Battle Royale....
is not that great of a movie. Suck it fanboys.
To W.W my star my perfect silence.
I really don't see why so many people compare. Battle Royale has a horror feel to it. The gore and gruesome deaths are the most important aspect. In the Hunger Games I never felt like the kids killing each other was the center. It's more about survival and later on rebellion. Half of them die off "camera" in the books right after the Games begin and a bunch of others aren't described in detail when they die until Katniss watches them pick the bodies up.
Yes they do share the whole putting people together to fight to the death. But that's hardly something Battle Royale invented.
Good comments. I think Battle Royale is more of a horror movie as well.
share
I really think you can't say, or truely think the hunger games are nothing in common with Battle Royale.
Because the concept of the Hunger Games ( not the Book or movie saga but the actual games in those books and movies) are strongly inspired by BR.
Even though, it's not the first time people are forced to kill each other for the enjoyement of other or for a gouvernement / Entity domination, on book or TV, the fact that they are quite innocent kid, and that it looks like a game makes HG BR-Like.
And so what ? is that a crime ? i loved BR when i saw it 2003, read the book in 08. When i saw the trailer of HG1, i did think " wow this is the american BR, it must be awesome". So i read Suzanne Collins book i loved them, enjoy movie one and really enjoy movie 2.
It's not a big deal for me that the heart concept of HG is strongly inspired by BR, because it's good for me, it works. And, HG not entirely about the games, it's much more than that and i think i don't have to explain it to you.
Sometimes in art, where people see copy they should see inspiration. I'm glad suzanne collins got inspired by battle royale. And i really enjoy both. I swear to you it's possible.
And for all the revolution thing in HG, i think it works much more than BR2. So i really think the HG are more inspired by the failure of BR2 than the sick and twisted by yet brilliant concept of BR1.
So quit arguing and just enjoy.
In my country people fight to know what is best : Rugby of football ( soccer) the happiest sportfan or those who enjoy both and not try to destroy one to glorify an other. The comparison is so lame... i'm ashamed of myself.
I could care less about the broken record of repetitive garbage. I've done a full research of both movies and source material. There are about 20 threads of this garbage (which is a violation of IMDb's policy for spamming boards with a repetitive message).
There are things that are common in a lot of movies. The bottom line is that science fiction lovers aren't going to care that much for a horror type movie that focuses on the gore more than it focuses on the other aspects of the movie. Battle Royale is a boring movie to me.
You may find it boring but the genre of BR movie is not " GORE ". If Battle Royale is gore so is Reservoir Dog or Saving private Ryan for that matter.
It's "Gore" if you defind "gore" by seeing heavily bleeding wound...
IMO
Actually "Saving Private Ryan" is gore (Rated R for this reason), but it is a fantastic movie. The people in it are very realistic for what it represents which is war.
"Battle Royale" plays on a theme of being real life but has a plot that would never match the real world. The children do acting that is way over the top during the violence as well.
You're complaining about "over the top" acting from teenage characters? Sorry mate, but that's how teens actually behave in real life. These are children, not soldiers. I've worked with classes in schools, and believe me, the class in BR, and the way they react in an "over the top" manner, is surprisingly realistic.
Of course the plot isn't supposed to be realistic, but the way the adolescent characters react to the situations is very believable, much more so than THG (but then, that was never really intended to be realistic).
"WHO THE HELL DO YOU THINK I AM???!!!!!"
No it isn't.
I am not expecting the kids to act like solders. The previous commenter is the one that mentioned "Saving Private Ryan" I just replied about it.
"Lord of the Flies" handles how the kids would act much better than "Battle Royale" in my opinion. And "Battle Royale" definitely isn't more realistic than "The Hunger Games". There are also huge differences on "The Hunger Games" and "Battle Royale" that allows "The Hunger Games" to create a truly competitive arena event where "Battle Royale" would fail in the real world.
In "The Hunger Games" none of the competitors know each other (except the other person from their district). It isn't easy for a non-violent person to kill anyone, but it is a lot easier to kill someone you don't know since you were never friends and have a lot less information about their demeanor. Note that Thresh and Rue were friends. And Katniss and Peeta were friends. I think all of them would have refused to kill their mate from the same district. In "The Hunger Games " after the blood bath where people get killed trying to get equipment, weapons, etc, they more often choose to hide and wait for the others to die rather than going on killing sprees. This is very realistic of how a majority would act. They would try to not engage hoping they survive by other means.
In "Battle Royale" the students chosen in the lottery are classmates that have been next to each other for six to twelve years in the same classrooms, school buses, playgrounds, neighborhoods, and perhaps even religious facilities. Unless this is a special school where all of the kids are disturbed or have a bad demeanor, they would never turn on each other like that. There would likely be a huge number of suicides. There would also be collars exploding because people refuse to engage.
