Battle Royale II (2003) User Reviews

Royale with too much cheese

[skymovies · 4/10 · 12 April 2005]

The enjoyably histrionic Lord Of The Flies-meets-The Running Man premise of Battle Royale is taken a film too far and far too seriously in this confused, confusing mess of a sequel.

Another class of errant schoolkids is abducted by the Japanese authorities, fitted with explosive collars, and despatched to a bleak island for a particularly harsh lesson in survival. But instead of killing one another, they must fight a band of young terrorists led by previous Battle Royale 'winner' Shuga. To the death. The very messy death.

The opening scene is identical to the first Battle, with a wacko 'teacher' (think Mr Blonde in a leather jacket) pairing up the kids and gleefully demonstrating that if one of the pair dies, so must the other. Then, from the chaotic Saving Private Ryan-like landing on the island to the dreadfully protracted denouement, it's an epilepsy-inducing procession of carnage and cod philosophy.

Had Fukasaku and Son stuck to pure action, BRII would have made for queasy fun. But their propensity for heavy-handed sermonising on the nature of war and society is not only unconvincing, it's boring. If the characters put as much effort into fighting as they do delivering 'profound' speeches, their chances of survival would be infinitely higher.

That's not to say that lots and lots of people don't get blown up, shot, eviscerated and decapitated. They certainly do. Unfortunately, BRII looks like a video game and sounds like a sociology lesson as given by someone who's had too much saké.

The movie that forgot what it was about half way through...

[endeyequote · 4/10 · 31 March 2004]

Many spoilers lie here in.

I was a big fan of Battle Royale - so much so that i read the book it was based on and it is now my favorite book of all time, anybody who hasn't read it should. It goes into much more detail on virtually every kid on the island, and the whole point of the story - why Battle Royale takes place - is completely different and incredibly more profound. It is 1984 meets Lord of the Flies - it is amazing.

So with that said - i went into watching Battle Royale 2 with high hopes and was severely let down. I didn't dislike this movie because it was so different than the first - I knew in the onset it would be. I really liked the concept of taking a class and sending them after Shuya just to screw with him. The sort of government portrayed in the first movie would do something just like that. I really enjoyed the scene with the white line - i liked the concept of them getting to chose - added a whole new level on vileness to Battle Royale. I had no problem with how quickly the kids got wasted, the way the story was set up it made perfect sense. And i liked that the daughter of the teacher from the first movie was out for blood - because she had hated her father and that was really an interesting side plot in this one. In fact i was enjoying this movie up until one point. That is when they were captured by Shuya's crew.

At this point the movie completely lost all focus - to the point of making almost no sense at all.

Before i get into the problems with the ploy i have one film making complaint. The whole storming the beach scene was far too reminiscent of Saving Private Ryan, from the camera angels, to the washed out color, to the jerky camera. It felt way to derived. I wouldn't have had a problem with it had that not been the only place in the movie it was done. As a result it stuck out like a sore thumb. I'm sure this could have been done in a much more original way.

now the plot

First of all - why would they hold up on an island where they would just be sitting ducks? The logic is just not there at all.

Second, I'm sorry I know this isn't Battle Royale 1, but the character of Shuya as portrayed in the movie and book would NEVER have taken thousands of innocent lives. That is not fighting for what you believe at any cost - that is just genocidal. The Shuya in the first movie and in this one were two very different characters. I know that what happened to him would have changed him - but it wouldn't have changed him into a homicidal lunatic. I found myself feeling no sympathy for him at all. It wasn't the adults who let this happen, it was a corrupt government. This whole kids vs. adults theme just became silly and contrived and after awhile didn't even make much sense.

Third - the teacher this time was INCREDIBLY overacted. That was one of the worst performances i have ever seen. And again, the scene where he shows up in the end in a rugby uniform, made absolutely no sense, and just came off as comical. And the whole bit with him having a collar? What? Who else missed something there?

