MovieChat Forums > Batoru rowaiaru (2000) Discussion > What a bunch of pretentious crap

What a bunch of pretentious crap

posted 10 years ago by fede_in_console
68 replies | jump to latest

Nice scenography and sound, that's all. The story seems written by a twelve years old, even The Condemned actually made more sense than this load of crap, they were in a reality show. Same for Hunger Games. But what about this?
All we have is a bunch of students that got kidnapped because of some not well clarified law and the only explanation given by the teacher is "because teens are arrogant"? Really? Who organized all of this and for what purpose? Why did the army was involved?
What did the hackers actually achieved with their job against them? Why the SPAS-12 dude suddenly changed his mind about killing the main characters? WTF was up with the teacher? What was his relation with the girl?
Why would they have a 2 hrs *beep* long movie when they don't actually put anything else than cheesy made gore? Why did they haven't dedicated the first half of the movie to an actual development for a true drama between the characters, instead of short flashbacks here and there that make you feel nothing for them?
Where did they go in the end? Why did the girl carried that knife for?
Not mentioning the cheesy close up on the characters to force emphasis in dramatic scenes, pretty pathetic.
I wanted to watch some twisted asian gorefest, 8/10 on imdb for this is an insult. Movies get trashed for lesser reasons here. I'm just not sure if there's the Tarantino fanbase or just otaku weeaboos behind this, but sure as hell this isn't an honest rating.
This movie barely deserves a 5 for the concepts and the twisted soundtrack, nothing more.

[–] mikejonas 10 years ago

Yeah, this movie is for people who can actually think and understand that there's much more that's going on than what is said and shown on screen, and figure out the answers for themselves rather than whinily ask questions and believe that the movie provided no answers. So...just go away and enjoy the dumbed-down American versions that spoonfeed you everything so you can wrap your mind around them.

[–] fede_in_console 10 years ago

Listen buddy, I'm not that kind of movie watcher you're thinking about. I've seen the "deep movies" too, I can read between the lines too, I'm an open minded watcher too.
Just the fact that you can't come up with factual objections to justify your tastes tells a lot about the true weight of the movie.
There's no acting. There's no suspense. There's no sense behind the story. There's no character developing (randomly thrown flashbacks does not count). There's no pathos. Just poorly done gore, bad filming skills and the Q.Tarantino seal of approval in the trailer.
Surely its not like the above mentioned (Condemned, HG) didn't miss of some of these points, but at least they're reasonably rated. Again, 8 for this is really insulting.

[–] mentattodd 10 years ago

Greetings. First - I applaud your English skills. Most Americans would not be able to write in Italian as well as you write in English. I initially though you might be a 12 your old American with limited English skills but I took a little time to check your profile out and learn something about you first. Perhaps you could do the same for Battle Royale and give it a chance like I decided to give you a chance and have a logical conversation about this?

Battle Royale was a book that delved deeply into each and every character. You learned back-story and you learned to care about each death. Frankly, if they did that with the movie it would have to be at least five hours long to get close and that simply is not logical. They had to cut it down and unfortunately a lot of the back-story and character development was dropped. Having said that, this is a film site and not a book sight so let's focus on that for a moment - but if you like to read you absolutely should read the book - it is very good.

As for the acting, suspense, and sense behind the story - I thought it was very well done considering the time limitations. The students were very realistic considering the situation they were put in. The back-story as to why the government was doing this to them and all that can be put aside. Just imagine for a moment you are on a school trip and the next thing you know you are in a classroom and told you have to kill all your classmates or die. How would you handle it? All those sides are explored: the ones who simply kill themselves, the ones who decided they will win at all costs, and the ones who try to avoid playing the game but want to survive too. The point of the film is, "What would happen if a totalitarian government became corrupt and did whatever it wanted to whoever it wanted?"

I rated this movie high mainly because I tried to put myself in their shoes and imagined how I would have handled it - and I think they explored that very accurately and skillfully without going off the deep end. There is enough story to keep it interesting while having enough gore to keep it realistic and unsettling because the ultimate goal was to unsettle people. We need to do everything we can to make sure governments never get that kind of power over the people - when all is said and done.

[–] The_Zig 10 years ago

I rated this movie high mainly because I tried to put myself in their shoes and imagined how I would have handled it - and I think they explored that very accurately and skillfully without going off the deep end. There is enough story to keep it interesting while having enough gore to keep it realistic and unsettling because the ultimate goal was to unsettle people.

This. Well said.

The film only really works vicariously - that is: if it sucks you in and forces you to see yourself in their place. When that happens, it forces you to explore how you'd react, to confront yourself on how you'd balance your core values against a real, imminent threat of death.

I gave it top rating. When I first saw this film, it hit me hard, and affected me for a while. From lurking here over the years, I know I am not unique, and many others were influenced this way.
I think this is why the film has a high rating.

I've learned from hard experience that if you didn't experience it this way, you most likely won't ever really get this. And no amount of painfully crafted posts from me will ever really show you.

[–] Old_Man_From_Scene_24 9 years ago

I've seen the "deep movies" too, I can read between the lines too, I'm an open minded watcher too.

You gave Everest a 5, Selma a 1 and Ender's Game a 7 and Jupiter Ascending a 6. I'd say this statement... nay, this entire post, is self-indicting.

"All these squares make a circle."