In "Battle Royale", none of the kids are trained on how to use weapons and they are supplied with weapons they have never seen in their entire life. It is amazing on how well they used and aimed these weapons. In "The Hunger Games" all of the weapons are more primitive weapon choices and training is provided on everything possible for a period of time.
"Battle Royale" was written in 1996 which means it occurs in our generation. "The Hunger Games" occurs far into our future after a huge number of changes in society and a war occur.
"Battle Royale" is a failure. "The Hunger Games" is a success.
In "The Hunger Games" none of the competitors know each other (except the other person from their district). It isn't easy for a non-violent person to kill anyone, but it is a lot easier to kill someone you don't know since you were never friends and have a lot less information about their demeanor. Note that Thresh and Rue were friends. And Katniss and Peeta were friends. I think all of them would have refused to kill their mate from the same district. In "The Hunger Games " after the blood bath where people get killed trying to get equipment, weapons, etc, they more often choose to hide and wait for the others to die rather than going on killing sprees. This is very realistic of how a majority would act. They would try to not engage hoping they survive by other means.
Have you even watched Battle Royale? Many of the kids in BR "choose to hide and wait for the others to die rather than going on killing sprees", much more so than the contestants in THG, a lot of whom behaved more like adult soldiers rather than teenagers. Even Rue's tragic death scene wasn't very realistic for a child, in contrast to many of the BR kids who were often screaming or crying as they were killed, which is a lot closer to reality.
In "Battle Royale" the students chosen in the lottery are classmates that have been next to each other for six to twelve years in the same classrooms, school buses, playgrounds, neighborhoods, and perhaps even religious facilities. Unless this is a special school where all of the kids are disturbed or have a bad demeanor, they would never turn on each other like that. There would likely be a huge number of suicides. There would also be collars exploding because people refuse to engage.
Once again, have you even watched BR? Countless kids committed suicide in BR, something the kids in THG never even contemplated. And on the other hand, you had some kids in BR killing classmates they didn't like because of previous bad experiences, killing friends out of fear they'd be killed, groups working together to overcome difficulties, some of those groups losing trust in each other, some feeling distress at having killed someone, and so on. The way the teens behaved in BR was much more varied, with each character handling the situation in their own way, whereas most of the contestants in THG mostly behaved in more or less a similar manner, with little remorse over killing someone. As has been mentioned before in this forum, THG is a sci-fi, whereas BR is more like a horror. Realism makes a lot more sense in a horror than it does in a sci-fi, so THG's comparative lack of realism isn't a deal-breaker.
In "Battle Royale", none of the kids are trained on how to use weapons and they are supplied with weapons they have never seen in their entire life. It is amazing on how well they used and aimed these weapons. In "The Hunger Games" all of the weapons are more primitive weapon choices and training is provided on everything possible for a period of time.
Once again, if you actually watched BR, most of the kids failed at handling or aiming their weapons. You must be thinking of that one crazy guy with the gun, but that's obviously because he was a previous contestant, so he already had experience from before, something the current class didn't have.
"Battle Royale" is a failure. "The Hunger Games" is a success.
Nonsense. Battle Royale was a success, both critically and commercially. It was a major box office success in Japan and gained millions of fans overseas, including a sizable cult following in America where it was banned for a long time. It received a highly positive reception from most critics, and Quentin Tarantino, one of the most renowned Hollywood filmmakers, even proclaimed Battle Royale to be the best film he's seen in the past 20 years. That's not the kind of reception one would expect from a "failure".
"WHO THE HELL DO YOU THINK I AM???!!!!!" share
And once again you are missing the salient point, these are two different works. And don't pull the BR was filmed before Suzanne Collins wrote her book!' crap. It may as well have not existed as far as Suzanne Collins was concerned. These are two different works of art, written for different audiences and with differing objectives. Suzanne Collins was not exploring the pressures put on students in Japan to betray and backstab their friends and classmates to get a job and Takami was not exploring how war devastates lives and how TV can exploit that.
~It always amazes me that BR trolls never give any kind of thought as to what the two different authors were aiming for. It's like they are incapable of going beyond the superficial.
At least in the BR movie attention was paid to the 'Death of a Generation' trope that Takami was aiming for. The hairstyles and the uniforms serve to blend all the students into a homogenous mass
_____________
I am the Queen of Snark, TStopped said so.
Do you even bother to read the posts you're replying to? I was discussing the differences above, not the similarities... Next time you think about trolling, at least read what you're replying to.
"WHO THE HELL DO YOU THINK I AM???!!!!!"