Fourth - i found the digs at the US didn't fit into the plot at all. i know that many countries around the world don't have high opinions of us Americans, and i have no problem with that - from their perspective it is very justified. In the beginning when the teacher made that list of countries at first i thought that this could turn out to be a really interesting plot. But it went no where. They never explained its relevance to Battle Royale or what was going on in Japan. And in the end when they were going to attack Japan just because of what Shuya said - it made even less sense, and had even less to do with the plot. They further went on to suggest that somehow Battle Royale was in part the fault of the US because Japan sat by and let the US do whatever they wanted - this again made no sense.

Fifth and final - even though there are many more complaints ill leave it here. Already i said why would they go to and island and corner themselves, but why would they then refuse to leave? If they really want to make a difference what good are they all going to dead? This follows no logic at all.

This movie had a lot of potential, but out of no where it was like the movie forgot what it was about.

Now i know that in Japanese cinema there is a lot placed on the subtext of a movie and to the symbolism as well, maybe being American i just don't get it, I'm willing to concede that as a possibility. Like the movie Suicide club, i didn't get it at all, but i couldn't say its a bad movie, i just realize that i cant fully understand a lot of its symbolism and imagery, the societal translation is just lacking. But BR2 is a bit different. I felt i understood exactly what it was trying to get at - but it just lost all its balance.

Well that's that. Sorry i through around "made no sense" a lot - but i cant really think of any other way to really put most of the problems in this movie.

An attempt at being meaningful...but falls flat...

[rocky-139 · 4/10 · 25 November 2006]

I watched Battle Royale a week before its sequel, and the effects the first had on me were still with me. I feel I tend to notice detail more than some people, but I know I look for it. While Battle Royale's premise was unusual, it was a great story. To imagine you and your friends dropped into a game where you had to kill each other...to see how the students were either so willing to kill, or else strive for union, or else just accept death-it was a wonderful story, with enough of all genres to keep me interested and also moved by it. Kitano was the perfect villain...human but vengeful. To see a sadistic person with so much depth, just walking around in a track suit. It was a beautiful movie with characters you cared about.

But, this is not a review of Battle Royale, but its inferior sequel. Now, once I read the premise, I knew it wouldn't be as good as its predecessor. But I wanted to see it nonetheless. First, its good to see the writer cares about recycling, because he certainly did that. We are treated a second time around to the students herded into a room and confronted by their ex-teacher. We get to see yet another trio of friends broken up when one is killed, and the others vow revenge. This time, instead of a bloody photograph to haunt the hero, it's a bloody football. From here, the story is different, but this is where it really loses its footing.

The movie makes no sense: why not just bomb the island if they're so worried about Shuya and his terrorist group? And, why make it impossible for the students to kill Shuya by keeping danger zones, and making so that when one person dies, their partner has to? Obviously the "teacher" did not care much about them accomplishing their mission, but did want to make the "game" move faster by having two people die at a time.

Then, we're treated to 45 minutes of bore, where the movie tries to get across a strong message concerning terrorism and peace. Now, I do not get bored easily. I love character development and scenes where the music just carries you along while you get to feel what the characters are feeling. But this was just falling flat in its message. And it was redundant. Every time they said something, it was a rehashing of some point already made. None of the characters were interesting. Even Shuya had become some kind of monk. And the teacher, Riki, was the stereotypical American villain. Donning a black cloak, evil laugh, and threatening one-liners. But, he was boring. Nothing like the human Kitano we got to see in the original.

Not much else to say. If they could just take the few sequences with Kitano out and insert them into Battle Royale, then we'd have no reason to watch this sequel. Maybe they should consider this...

