# Hunger Games Vs. Battle Royale (WTF content)



## broj15 (Apr 12, 2012)

First Read this:

The Hunger Games - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Now read this...
Battle Royale - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Really ?

Now first things first: I'm not accusing the author of The Hunger Games of copyright infringment/ plagiarism. I just find it a little odd that these 2 books have very similar concepts, especially since Battle Royale (novel) was first published in 1999 and then translated and published in english in 2003, where as The Hunger Games wasn't published until 2008. 

I just wanted to get everyones thoughts and opinions on the matter. Also i should mention, I have yet to see The Hunger Games and i haven't read the book, although several of my friends did in high school so i have a pretty good idea of what it's all about. I have however read the manga version of Battle Royale (published in the US by tokyopop in 15 volumes from 2000-2005) but it has been quite some time.

Now, feel free to discuss.


----------



## MFB (Apr 12, 2012)

Oh jeez, this argument eh?

There are differences between the two that separate them into works of their own rights. THG are known to the kids in the books, and some districts go as far as to train their kids to win them as it means more food for their district for the rest of the year and no one will die from starvation (Hey, isn't that where the title came from? Oh my god IT IS! Who would've thought). Along with that there's relationships that happen during the games as well as sequels that aren't full-on atrocities from what I've heard, unlike Battle Royale's sequel which was video only. Also - THG are a form of punishment upon the districts for trying to rebel some 75(?) years ago, and not just population control. Hence why the Capitol also now controls their food supplies.

Battle Royale is a program deemed by the government as "population control" and only the parents know about it, so that when the kids are placed into it at random by class selection; the only ace up their sleeve is their own quick thinking/resourcefulness. Basic idea is for a class of 30 some-odd kids to go on an island, be given a bag and kill each other until only one is left standing where he/she is declared the winner, and given a card signed by the Dictator of their nation; which it should be said nation is a basic representation of China/any oppressive country that limits it's peoples rights such as they don't have internet there, and rock music such as Bruce Springsteen is forbidden etc...

TL;DR - they're different stories


----------



## broj15 (Apr 12, 2012)

Not really an argument. More of a discussion. I just find it odd that The two works, while different, do share a lot similarities. I also did some research about how Battle Royale was set to get an american big box office adaptation but between the backlash of the Virginia Tech shooting and the release of The Hunger Games the project got shut down. When you pick the two novels apart and examine each detail, then yes, they are different, but when viewed on a larger scale they are similar IMO.


----------



## MFB (Apr 12, 2012)

Yes, and there is a reason for that, which is that stories as a whole revolve around I think it's the neighborhood of 8 central plots. That's to say, EVERY STORY when boiled down falls into one of those eight plots, and I can see that being true since I obviously don't have time to do research of that magnitude for myself. It's just how things go really, and that's what separates one good novel of the same plot from a bad novel of the same plot - the means you use to get to the end, and whatever stories may follow it if it's part of a series.

Books nowadays are all dependent upon the means since they've been around for how many years? It's insane to think that something you create will fall into a category that has somehow never been touched upon unless you create something so non-sensical that it doesn't make sense, which would probably put it into a category with other works that tried to do the same thing and ended up there.


----------



## Sepultorture (Apr 12, 2012)

THIS is right up there with The Running Man and The Most Dangerous Game


----------



## Demiurge (Apr 12, 2012)

I'm not familiar enough with both to directly compare, but I suppose that the themes of the future of sustainability of resources, dystopian governments and societies, the future of entertainment in its growing violence and hold over society, and its effects on the future (the stress on and brutalization and exploitation of children) are writ large enough in the cultural consciousness for disparate creative sources to produce something that combines those themes in these stories.


----------



## Bloody_Inferno (Apr 12, 2012)

6 Common Movie Arguments That Are Always Wrong | Cracked.com

Point 4.


----------



## flint757 (Apr 13, 2012)

Bloody_Inferno said:


> 6 Common Movie Arguments That Are Always Wrong | Cracked.com
> 
> Point 4.



I read that earlier when you linked that other cracked article. I love the picture of Lion King and would honestly love to see it done that way. 

That being said I doubt she read Battle Royale or watched it. New of it maybe.

There are differences and similarities like anything else. What I can say is the books don't make the games all that important and the movie definitely didn't. In both half is spent in preparation and viewing how the other side of the fence see's the world and then when in the games the main character avoids killing like the plague until anger gets the best of her. Then in the book (not so much in the movie) the romance takes about a quarter. My estimations may be a little off since I read it awhile back and the movie didn't exactly have any staying power with me. As time progress i find the series and movie to be just okay and slightly forgettable.

If you are concerned because now there is no remake I doubt they were going to do it anyways. The violence in THG was very underplayed and like you said the american audience wouldn't respond very well to child bloodshed in full reveal because of the different incidents that have occurred over the past twenty years. lets just say they did when is the last time a foreign to American remake was better than the original. Off the top of my head I can pull 2 that were okay like Let Me In and Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, but they weren't better than the original either. My point is you aren't going to be missing much anyway and give it another 5 years or so and they may try again when the dust has settled.