All your points are the same as what you have already posted, and they are all superficial. I must thank you though for pointing out the differences in style between the two works. Hardly surprising as they have nothing really in common. Well except for the well work trope of the Deathmatch forcing people into situations they would rather not be in.
_____________
I am the Queen of Snark, TStopped said so.
Right, they have nothing in common... except for the dozens of similarities already mentioned by myself and others.
"WHO THE HELL DO YOU THINK I AM???!!!!!"
What in your list of similarities cannot be attributed to the restrictions of the genre and when looked at properly are not similarities in the first place.
How about the ubiquitous backpacks? I have several backpacks, my grandsons have several. They have been around for centuries in one form or another. You know why...because they do the job. Characters in both books wear underpants as well, you know why...because they do the job.
There are boys and girls in both films, you know why...because we only have two sexes.
THG has two definite winners, BR has two survivors who are not winners. They are listed as dead and are not paraded in front of the country in a huge Victory Tour. This isn't really similar at all.
BR has explosive necklaces that can be tracked and will explode when you get out of range of the tracking devices. Spike in BTVS had a tracking device in his back that had to be cut out so the Initiative couldn't track him...did THG rip it off BTVS, after all Buffy did it first and the trackers in THG correlate much more to Buffy than BR. But this is rubbish really. The Gamemakers need to keep track of the protagonists/contestants. The athletes in the Olympics wore numbers on their chests. It the same thing. Again you list a similarity that isn't similar or has been done many times in many films/books. I couldn't count the films that I have seen with a tracker of some kind in it.
All of your 'similarities' come down to that, the restraints of the premise and the practicalities of showing a contest with a lot of contestants. Everybody in a Western uses six guns and rides horse, everybody in a Jane Austen novel rides in carriages and the women all wear corsets. This is what I mean by surface similarities and you are so hung up on them you don't bother looking at what is more important...the themes and motives behind both novels/films.
_____________
I am the Queen of Snark, TStopped said so.
What in your list of similarities cannot be attributed to the restrictions of the genre and when looked at properly are not similarities in the first place.
How about the ubiquitous backpacks? I have several backpacks, my grandsons have several. They have been around for centuries in one form or another. You know why...because they do the job. Characters in both books wear underpants as well, you know why...because they do the job.
Not just any backpack, but a backpack with a unique weapon for each participant. That goes well beyond the superficial similarity you're describing, but goes down to specific details.
There are boys and girls in both films, you know why...because we only have two sexes.
THG has two definite winners, BR has two survivors who are not winners. They are listed as dead and are not paraded in front of the country in a huge Victory Tour. This isn't really similar at all.
BR and THG both involve a main pair, a boy and a girl, who survive through to the end, and refuse to kill each other, with the boy having feelings for the girl, but with uncertainty over whether she feels the same way, not to mention there being a third boy also having feelings for her. Again, that goes well beyond superficial similarity, but is very specific.
BR has explosive necklaces that can be tracked and will explode when you get out of range of the tracking devices. Spike in BTVS had a tracking device in his back that had to be cut out so the Initiative couldn't track him...did THG rip it off BTVS, after all Buffy did it first and the trackers in THG correlate much more to Buffy than BR. But this is rubbish really. The Gamemakers need to keep track of the protagonists/contestants. The athletes in the Olympics wore numbers on their chests. It the same thing. Again you list a similarity that isn't similar or has been done many times in many films/books. I couldn't count the films that I have seen with a tracker of some kind in it.
Not just any tracker, but a tracker that could get a participant killed if they stay in a specific area for too long. Again, not superficial similarity, but very specific.
All of your 'similarities' come down to that, the restraints of the premise and the practicalities of showing a contest with a lot of contestants. Everybody in a Western uses six guns and rides horse, everybody in a Jane Austen novel rides in carriages and the women all wear corsets. This is what I mean by surface similarities and you are so hung up on them you don't bother looking at what is more important...the themes and motives behind both novels/films.
Like I already said above, THG is more of a sci-fi, while BR is more of a horror. THG simply borrowed certain ideas and fit them into a more sci-fi framework. And there's nothing wrong with that. Inspiration isn't such a bad thing like you're making it out to be.
"WHO THE HELL DO YOU THINK I AM???!!!!!" share
And the backpack in THG had no weapons of any kind in it. The weapons were in the Cornucopia. The backpack in THG served it's purpose as a backpack, not a weapon cache, and Katniss nearly died getting hers. She wasn't simply given it. This is called 'surface similarity', backpacks are too commonplace for it to be anything else. Tell me what should Suzanne Collins have written in place of a backpack? If Takami have invented a carrying bag of some kind and Collins had used that you might have a leg to stand on here, but he didn't and you don't.
The very big difference is they win the Games, in BR they survive to...run away?