Dull and uninteresting - a great shame

[The_Void · 2/10 · 21 November 2004]

The original Battle Royale is one of my favourite films of all time. It's fusion of extreme violence and a thought provoking, complex substance made for a very different and refreshing movie. The sequel, unfortunately, is merely a stale variation on the events of the first film. It's ironic that this sequel is a complete disaster as making a sequel to 'Battle Royale' should be one of the easiest tasks of all time. It's simple; another battle royale, with all the uncompromising violence of the first, and to continue the story; we'll have Nanahara, survivor of the first film, put back into the frey. Simple. But no; for some reason, the writers have opted for some drivel involving Nanahara becoming an internationally wanted terrorists and an act known as 'BR 2', whereby school children are 'hired' to fight terrorist threats...or something. Now, you might be thinking along the lines of "well, as long as there's school kids with weapons, I'm happy'; but it's no again. The film plays out more like a feature length version of the start of Saving Private Ryan. That's it; it's more or less a simple war film. Damn.

One of the things that made the first film work was the underlying theme that the violence is coming from children that know each other, killing each other. This gave the film a soul-searching horrific edge; "could you kill your best friend" was the tagline, and the film got it's depth from that. Here, that message is gone; and it's replacement is a dull 'anti-war' one. The film piles on the sentiment in an effort to get it's message across, but it never really succeeds. The film also seems keen to prioritise it's 'Requiem' subtitle. Far too keen, in fact. The requiem sequences were the worst thing about the first film; interrupting the adrenaline pumping action sequences all too regularly, I don't doubt that I'm the only person who feels this way. Battle Royale 2 is much like one long requiem sequence, with characters 'reflecting' left and right and the film on the whole suffers because of this. If the film had focused more on character development, the reflecting parts might have worked because we would have cared; but it doesn't, so we don't. Pretty stupid really.

Battle Royale 2 isn't completely devoid of positive aspects, however; the first half hour is definitely good. Going back to how it was in the first film, we see a group of unwitting school children kidnapped by the government and, of course, the hysteria that results in a couple of the kids ending up dead. Although this is almost a complete copy of the first film (we've got knives being thrown, necklaces exploding etc), it works because the first film worked, and fans of the original masterpiece will no doubt enjoy it. However; when I said that I'd have been happy with just 'another Battle Royale', I did mean one that's different from the first one, not just a remake of it. In fact, the sequel takes most of the ideas from the first film and reuses them; from the danger zones to the maniacal teacher who delights in seeing his kids maimed and killed. The only real new idea in the movie is the idea of the 'tag game', which involves the detonators being linked to each other, so if your partner dies; you go too. However, although this is a fairly good new idea, it doesn't make sense.... you see, the government want these kids to kill Nanahara, so why do they make it hard for them? Why not send them in with an army of tanks and just have done with it? Why not just bombard the island with napalm? On that note: I deem this movie ridiculous and pointless, and therefore not worth your time. Even if you like the original as I do; this film is one to miss.

Insufferable mess

[fertilecelluloid · 21 February 2004]

It pains me to say that I "suffered" through BATTLE ROYALE 2, the sequel to one of my favorite films of all times.

What's missing from BR2 is Kinji Fukusaku, the legendary action director who helmed the first film and died one day of shooting into this. His son Kenta replaced him.

Everything that made BR1 so amazing is botched badly here. Kenta Fukusaku fails to keep forty-one characters spinning. He fails to bring power and aesthetic catharsis to the film's violence. He fails to marry social commentary to strong exploitation elements.

The first film is referenced plot-wise and musically. The BR rules are altered slightly. Danger Zones still exist. The corpses are counted on screen.

But it's boring. Yes, BR2 is a crashing bore. The SAVING PRIVATE RYAN sequence demonstrates its paucity of ideas. The special effects are cheesy and obvious and the film's efforts to wring emotions out of one-dimensional relationships are pathetic.

I had high hopes. After one hour I just wanted it to end.

Never underestimate the importance of a good director or the genius required to deliver a masterpiece.

Bloody mess!

