Battle Royale vs. The Hunger Games

10 comments

3 comments

I'm just throwin' this out there: I haven't seen Hunger Games, nor do I really have any interest in seeing it. I don't even know much about it, but I'd like to know, over the coming days, if people see this comparison and think Hunger Games is just Battle Royale for pussies. That is all.

It is impossible to talk about The Hunger Games without referencing Battle Royale. However, they are both astonishing pieces of work. The immensely hard-hitting topic of children being forced to fight to the death is impossible to lighten. Both BR and HG are just as effective as the other as conveying the dread that the main characters are constantly facing during each of the films. My advice to Cleckley, and all other skeptics, if you enjoyed BR you should go and see HG and form your own conclusions on whether you think that HG is just a diluted BR. In my opinion, there is so much more to HG than what it appears to be advertised as, the themes involved aren't anything original but it doesn't weaken the film at all.

While I think Battle Royale is the better film, The Hunger Games is still worth checking out. Besides the basic concept both are different in their own way. I think both works can be enjoyed on their own merits.

I may be sacrificing my cred here, but I have to give this to HUNGER GAMES. They are both terrific films, and BATTLE gets the originality points, but I was shocked how moved and impressed I was by HUNGER. The film has flaws, but Jennifer Lawrence's performance and the tragedy of teens killing each other (not lessened by the PG-13 in my opinion) carried me through, breathless. BATTLE treats the same premise as a sick joke and is much more episodic. There wasn't one character to latch onto, as with HUNGER, which made it less memorable for me, though it has many great cinematic touches and is very fun. I recommend everyone to see them both and enjoy the comparisons.

I just saw the Hunger Games a few days ago so it's fresher in my mind than Battle Royale. Both were good, but neither portrayed the basic concept as well as they might have. Battle Royale lacked depth of character and insight, while Hunger Games held back on the gruesomeness and brutality. I'll give this one to the Hunger Games; the characters were more distinctive and performances stronger, especially the excellent Jennifer Lawrence.

Yes they have the same idea of teenagers put in an arena to fight to the death but that is where it ends. As many have said Battle Royale aims for the gorefest brutality where as it's not needed in the Hunger Games as the story is so different.

@Jerfilmfan But isn't that the entire point and beauty of Battle Royale? It's just a sadistic fancy. It's purposefully gladiatorial no? To take a bunch of kids and have them kill each other for our pleasure without really giving much of a fuck about some bullshit character back story? You're suggesting that Hunger Games takes the Cameron's Titanic approach to tragedy. That devastating mass death is only devastating if we can focus on one or two people, just so we can connect. That's a pretty sick abasement of viewers' humanity when you think about it.

I feel two things were lacking form the hunger games: gore and the TV aspect. The games are grim and should be shown that way, but since it is trying to appeal to a younger audience, the gruesomeness became diluted. Diluted to the point that people that would have been watching it on TV saw more action than us, the actual audience.

To add (as I wrote as I was ranking so didn't see previous comments) Cleckly is spot on. Character development in Hunger Games is vastly superior to Battle Royale, but should that be necessary? A 12 year old being murdered should incite reaction regardless of their development. Schindler's List didn't need to develop every Jewish person to get across the point that the holocaust was pretty crappy.

battle royal blows hunger games away

JRM
JRM

While both share a similar premise, they're wildly different from one another in just about every way. I highly prefer Battle Royale over The Hunger Games the film; I enjoyed the book far more than the adaptation. However, the potential was there and I am looking forward to Catching Fire.

Crazy Japanese Kids are crazier than Crazy American Kids. That seems pretty factual.

Battle Royale.

I definitely feel BR i better because at the end of the movie, you feel bad for everyone involved (And the music at the end is outstanding). In The Hunger Games, I couldn't care less about any of the tributes besides the main two tbh.

Battle Royale

Hunger Games was absolutely terrible!! Battle Royale is the real deal!

Battle Royale Goes All In With The Gory Violence And It’s All In Your Face, The Hunger Games Was REALLY Toned Down, Handcuffed, And Held Back And It Discouraged Me From Watching The Other Ones. Battle Royale Wins And It’s What The Hunger Games Should’ve Been