Movie Deathmatch: The Hunger Games vs. Battle Royale

Both The Hunger Games and Battle Royale are movies based on dystopian novels in which teenagers are forced to kill one another or be killed in a cruelly arranged contest. The latter was decidely controversial in its original Japanese release (and never received proper US theatrical distribution), but the former looks ready to smoothly embrace mainstream popularity in the States and abroad.

Two films enter the CoH Comic and Hero/Villain Culture forums, but only one leaves. Which will it be?

I've yet to see either of these films but do look forward to both since they do appear to have -very- similar plotlines. In fact I've seen people doing their best to pre-claim that The Hunger Games is a complete and total rip-off of Battle Royale.

But yes the idea of packaging a controversial concept in a fictional story and how it's accepted in various cultures is an interesting study. Why is it that one version of "teenagers being pitted against each other via an organized government deathmatch" considered box office gold as long as it's "dressed up" the right way? Makes you realize you can probably get anyone to accept anything as long as you spin it the right way.

If Hunger Games was rated R this would be a fairer fight. With the watered down violence, I'm not sure it can win.

The good news, from what I hear, is that they have not toned down the subversive revolutionary message of The Hunger Games. If anything, the movie plays it up. That's very interesting.

In a country as divided as the US is right now, I'm curious about what will happen when a story about caste-based revolution becomes part of our cultural consciousness. If this movie is a hit (and every sign is pointing to it becoming one), I expect it to show up as a minor theme in the presidential election. This movie could be bigger for the protest movement than V for Vendetta.

As a follow-on to my last post...

I'm not familiar with Battle Royale, but from what I read it's about escaping an oppressive, murderous government. The Hunger Games trilogy is about overthrowing one. For that reason alone The Hunger Games is my first pick, although I haven't seen either and can't vouch for the actual quality of their stories.

Ah I missed out on you saying you hadn't even seen the first one, forgive me if I can across snarky wasn't intended.

Just that Battle Royale 2 is pretty much forgotten about these days.

Both movies convey the same theme. An evil government subjects several youths in a project or a spectacle to induce fear and paranoia, by having children kill each other. Battle Royale which I have seen, is visceral, it shows just what people are capable of given the choice between kill or be killed. Some are up to the task, others aren't. I think Battle Royale is much more about the survival aspect, the emotional conflict each character face from the choice, and what it takes; what has to be done in order to live. It's a social commentary that gives the viewer a character that they can indentify with. It's sick, twisted, and brutally honest.

While I haven't seen the Hunger Games yet. I imagine it will be much more centralized around Katniss Everdeen and her evolving into a much stronger individual, and the beginning or her quest to overthrow the corrupt government. Meanwhile show the economic and social inequalites of social classes. I think the Hunger Games is more a story than Battle Royale and Battle Royale is more a social commentary.

Just linking this video since they do bring up the Hunger Games/Battle Royale discussion close to the start of it.

Team NChick on Hunger Games

They pretty much agree with ChaosAngel above.

The notion of throwing second-class citizens into a death arena isn't all that unique. Let's see, there's Running Man, Death Race, Hunger Games, Battle Royale, and what else? Not to mention the actual battle royales that would take place at least a century back where they would take black kids, blindfold them, then toss them into a pit, force them to fight, and bet to see who comes out on top.

Salon had a good article on the DNA of The Hunger Games and it goes much deeper than merely Battle Royale. Collins claims to have drawn inspiration from the myth of the Minotaur when young tributes were thrown into the labyrinth to be eaten by the aforementioned beast.

She also claims she never saw Battle Royale, and I have no reason to disbelieve her. I think the theme of corrupt governments throwing people into gladiatorial games for sport is old enough that the fact that both of these stories feature it, just with young contestants, isn't enough evidence to prove plagiarism.

Hell, Steven King reviewed The Hunger Games when it came out and basically pointed out how Collins was ripping off his The Long Walk and Running Man.

Yeah it is far from an original idea, heck as just shown there are a large number of 'pit people against each other for entertaining the masses' plotline type films and books that...yeah it's hard to say who is ripping off who.

That if we go into the 'ultraviolent sports' entries either like Death Race 2000 or Rollerball then there is god knows how many books, films and TV series based around the idea...

Just got back from it. It covered what it needed to cover, but I thought certain moments lacked emotional punch and the plot progression could have been a little more smooth. Then again, you can say that about most adaptations, and when you can come out of it and can't bring yourself to say it was actually bad, then it puts it above most adaptations.

I blame LOTR for setting the adaptation bar so high. >.>