[Coventry · 2/10 · 30 January 2005]

Bad sequels are especially painful when their predecessors were brilliant and mesmerizing films. Like in the case of "Battle Royale", which was the most controversial shocker in years and probably the only film of the recent Asia-mania that was worth the hype it caused. BR featured a simply absurd story and exploitative violence, yet it worked. The sequel, for some reason, wants to be more ambitious and turns the premise into a gigantic anti-war campaign. Sole survivor Shuya Nanahara of part one has become a feared terrorized who declared war to all adults but, instead of responding, the government sends a fresh shipment of adolescents with death-collars over to the hideout island of Shuya in order to annihilate him. The only really good sequences are almost exact copies of situations that already took place in part one (a giant amount of nasty collar-explosions) but the shock-effect is gone. I normally have sympathy for filmmakers that try something new instead of re-telling the original but in this case the director should have optioned for a screenplay that harped more on the same successful idea. Something's also pretty wrong with the regularity and structure of this film. The first 45 minutes are stuffed with hard-boiled action, featuring for example a Saving Private Ryan-like coast-storming. But then the boredom kicks in and the story begins to live up to its extra title: "Requiem". Endlessly irritating friendship speeches, tedious morality and unnecessary flashbacks completely ruin the tempo of the film and you literally have to struggle yourself through every remaining minute that's left. 134 minutes is way too long for a film like this, by the way. The whole BR2 project is an incompetent mess and not at all recommended. It's too idiotic too pass for a war epic and far too moralizing to become a controversial cult flick.

This one's a mess

[Inakaguy · 3/10 · 20 May 2004]

After loving the first battle royale, I was extremely disappointed in this and struggled to make it through the whole movie.

Most of the faults have already been pointed out. The acting (not really a feature of even the first film) is laughable. Fujiwara, who was well cast as the naive Shuya in the first film, looks totally out of place as a hard bitten terrorist/freedom fighter.

The rugby coach was one of the worst actors I have ever seen, hardly a suitable replacement for Kitano.

The direction is full of choppy cuts, meant to convey a sense of fast paced action but effectively just turns the movie into a bloody mess.

Obviously the movie wasn't helped by the untimely demise of the director. Avoid this one and watch the first instead.

The Royale continues...

[Captain_Couth · 7/10 · 4 January 2005]

Battle Royale 2 (2003) was a step down from the first film. There's something missing from this movie that I can't quite point out. The movie is very violent but that's not it. Direction and acting was up to snuff, but that's not it. Maybe the presence of a strong antagonist. Yeah, that's it! Although the movie is not as brilliant as the first one, it's still a whole lot better than anything Hollywood has put out.

The Japanese government is trying to crush a terrorist group called the Wild Seven. The leader of this militant group is being led by a survivor of the last Battle Royale. So a new class is forced to participate in another round of the Royale with different rules. Their mission is to go back to the island and ferret out the Wild Seven.

Not as great as the first film, but it's still better than anything Hollywood has cranked out. I have to recommend this movie. It's entertaining and a good watch. You wont be disappointed.

terrible

[ZeGerman · 1/10 · 3 April 2006]

Being a fan of the first movie, and considering its strong concept I expected the sequel to be good as well.

But it was terrible.

This rant will contain spoilers!

Story:

They start out OK with another class being picked for the program and I expected the same set up of class mates being forced to kill each other to live, and the different responses to that choice. But this movie just goes downhill fast.

Instead of having to kill each other they must fight the survivors of the first Battle Royale, who are now the leaders of a terrorist group that blew up half a city. The terrorists have made themselves a sitting duck by retreating to an Island.

The classmates also have their explosive collars linked together so that if one dies his partner blows up. Original maybe but it only lead to many extra deaths and is completely devoid of logic as the Government actually wants the terrorists dead and the mission to succeed. It first start with a rip off Saving Private Ryan beach landing scene where half of the class dies already, and they are being picked off 1 by 1 by snipers and booby traps. Some make it into the terrorist lair but are heavily outnumbered by these superhumanly skilled terrorists. But when the terrorists see they are still children, another class from Battle Royale, they spare their lives.