The trackers in THG were just that, trackers. Did you watch the film or not. It was a tracker exactly the same as in Buffy, and 'Mission Impossible' and a thousand other films. For you to moan about the trackers you have to moan about BR because it very specifically copied the exploding necklaces in 'Wedlock'. In either case the trackers served the same purpose as they had in every other movie that used them. Again you have to have something specific to complain about and something as commonplace as an electronic tracker just doesn't cut the mustard. What are you going to complain about next, that the water was wet in both movies?
Everything that you say THG 'borrowed' from BR is in a hundred thousand other movies. Backpacks, trackers, a male and female protagonist that survives to the end of the story. There is one 'similarity'...the Deathmatch and you really can't use that because the Ancient Romans did it first, complete with young girl gladiators. You just don't want to admit it.
_____________
I am the Queen of Snark, TStopped said so.
And the backpack in THG had no weapons of any kind in it. The weapons were in the Cornucopia. The backpack in THG served it's purpose as a backpack, not a weapon cache, and Katniss nearly died getting hers. She wasn't simply given it. This is called 'surface similarity', backpacks are too commonplace for it to be anything else. Tell me what should Suzanne Collins have written in place of a backpack? If Takami have invented a carrying bag of some kind and Collins had used that you might have a leg to stand on here, but he didn't and you don't.
And why must each participant even have a unique weapon in the first place? Once again, this is a far cry from the "surface similarity" you're referring to, but a very specific similarity.
The very big difference is they win the Games, in BR they survive to...run away?
The reason they have to run away in BR is because they broke the rules by having two survivors. If they played by the rules and there was only a single survivor left, then s/he would be the winner. THG simply added a twist to it by having the organizers change their minds and allow there to be two winners.
The trackers in THG were just that, trackers. Did you watch the film or not. It was a tracker exactly the same as in Buffy, and 'Mission Impossible' and a thousand other films. For you to moan about the trackers you have to moan about BR because it very specifically copied the exploding necklaces in 'Wedlock'. In either case the trackers served the same purpose as they had in every other movie that used them. Again you have to have something specific to complain about and something as commonplace as an electronic tracker just doesn't cut the mustard. What are you going to complain about next, that the water was wet in both movies?
Once again, completely missing the point. Here we go again... "Not just any tracker, but a tracker that could get a participant killed if they stay in a specific area for too long. Again, not superficial similarity, but very specific." I don't see why you have such a hard time understanding this.
Everything that you say THG 'borrowed' from BR is in a hundred thousand other movies. Backpacks, trackers, a male and female protagonist that survives to the end of the story. There is one 'similarity'...the Deathmatch and you really can't use that because the Ancient Romans did it first, complete with young girl gladiators. You just don't want to admit it.
Once again, when two works have dozens of similarities down to specific details, then it becomes highly unlikely that it could have been mere "coincidence". The more and more "coincidences" you have between two works, the less and less likely it becomes that one was not influenced by the other. You would have to abandon rational thought to believe that Collins could have possibly come up with all those specifically similar scenarios independently without any influence. "You just don't want to admit it", but you're just being plain irrational here.
"WHO THE HELL DO YOU THINK I AM???!!!!!" share
I don't understand you, THG has no specific weapon for anyone in the story line. Katniss is a hunter who was taught to use a bow by her father. But she isn't given a bow in the Games, either in or out of a backpack. What was in her backpack was some survival gear. Survival gear was not needed in BR because there were residences with food available. How do you see a 'similarity' here? This is actually very puzzling.
How did the trackers in THG get anyone killed. All it did was show where that person was. The necklaces were a weapon that could and did decapitate the students if they went into 'forbidden zones'. But there was nothing like that in THG or even 'Catching Fire'. No place in any Arena would trigger an automatic death in either scenario. Even in the clock arena you could survive the traps if you were quick and strong enough. Katniss got pushed back by the Gamemakers because she was getting too far away from the other Tributes, not because she was in danger of being decapitated. And in THG this could be seen. In BR nobody could be seen because there was no cameras. Well it wasn't in a purpose built Arena. it was an island who'es residents had been evacuated so they could hold the battle. Do you know what a 'similarity' is?
Name one similarity that was specific to BR and that was never ever used in another film. You see to accuse Collins of 'ripping something off' she would have to have ripped off something that was unique to BR. And there was nothing in BR that had not been done before. Even the Deathmatch was not that unique, it had all been done before and in films and books that were a lot more well-known than a foreign book that didn't sell and in a film that was never released in the country that Collins lived in.
_____________
I am the Queen of Snark, TStopped said so.