[–] zhoolagin 10 years ago

I actually heard a movie reviewer call this "a masterpiece"! Wha??? There's 0 character developement, so you feel 0 sympathy and 0 connection to the them. I'm coming from the viewpoint of a Hunger Games fan that had to see what all the fuss was about from all the BR fans. I get that the movies have the whole "fight to the death" thing in common, but seriously, people need to get over their love-affair with this movie. You take a class of 9th graders and put them in a kill or be killed situation and most of them are, all of the sudden, cold blooded killers. No training with guns, but all at once you have 15-year-old girls chasing down their classmates and shooting them... These kids hadn't even even heard of the battle royale act and we're expected to accept the fact that kids can just become killers because they're told to.
At least in The Hunger Games this was their way of life.... Every kid grew up losing friends to the reaping and knew that next year it could be them in the games. I think mentally, they would be at least a little desensitized to the thought of killing people. And then, of course they're trained and have some time to prepare.
I'm not saying Suzanne Collins din't steal parts of BR for her books, but if she did, I'm sorry, I think she drastically improved it.

[–] jadecoloredglasses 10 years ago

lol k

---

May those who accept their fate find happiness. May those who defy it find glory.

[–] jessicacopeland39 10 years ago

I have not seen all of it just clips on youtube. Last time I check the whole film was on youtube. Anyway a class told me that the reason for all this is because the teen are too rebellious. It been said online that the teens would abuse the teacher and boycott their lessons. The only actress I can identify is the girl that played GOGO from Kill Bill.

[–] mortezahalimi 10 years ago

Because you don't need those back stories and explanations.

The students had no idea what is going around them, and because we don't know much about it either we are put right into their shoes AND THIS IS THE ESSENCE OF STORY TELLING!

There was a lot of suspense, good acting, and quality cinema all together.

[–] paynespnz 10 years ago

Are you kidding? There isn't even the faintest hint of suspense. The acting is barely on a par with B-horror garbage. The book wasn't bad but wasn't amazing either. In the film I don't see a need for extensive back stories but some believable personalities and character development is absolutely essential for good story telling. Simply conveying a situation that is happening is NOT the "essence of story telling" Tell Stephen King, Poe or Charles Dickens that real story telling isn't about an emotional connection with characters and a well developed multidimensional personality. Without any depth to the characters you just end up with people in the story serving simply as props. In BR that's basically all they are. Their actions have no believability because the characters have no identifiable traits to relate to.

[–] !!!deleted!!! (8778465) 10 years ago

Anyone who says "load of crap" is a *beep*

[–] volkstraum 10 years ago

"Pretentious" is the polar opposite of what I would consider this movie.

Perhaps the word you were searching for was "foreign"? Don't be scared of things you can't understand.

"I can't help but notice that there are skulls all over everything. Are we the baddies?"

[–] summeriris 10 years ago

I'm sorry, but excusing the film's faults because the film is 'foreign' is a cop out. 'The Seven Samurai' is a foreign film as well, so is 'Ringu', 'Crouching Tiger', 'Eat Drink, Man Woman'. But these films have character development and cohesive storylines. The fact the some are in Japanese and the others Chinese doesn't make any difference. Now I know some people simply don't like subtitles, but not everyone feels like that. I myself prefer them to a film being dubbed. The story in BR is weak (despite the multiple death scenes), the character development is missing and the acting is poor. And there is no real excuse for this. I know the director was ill during the filming but the film does have many of his touches, but they are simply not enough. I'm not comparing the film to THG because the stories are just too different for a good comparison to be made.

Perhaps if Takami and the director had concentrated on one or two characters, given them some depth and a cohesive storyline the work would have been better. It didn't even have to be one of the three survivors. Any one of the students that died after we got to know whoever it was would have introduced some pathos, and the having the three survivors being more or less strangers would have introduced the element of chance into the story as well. And the Teacher's death scene should certainly have been changed. Was the director deliberately trying to include an element of farce into the story?

_____________
I am the Queen of Snark, TStopped said so.

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] summeriris 10 years ago

watered-down, weak, Xerox copy of the entire plot, characters, storyline and premise of the original Battle Royale,

Oh, please enlighten me. What points? What plot? What characters? What premise? I know that there is a Death Match, but you can't claim that every movie with a Death Match trope in it was inspired by BR, after all Spartacus was made a long time before BR. So were a heck of a lot of movies from Italy made in the late 50's and early 60's. They were the great sword and sandal 'epics' and of course Robert E. Howard's great Conan stories published in the 40's. But do tell me every single original plot point, character, storyline and premise that was in BR that was never in any other film or book before Takami wrote the book. The film doesn't count, there is something about the fact that it was never released in the US that kind of made it hard for anyone who didn't order illegal copies from Hong Kong to actually see it. And please don't mention that there are males and females in it just like THG, as far as I know there are only the two sexes around for any film/book. But let me know what other two sexes Collins should have used.

_____________
I am the Queen of Snark, TStopped said so.

[–] The_Zig 10 years ago

Perhaps if Takami and the director had concentrated on one or two characters ... It didn't even have to be one of the three survivors. Any one of the students that died after we got to know whoever it was would have introduced some pathos

Really disagree.
Would have messed up the structure of the film - and personally there's little I hate more than when shows/films do that "this character is doing this for their sister's life-saving operation" - oh look... they've died protecting someone... how meaningful... "Oh look, this baddie was abused as a child and was horrible because no one ever showed them how to love..." [wipe tear]...