Cause actually the terrorists are the good guys here! They fight a justified war against the mean "adults" which is completely idiotic as they are on the verge of becoming adults themselves. Lets say they mean the evil government and "that country" instead. "that country"? yes that is the USA. Apart from a good start where the teacher writes down a number of countries which are all connected by that they were attacked by America at one point in history, this all goes haywire with terrorists being glorified and "that country" being the one to pressure the Japanese government to attack the heroic terrorists.

Considering the terrorists killed many innocent children and only targeted innocent civilians with their earlier terrorist attack, it seems a bit strange for them to be the "good guys" especially with the retarded reasons they give. But it is enough to win the Battle royale class over! They switch sides and get their collars removed......

Seeing the betrayal, the Government goes for plan B, send in the military! A bit strange to send in the class first knowing they had no chance of success, but who cares about things such as logic right?

And so this movie sinks to a new low, masses and masses of infantry storm the terrorists. Getting completely massacred along the way, but due to sheer number overwhelm the terrorists. Each terrorist who got a little screen time, gets a dramatic death scene, saying some last touching words, heroically taking some infantrymen with him/her, as the carnage around this freezes. Yes freezes, as in infantry overrunning the lines, terrorist gets shot, 3 minute death scene, and the remaining terrorists fall back with the infantry still at the same distance as before the 3 minute death scene.

Many heroic deaths and many many dead marines later, some flee by an underground passageway, while our last heroes fight on with their last ammo. Even wounded and with almost no ammo, they hurl themselves at the oncoming marines and the screen becomes white.

Then "that country" decides they gave the government enough time and bombard the Island. Hmm why did they not do that earlier? why did the government not use that tactic instead of sending that many infantry to their deaths against the super trained terrorist heroes?

Well at least that Osama wannabe is dead I thought, but wait this movie is not over! The next scene sees our heroic terrorist survivors happy together in Afghanistan! Because thats where the children smile? (their way of saying how great taliban Afghanistan must be?) And what do we see there!? its our terrorist leader and his friend! Somehow they survived attacking armed marines with no more ammo and being wounded, AND survived the whole Bombardment to boot!

What did they do? just FLY to the chosen land? How come the government did not trace their steps? whoops I almost forgot this is fantasy pixie land where everythings possible.....

But in the end they were defeated right? they had to flee? No says our terrorist leader, as long as you believe in it, you can make it happen or something along these lines. Well I'm so happy because I really want you to win against the "adults" or whoever your fighting against! No actually I want them all to die. I want my time and money back, I want to form a terrorist organization myself to take revenge for this movie ruining the memory of the first Battle Royale.

Oh and the teacher goes insane, tells them he wanted to play rugby with them in full rugby gear, and then lets his collar go off as apparently he can not live with the fact this movie was such a waste of time.

TERRIBLE.

Radical sequel to the cult classic

[poikkeus · 7/10 · 26 December 2005]

The original Battle Royale won the hearts of many moviegoers with its black humor and deft social commentary. The sequel isn't quite so deft with the humor, but rates as one of the most politically explosive films that will never play on American screens. From its opening aerial sequence = a Japanese version of the Twin Towers tragedy - to its brutal examination of terrorist vs. military violence, Battle Royale 2 explores a lot of incendiary territory.

Unlike the original, BR2 comes off like a vintage war film, albeit fought by teenage boys and girls in military fatigues. When a group of delinquent high-schoolers are exported to a deserted island, they have been charged with rooting out and killing a terrorist cell (who just happen to be the survivors of BR1).

Perhaps a bit too long (like many war movies), this film makes its major points with its sheer radicalism. BR2 takes great pains to suggest that there may not be any clear-cut answers when it comes to violence, sanctioned or not, and that the only way to progress is by at least trying to understand both sides.

A Dull Un-Inspired Mess Nowhere Near The Originality of The First Film

[no-skyline · 3/10 · 19 January 2006]

Why, is the first thing I thought when I watched this movie, why the hell have they made this mess of a sequel to something that was so unique and shocking that it only works once. The initial shock value of kids kidnapped by the government has gone now if you've seen the first film and this is just one of this films many problems.

