PDA

View Full Version : Battle Royale


Kappa
02-05-2006, 17:17
"You've been drugged while travelling to your graduation ceremony, along with all your 9th grader friends. You'll wake up in an island in the middle of nowhere, with a strange necklace around your neck and the feeling of dread climbing up your spine. A teacher your had in 7th grade appears and explains that you and your class have been chosen (and should be honored) for Battle Royale. What is a Battle Royale?

"You see, that necklace around your neck. It's lethal. Try to take it off, and it'll explode and automatically slit your throat. Boom, you're dead. You also can't be in the wrong place in the Island Map (aka Danger Zones) at the wrong time (every two hours), because the collar'll explode. We'll be adding danger zones to the already existing ones, so be sure to mark them in your map!

"So what's next? You'll be given a backpack with food and water supplies, and a weapon. But you could get anything as a weapon. Anything ranging from an AK-47, to a GPS device, to a baseball bat, to a paper fan, to a cooking pot lid. Won't it be fun? It'll automatically eliminate natural advantages. The class geek could get a shotgun, while the most violent jock could get a paper fan.

"You have 72 hours to kill as many of your classmates as you can. If by the 72th hour we don't have only one person left, only one winner, the remaining necklaces will explode and the game will be forfeit."

~

This is an introduction (of sorts) to Battle Royale; I wrote it after the third time I saw it. It's a Japanese movie which was released in 2000, with a sequel in 2003. It's, to say the least, a very shocking and gory movie, but differently from most gory movies, it poses a moral question which has been poking at the back of my head fro the past 6 years.

I'm curious. It's an underground movie, which wasn't released in the States (not banned... merely not released). From what I hear, Europe is closer to Japan media-wise, since a lot of the material I get that is not released in USA comes from Europe, which makes me wonder if anybody else has seen it and what they think about it, mainly because we have a hell of a lot of European members. I myself would recommend to anybody.

If you haven't, the moral questioning is still valid. Please share your opinions.

Kappa
03-05-2006, 05:49
Something tells me I should've given this thread the title of "HAY GUYS, I HAVE PICTURES OF LENA HAVING SEX WITH A WOMAN OTHER THAN YULIA" to at least get someone's attention. o_x

Why other than Yulia? :spy:

I was sleepy, Lena was the first name that came up in my head and a friend on msn joked that I should've posted a sex-themed name for my thread to get attention.. :lol: Why, would you have cared if it was Yulia?

Well, that would have certainly caught my attention!

Obie
03-05-2006, 21:43
Well, it looks more like a video game,,,,, I'd like to watch that movie,,,, but subtitled:cool:

People killing other people just for fun is old story,,,,, but killing because if not oyu're the one who's gonna be killed,,, that's something interesting.

angelmouse
04-05-2006, 06:23
I've seen the movie. It must have been in 2001 or 2002 I saw it so I don't remember more in detail what I thought about it. But I know I liked it, mainly for being different, and japanese :)

The sequel is pretty useless though as it's much the same as the first one. I didn't actually watch through the sequel cause I got so bored with it.

razormaid
04-05-2006, 14:20
I watched this film way back when it came out in Japan (I could hardly understand the language) and then later on DVD with subtitles. I really loved it!! (but then, I love movies with senseless violence!). The sequel was pretty much more of the same and far too long, but it's worth watching the first one.

I remember there were many discussions on how the film was a comment on modern Japanese society, despite being somewhat cartoonish. My Japanese friend said it was a massive hit in Japan, and said that, although no-one shot anyone at his school with an uzi, he had heard of isolated instances of relatively extreme, out-of-place violence: particularly cases of teachers punish students and causing injury or death (examples I was given was a teacher forcing a student to hold the blade of a pair of scissors and slamming them agains the desk so the opposite blade cut them, and a teacher slamming a metal gate against a student's head).

I don't know if anyone in Japan can verify that these sort of things happen / happened, or whether it's an urban myth, but in Battle Royale, the scenario is that school kids have become uncontrollable by teachers, to the point of violence; so the solution is to scare or punish them in to obedience by forcing them to kill each other. Perhaps this film illustrates Japanese society's fear that it's citizens are becoming less inclined to confirm to past standards. Perhaps they worry about what society will become if people don't uphold high moral and work standards.

I know that in Australia, school is not the place I remember: There is far more bullying and harrasment, cases of violence between students. I'm sure there are more and more cases of attacks by students on staff;- not to mention the large number of students who are not even in school.

Need I mention the apparent state of affairs in American schools? I guess they didn't release this film in the states because it would be too disturbing. Perhaps they didn't want to give kids any new ideas.. :rolleyes:

(this ramble is purely my own observations and opinions, and I don't mean to offend anyone's nationality) :)
Kappa, you should check out 'Suicide Club' - another ultra-gory Japanese film with chilling social parallels.

Kappa
04-05-2006, 16:07
razormaid, I've thought of seeing it, but I had no idea what it was about. Thank you, I'll look into finding it. :kwink:

I do know that as any movie of this gore amount, it did bring out the nutsos from their caves. I don't know from the "teachers punishing their students to the point of death" incident that you mention, but I do know of some similar things. For example, the infamous Nevada-tan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nevada-tan) murder case shocked Japan, and was linked to Battle Royale (and put off a couple weeks the airing of the sequel, I think) because it was Nevada-tan's favorite movie.

Some other cases of bullied students killing or injuring their bullies also surfaced after Battle Royale came out. All in all, I think it was the shock many nations needed.