The novel did this quite horrifically with Mitsuko. Seriously glad the film avoided it. The film implied and alluded to character, you had to watch for gestures, glances, it showed personality through action. And it did that enough for a heck of a lot of people to buy into the characters. Perhaps not you, but different strokes, different folks, eh?

hard for anyone who didn't order illegal copies from Hong Kong to actually see it

The Korean one was the worst!
But still, it was no great secret. It was never 'banned' in the US - there was just no distributor. It showed in some small cinema screenings back when it was new. There were Hollywood remake plans floating around media circles way before the Roy Lee attempt, and WAY way before Collins's book. And Tarantino has been telling everyone he sees about it for about a decade now. Even cast Kill Bill around it! It was in Hot Topic way back, and has been available through Netflix just about forever. Plus the UK release has been available on an R0 (universal DVD) for about as long as Stone Henge. And every time I've checked YouTube since... 2006? There's been a rip of Battle Royale on there - either as a whole film or in parts. (It was even on Google Video if you remember that!) It really was no secret.

When first I heard that Collins claims never to have heard of Battle Royale until after she gave in her final manuscript - I honestly just assumed she was covering herself legally. But on reflection, to be totally fair, it is quite possible she was an incompetent researcher.

[–] summeriris 10 years ago

Really disagree.
Would have messed up the structure of the film - and personally there's little I hate more than when shows/films do that "this character is doing this for their sister's life-saving operation" - oh look... they've died protecting someone... how meaningful... "Oh look, this baddie was abused as a child and was horrible because no one ever showed them how to love..." [wipe tear]...

I never said it had to be that kind of back story. It could have been any kind of back story. A character who came from a loving home and parents who were supportive and strong who was kidnapped with the rest of his class would have done nicely. But you'r right. The entire film of BR's would have been changed, I don't deny it. It just would have had something in the way of a character instead of a group of stereotypes who have no reason for acting like they do except that someone put the names in a bag and pulled one out for an assigned action.

I'm not disputing some people knew that the film could be obtained through illegal means. I disputing that it was common knowledge. The vast majority of the population in the US never heard of the book or the film so they didn't go looking for it.

_____________
I am the Queen of Snark, TStopped said so.

[–] The_Zig 9 years ago

It was never "illegal" to get it in the US. That was my point. Tricky, yes. Ish. Illegal, no.

[–] summeriris 9 years ago

Anything that is 'tricky' to get and has to wait over 10 years for an official release is illegal. How much of what you paid to the sellers of the DVDs went to the US taxman, import taxes, sales tax etc. How much went to the Hong Kong export system?

_____________
I am the Queen of Snark, TStopped said so.

[–] jadecoloredglasses 9 years ago

A movie not being licensed in a certain country isn't the same thing as being illegal. Also, the book and manga have been available in the US since 2003.

---

May those who accept their fate find happiness. May those who defy it find glory.

[–] summeriris 9 years ago

Oh, isn't a licence a legal requirement for whatever needs licencing? And a film is not a book, otherwise couldn't any film company make a film out of a book without having to worry about those pesky copyright laws? And wouldn't any company in Hong Kong be selling DVDs for private use only and that would make it illegal for any shop to sell the DVDs on a commercial basis?

_____________
I am the Queen of Snark, TStopped said so.

[–] caissas_deathangel 9 years ago

A licence is not always a legal requirement, often merely a practical one, or needed for distribution agreements. Cinema chains cannot show films without a means of distributing though, and that requires permission.

Arthouse cinemas could and did still occasionally show the film, and DVDs can be imported - those with English subtitles have existed for well over 10 years since the film did get a cinema release in the UK.

That is entirely legal, and buying such DVDS from or when overseas is entirely fine too.

I'm Addy. Just Addy. From God, to Kane, to Addy.

[–] summeriris 9 years ago

Then I bow to you superior knowledge. That knowledge told me that the licence situation is murky, that the film was never distributed in the US, although a tiny amount of art house cinemas did show it once in a while and the DVD was only available through overseas shops and was not ever available for rental in any way shape or form. Thank you for clearing that up so nicely.

_____________
I am the Queen of Snark, TStopped said so.

[–] The_Zig 9 years ago

Love the gracious response! All I was trying to tell you is that it was never illegal there, and was always perfectly possible to get legally (without involving any piracy, copyright infringement or Hong Kong profiteering). I'm genuinely surprised how strongly you resisted this idea! But then I fairly routinely have to import DVDs for the kids that won't ever get broad global distribution so while it seems obvious to me, I accept that this probably isn't something most people would need to worry about.

Moving on... Personally I don't know/care how close BR is or isn't to THG (which I have never seen so am not really qualified to judge).

