Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
WhiteLiteSunburn
Apr 10, 2004
Fascists do it for the Fatherland.
Directed by: Kinji Fukusaku and Kenta Fukusaku
Starring: Tatsuya Fujiwara, Ayana Sakai, Riki Takeuchi

When i first got my region-free dvd player, the first two movies i got for it were Battle Royale and Battle Royale 2. I had already seen Battle Royale and i absolutely adored it. So i was skeptical about BR2. I'd heard mixed reviews on the film, i knew that Kenji Fukusaku died shortly into filming, and frankly, the first BR was so good i wondered why they would make a sequel.

For those of you that don't already know the premise, BR2 works like this:

(SPOILERS FOR PEOPLE THAT HAVE NOT SEEN THE FIRST BATTLE ROYALE!!!!)
MODNOTE: DO YOU loving UNDERSTAND WHAT SPOILER TAGS ARE? Also, this thread is worthless, I should have gassed it before all these people posted in it.

Shuya Nanahara and a bunch of other BR survivors have formed together to create an anti-BR terrorist organization known as "Wild Seven". The japanese government wants them taken out and decides to do this using BR. In BR2 the game has new rules. The kids are now sent to the island where Wild Seven has set up base and their sole objective is to kill Shuya Nanahara. Also, everyone is in pairs according to their seating arrangement, so it's a boy/girl partnership for everyone, and if one of them dies, their respective partner dies as well (the necklace goes off).

Now when i first heard this, i was impressed and intrigued, because i felt that this could really open up new possibilities a la heroic rescues, real teamwork, battle strategy, etceras. Unfortunately, all this partnership thing does is kill any form of characterization in the movie. Right when they land, it's a two for one special, every time the 'terrorists' kill someone, they get another automatically. So naturally, the kids die pretty fast. A lot of them go and die without you even noticing.

The action in the second one is far superior to the first, but in a completely different manner. While the first one was tense and nailbiting, the second is more of the feel of a proper action movie, as the students storm the island in an impressive D-Day style invasion. But BR isn't the kind of movie that can rely on action alone. The pacing is frenetic and fast-paced, they land and get going at break-neck speed and never really let off.

All in all, nothing is done with a lot of the characters, they attempt to follow the same formulaic style of characterization used in the first movie, but it doesn't work quite so well. Because the pace of the movie is so fast, you never really get the opportunity to connect with any of the characters like you did in the first BR.

As for the acting, it's again, not quite up to par with the first movie. Tatsuya Fujiwara overacts his role as Shuya, the two main students spend a lot of their time sullen, screaming, and shooting. And Riki Takeuchi makes an appearance as his normal badass self, but he completely overacts the role, it's not that he doesn't do a good job, it's just kind of hard to swallow.


Overall, BR2 isn't a bad movie. It's definitely entertaining and a worthwhile watch, but it's just not up to the ridiculously high standards that were set by Battle Royale. I'd recommend watching it, but don't expect the something as great as BR.


PROS: Great action and direction
CONS: characterization?

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0338763/

Somebody fucked around with this message at 02:58 on Aug 25, 2004

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

A big dumb baby
May 2, 2003

Lots of great action, with a completely nonsensical plot line. The characters aren't much more than cannon fodder, with no real emotions, motivation, etc. An intensely dissapointing sequel to one of my favorite Japanese films.

Rugby anyone?

pud
Jul 9, 2001
While it's pretty lame compared to the first, it's not quite as bad as most people would have you believe. The majority of the kills in this one aren't as good as BR1's, but both movies have weak character development for the 1/5 of the cast that live through the first third. This one just had some major fat that needed to be trimmed, like Shuya's flashbacks and the overlong briefing scene.

Xlyfindel
Dec 16, 2003
Raw Esoteric
Well, I kind of enjoyed the first one, it was pretty entertaining at the very least, but this sequel is practically unbearable. I attribute this to the lake of Takeshi Kitano, but seeing as how he is dead I can’t really blame him. Basically what I’m saying is that he was a comedian, and although a lot of his films are very serious, there is room to laugh at some point. However, the second installation felt a bit stiff to me, there was a much greater focus on the action, and with the increased budget, it looked pretty good. I didn’t think it was possible to take a step down from Battle Royale’s story, but somehow this does exactly that. Personally I think that this movie had great potential, I loved the camerawork and the special effects were fairly well done, but I can find no reason why I would ever want to watch this movie again. If you liked the first one you will probably want to see this one too, that’s exactly what I did, just don’t expect the second one to be any good and you might like it.