Regarding what you said about the States not releasing BR, it's not true that it wasn't released there because of the gore. It just wasn't released because of a series of unfortunate factors, amongst them the fact that Toei refused to pay the obscene amount of money that the american distributors were asking for, that the plot made many studios queasy, and a number of other things you can probably imagine.

I don't get why so many people didn't like the sequel. I quite frankly found it to be... enlightning might be the word. Besides, where else are you going to find another movie where 30 students die in 45 minutes? :lol: I didn't think it was too long, and at many points I felt I could relate. Then again I live in a country in which the US holds us by the nuts for 364 days a year (we did boicott it ONE day this year...). I think it was a good way of venting my own anger at the States, through this movie.

Another thing might be that I already knew five of the actors and actresses of BR2 from some other movie or play. Miyuki Kanbe was the reason I wanted to see this movie, and I already knew Masaya Kikawada, Michiho Matsumoto, Tatsuya Fujiwara, and as much as it pains me to admit it, Nanami Oota. :gigi:

angelmouse
04-05-2006, 16:28
where else are you going to find another movie where 30 students die in 45 minutes?

Uhm, the first one? Perhaps they died slower then... :D

Kappa
04-05-2006, 16:40
Uhm, the first one? Perhaps they died slower then...

Yeah well, in the first one 39 students die in the course of two hours. Want it or not, that's slower than 30 students dead in 45 minutes.

... I mean, at one point while watching the sequel, I had to pause and recount who had died and who was still alive because so many people were getting killed within short spans of time I had no idea who had lived through it. :laugh:

angelmouse
04-05-2006, 16:43
Yeah well, in the first one 39 students die in the course of two hours. Want it or not, that's slower than 30 students dead in 45 minutes.

... I mean, at one point while watching the sequel, I had to pause and recount who had died and who was still alive because so many people were getting killed within short spans of time I had no idea who had lived through it.

Hmm...yes. I guess there was quite a few dead only in those 30 min I saw :D


I don't get why so many people didn't like the sequel.

I didn't like the sequel cause I didn't think it brought anything new compared to the first one. Ok, I stopped watching after maybe 30 minuntes so after that of course, i don't know. But basically the story was the same as the first one. Students are brought to an island where they are forced to kill each other for survival. That story line was sort of breaking new ground with the first movie but the second one became just a gory, somewhat comical movie with a lot of killing (I guess more than the first one) since we already knew the story. It just had nothing new.


Edti: Btw, I don't know if the movie was released here (Sweden). I'm quite sure it was never shown in movie theatres at least so I don't know the "public opinion" of this film.

Kappa
04-05-2006, 17:49
But basically the story was the same as the first one. Students are brought to an isalnd where they are forced to kill each other for survival.

Just curious, did you watch this movie unsubbed? o_ô Battle Royale 2 has practically nothing in common with the original Battle Royale. The second movie is not about killing each other for survival.

The rules have been changed, and they don't need to kill each other, they need to kill Shuya Nanahara (winner of the original Battle Royale and head of a terrorist group) if they want to survive. The only thing in common with the original BR is that they still have 72 hours to kill Nanahara. The rules change to the extent that the collars will explode if your partner is killed (which is why so many die in the first 45 minutes).

In resume... in BR1 the rules are:
- 72 hours, or else the necklaces explode
- Only one winner by the end of it, no couples
- It's kill or be killed
- You might get the lamest weapon ever and still survive

In BR2, however...
- 72 hours, or else the necklaces explode
- Doesn't matter how many survive, the goal is to kill Nanahara
- All kids involved in BR2 get a FAMAS Type III rifle (which is one mean sunnova gun), no lame weapons
- If your partner of equal number (Girl #4 <-> Boy #4, for example) dies, your necklace will explode

I fail to see what's so similar to the first one. The rules are not the same, the story is not the same. :gigi:

angelmouse
04-05-2006, 17:59
Just curious, did you watch this movie unsubbed?
LOL, no, but it was a few years back.

I fail to see what's so similar to the first one.
Really!? No similarities? I mean, they're still on the island killing each other. That to me is basically the same.

Anyway, when I say I don't think BR2 brought anything new I am not talking about details. I mean, with BR1 the whole concept was new and the movie was interesting from that point of view. It was something a bit different. BR2, being a sequel, is not bringing anything new in that sence. That's what I'm talking about. To me the story was exciting ones, not twice. Change of rules and guns doesn't change that.

QueenBee
04-05-2006, 21:53
I heard about it before, but sort of forgot about it I guess. I really wanna see it now. I love stuff that are extreme and shocking while linked to the truth (to a certain extent maybe, but still).

Kyro
04-05-2006, 22:10
I think a friend mentioned this to me a while ago. I meant to check it out, but I never got around to it. It sounds like something I would really like. I love anything that's shocking or controversial.

Kappa
05-05-2006, 00:31
Anyway, when I say I don't think BR2 brought anything new I am not talking about details. I mean, with BR1 the whole concept was new and the movie was interesting from that point of view. It was something a bit different. BR2, being a sequel, is not bringing anything new in that sence. That's what I'm talking about. To me the story was exciting ones, not twice. Change of rules and guns doesn't change that.

Dude, you saw 30 minutes (if what you said is true). You missed the hour and a half that came after that, which is what actually holds the interesting part of the story. :gigi: But I guess I should accept those thirty minutes bored you because it was the same you saw before... even when what comes next is what IS new and fresh...