I do have an issue with the "I'd never heard of Battle Royale before, therefore it was totally unknown, therefore THG did not copy BR" defence. I've heard this a bunch of times from THG fans and it just doesn't hold.
The film made a stir globally on release (aside from Japan where it won major awards, it was played and nominated in international film festivals across the globe, and this was partly why TOEI demanded more than any US distributor would pay - they felt they had a big hit on their hands). It was certainly big in media circles - most obviously with Tarantino casting two extra characters into Kill Bill on the strength of BR (in the end only Chiaki Kuriyama was in it, as Ko Shibasaki couldn't do). It's influence is equally clear from other countries that released films/series that were openly inspired by it.
Plus I know for a fact there were already serious talks of a Hollywood BR remake around 04/05 (trying to ride the wave of the Ring and Grudge remakes iirc) as a friend used to work out there, saw a script and knew of major meetings. It fell through but was soon followed by the Roy Lee attempt.
Also as stated above, the book was widely available in English way way back (03-ish). The manga was also pretty huge in manga circles for the best part of a decade.

Please notice, I am not claiming THG copies BR. People I know and trust claim that it does, but personally I don't know. I just dislike the above argument.

Finally, I think that if Collins genuinely failed to spot BR when researching her book, she needs to improve her research skills before she starts writing up her fantastic idea about a school of wizards...

[–] jadecoloredglasses 9 years ago

Nah, I heard she's too busy working on her revolutionary new TV show about an alien man in a time-traveling box.

---

May those who accept their fate find happiness. May those who defy it find glory.

[–] summeriris 9 years ago

That sounds rather interesting. Will he have a sonic screwdriver? Do you know what else is interesting, Dr Who was massive in the UK in the 60's, 70's, 80's and 90's. I mean massive. Nobody in the US ever heard of it, although Stephen King once mentioned it in his book Danse Macabre. But mention a Dalek or Cyberman and you got a lot of blank stares. It got to be somewhat well known when satellite TV became more common and BBC America could be watched in the US. It would be interesting to know how many recognized your reference on the board.
_____________
I am the Queen of Snark, TStopped said so.

[–] summeriris 9 years ago

It's 'bigness' depended on how many watched Tarantino's interviews. I certainly did and I remember very clearly how he spoke about it. He saw the movie in Japan and he was lamenting because it was unknown in the US. Not my words, his and the word was 'unkown'. I heard about it and then forgot about it. I'm not disputing that if you were very much interested in Japanese slasher movies you would have known about it. But truthfully just how many fans of Japanese slasher movies were around then or now?

Anyway it's best I leave it there, you certainly did a good job of confirming what I have always maintained, BR was very difficult to obtain and you had no way of just going out to a shop to get a copy. That meant word of mouth and there certainly wasn't much of that.

_____________
I am the Queen of Snark, TStopped said so.

[–] jadecoloredglasses 9 years ago

Aren't you pleasant.

Nobody in the US ever heard of it

My mom's been a Whovian since the 80's and she's never been outside of the US, ever. It had a cult following, just like BR. You know that the word "unknown" isn't always all that literal, right?

BR was very difficult to obtain and you had no way of just going out to a shop to get a copy.

Except that the book and manga were in major chain bookstores for years before THG was published. Borders had the novel in the sci-fi/fantasy section, strangely.

Don't see why I bother, though, you've been doing the equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears and shouting LA LA LA LA LA at the top of your lungs this whole time.

---

May those who accept their fate find happiness. May those who defy it find glory.

[–] summeriris 9 years ago

Perhaps your mother read the same Stephen King book that I did and learned about Dr Who from it.

And no, BR was never sold in main street bookshops and the manga certainly was not. They were sold on Amazon, but that was when Amazon was just launched and nearly went under.

Mangas were sold on line and in New York, you can actually find out on-line. And BR mangas never made it to the best selling manga lists. I found that strange and then I looked at the sales figures on Amazon and I understood why.

But I do love the Manga Classics. It's good to know that Japan likes the classics as well.

_____________
I am the Queen of Snark, TStopped said so.

[–] The_Zig 9 years ago

And no, BR was never sold in main street bookshops

From the sweeping confidence of this statement, I assumed you were about to back it up somehow. No?

I do have evidence to the contrary. I'm sure others here can back me up: I remember - and this was BEFORE I went to Japan (so 2004-6ish) - a LOT of threads here with Americans complaining that the 'movie' didn't live up to the book.
Typically they'd picked up the book in 'Borders', and then discovered the movie (which they eagerly imported, and then felt cheated that it didn't live up to the book).
As I recall, we even had an FAQ thread that recommended film-first, book-second just to get around this. So unless these Americans were all buying this accidentally off Amazon (typo?!), or browsing back-alley bookshops, I can only assume there WAS major book distribution going on.

And this is if I totally discount the word of various American posters over the years who have clearly told me that they bought it in the main bookshops.

[–] summeriris 9 years ago

All I can really do is state that I never once saw it in a bookshop and as someone who'es idea of fun was haunting bookshops I think I probably would have done so. The other thing is I can find no trace of the first version of BR being sold in any High Street book chain. There are no reviews for it on B&N for instance. The second rewritten and expanded version has book reviews on it, but not the first version. Now Amazon does have some reviews for the first version, but they are mainly from overseas. I think there is about 10 for the first three years from readers in the US but I haven't counted them in ages. The oldest review I can find for it on for it on GoodReads is dated 2007. And as you probably are aware the second version was published after THG. Borders opened in 2005 and it did specialise in used books but as it is no more I can't really trace any record of it actually selling BR. If you can prove with confidence that it sold the original version of BR I would find that interesting.
_____________
I am the Queen of Snark, TStopped said so.