----------



## Trespass (Apr 16, 2012)

MFB said:


> Oh jeez, this argument eh?
> 
> There are differences between the two that separate them into works of their own rights. THG are known to the kids in the books, and some districts go as far as to train their kids to win them as it means more food for their district for the rest of the year and no one will die from starvation (Hey, isn't that where the title came from? Oh my god IT IS! Who would've thought). Along with that there's relationships that happen during the games as well as sequels that aren't full-on atrocities from what I've heard, unlike Battle Royale's sequel which was video only. Also - THG are a form of punishment upon the districts for trying to rebel some 75(?) years ago, and not just population control. Hence why the Capitol also now controls their food supplies.
> 
> ...



Those are all semantic differences. Unfortunately, they're semantic enough that it doesn't make it nearly as clean cut as to whether she "ripped off" or was simply "inspired".

By your logic, if I were to take a successful series like, say, I don't know, Lord of the Rings, and change enough semantic elements, I could expect to publish it without anyone questioning my legitimacy?

When you're that close in plot and concept, people are naturally going to question it.


Besides, she's a writer. That's her job. This isn't some bullshit "oh, artistic integrity is everything" world when you're hungry. Sometimes, you take a lesser known story, retool it for mainstream success, and release it to collect a paycheck. That fact it blew up was an accident (or publishers hungry for another trilogy to bring in the dough).


----------



## MFB (Apr 16, 2012)

Trespass said:


> By your logic, if I were to take a successful series like, say, I don't know, Lord of the Rings, and change enough semantic elements, I could expect to publish it without anyone questioning my legitimacy?
> 
> When you're that close in plot and concept, people are naturally going to question it.



I don't doubt anyone to question it, in fact I expect it at this point and that's why my opening line was rather blunt; BECAUSE this argument/debate whatever you want to call it has come up so often due to the popularity of it vs. the cult fanboys/girls of Battle Royale it's bound to never end.

Also, Lord of the Rings is just the 12 Stages of the Heroes Journey I believe which is a structure that's been beaten to death since God knows what year, so you probably wouldn't catch much shit for changing something unless it's like "Uruk-Hai" now became "Uruh-kai" in which case it'd be pretty much be :

A. you know what you're doing (trolling/phishing)
B. asking for people to call it out on similarities and gaining publicity through it's similarities

Once you start to change things in the 12 Stages the story would become it's own thing and people may not even know you ripped off LoTR, and unlike BR/THG where the ends are the same but the means are different - in this case you would DEFINITELY have to change the ending


----------



## Trespass (Apr 16, 2012)

MFB said:


> I don't doubt anyone to question it, in fact I expect it at this point and that's why my opening line was rather blunt; BECAUSE this argument/debate whatever you want to call it has come up so often due to the popularity of it vs. the cult fanboys/girls of Battle Royale it's bound to never end.
> 
> Also, Lord of the Rings is just the 12 Stages of the Heroes Journey I believe which is a structure that's been beaten to death since God knows what year, so you probably wouldn't catch much shit for changing something unless it's like "Uruk-Hai" now became "Uruh-kai" in which case it'd be pretty much be :
> 
> ...




I think you need to understand the difference between structure and defining elements.

They are all going to indulge in winning formulas (use of a relatable overarching problem, archetypal characters that assist or detract the hero, self-discovery and growth) but it's the quality of execution and story telling that matter, as well as the depth and consistency of the inner world logic.

In this case, the concept was very closely mirrored. The world dynamic and the motivation various opposing forces are so similar to the original Battle Royale, it's quite obvious that she had definitely encountered it.


For the record, I don't think it's a bad thing. Society is weird. If I hear a composer playing a classical piece, and I say "I could probably play that better" and record it, no one would think twice (unless the composer denied me the license to recording/public performance). If I take a terrible movie like that Hulk reboot from 7-8 years ago, and say "I can do that way better" and retool it with your ideas, it's socially acceptable. The same is true with jazz, writing (Twilight could be analyzed under this light as Meyer taking Ann Rice's "vampires are actually sexy and tortured beings" Byronism and updating it with more modern mainstream ideas), engineering etc.

If I create a product that specifically competes with Axe FX, then I'd be lauded for creating competition in the market, providing more choice to the consumer etc.


----------



## flint757 (Apr 16, 2012)

Other than for fun purposes the debate is unnecessary. While I enjoyed the first book and I enjoyed the Battle Royale movie (haven't taken in any other form of that series) the sequels to the hunger games and the movie were only okay. There is a lot of character development in the book that if you didn't read the book first in the movie a lot of shit would be like "why are they so close?" kind of thing. That being said they will probably continue with the rest of the series which is going to be meh at best.


----------