The plot doesn't make any real sense, while this is true of the original too it managed to suspend dis-belief with it's sheer over the top bravado, while this film is mired in pretentious philosophical musings and over the top 9/11 imagery. The anti-American sentiment running through this film is so over-played it really works against it to often using heavy handed metaphors and one image in particular referencing the twin towers is way beyond the limits of making a statement. America and the war in terror is an easy enough target to hit so why the film makers have consistently missed the mark in un-known.

The acting quality of the film is a severe let down gone is the fine performance of 'Beat' Takashi and in its place is an actor who wouldn't look out of place at Wrestlemania. The kids fare no better than the adults they just seem to be trying to out scream each other and the main 'star' seems to have only two facial expressions dumb shock and angry. The script is second rate, the action scenes seem like a low budget Saving Private Ryan, I could go on and on listing the faults of this film but by now you'll have got the point this is a bitterly disappointing sequel that leaves a bad taste in the mouth.

3/10 – Dumb where the original was smart, blunt and offensive where the original was laced with cutting satire, a dour nasty mess of a sequel that sours the memory of the original avoid!

Watch the Director's Cut!

[HarryWarden · 9/10 · 3 January 2004]

'Battle Royale II' is an uneven, but worthy follow-up. It's one of those sequels that tries something different, but is generally hated due to high expectations and the reputation of the mammoth original.

Here, the two Fukasakus take the story in the exact direction it needs to go. The survival game setting has been ditched...this time, it's about all-out war between the children and the adults. Naturally, there's less intimate moments here and only a few characters are well-defined...but seeing the world of 'Battle Royale' explode in your face (literally) is completely involving.

The few good character moments we get here are nice and match up with the poetry of the original. Shuya Nanahara is a much more interesting and complex person this time. Shiori Kitano is one of the best characters in either film. And the over-the-top Riki Takeuchi almost steals the film.

There are flaws, though... The children feel less like individuals and more like a collective, so there's less emotional involvement this time out...but that is perhaps inevitable, given the war setting. Plus, the resolution to the battle seems a tad anti-climactic.

Problems aside, this is a film well worth watching. The story is more complex, the battles are blistering, and the performances are great. It may not match the greatness of the original, but it's certainly one of the better directions a sequel has taken.

Note: Fans should avoid the theatrical version "Requiem" and seek out the newly re-edited Director's Cut - "Revenge." It restores a lot of missing character development and thematic elements and is a much better film overall.

Actually...it wasn't all bad.

[kermit_kickass · 7/10 · 17 November 2006]

This movie was on Channel 4 last night (in U.K) and having really enjoyed Battle Royale, I decided to give the sequel a chance, even though I'd heard that Requiem wasn't anywhere near as good as the first movie. I have to say I actually quite enjoyed the movie.

Not to say that there weren't aspects of it that I didn't like. The attempt tocontinue the plot onwards from the first movie is what let it down. The first film was so great because in many ways it didn't rely on plot at all, it was simply taking an interesting, gritty look at human violence and survival, while giving plenty of great fighting scenes to keep the audience entertained. It's simplicity made it work. But with Requiem they tried to bring too much emotional investment into the mix along with a plot outline.

You almost expect them to take the mistake even further and make a third BR (thus the film trilogy that we see far too much of these days). It's a shame because if it wasn't for the silly plot then I would have been able to take the film a lot more seriously.

However looking at it as a stand alone movie in its own right that gives a dire warning about humanity's continuing lack of morality, it ain't half bad. The Saving Private Ryan style beach landing was really cool, and as mentioned earlier, the cinematography did the film a lot of justice.

In short the film would have been a lot better if it had had nothing to do with the plot of the original and taken its own storyline rather than a continuation of the original. But there you go, such is the way with so many sequels, and in the end, you can't deny that if you just want to watch a film with plenty of gore and entertaining battle scenes, then BR 2 fits the bill.

