MovieChat Forums > Batoru rowaiaru (2000) Discussion > I enjoyed it but it wasn't that violent

I enjoyed it but it wasn't that violent


Like everyone else said it was

War Surrounds MeAnd I Scream Her Name

reply

The violence isn't the point of it, anyone who told you it was missed the point. It's a socio-cultural satire about teenage life. Violett, yes, but it's the character interaction and the playground politics that are the more important aspects.

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

reply

Yeah, I know. It was just literally everyone who saw this movie told me it was so gory and violent so I was expecting me to throw up or to gag or be disgusted or disturbed but nope. I enjoyed the movie not for the violence but for the story.

War Surrounds MeAnd I Scream Her Name

reply

Glad to hear it. Even when this movie came out, back in 2000, it wasn't that bloody. By now it's practically tame. Much of the violence doesn't go beyond splashing some fake blood onto the actors' costumes in between shots. There's very little spectacle, which is exactly the point.

reply

I'm glad you enjoyed it despite what people told you to expect. If all they could really tell you was that it was really violent and gory, then it sounds like the whole idea of the film just went way over their heads.

Take Nobu's death for instance, his collar explodes and blood goes everywhere, sure, it's a bit gory, but the horror of it is in the intensity of the scene, the build up/anticipation, the fact that it was 14 year old surrounded by his classmates, and that he dies right in front of his best friend and sprays blood all over him. Far from the most violent scene of all time, but the shock and intensity of that scene makes it more memorable than some random beheading or dismemberment in a slasher film.

reply

True. Also these people told me that the kid's head gets exploded off woth the collar, not that it slit his neck. So they obviously exaggerrated the violence in their head.

reply

It was at the time and plus a year after Columbine seeing kids shoot eachother like that was very soon in America that along with the same license reasons was the reason why the movie wasn't released in America to like 2011. But kids killing eachother in general is violent. If you want to see your violent it really got. Read the book. The Uzi tooting maniac shoot his stalker in the book and left him to die but the stalker was in a danger zone so he blew up too. That and I forgot who the oh wait the guy with the bullet proof vest strangled a girl with a belt and ripped her fingernails off while doing it. Because she shot him and thought he was dead. That was all in the book and there what I remember now. There Alot of stuff they didn't put in the movie. But yea it was pretty damn violent.

reply

For a while - at the height of Asian-remake-mania - a guy called Roy Lee was trying to remake it for the US. About every time it got close there was ANOTHER school shooting and it was 'too soon' for another year or so.

By the end I almost felt bad for the guy! And it's tough to feel sorry for the guy who remade the uninspired Grudge, the dull American remake of Ring, and 'remade' Infernal Affairs into The Departed (i.e. he pressed Ctrl+H 'Search and Replace' "Triad"->"Irish Mafia")

reply