WhiteLiteSunburn
Apr 10, 2004
Fascists do it for the Fatherland.

quote:

Xlyfindel came out of the closet to say:
Well, I kind of enjoyed the first one, it was pretty entertaining at the very least, but this sequel is practically unbearable. I attribute this to the lake of Takeshi Kitano, but seeing as how he is dead I can’t really blame him. Basically what I’m saying is that he was a comedian, and although a lot of his films are very serious, there is room to laugh at some point. However, the second installation felt a bit stiff to me, there was a much greater focus on the action, and with the increased budget, it looked pretty good. I didn’t think it was possible to take a step down from Battle Royale’s story, but somehow this does exactly that. Personally I think that this movie had great potential, I loved the camerawork and the special effects were fairly well done, but I can find no reason why I would ever want to watch this movie again. If you liked the first one you will probably want to see this one too, that’s exactly what I did, just don’t expect the second one to be any good and you might like it.

Right um...dude, you are aware that Takeshi Kitano is still alive and well? And released a film just recently? He never directed Battle Royale, he only starred in the first one, and made a cameo appearance in the second. He wasn't even a producer, so that a lot of what you said...made no sense whatsoever. Sorry pal.

DietSoda
Mar 31, 2004
I was horribly dissapointed with this film, and didn't even finish it because it bored me so much. I don't like to give any film on here a one or a five, but this is one of only 5 or 6 movies that was so bad that I couldn't even finish it. It deserves every bit of the bad rating it gets.

Bad characters, horrible plot, and one of the worst sequels ever made.

lenin
Sep 11, 2001

dear leader

quote:

WhiteLiteSunburn came out of the closet to say:


Right um...dude, you are aware that Takeshi Kitano is still alive and well? And released a film just recently? He never directed Battle Royale, he only starred in the first one, and made a cameo appearance in the second. He wasn't even a producer, so that a lot of what you said...made no sense whatsoever. Sorry pal.

He meant Kinji Fukasuku, who did die between productions of both films, and BR2 was directed mostly by his son, and it was his first work. I think that kinda shows in the abhorent blandness of this film. There are times when it tries to be over the top, like when 12 kids die in one sequence, but since it was the beginning of the film and every character had no definition other than "dumb punk" the audience just says "oh well" and continues watching as the movie rips off Saving Private Ryan.

Then it just becomes downright preachy. The whole blatent "Amerikkka sux" message was juxtaposed with an only somewhat subtle "Osama Bin Laden is a hero" message. In addition, what the gently caress was up with the teacher character in this film? For some reason he swallows pills en masse, then shows up in the middle of a war zone in a rugby outfit.

not only did this movie make sense, but it was boring, dumb, and in no way resembled the previous.

The Phantom Goat
Oct 6, 2003

Where my moviez at?
Having been a huge fan of the first film, reading all this is making me really depressed. Guess I shouldn't even bother getting the BRII dvd.

grahamobroin
Feb 16, 2004
I loved the first film and this one was a big disappointment. It tried to be political and ended up doing it retardly. The emotional attachment to any of the characters was almost non-existent. The fact that it seemed to take an age for anyone to die despite how many times they had been shot, had there neck exploded e.t.c was particularly bothersome for me. It has no become a personal joke for my friends and I if we are watching a film which has an overlong death scene.

This is nothing compared to the first one and I feel sorry that Beat Takeshi even appeared in it.

Given the harsh critique I do have to say that I did like the completely off the wall re-entrance of the teacher but even that moment of (unintentional) comedy could not redeem much for me.

Paranda
Jun 9, 2003

I found it a lot more boring. The first one had more suspense and implemented some creative ways of killing off people, whereas here everyone just dies by machine-gun fire. It felt like an poorly paced war movie. I also didn't like how 2 guys managed to fight off an entire army against all odds and survive without any serious injuries. The teacher was awesome though.

DFu4ever
Oct 4, 2002

This movie was a god drat tragedy.

0.5

Garlo
Feb 1, 2004
I am the great mexican fighter of freedom
Great and interesting ideas, mostly poorly executed. It's too slow.

McGann
May 19, 2003

Get up you son of a bitch! 'Cause Mickey loves you!

I came into it thinking it would be decent at least. When I saw the Wild Seven terrorists, dressed up in Command & Conquer FMV clothes, I knew it wouldn't make the grade at all.

FreelanceSocialist
Nov 19, 2002
Perhaps not as brutal as BR1, but a decent movie by its own right. I still enjoyed it, but not as much as the first. It's worth grabbing on DVD, Covetous.