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] jadecoloredglasses 9 years ago

Perhaps your mother read the same Stephen King book that I did and learned about Dr Who from it.

Or she just watched it on PBS.

And no, BR was never sold in main street bookshops and the manga certainly was not.

Except yes they were, or were my eyes just playing tricks on me when I saw them on the shelves well before THG was published? It wasn't like they were hyping it up along with Harry Potter and Twilight, but it was there. I didn't even have to buy a copy of the book the first time I read it (fall 2007ish), I just got it from the library. I don't know where you're getting New York from, but I live very far away from there, for what it's worth.

---

May those who accept their fate find happiness. May those who defy it find glory.

[–] summeriris 9 years ago

Dr Who was never shown on PBS.

As for the behaviour of your eyes, well you are anxious to disprove me. And of course I can't disprove you because I was never in a bookstore with you. All I have to go on is common sense and the booksale figures. I can factor in the few reviews for the mangas and the relevant best selling lists which are quite extensive, and the undeniable fact that Suzanne Collins say she never heard of it. As i never heard of it before the first Hunger Games movie was released I find that more than feasible. And as Collins started writing her books in 2005/2006 it puts some pressure on the claims that she must have heard about BR, because quite frankly it just wasn't well known. The word obscure springs to mind.

Now I am not going to disparage the book, it is a book that is disturbing and fascinating. The movie I didn't like but the book has resonance. At least the second rewritten book has. You do know that Takami rewrote and greatly expanded the book after THG was published, don't you?

_____________
I am the Queen of Snark, TStopped said so.

[–] Beezow_Zopittybop-Bop-Bop 9 years ago

Dr Who was never shown on PBS.

lol, yes it was. The classic Who was shown on PBS sporadically for many years, and even some earlier NuWho (Eccleston and early Tennant).

--

[–] summeriris 9 years ago

I stand corrected. It wasn't shown in the 70's and 80's. I know because I lived in the US then. But Eccleston and Tennant are from the reboot. What Drs does you mother remember. Who was the first Dr she watched? I liked Eccleston but he only played the Dr for one season.

_____________
I am the Queen of Snark, TStopped said so.

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Beezow_Zopittybop-Bop-Bop 9 years ago

It was very much shown in the 70's and 80's. My brother grew up watching Classic Who with Tom Baker on PBS. And I don't know why you're telling me stuff about NuWho that I already know.

--

[–] summeriris 9 years ago

Hmm, your brother was alive and well and watching DR Who 40 years ago in the States? Wow you must be older than I thought.

_____________
I am the Queen of Snark, TStopped said so.

[–] jadecoloredglasses 9 years ago

Oh FFS... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_Who_in_Canada_and_the_United_State s

And of course you never heard of Battle Royale, so clearly nobody else in America ever did. Flawless logic there. I'm no more anxious to disprove your point than you are to prove it.

---

May those who accept their fate find happiness. May those who defy it find glory.

[–] summeriris 9 years ago

Tell me, how comes it you remember Dr Who debuting on a Canadian TV station 40 years ago? And let's face it, Dr Who the TV program is over 50 years old. I watched the premiere show on BBC as a child here in Scotland. (Yes, I am that old). That's the big difference between Dr Who and BR. Dr Who is a genuine cultural icon with fans of all ages and BR has no fans except a few Otaku enthusiasts. And of course the real fans of BR know the history of the film and novel and don't come here to whine about a rip-off that never happened. The real fans know the plots are very different. See a real fan knows the difference between PROPS in a film and Plot Points in a novel.

_____________
I am the Queen of Snark, TStopped said so.

[–] The_Zig 9 years ago

I think I'm gonna just agree to disagree and bow out before I slip into a boredom induced coma.

To lay my cards on the table: I think the film was better known than summeriris gives credit, due to a loud cult following - mainly focused around media circles (partly due to it being the "Foreign Film" darling of pretty much every film festival that year). A guy I worked with - aspiring film director who went to these things - raved about it long before I ever knew what it was!

Book too. After I saw the film, I wound up here. I remember Americans routinely stumbling to this forum after getting the book seemingly by accident. Many had never heard of the film, and were wondering if to watch it. Others liked book and complained about bits the film missed. This annoyed me at the time, because I hadn't even realised there was a book and couldn't find it anywhere (in UK) and was paranoid of spoilers.
I ended up resorting to Amazon UK to buy it (18 May 2004 - wow Amazon keeps order history forever!) Interestingly the UK site has 6 reviews for it in the first year of release (not bad for a book on Amazon UK in 2003). The American site has 33 reviews for the same year. Obviously Amazon was more mature state-side back then, but this supports the idea that the book was more widely bought there. This also supports the idea that people were seeing it around, as there have been plenty of studies into how Amazon gets business from customers "showrooming" - this would explain the difference between UK and US.

UK side, it seemed the film drove traffic to the book, especially after Channel/Film 4 re-subbed it and showed it a bunch of times; state-side, with the film less available, the book seems to have been bigger.

Given that BR was biggest in media circles, and that Collins had been moving in media circles for a while, I am surprised she'd never heard of it. I also am genuinely shocked that she never put "teens island deathmatch" into Google. When I write, it's mostly factual - I have to research. But I also know fiction authors, and the good ones universally research the hell out of their topic! They look for interesting content such as realistic side-facts and psychology, animal-facts, science, literature and real-life works that support and flesh out their fictional worlds - and also just to make sure it hasn't already been done.
People say Collins is a good author - so I'd imagine she researches (some articles mention her research into wilderness living). But then very basic Googling would have uncovered BR. So Collins' claim would seem to suggest that she didn't do any online research at all - which I find bizarre.

