply

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] MrZAP 9 years ago

People that can accept and ignore the setting in BR tend to get wrapped up in the characters and carried away by the story. And they see the real point of the movie: they feel the threat, the intimacy of it. They leave trying to answer the questions this movie asks about friendship and trust, survival and mortality and what really matters. They come out the other end quite affected by it.
People that get hung up on the plausibility of the setting tend to miss all of this and call it a cheap slasher flick.

Amusingly, I'm in the middle. I think it's at least somewhat deep as a character study and a philosophical premise, but also find the story's premise distracting enough that it's also a cheap slasher flick. It's both! This is also why I'm actually more of a fan of OBR fanfiction that changes the premise but keeps the deeper aspects.

Suspension of disbelief works in different ways. Zig's examples were all of cases where we as viewers are asked to accept something that is scientifically impossible. This really should be a harder thing to do than accepting something that is merely politically implausible. Like I already said, though, if you can't accept the premise, it's your loss. Nothing we can say will fix that.

I also actually think it's a lot easier to accept sci-fi hard science issues with willing suspension of disbelief than I do political and psychological and social things, but that's probably because I'm a lot more educated and interested in those areas. One of the major points of willing suspension of disbelief is that it's subjective and is different for each person. I don't really fault the film for not meeting my personal standards specifically, because it is subjective and I know that's unfair; I fault it for the egregiousness of the weaknesses in the premise (also I think a lot of the action is rather meh, but that's also subjective, and as pointed out isn't really the point of the film anyway).

For what it's worth I rated the film a 5, which is like a low-middling 3/5 stars for me. I liked it overall, but it had serious flaws. If the premise was different then it would probably be a 7, which can be a high 3 or low 4 stars thing, which is a pretty decent rating and would be worth a general recommendation. If they changed the premise and brought more of the book character depth into it, then it would probably be a high 8, which is really good!

So I guess my point is that Battle Royale actually has a lot of potential, but the film incarnation just doesn't come close to meeting it, which is a shame.

reply

[–] mimosveta 9 years ago

the sequel goes into that exact scenario

___
Anyone who has ever read any spoilers,
knows that Winter Is Coming

reply