Do you think it's a coincidence that you were able to obtain a dvd (blueray, whatever) of Battle Royale easily and conveniently this year?
I don't believe the woman who wrote The Hunger Games when she says she didn't know about the cult Japanese book and movie, Battle Royale. The premise is too similar, as is the development of the plot. There are some key differences that I will shortly highlight, but I watched both back to back, and want to post a comparative review.
First, the Japanese movie is far superior. It lacks the melodrama and personal focus of Hunger Games, and takes place in a very near future or alternate present. The movie doesn't waste time with bad clichés and slow exposition and moves immediately to the slaughter, letting us know when each of the 42 contestants dies, and showing us the gory details. Quentin Tarantino named this movie one of his all-time favorites.
The US movie is a vomitous melodrama where the main character consistently acts in an idealized manner, against a backdrop of cheap propaganda clichés (institutionalized exploitation of proud and honest poor rural hicks by evil, rich, egotistical and degenerate city-dwellers), something bound to excite viewers with an active victimization complex. It shares aspects of an equally bad movie, which was called, I believe, In Time and had Justin Timberlake in the main role, mainly the economic exploitation line. The coal miners' union probably loved this steaming pile of horseshit.
Second, the movie taints Triple Falls, Bridle Vail Falls and the DuPont Forest area of North Carolina, places I love and remember fondly. Stupid emo chicks will now swarm these lovely locations so they can vicariously feel victimized and rage against the machine.
Finally, the premise of the US movie is awful. It makes no sense. The Japanese movie condemns entire classes of juvenile delinquents, combining societal pressure with reality TV. The Hunger Games has this stupid tribute idea, which no society would ever contemplate. It makes no sense.
Fuck them all, and fuck The Hunger Games. Battle Royale was so, so much better. It had that ultra happy hot Japanese chick explaining how you blow up if you take your collar off.
First, the Japanese movie is far superior. It lacks the melodrama and personal focus of Hunger Games, and takes place in a very near future or alternate present. The movie doesn't waste time with bad clichés and slow exposition and moves immediately to the slaughter, letting us know when each of the 42 contestants dies, and showing us the gory details. Quentin Tarantino named this movie one of his all-time favorites.
The US movie is a vomitous melodrama where the main character consistently acts in an idealized manner, against a backdrop of cheap propaganda clichés (institutionalized exploitation of proud and honest poor rural hicks by evil, rich, egotistical and degenerate city-dwellers), something bound to excite viewers with an active victimization complex. It shares aspects of an equally bad movie, which was called, I believe, In Time and had Justin Timberlake in the main role, mainly the economic exploitation line. The coal miners' union probably loved this steaming pile of horseshit.
Second, the movie taints Triple Falls, Bridle Vail Falls and the DuPont Forest area of North Carolina, places I love and remember fondly. Stupid emo chicks will now swarm these lovely locations so they can vicariously feel victimized and rage against the machine.
Finally, the premise of the US movie is awful. It makes no sense. The Japanese movie condemns entire classes of juvenile delinquents, combining societal pressure with reality TV. The Hunger Games has this stupid tribute idea, which no society would ever contemplate. It makes no sense.
Fuck them all, and fuck The Hunger Games. Battle Royale was so, so much better. It had that ultra happy hot Japanese chick explaining how you blow up if you take your collar off.
Hunger Games vs. Battle Royale
- 23/04/2012 02:11:03 AM
1133 Views
I don't wanna defend HG all that much...
- 23/04/2012 08:44:00 AM
820 Views
What issues exactly did Hunger Games not address that it should have?
- 23/04/2012 04:46:34 PM
807 Views
Re: What issues exactly did Hunger Games not address that it should have?
- 24/04/2012 05:41:28 AM
750 Views
I did not necessarily take the strict dichotomy of poor = good and rich = bad from the film...
- 24/04/2012 08:22:59 AM
952 Views
That premise is the equivalent of public domain - it's so unoriginal you can't call plagiarism
- 23/04/2012 03:40:26 PM
982 Views
*NM*
In this case, the suggestion is justified (at least with the books)
- 23/04/2012 06:03:08 PM
843 Views
Superiority is not evidence of plagiarism (and arguably more evident of the opposite)
- 23/04/2012 07:15:35 PM
736 Views
indeed..think of the suits that could run rampant throughout sci-fi/fantasy if that was the case! 
*NM*
- 23/04/2012 09:23:37 PM
423 Views
*NM*
- 23/04/2012 09:23:37 PM
423 Views
Is it really fair to compare the two books of BR to the first book of THG alone?
- 23/04/2012 09:22:18 PM
824 Views
There's only one BATTLE ROYALE novel.
- 23/04/2012 10:18:27 PM
741 Views
AH okay. I couldn't quite understand what you were saying. Thank you for clarifying. *NM*
- 23/04/2012 10:47:48 PM
411 Views
I posit: THG raised awareness of Battle Royale
- 25/04/2012 08:22:16 PM
818 Views