I don't understand you, THG has no specific weapon for anyone in the story line. Katniss is a hunter who was taught to use a bow by her father. But she isn't given a bow in the Games, either in or out of a backpack. What was in her backpack was some survival gear. Survival gear was not needed in BR because there were residences with food available. How do you see a 'similarity' here? This is actually very puzzling.
The fact remains that, however they acquired it, each participant had their own unique weapon.
How did the trackers in THG get anyone killed. All it did was show where that person was. The necklaces were a weapon that could and did decapitate the students if they went into 'forbidden zones'. But there was nothing like that in THG or even 'Catching Fire'. No place in any Arena would trigger an automatic death in either scenario. Even in the clock arena you could survive the traps if you were quick and strong enough. Katniss got pushed back by the Gamemakers because she was getting too far away from the other Tributes, not because she was in danger of being decapitated. And in THG this could be seen. In BR nobody could be seen because there was no cameras. Well it wasn't in a purpose built Arena. it was an island who'es residents had been evacuated so they could hold the battle. Do you know what a 'similarity' is?
In both BR and THG, they were zones where you get killed by a trap. In BR, the trap is the neck collar exploding, while in THG, it's an elaborate explosion. And speaking of the "purpose built Arena", it even had a similar look to the jungle environment in BR. How convenient.
Name one similarity that was specific to BR and that was never ever used in another film. You see to accuse Collins of 'ripping something off' she would have to have ripped off something that was unique to BR. And there was nothing in BR that had not been done before. Even the Deathmatch was not that unique, it had all been done before and in films and books that were a lot more well-known than a foreign book that didn't sell and in a film that was never released in the country that Collins lived in.
Name one previous film that was specifically about a game of death where teenagers are forced by adults to fight each other to the death until only one is left standing. Sorry mate, but there was no other film like that for over a decade until THG came along. And for the record, I'm not accusing Collins of "ripping something off", but pointing out that she borrowed ideas from BR, whether intentionally or unintentionally. You're the one that's accusing me of something I didn't accuse her of, i.e. a straw man argument.
"WHO THE HELL DO YOU THINK I AM???!!!!!" share
Who had a specific weapon handed to them? This is really puzzling. How much attention did you pay to the movie.
Yes you could get killed by a trap in Catching Fire,. But there were no traps in THG. Again I don't think you paid much attention or you are deliberately stretching things to try and make a point. When you have to stretch something to make a point, you don't have a point.
I never denied that the one similarity in the films was the DEathmatch. Now what was the reason for the Deathmatch in BR and what was the reason for the Deathmatch in THG? As for children being forced into a life or death situation you have to look no further than the Theseus myth which was Collins inspiration along with the Iraq war and the reality TV game, Survivor. You see when a book's inspiration jumps out at you in the first chapter, (The Reaping Lottery and the word Tributes) you don't have to twist, stretch and pretzel points to make a case. The case is right there on page.
_____________
I am the Queen of Snark, TStopped said so.
despite the dozens of obvious similarities I don't think is a rip off of "Battle Royale" because I'm a fan of "The Hunger Games", and female, and old, and depressed, and bitter, not to smart also..
shareMy dear, I would never dream of calling you stupid. I will leave that to people who cannot think up an original insult. There are many on these boards you know. They are really quite pathetic in their attempts to put you down. Do as I do, pity them. After all they don't have much of a life most of the time. When you have a rich and more or less contented life, (I do wish they grandkids would take a turn walking the dog, they live just next door.) You don't have to worry about them. They are simply a source of endless amusement. As for bitterness, leave that to the trolls also, they have nothing else, least of all a case on question about BR.
_____________
I am the Queen of Snark, TStopped said so.
Its seems quite harsh to use words like "pathetic' and to assume peoples lives are not "rich" or "contented" or that they could be a "source of endless amusement" because they "don't have much of a life most of the time" - just because they don't like the same movie that we do.
I don't accept all views but I don't feel the need to be snarky, or attempt to make others feel bad because of it.
It does seem harsh doesn't it. But then I feel that when these people have no qualms about calling a woman a thief and a liar with no more evidence than their overactive imaginations, well I do find that behaviour quite pathetic. And let's face it, when all you have is an over active imagination. it does seem that you don't have much of a life. Well except to come on a public forum and display a certain kind of nastiness to the world. But you are right, we really should feel sorry for people like that. I just wonder if they feel free to call everybody they know a thief and a liar with no evidence?
_____________
I am the Queen of Snark, TStopped said so.
Its not me, and its not you, thats called a thief or liar. I don't worry about Suzanne Collins ability to defend her own growing financial empire. And she can do it without the need for me to become a mean spirited troll as well.
shareEspecially when she earned every single penny with the use of her own imagination.
_____________
I am the Queen of Snark, TStopped said so.