[–] summeriris 9 years ago

Well that's a way to bow out without admitting you can't prove anything because there is nothing to prove. You can state all about the UK if you wish, Suzanne Collins doesn't live in the UK, she never has. So what was well known here doesn't count for her. And I also was living here in the UK then and I never heard about it. I know about the Channel 4 showing because it mentions it on the site. It was shown once, a very long time ago. And there are no huge amount of fans for the film in the UK. If it wasn't for the trolls banging on about it here it would have slipped into the abyss of obscure films long ago.

_____________
I am the Queen of Snark, TStopped said so.

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] caissas_deathangel 9 years ago

I've seen BR in UK cinemas twice, and it's been on UK TV dozens of times on Channel Four and Film Four. The most recent was only a few weeks ago, actually.

Around 10 years ago, the original Japanese Ring inspired a massive wave of interest in Japanese films - pretty much every significant Japanese horror film made in the few years preceding and the several years since was subsequently remade in the US - why would that have been the case if there was no interest? Other, non-horror films consequently gained a massive interest, BR among the most famous.

Again, the fact that YOU haven't personally heard of it means the square sum of sod all.

You're also ignoring the fact that she could, should and in all likelihood actually DID google a few relevant terms. It's monumental ignorance and stupidity if she didn't, but allowing her a little more intelligence such that she did it,she's a total liar.

Either way, she doesn't come off looking good.

I'm Addy. Just Addy. From God, to Kane, to Addy.

[–] summeriris 9 years ago

Film 4 has a website and on that website it has the dates of when it showed any particular film. Battle Royale was shown once 7/8 years ago. That's it.

_____________
I am the Queen of Snark, TStopped said so.

[–] caissas_deathangel 9 years ago

I know for a FACT that's bull, it was last shown a few months ago.

You got a link to this website showing when it showed a particular film? I can't see it anywhere on their site.

This is the link to the only mention of BR on their website - no listings of when it was shown. http://www.film4.com/reviews/2000/battle-royale

I'm Addy. Just Addy. From God, to Kane, to Addy.

[–] The_Zig 9 years ago

Was shown over 10 years ago. 2004.
http://beta.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=106952&cid=9104452

These all attest to it being shown in May 2004. 10 1/2 years ago
http://trashaddict.blogspot.co.uk/2004/05/battle-royale-shown-on-chann el-4-on.html
http://www.kirupa.com/forum/showthread.php?137411-Battle-Royale-on-Cha nnel4-now-%28UK%29
http://forums.digitalspy.co.uk/showthread.php?t=125224

This one also shows that the film was available on Netflix by 2005.
http://roosterteeth.com/forum/viewTopic.php?id=1758452
Seconded here:
http://www.hackingnetflix.com/2005/09/missing_movies_.html

[–] caissas_deathangel 9 years ago

I've had Netflix a couple of years and it's been on there the whole time, yeah.

EDIT: It's also on Amazon Prime (which used to be Lovefilm)

I'm Addy. Just Addy. From God, to Kane, to Addy.

[–] summeriris 9 years ago

Name the date and time, any date and time.
Here's the link to the most recent showings on Film 4
http://film4od.film4.com/Collections/Recently-On-4/

How about a film that Battle Royale ripped off, well it must have seeing as the film was made before Battle Royale was. That's your logic by the way.
http://www.film4.com/reviews/1982/turkey-shoot

And just to be nice;
http://www.film4.com/reviews/2000/battle-royale

And here's a page from a BR fansite announcing how the film was finally going to be released in the US, dated four years ago. And I suppose I don't have to tell you that it reallt doesn't matter if a few people in the UK knew about the film. Suzanne Collins doesn't live in the UK, she lives in the US where it was never released in any format.
http://screenrant.com/battle-royale-3d-release-kofi-87490/

But it hasn't been shown in the past 7 years on British TV.

_____________
I am the Queen of Snark, TStopped said so.

[–] The_Zig 9 years ago

Name the date and time, any date and time.

I did. Above. Monday May 10th 2004. Corroborated by three different sources linked above. 10 1/2 years ago.

Here's the link to the most recent showings on Film 4
http://film4od.film4.com/Collections/Recently-On-4/

You a troll or illiterate? This link is completely irrelevant.
This links to a page showing a few of Film4's recently shown films. It NEVER claims these are the ONLY films shown recently - because they aren't: Dear John showed this afternoon at 16.45 and is not listed on there.

... some irrelevant nonsense ...

And just to be nice;
http://www.film4.com/reviews/2000/battle-royale

Cassias linked that already. Shows nothing.

... some vaguely relevant but blindingly obvious stuff ...
But it hasn't been shown in the past 7 years on British TV.

You're talking out the wrong end again. It was on Film4, on Monday March 31st 2014 at 01.20am. Less than nine months ago. See the link:-
http://www.thegryphon.co.uk/2014/03/tv-freeview-flicks-of-the-week-sle epers-submarine-and-good-old-king-kong/
It may have been on more recently, but this is the most recent one I can found evidence of with a few minutes of Google-Fu.