3.5 - above average

Shakey
May 12, 2004

by OMGWTFBBQ
Having a basic idea of the plot beforehand, I did not go into this expecting a Battle Royale 1 clone. I did not expect it to be like the first one. I expected it to be exactly what it was, and I guess in a way that helped me enjoy the movie more than most of you.

I really only bought the DVD out of curiosity. I was expecting it to be absolute poo poo, based on what I've read here and elsewhere, so I was pleasantly surprised with what I got. It was actually pretty good.

There certainly wasn't as much depth to [some of] the characters in this movie, but I don't think it matters as much as it did in the original. The majority of them were not as central to the plot as they were in the last movie. It wasn't a "omfg only one of you can survive who will it be?" movie, it was a "go loving kill Nanahara" movie, so getting to know all of the charaters wasn't as relevant.

It was a little slow though, and the CG blood began to piss me off after about 45 minutes. But overall I liked it. It was a good sequel considering what it had to live up to. Not nearly as bad as it's been made out to be.

3.5/5

profbobo
May 22, 2004

Vivat Buster!
This movie was the biggest letdown I've seen in a long long time :( I was looking forward to it, but the only part of it I could reasonably salvage was Takeshi Kitano's brief cameo. Even Riki Takeuchi (who I usually love) was abysmal in this movie.

1 / 5 :(

hellocruelworld
Feb 28, 2003

Dude, I See God!
I could find no redeeming value in this movie. It was just plain horrible...the whole "nevar forget, terrist" scenario was stupid...there is a bunch of terrist apoligism and silly America bashing that really clashes with the spirit of the original. The movie tries to make us suspend our disbelief a bit too much...whereas the original also asked us to suspend our disbelief, which I was gladly able to do becuase it was an excellent movie, the sequel is borderline preposterous. We are expected to believe that someone who hated the original Battle Royale game because it kills innocent people, and could hardly bring himself to kill anyone in the first movie, now is going to carry out one of the most terrible acts of terrorism in history? The plot is silly, the acting is terrible...If you enjoyed the first...I'd advise to avoid this at all cost...as it may tarnish your memory of the original....it really is that bad.

1/5

funkyheadhunter
Aug 1, 2003

A lot of people think a lot of things about Louisiana.
there's always dissention within the regime.

I liked it, not as much as the first one but then again, most people come into a sequel thinking "OMG IT'S GONNA RAPE LIKE THE FIRST ONE DID HARDCORE" which most of the time is unreal expectations. Let's face it BR1 rocked rear end, not because it was SOOO GOooOOOd acting and the greatest character building ever, but because it was an all new movie with kick rear end killing and a sweet rear end plotline to follow. Of course most people treat this just like the matrix sequels, which is pretty stupid to me. You go in expecting the same kick assness which is obviously inflated overtime and while anticipating the movie your ideals of what it will be keep growing.

All-in-all it's a good movie, they took BR1 one step further, I thought it was conceivable because did anyone else see the end of BR1? They were fugitives right? OK so now they're terrorists for blowing up buildings... wow seems like a pretty decent explanation there, and something I could follow with relative ease. If you come in expecting BR1 then obviously that's not what you're going to get.

If you buy into the movie and don't treat it like "OMFG THIS ISN'T HOW BR1 WENT!" then you'll enjoy it, if you come in expecting the greatest movie ever (which br1 is up there for me) you'll obviously be let down... what the hell do you expect a brand new story with amazing plot twists and 100 insane deaths with scythe's and grenade launchers etc? That was already done in BR1, and if that's what BR2 was you'd all be complaining about how it was just the same thing over again.

Conclusion: No, not the best movie, I enjoyed it though. Of course I wasn't expecting it to be another BR1, which blew me away when I saw it.

oh yeah = 4.0

Mr. Sleep
Aug 2, 2003

I really didn't like this movie, especially considering the outstanding quality of its predecessor. It isn't that it attempts (poorly) to pay homage to Saving Private Ryan, or justify international terrorism, but that at the end, they intend us to take the concept of globe-trekking Japanese terrorists who pop up in LOL, Afghanistan seriously.

1/5, for loving up a great movie license.

Ty Webb
May 24, 2004

This movie did pale in comparison to the original. I have watched it once and if it wasn't for my buddy changing a couple of the subtitles to include "LOL XBOX IS HUEG!!1" and something about gettin hit in the oval office, I would be rating it 0.5...