OK, I'm gonna write an original story also....my hero is named "Luke" and its set A long time ago in a galaxy far, far, away....
share[deleted]
[deleted]
The game in 'Battle Royale' wasn't even broadcasted nationwide. You were saying???
share[deleted]
Have you even watched Battle Royale? Many of the kids in BR "choose to hide and wait for the others to die rather than going on killing sprees", much more so than the contestants in THG, a lot of whom behaved more like adult soldiers rather than teenagers. Even Rue's tragic death scene wasn't very realistic for a child, in contrast to many of the BR kids who were often screaming or crying as they were killed, which is a lot closer to reality.
Once again, have you even watched BR? Countless kids committed suicide in BR, something the kids in THG never even contemplated. And on the other hand, you had some kids in BR killing classmates they didn't like because of previous bad experiences, killing friends out of fear they'd be killed, groups working together to overcome difficulties, some of those groups losing trust in each other, some feeling distress at having killed someone, and so on. The way the teens behaved in BR was much more varied, with each character handling the situation in their own way, whereas most of the contestants in THG mostly behaved in more or less a similar manner, with little remorse over killing someone.I will relent and agree with you that many do wait it out, but countless suicides does not equal four. Yuko Sakaki jumped from the lighthouse but that suicide was because of the events in the Light House. My main problem with the movie is all of the psychotic killers. Kazuo Kiriyama makes sense as one since he was brought into the event to be a killer. But numerous students turned into psychotic killers and that would only occur if they had been pretty evil before the Battle Royale event occurred. Mitsuko Souma was like a mass murderer, but her experience in her previous life was being a hooker. Takako Chigusa is smiling while going on what looks like a casual exercise run while her friend is doing a casual bike ride. They are right out in the wide open vulnerable and her only defense is an ice pick. How wonderful. They are so happy even though they know they likely only have a maximum of three days left alive. Next thing you know she is pulling out her ice pick and wildly stabbing an unarmed Kazushi Niida.
As has been mentioned before in this forum, THG is a sci-fi, whereas BR is more like a horror. Realism makes a lot more sense in a horror than it does in a sci-fi, so THG's comparative lack of realism isn't a deal-breaker.They are trying to pass the film off as Science Fiction genre.
Once again, if you actually watched BR, most of the kids failed at handling or aiming their weapons. You must be thinking of that one crazy guy with the gun, but that's obviously because he was a previous contestant, so he already had experience from before, something the current class didn't have.We are talking about fairly young kids who have never handled a weapon. It is called a Middle School (9th grade). Kids at that age would do much worse with guns. For example, Niida having never used a cross bow manages to pick it up off of the ground and use it perfectly on Akamatsu without having ever seen it before. He didn't have to figure out how to hold it or use the trigger.
Nonsense. Battle Royale was a success, both critically and commercially. It was a major box office success in Japan and gained millions of fans overseas, including a sizable cult following in America where it was banned for a long time. It received a highly positive reception from most critics, and Quentin Tarantino, one of the most renowned Hollywood filmmakers, even proclaimed Battle Royale to be the best film he's seen in the past 20 years. That's not the kind of reception one would expect from a "failure".You can give it all the critic acclaim you want, but people did not buy it in the USA. It is only getting watched now because of the Hunger Games connection. The other problem with the movie to me is there are too many participants. There is a lot of confusion trying to keep up with this many people who are being introduced far into the movie.
Last off, the Battle Royale Act makes no sense. One has to wonder how killing 41 students in a secret event (not televised) is going to make 800,000 become better students.
share
I will relent and agree with you that many do wait it out, but countless suicides does not equal four. Yuko Sakaki jumped from the lighthouse but that suicide was because of the events in the Light House. My main problem with the movie is all of the psychotic killers. Kazuo Kiriyama makes sense as one since he was brought into the event to be a killer. But numerous students turned into psychotic killers and that would only occur if they had been pretty evil before the Battle Royale event occurred. Mitsuko Souma was like a mass murderer, but her experience in her previous life was being a hooker. Takako Chigusa is smiling while going on what looks like a casual exercise run while her friend is doing a casual bike ride. They are right out in the wide open vulnerable and her only defense is an ice pick. How wonderful. They are so happy even though they know they likely only have a maximum of three days left alive. Next thing you know she is pulling out her ice pick and wildly stabbing an unarmed Kazushi Niida.
Mitsuko Souma was a victim of sexual abuse as a child. There's nothing unusual about former victims of child abuse growing up to become bullies and/or psychotic killers (or both, like in Mitsuko's case). As for Takako Chigusa, she was paranoid that she'd get raped by Kazushi Niida if she let him live, so she killed him the moment she felt he was a threat. The shocking brutality of the murder, however, makes a lot more sense in the novel (where Kazushi was a lot more aggressive) than in the movie, but nevertheless the movie's version of events kind of fits the horror / black comedy / Tarantino-esque vibes that the film was going for.