[–] summeriris 9 years ago

Okay, you were right. It was on in the small hours of the morning nine months ago. Such a clear sign of popularity. I wonder...did it have two viewers or three? How good was the reception in Connecticut do you think.
_____________
I am the Queen of Snark, TStopped said so.

[–] caissas_deathangel 9 years ago

Sarcasm only works when it has substance. What you should be showing is contrition - an apology for having been proven a bare-faced liar, having accused us (baselessly) of the same - would be appreciated.

I'm Addy. Just Addy. From God, to Kane, to Addy.

[–] summeriris 9 years ago

I apologise. I was so wrong. Since the showing of BR seven years ago Film 4 showed 'Battle Royale' once more 9 months ago in the wee small hours of the morning. It probably had an audience of approximately 3-4 people. It still was never shown in the US on any television channel and Suzanne Collins still never heard of it. Just like the rest of the country. Not my words, I do believe that Tarantino lamented over how unknown BR was in the US. But you are correct, I got a fact wrong, there was a showing this year at March 31 @ 1:30 am. Not exactly peak viewing times.

_____________
I am the Queen of Snark, TStopped said so.

[–] mitzibishi 9 years ago

Summeriris both Battle Royale and Battle Royale 2 have been shown on UK TV, channel 4 and Film4 many many times since the early 2000's. Sometimes twice a year.

I have links and evidence to prove this.

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] mitzibishi 9 years ago

How long as this been going on for Antiblood?

Its pretty much the same here, back to back, for years.

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] caissas_deathangel 9 years ago

Oh, come ON. Why bump this thread? It's almost a year old! There is no need to revisit this rubbish.

I'm Addy. Just Addy. From God, to Kane, to Addy.

[–] mitzibishi 9 years ago

It hardly said "bump".

It was in response to some misinformation.

What summeriris was adamantly stating was factually incorrect and I addressed that.

It was on topic to the conversation, as far as anyone is concerned dates do not matter as the discussion is on page 1 of this board so its currently open to be added to.

[–] summeriris 9 years ago

You're right. It's been fun but Mizi is just getting boring now.

_____________
I am the Queen of Snark, TStopped said so. And I have groupies, Atomic Girl said so.

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] mitzibishi 9 years ago

It gets boring being proved wrong summeriris?

[–] mitzibishi 8 years ago

Bye summeriris.

Summeriris:

BR was shown once on UK TV 7 years ago at 2 AM in the morning. BR2 has never been shown to the best of my

knowledge on UK TV

Here is what summeriris claims.

Film4 or Channel 4 does not know BR2.

She watches Film4 all the time and keeps track of films.

She can use google.

She keeps a list of movies she never new existed until late and their TV listing times over the years? Even though she was never aware of its existence.

She is aware of every movie to have ever been shown on UK TV.

And she memorises the TV guide since the early 2000s?



Ready for the wall of links you missed? ok here we go summerirs, looks like you missed one or two.

------------------------------------------------------
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RhjbGM1kB-o

Joe Cornish Introduces Battle Royale during Film4's Monster Night season

------------------------------------------------------

https://twitter.com/film4/status/317608569275047936

5:05 AM - 29 Mar 2013

Bugsy Malone... Bueller... Battle Royale - we've got all sorts lined up today to make your Good Friday even

better:

----------------------------------------------------

Twice in 2013, once in May and once in December. thats only by internet record, we know not all TV listings are

recorded or mentioned on the internet 

http://sabotagetimes.com/tv-film/top-film-tips-best-films-on-tv-this-week-18

Top Film Tip's Best Films On TV This Week

Dec 29, 2013

42 Japanese teenagers are sent to an island to murder each other in a last man standing game of death when Takeshi

Kitano's cult classic BATTLE ROYALE plays at 1:30am on Film4.

----------------------------------------------------

https://twitter.com/film4/status/181122835404693505

Battle Royale tonight, 11.10pm.
2:00 PM - 17 Mar 2012

---------------------------------------------------

http://www.s4c.cymru/top20/rm/view_top20_english_progs/uploadid/234/language/eng/

Channel 4 viewing figures for Wales

Top 20 English Programmes - Week ending 06/06/2004

BATTLE ROYALE

Monday (07/06) - (2.40am) Channel 4 Viewing figures 40,000

Amazing figures for a 18 rated Japanese movie with subtitles shown at 2:40am, its in the top 10.

It got more viewers than Friends, Richard and Judy and some Big Brother shows shown at major times on the

schedule. Back in 2004 Friends, Richard and Judy and Big Brother were at the peak of their popularity at peak

times, and it beats them in viewing figures.

And dont forget all the video recorders taping it that are not counted. 

---------------------------------------------------

http://www.joblo.com/forums/showthread.php?t=45482

2nd September 2003, 09:05 AM

Battle Royale on FilmFour

FilmFour is showing Battle Royale on Friday 14th February at 10pm.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://trashaddict.blogspot.co.uk/2004/05/battle-royale-shown-on-channel-4-on.html

May 12, 2004

Battle Royale (shown on Channel 4 on Monday night)

http://forums.digitalspy.co.uk/showthread.php?t=125224

So 2 confirmations that BR has been shown on Channel 4 in May and then June 2004.

