Bloodhounds will lick their lips experiencing the re-launch of Kinji Fukasaku's trendsetting Battle Royale (2000) with 3D effects, which basically make the splatter scenes gorier and stickier.
What are people saying?
What are critics saying?
The New York Times by A.O. Scott
American fans of "The Hunger Games" may not embrace - or even be permitted to see - Battle Royale, which is too bad. It is in many ways a better movie and in any case a fascinating companion, drawn from a parallel cultural universe. It is a lot uglier and also, perversely, a lot more fun.
Maybe Battle Royale's ultimate punchline is its inexplicable ability to fool some people into taking it seriously.
Kinji Fukasaku's slick, sick nightmare is best left to the quasi-banned realm where it exists as a perfect satire; when brought into reality, it's a touch awkward.
Departing from two decades' worth of domestic and personal dramas and returning to his roots as Japan's maestro of mayhem, Kinji Fukasaku has delivered a brutal punch to the collective solar plexus with one of his most outrageous and timely films.
I absolutely love this film. I don't understand why some are being so hard on this film. Sure, the premise is kind of silly and requires a certain amount of suspension of disbelief. You could also say that some of the satire and character depth has been lost in the translation from book to film. For all it's flaws (and I don't think there are that many), however, this is just an awesome film. I can't think of many other action films that pack as much of an emotional punch while still packing so many actual punches. The action is both gritty and super stylishly choreographed, the stakes feel high, and the characters are likable. If you're a fan of the Hunger Games (well... you have bad taste), but you will love this movie.