They are trying to pass the film off as Science Fiction genre.
Which one do you mean? THG or BR?
We are talking about fairly young kids who have never handled a weapon. It is called a Middle School (9th grade). Kids at that age would do much worse with guns. For example, Niida having never used a cross bow manages to pick it up off of the ground and use it perfectly on Akamatsu without having ever seen it before. He didn't have to figure out how to hold it or use the trigger.
Niida kills Akamatsu by accident, as he's falling to the floor. That's a far cry from actually knowing how to handle and aim the weapon. And this is pretty obvious later on when he can't handle the crossbow in that Chigusa scene we've discussed above. Hell, he even throws the weapon away when she starts chasing him, instead of trying to defend himself with it, knowing how much he sucks with it.
You can give it all the critic acclaim you want, but people did not buy it in the USA. It is only getting watched now because of the Hunger Games connection. The other problem with the movie to me is there are too many participants. There is a lot of confusion trying to keep up with this many people who are being introduced far into the movie.
How can Americans have brought it if it was banned in the US until 2012? As for the large number of participants, I find it impressive that BR was even able to develop such a large cast of participants, giving most of them distinct personalities and many of them backstories, all in the span of just two hours. In comparison, THG had a much smaller cast of participants, yet only developed several of those characters, while the rest were just two-dimensional extras. But then, THG was intended to be mainly focused on a single heroine (i.e. first-person), whereas BR was intended to be an ensemble piece (i.e. third-person).
Last off, the Battle Royale Act makes no sense. One has to wonder how killing 41 students in a secret event (not televised) is going to make 800,000 become better students.
There is an entire backstory for that in the original novel, but the movie doesn't dwell on it and mainly focuses on the Battle Royale itself.
"WHO THE HELL DO YOU THINK I AM???!!!!!" share
Mitsuko Souma was a victim of sexual abuse as a child. There's nothing unusual about former victims of child abuse growing up to become bullies and/or psychotic killers (or both, like in Mitsuko's case). As for Takako Chigusa, she was paranoid that she'd get raped by Kazushi Niida if she let him live, so she killed him the moment she felt he was a threat. The shocking brutality of the murder, however, makes a lot more sense in the novel (where Kazushi was a lot more aggressive) than in the movie, but nevertheless the movie's version of events kind of fits the horror / black comedy / Tarantino-esque vibes that the film was going for.We have a very high percentage of people acting like psychopaths. The movie provides no background for Mitsuko or any of the other psychopaths.
Which one do you mean? THG or BR?"Battle Royale" is classified as sci-fi on IMDb.
Niida kills Akamatsu by accident, as he's falling to the floor. That's a far cry from actually knowing how to handle and aim the weapon. And this is pretty obvious later on when he can't handle the crossbow in that Chigusa scene we've discussed above. Hell, he even throws the weapon away when she starts chasing him, instead of trying to use it against her, knowing how much he sucks with it.Nobody is falling to the floor. Akamatsu is another one of the psychopaths and he is rushing toward Niiada who is casually picking up the weapon. Niida then manages to point and shoot the weapon under extreme pressure even though it is unlikely that he has ever used a cross bow in his entire life.
As for the large number of participants, I find it impressive how BR was even able to develop such a large cast of participants, giving most of them distinct personalities and many of them backgrounds, all in the span of just two hours. In comparison, THG had a much smaller cast of participants, yet only developed several of those characters, while the rest were just two-dimensional extras. THG was intended to be mainly focused on a single heroine (i.e. first-person), whereas BR was intended to be an ensemble piece (i.e. third-person).For me that is a big weakness of Battle Royale. I found myself having to pause the movie multiple times when I watched it to keep up with so many characters. The movie kept jumping around all over the place. It seems like characters are sill being introduced an hour into the movie. "The Hunger Games" isn't anything like this. Everything in the arena is focused on what Katniss sees except for a few four or five second long clips of the Game Maker and Capital people. They don't even show video of Peeta getting injured. There is no video of anyone else getting killed unless Katniss is present. This paragraph explains another reason "The Hunger Games" doesn't copy "Battle Royale"
Do you have any US DVD sales figures to back up your claim?Amazon is likely the largest retailer in the USA for books and movies.
