To start off this review, I’m going to be fair. I read The Hunger Games before I saw Battle Royale. But I saw Battle Royale before I saw The Hunger Games movie. I both read and saw The Running Man before I did either thing. So if we’re going for originality, The Running Man came out in ’85 so it trumps both. But it’s not my job to decide which movie is better – rather, we’ll be looking at what they have in common, what’s different, and which movie is for which people?
Since The Hunger Games came out, it’s been drawing comparisons to Battle Royale. Games writer Suzanne Collins claims she had never heard of Koushun Takami’s tale. Both are stories with the government sanctioning a group of teenagers into an arena to fight to the death as punishment. The participants are given a variety of weapons and in both films, there’s a tale of lovers. Both are a commentary on television and its influence in the future.
So much for sleeping for the next four months.
While there are some DEFINITE similarities in the plots of the moves, they are very different stylistically. To put it in a way everyone can understand, this is how I feel about the two movies: The Hunger Games is a love story with an action plot tacked on; Battle Royale is an action flick with a love story tacked on. I never felt like there was massive chemistry between Shuya and Noriko but that may just be my opinion. The love between Peeta and Katniss is at the forefront throughout all the action, taking up a majority of the movie.
Although...this definitely gets The Hunger Games a few extra points.
Another big difference is the general feel of these movies. Battle Royale feels so much more gritty and realistic than Hunger Games does; it feels like something that an imperialistic government could really do. Making the lowest scoring class fight to death would be a FANTASTIC motivator to get scores up. The participants act very much like real children would act in this situation as they try to form alliances and seek a way out. Meanwhile, Games feels like a fantasy world: A strange land called Panem complete with strange creatures such as Mockingjays and Trackerjackers. The people in the Capital of Panem have strange technologies and even stranger fashions that just make it seem like a different world altogether.
Of course, The Hunger Games was a teen novel. This didn’t stop it from being dark and illustrating the deaths in a very Kingesque fashion. Since the novel was written for teens, that means the movie had to be PG-13 (the worst thing that can happen to ANY “action” movie). The Hunger Games was quite tame in the actual death scenes. It uses an AWFUL shaky camera to cover up the kills. I’ve made it through Cloverfield and every other POV without problem but the shaky camera in the final fight of Games made me feel queasy. Meanwhile, Battle Royale showed every single, glorious death in a fashion that a movie of the genre should. That’s what makes it the true action movie of the two.
By showing every death, Battle Royale feels a bit like a satire and a comedy. By showing the deaths that make the audience hurt and the ones that are ridiculous, the movie teaches a lesson. Despite running a similar plot, The Hunger Games is a story about a single character and her journey. Without fail, it almost never leaves Katniss’ point of view. We never see what the players that aren’t in her general vicinity are doing. We don’t even see the death of the rest of the characters. By sticking with her from start to finish (for the most part), we focus on the changes in the character and the love story, leaving little room for satire.
A small detail I must bring up, the time limit in the game/program. In The Program in Battle Royale, the kids are given three days or they all die. In The Hunger Games, the game can drag on as long as needed. AND wow, did the movie drag on! The areas between the action scenes are either part of the Twilightesque love story or just filler of Katniss sitting around in trees or taking care of Peeta. I much preferred how Battle Royale jumped STRAIGHT into the arena. I kept looking at my watch to check the time in Games since a hour passed before they got into the arena.
So which movie is for who? The Hunger Games is for people that enjoy their romance with a twist. The Hunger Games, like Twilight, has the love triangle. Instead of Bella-Edward-Jacob, this time we have Katniss-Peeta-Gale. Ignoring the comparison, The Hunger Games is a vast improvement over the Twilight flicks. It’s not a bad movie and is worth at least a watch. It’s by no means bad! But if you’re looking for a hardcore action movie, this isn’t what you need.
For a hardcore action movie, Battle Royale is up among the best. But even more than just an action movie, it has something that The Hunger Games doesn’t: dark humor. My best friend and I watched Battle Royale just the other night and laughed hysterically at the “no whispering” part and the absurdity of getting stuck with a pot lid as a weapon (We were both laughing at a kill in The Hunger Games but we were the only ones. Maybe we’re twisted).
See, it's funny because....Well, actually, just watch watch the movie. If I try to explain it, I'll definitely come off like a sociopath.
All in all, the comparisons are just. The plots are SUPER similar but, ignoring that, the movies themselves are quite different. Everyone is going to have their favorite, which is okay. With that said, I’m off to watch The Running Man.
If you like this article, be awesome and follow me on twitter!
No comments:
Post a Comment