Ty's score - 1.5/5

Dell_Zincht
Nov 5, 2003



Resurrecting this one as I just bought the DVD today as soon as it came out, and have just finished watching it.

Ok so it's not as good as the first one (which was, quite frankly, a masterpiece.) However it's not a bad film at all. There's lots of action, lots of blood and gore, and the social satire is really quite brilliant, what with the references to 9/11 and the Normandy beach landings.

I didnt start to switch off at any point either. The only gripe was that as the movie moved at such speed, it became near impossible to track exactly who had been killed, and sometimes even how they were killed. Having said that, the tagline for BRII is "This time, It's War" and that's just how this movie plays out. I will be watching it again and would recommend it to anyone who's seen the first one, however I dont think the original can possibly be surpassed.

3.5/5

Kro-Bar
Jul 24, 2004
USPOL May
I had high expectations, which may have hurt. Either way, I was not entertained by this movie. It's a bad sign when I'm cleaning my fingernails instead of watching the movie. The gore was okay, when there was any, though..

1.5/5

Cadamori
Jul 4, 2004

by Ozma
Of course it doesn't hold a candle to the first one , but it was still better than average.

Pros
New Twists to the game (The "Pairs" Rule Specifically}
The last fighting scene kicked some serious rear end

Cons
Everyone dies either by a gunshot or the collar thingy


Voted 3.0

FullMetalJackoff
Feb 15, 2004

Waluigi want his fucking Amiibo
Battle Royale II was never going to surpass, or even equal the quality of the first BR and I didn't expect it to. That being said, the movie drags on far too long and some areas, particularly the middle section comprising of trite and borderline intelligence insulting 'social commentary' and so forth. If I wanted to watch a movie on terrorism and the evils of Amerikkka, this is not the resource I expect to get that from. and the drawn out ending. The movie would have left a more positive mark on me had the middle drivel been cut out and the ending dropped in favour of the scene of the remaining two running up the stairs and blasting their way out into the light.

Pros: Sections of fast paced action, Kitano cameo, firepower.

Cons: Retarded and narrow-sighted 'social commentary', Shuya overacting, very hard tdentify with any of the kids.

Rated: 3/5 - Worth a rental, not a purchase.

JoeAlane_M.D.
Oct 25, 2002
ERGH ARGH MRR JOHNSON ERR AHH OWLS CLOGGING GRRRRR INSTRUMENTS ARGH ERR PLAIN CRASHING
Yep, just saw it. Total poo poo. Introduce Charater-->character dies. repeat 30x.
Rating: 0

ProdigalSon
Sep 15, 2003
really just awful. just see the first one.

1/5

BadGimpy
Jan 19, 2004

I need more ammo!
I hated this movie as well. I guess it was due to high expectations. Oh well.
If only there weren't as many drwan out slow motion death scenes. I think there were 6 or so in the final major battle. That got old pretty fast.

1/5

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Zultros
Sep 24, 2004
Ferretbumpmaster
The soul of Battle Royale has been retained in this sequel. But the heart has been lost. True, it contains all the mindless children slaughter we've come to expect since the first movie, but gone are the touches that made that movie truly likeable.
Character development is nonexistent. To be fair, BR1 only had a half dozen or so memerable characters, but that allowed for enough captivating death scenes to make a full movie. All the danger posed in this movie comes from external hostile forces. It was much more effective when the deranged murderer is one that the viewer has followed the whole film. Most of the basic characters are bland stereotypes, but they are dealt with soon enough in the usual way. These are basic storytelling issues.
One character I did like however, was the general in charge of this movie's Battle Royale "game". His pill popping antics amused and horrified me quite consistently.
While still well done in BR2, the violent content also suffers. The crushing setbacks of the first movie are replaced with over-the-top mayhem and copious and cheesy blood. Also the movie frequently parodies other notoriously violent movies, Saving Private Ryan in particular. These serve no real purpose except to keep the bodies piling up. Also, there seems to be some message about America and Afghanistan. What is the point? Are people who see this movie supposed to carry away a meaningful geopolitical message? Perhaps BR1 accomplished this to some extent, but there's no chance of that here.
Again due to the lack of character, the movie seems overly long, clocking in at well over 2hrs.
That is not to say that this is a bad movie, it is simply an underwhelming and slap-dash effort to follow up BR1, which is simply a good slasher/gore movie. Such movies need not be scrutinized so carefully: You watch, react while watching, and move on.
As a slasher movie: 4/5 As a sequel to Battle Royal: 2/5

  • Post
  • Reply