Battle Royale: The Novel Paperback
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #8,933 in Books
Battle Royale (2012)
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #11,284 in Movies & TV
Battle Royale (Director's Cut Collector's Edition) (2000)
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #146,678 in Movies & TV
The Hunger Games
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #28
Hunger Games: Catching Fire
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #27
Hunger Games: Mockingjay
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #9
The Hunger Games Trilogy
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #112
Praise for The Hunger Games series
#1 USA Today Bestseller
#1 New York Times Bestseller
#1 Wall Street Journal Bestseller
#1 Publishers Weekly Bestseller
A People magazine (Top 10) Best Book of 2009
A Time Magazine Best Fiction Book of 2009
A Publishers Weekly Best Book of 2009
A Kirkus Best Book of 2009
A 2009 BooklistEditors' Choice
EDIT*
The Hunger Games: Catching Fire (DVD / Blu-ray Combo + UltraViolet Digital Copy) (2013)
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #85 in Movies & TV (See Top 100 in Movies & TV)
share
We have a very high percentage of people acting like psychopaths. The movie provides no background for Mitsuko or any of the other psychopaths.
If you honestly believe many humans, especially adolescents, wouldn't resort to immoral "psychopathic" behaviour if they were forced into a life-or-death situation, then you'd have to be very naive to actually believe that. As for background details, there's only so much one could fit into a 2 hour movie dealing with such a large cast. The original novel provides plenty of background details though.
Nobody is falling to the floor. Akamatsu is another one of the psychopaths and he is rushing toward Niiada who is casually picking up the weapon. Niida then manages to point and shoot the weapon under extreme pressure even though it is unlikely that he has ever used a cross bow in his entire life.
You might want to watch that scene again. Niida literally fell to the floor as he accidentally shot the crossbow at Akamatsu. And Akamatsu isn't so much of a "psychopath" as an immature adolescent who desperately wants to live even if it means abandoning morals. And you might not want to admit it, but when humans are forced into life-or-death situations, they often do abandon morals. That's reality, whether you like it or not.
For me that is a big weakness of Battle Royale. I found myself having to pause the movie multiple times when I watched it to keep up with so many characters. The movie kept jumping around all over the place. It seems like characters are sill being introduced an hour into the movie. "The Hunger Games" isn't anything like this. Everything in the arena is focused on what Katniss sees except for a few four or five second long clips of the Game Maker and Capital people. They don't even show video of Peeta getting injured. There is no video of anyone else getting killed unless Katniss is present. This paragraph explains another reason "The Hunger Games" doesn't copy "Battle Royale"
Perhaps that's a weakness for you, but for many BR fans as well as the critics, that was one of its strengths. And on the other hand, THG's almost complete lack of characterization for the supporting cast was one of its weaknesses.
Amazon is likely the largest retailer in the USA for books and movies.
...
I was actually asking for sales figures, not sales rankings. Also, I wasn't asking for sales comparisons to THG either. BR is a 13 year-old foreign-language classic whereas THG is a modern English-language American film, so it's a no-brainer that THG will be more popular in North America and/or the English-speaking world today. Nevertheless, thanks for the sales rankings anyway.
"WHO THE HELL DO YOU THINK I AM???!!!!!" share
The best site I have found for hard data about films and DVD sales in the US is this one.
http://www.the-numbers.com/. As you can see BR did not make the top 100 for 2012 or 2013.
Nor did it make the top 100 books in 2012
http://www.usatoday.com/story/life/books/2013/01/16/100-best-selling-b ooks-of-2012/1839803/
On Amazon which sold the version of the book that was published before the present edition, the book is listed at No.160,066 and has a total of 184 reviews...which are all dated. The present edition of 'Battle Royale' which Takamie expanded and had retranslated was published after THG was published. Publication dates are there on Amazon for the world to see. Along with the sales figures and customer reaction. The film is listed at No.88,631
'The Hunger Games' book is listed at No.107 on Amazon with 19,877 customer reviews. It was No1 in DVD sales for 2012 and reached No.60 in 2013.
Glad to be of help.
_____________
I am the Queen of Snark, TStopped said so.
[deleted]
Funny, here's the links for the charts for 2012 and 2013 DVD best Sellers
2012 http://www.the-numbers.com/home-market/dvd-sales/2012
2013 http://www.the-numbers.com/home-market/dvd-sales/2013
The links for The New York Time Best Sellers
2012 http://www.nytimes.com/best-sellers-books/2012-12-23/mass-market-paper back/list.html
2013 http://www.nytimes.com/best-sellers-books/hardcover-advice/list.html
'Battle Royale' isn't even on the manga lists.
_____________
I am the Queen of Snark, TStopped said so.
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
I never realized it was most beloved by americans.
Because it wasn't. share
[deleted]
1. How would the largest 'Battle Royale' fanbase be located in the U.S. if it was never released until 2012?
2. 'Battle Royale 2: Requiem' is hated not because of the U.S. issues, but because it's considered as a colossal embarrassment.
[deleted]
[deleted]