Eagerly awaited.
There is a fairly common formula for sequels to popular films. More money, similar story, same characters, lavish cinematography and, most importantly, not as good.
I saw Battle Royale a few years ago at the cinema in the UK having had my interest piqued, indirectly, by watching "Ringu". The original Battle Royale is a much deeper, and cleverer, film than I think it is given credit for in many quarters. I think even a lot of its fans would baulk at the suggestion of depth to its premise and execution. But its there. Battle Royale came out in the UK in September 2001. There was some other big event then too…
BRII is set a few years after the initial film and opens with a wide shot of Tokyo and then two very big buildings collapsing - this is a film that is going to wear its controversy on its sleeve. The plot is set up with this event, the "winner" of the last film - Shuya - has become the leader of a terrorist organisation named "Wild Seven" and they are responsible for the devastation. The new contestants play a new game and they can all survive this one. The new aim is to kill Shuya. There is a lot less of a set up to the game itself here and it is a lot quicker into it. The kids, however, are given combat equipment to attack with and expected to work in team. A clever addition to the rules is the pairwork "encouraged" by having each person paired up forcibly - if one of the pair dies then the other necklace starts beeping…
The film is a lot more overtly political than the previous one and, at the beginning, reels off a list of countries that the US has bombed. Rather surprising to hear in a mainstream (in its native country) film and this is a theme that follows through. As mentioned previously, Shuya is a "terrorist" and is responsible for the deaths of thousands of people yet, by the end of the film, he is dealt with rather sympathetically by the film.
I don't really want to get into the plot details here but this film shocked with its portrayal of the characters and I was very surprised by it. In many ways it is a mixed bag of a film. As it started it felt quite weak and like a "sequel by numbers" but this was a very different beast by the end of it.
Compared to Battle Royale, and there are few other films I could compare it to, there are a number of comments to make. I think that the potency of the imagery is somewhat dulled by the simple difference in clothing. Although the characters do seem to look younger than the previous batch, the constant of school uniform in Battle Royale was an ever-present reminder of the age and immaturity of the protagonists. And, it did just look better aesthetically. As the film develops, the imagery throughout is fairly standard war film fare, which although still technically impressive, is not too memorable. There is nothing to match, or near, the lighthouse scenes in the original for instance.
The characters, in general are not so well developed but they are quite easy to differentiate due to the fact that a sizable number have dyed hair and are "cool". But, whereas the original film told you something of each character before they came to their inevitable end, here there are a fair few cannon fodder types giving the air of time filling. This is due, in part, to the differing intentions of each film but it is still a failing of sorts.
This is not the classic that the original was, this is rarely the case with sequels, but it is a very interesting film with some themes that you would not be expecting to see in other films. It is a sequel, it has some of the same characters, its got some violence, its got decapitation. Definitely worth watching for fans of the original and I would certainly recommend watching that before this.
I saw Battle Royale a few years ago at the cinema in the UK having had my interest piqued, indirectly, by watching "Ringu". The original Battle Royale is a much deeper, and cleverer, film than I think it is given credit for in many quarters. I think even a lot of its fans would baulk at the suggestion of depth to its premise and execution. But its there. Battle Royale came out in the UK in September 2001. There was some other big event then too…
BRII is set a few years after the initial film and opens with a wide shot of Tokyo and then two very big buildings collapsing - this is a film that is going to wear its controversy on its sleeve. The plot is set up with this event, the "winner" of the last film - Shuya - has become the leader of a terrorist organisation named "Wild Seven" and they are responsible for the devastation. The new contestants play a new game and they can all survive this one. The new aim is to kill Shuya. There is a lot less of a set up to the game itself here and it is a lot quicker into it. The kids, however, are given combat equipment to attack with and expected to work in team. A clever addition to the rules is the pairwork "encouraged" by having each person paired up forcibly - if one of the pair dies then the other necklace starts beeping…
The film is a lot more overtly political than the previous one and, at the beginning, reels off a list of countries that the US has bombed. Rather surprising to hear in a mainstream (in its native country) film and this is a theme that follows through. As mentioned previously, Shuya is a "terrorist" and is responsible for the deaths of thousands of people yet, by the end of the film, he is dealt with rather sympathetically by the film.
I don't really want to get into the plot details here but this film shocked with its portrayal of the characters and I was very surprised by it. In many ways it is a mixed bag of a film. As it started it felt quite weak and like a "sequel by numbers" but this was a very different beast by the end of it.
Compared to Battle Royale, and there are few other films I could compare it to, there are a number of comments to make. I think that the potency of the imagery is somewhat dulled by the simple difference in clothing. Although the characters do seem to look younger than the previous batch, the constant of school uniform in Battle Royale was an ever-present reminder of the age and immaturity of the protagonists. And, it did just look better aesthetically. As the film develops, the imagery throughout is fairly standard war film fare, which although still technically impressive, is not too memorable. There is nothing to match, or near, the lighthouse scenes in the original for instance.
The characters, in general are not so well developed but they are quite easy to differentiate due to the fact that a sizable number have dyed hair and are "cool". But, whereas the original film told you something of each character before they came to their inevitable end, here there are a fair few cannon fodder types giving the air of time filling. This is due, in part, to the differing intentions of each film but it is still a failing of sorts.
This is not the classic that the original was, this is rarely the case with sequels, but it is a very interesting film with some themes that you would not be expecting to see in other films. It is a sequel, it has some of the same characters, its got some violence, its got decapitation. Definitely worth watching for fans of the original and I would certainly recommend watching that before this.
Japan, China, North Korea, Cuba, Congo, Peru, Laos, Vietnam, Cambodia, Grenada, Libya, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Panama, Iraq, Somalia, Bosnia, Sudan, Yugoslavia, and... Afghanistan
What do they all have in common?
In the past 60 years, America has bombed every one of them
Some 8 million dead among 22 nations
Equality? That's a lie
No comments:
Post a Comment