This Board needs cleansing....
Like there are way too many BR trolls here. Can you guys get a life and bitch about The Hunger Games on YOUR message boards? Like no one gives a flipping *beep* except you guys. Smh.
share[deleted]
If an entire board dedicated solely for Catching Fire is FILLED with a whole bunch of bitching Battle Royale threads talking about "how its better" or how "its been plagiarized", then yes you're *beep*-ing trolling. Please get your head out of your ass and *beep* off.
share[deleted]
Are you *beep* kidding me? I'm pretty sure a Hunger Games fan wouldnt bitch about how "Battle Royale is better" or how "this is exactly like BR2". 90% of the posts on here are created by BR *beep*-tards like you. Take your bull *beep* somewhere else.
That makes absolutely no sense though, because CF and BR2 are nothing alike, not to mention that Catching Fire is 20x better than BR2. *beep* outta here.
If it weren't for them, this board would be empty! lol
shareThat's better than what's happening now.
Oh Ms. Everdeen, I thought we had agreed not to lie to each other...
If it weren't for them, this board would be empty! lol
The board's empty because genuine posters have been driven away by the deluge of trolling.
That's what the trolls want: to render these boards unusable...
--
"So I've got bullets, but no gun. That's quite Zen." share
You look closer. Even if there was actual EVIDENCE that plagiarism had occurred, that wasn't all your beloved trolls had said in their effort to make themselves as annoying as possible. When Jennifer Lawrence's cloud account was hacked and pictures she intended to keep private were leaked, your favorite trolls claimed that:
1) They were part of a publicity stunt,
2) That she was behind the hacking, when people with even a dab of decency would assume that she had assumed the site was secure, and
3) She had done so for the purpose of besmirching BR.
No, the tactics used by the BattleRoyds goes far beyond any legitimate protest of plagiarism.
[deleted]
You ask "beyond a cursory comparison" because that's all you've got.
The evidence you need beyond a cursory comparison is called EVIDENCE.
[deleted]
No. Actually I asked what actual evidence would be needed beyond a cursory comparison of the two works in question(?)Yes. You asked what evidence would be needed and I answered "evidence." Is that clear enough??? You have nothing, and are simply repeating the question to disguise that fact. share
[deleted]
With Netflix having somewhat recently announcing that they are going to delete The Hunger Games: Catching Fire from their inventory, I decided to finally give it a chance so that I could compare it with Battle Royale 2 (a similar Japanese film from 2003).
Originally I had planned to talk about how Catching Fire ripped off Battle Royale 2 without giving it any credit, but after giving it some thought I realized that (even if the author won't admit it) it may borrow some ideas from Battle Royale 2, but it can be said that Battle Royale 2 borrowed ideas from stories like The Fly, Inception, and Jurassic Park III. Also, having recently given the film Oblivion a pass despite obviously borrowing from many other science fiction stories, I felt it wouldn't be fair to write off Catching Fire in this way.
So I want to take a look at the films and compare them. Another interesting discussion would be to compare the books, but because this blog is more devoted to film, I'm just looking at the films as stand alone stories, to see how they compare and stand up as films.
Catching Fire is just ok. It's somewhat entertaining, but that's it. There isn't really much in terms of shock value, and it just didn't hit me on any level. The fact that I am not as taken with reality TV in the way most are doesn't help its case considering so much of the film is setting up this reality show.
Battle Royale 2 is disturbing for all the right reasons, it makes you think. It leaves a lasting impression on you.
While The Hunger Games spends much of the time setting up the show and turning it into a spectacle, it curiously, leaves only a relatively short time to show the game itself, and seems to try to avoid showing much of the blood and violence. And if the deaths weren't flying by fast enough (almost unnoticed I might add) they are able to design and insert digital dog-like creatures that enter the arena and kill contestants to speed up the game, but most of the deaths in The Hunger Games happen off camera and/or in quick flashes at the beginning of the game.
Battle Royale 2 is all about the survival scenario and what goes on with all the participants and their relationship to one another, because, again, these are all people that know each other. We witness most if not all the deaths.
Catching Fire is a futuristic world that is easy to distance ourselves from, while Battle Royale 2 is meant to be more like our real world, making it all the more disturbing.
I guess it comes down to personal taste, just like any other film/book, but personally The Hunger Games did nothing for me. When you have a story about a bunch of young people forced to kill each other, it's strange that The Hunger Games seems to avoid making that the subject, while Battle Royale 2 realizes that it should be the focus.
You can watch both on Netflix, but if you are going to watch Battle Royale 2 make sure you are watching the first one, and not the second one. I've only seen the beginning of the second one (which is also on Netflix), but the acting from the main bad guy in the second was so over the top I couldn't stand watching any more of it.