Then repeated on Film4.

http://www.cpfc.org/forums/archive/index.php/t-140139.html

Battle Royale/Batoru rowaiaru - Tonight on FIlm4. 10-05-2004

---------------------------------------------------------

Then in October 2004

https://www.digitalworldz.co.uk/bargain-basement-115/25430-free-film4-weekend.html

1st October 2004

FREE FILM4 weekend

THIS WEEKEND ON FILMFOUR WEEKLY

8pm The Wedding Planner
10pm O Brother, Where Art Thou?
12am Battle Royale

--------------------------------------------------------

http://n-europe.com/forum/showthread.php?t=9287

Battle Royale - Film4 - 11:10pm Tonight (Saturday) 16th September 2006
I'm sure we've all heard about Battle Royale before



I cant wait for the america remake version.

---------------------------------------------------------

http://www.watchthis.co.uk/battle-royale-on-film4/

Battle Royale on Film4
October 15, 2006

------------------------------------------------------

http://digiguide.tv/pick-of-the-day/19+August+2007/film-battle-royale-forty-two-students-three-days-one-survivor-no-rules/

What to watch on Sunday, August 19th, 2007

Battle Royale
Film4 at 11:00pm

Confirmed

http://www.newcastle-online.org/nufcforum/index.php?topic=27015.265;wap2

SUNDAY 19TH AUGUST 2007

BATTLE ROYALE 11pm Film4
BATTLE ROYALE II: REQUIEM 1.15am Film4

--------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.boxingscene.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-164290.html

17th February 2008

Battle Royale
Anyone watching this film, it is on film 4 at the moment, been on for 20 minutes. Oh my it is very ****ed up...putit on!

----------------------------------------------------------

http://www.theguardian.com/film/2008/apr/05/tvpickoftheweek.television

Saturday April 5 2008

Battle Royale 12midnight, C4

Confirmed

http://www.saxperience.com/forum/showthread.php?t=140231

7th April 2008

Battle Royale starting just now on channel 4
absolutely love this film great fun to watch

------------------------------------------------------------

Twice in 2011

http://www.denofgeek.com/movies/17444/geek-shows-and-movies-on-uk-tv-in-the-coming-week

Battle Royale
On: Film4
Date: Friday 13th May 2011
Time: 11:00pm (and midnight Film4+1)

-----------------------------------------------------------------

http://thelatest.co.uk/brighton/2011/10/25/back-to-spooky/

October 2011

If you’re after something a little more art house but still a classic make a date with the Japanese classic Battle

Royale (Film4, 12.35am)

-----------------------------------------------------

http://computertalkplace.com/index.php?/topic/263227-films-on-tv-14-20-july/

Films On TV: 14-20 July 2012

Battle Royale (2000) – Film4 12.05am SAT

Confirmed

http://fansonline.net/blackpool/mb/view.php?id=1166236

00:12 21st July 2012
O/T Film 4 - Battle Royale

------------------------------------------------------
Showing in July and then August 2012

http://www.kieronmoore.com/2012/08/battle-royale-with-cheese.html

24th August 2012
I finally watched Battle Royale last night (thank you, Film4 and Sky+)

I'll leave you with this hilarious joke:

What do they call The Hunger Games in France?

Battle Royale with Cheese.

-------------------------------------------------------

http://letterboxd.com/lordcookie/list/films-on-uk-tv-28-december-3-january/

Films On UK TV: 28 December – 3 January 2014

Battle Royale (2000) - 01:30 Film4 SAT 2014

------------------------------------------------------

https://enchantedbyfilm.wordpress.com/2014/03/24/film4-launches-its-action-packed-season/

Film4 launches its ‘action packed’ season, Battle Royale
March 24, 2014

------------------------------------------------------

Sometimes twice a year, how could you miss it?

http://www.viewfilm.net/person/taro-yamamoto

Battle Royale on Film4

Last On

23:10-01:30 Sat 17th Mar 2012
00:05-02:25 Sat 21st Jul 2012
00:55-03:15 Sat 30th Mar 2013
01:30-03:50 Sat 4th Jan 2014
01:20-03:45 Mon 31st Mar 2014

-----------------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------------------

Film 4 does know Battle Royale no matter what you try and push on people.

http://www.film4.com/special-features/top-lists/100-must-see-films-21st-century/page3

100 Must-See Films of the 21st Century

82. American Psycho (2000)
81. The Wolf of Wall Street (2013)
80. Lost In Translation (2003)
79. Stoker (2013)
78. Old Joy (2006)
77. Four Lions (2010)
76. Untold Scandal (2003)
75. In Bruges (2008)
74. The Dark Knight (2008)
73. Archipelago (2010)
71. Battle Royale (2000)

How could you miss it summeriris? And I thought you said you used google and watched Film4 all the time?

You cant have.

Like I said, I did my research, I saw these films many times on Channel 4 and Film4.



[–] The_Zig 8 years ago

Like I said, I did my research

Damn straight. That was outstanding.
Excellent research.

That was pretty comprehensive.

[–] mitzibishi 8 years ago

I have a similar sized list for BR2. Which she has claimed for years has never been shown on UK TV.

It has, many many times, sometimes twice a year since it was released.

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ItsanAckbar 9 years ago

Hunger Games is better as it is Western. This moans about not being successful when it only appeals to a niche audience.

http://bit.ly/1FGMpQd