Pointless movie

[mangodurian · 1/10 · 25 March 2007]

I got this movie for about 4 months without watching it as after watching the original, I knew it was going to be violent - and thus couldn't find time alone where my wife and kid would not be around. Finally, while travelling, I managed the chance to watch it ... and I regret that I didn't accidentally misplaced this junk in the first place.

First of - there is no story and no real connection to the original movie. I still don't get the point of the movie. The commentary at the end about wars around the world was pathetically naive and inaccurate. Lumped together with Afghanistan was Indonesia and Cambodia. Hallo?! These are not countries even close to being in a state of war.

The old sensei had a purpose - an he was dark, sad and full of issues that made him this cold monster that could kill the kids without a thought, but he had a dim light in him on why he is that way. This new sensei is nothing but a deranged nutcase in a trenchcoat. There is no story behind this dude. The acting was terrible.

As for the kids, the rebels are a pathetic bunch. They are supposed to be freedom fighters and know nothing more than doing dramatic kamikaze runs to kill themselves. And those number of kamikaze runs were just completely boring after the 3rd one. It is as if the director only knows of that form of dramatisation. Pathetic.

The story? What story? What's the point of Nanahara Shuya? What's Noriko doing being alive? What's the sensei committing harakiri for? And don't even mention the logical side of things. I am sure an AK-47 don't sound like that, and the last I check, mine shafts sure don't look like a service tunnel with nice bright lights! I really had a good chuckle seeing those sweet bunch of Japanese kids dressed up in North Indian gowns trying to pass off as being in Afghanistan.

If you value BR1, please don't watch BR2 - you WILL be disappointed.

An exercise in viewer torture.

[danberkeley04 · 1/10 · 9 April 2004]

Possible Spoilers ahead...

I loved the original Battle Royale. I loved the book it was based on. I was incredibly excited to see it's sequel. I bought it on eBay, ripped it open the second it arrived and... Almost killed myself.

The opening scene rips off the original's opening scene. It might as well have been a shot-for-shot remake of the same scene from the first film, only with bad actors and haphazard direction. From then on, the film... Rips off Saving Private Ryan's incredible beach landing scene. Offers no characterization, in a film where characterization should have been key to understand what was going on. Supports acts of terrorism. Transforms the main character into a monologue-spewing half-wit with no motives. Uses the most fake-looking CGI blood ever captured on film. Destroys any memories you had of how good the first one was.

Do yourself a favor. Buy the original. Skip this dreck. And don't believe those who say they were both by the same director. The director, Kinji Fukasaku, died before filming of the second one began. His functionally retarded son took over the production, and butchered what could have been a great film.

Don't expect BR1, and you'll come out smiling

[uksaiyan5 · 15 May 2004]

As with most people who know anything about films, or just those with a sick and morbid sense of humour, I loved the original Battle Royale. It is my favourite film of all time, and I expect will be till the day I die. Never before had such an obscure concept on paper, transfer into such cinematic gold. So, as you can imagine, if you go in expecting the same of BR2 then you're going to be disappointed.

The first thing to note when seeing BR2, is don't get your hopes up. Good sequels are often looked down upon merely because they pale in comparison to the original. That said, BR2 is a good film, but it's not the original Battle Royale, and don't expect as much. What made the original great was 3 things: Originality, an intense amount of dark humoured violence, and Beat 'Kitano' Tekashi. BR2 has none of these (well a little Beat Tekashi).

What first strikes you odd about BR2 is exactly what they were thinking for the replacement they hired for Beat Kitano. Personally I'd have a preferred a "we cloned him so here he is" storyline line just so they could recast the master that is Beat Tekashi, than the low grade actor they got for this film. Whereas Kitano managed to pull off the role effortlessly with a sense of depression and casual disregard for life which excellently portrayed what his character was going through, the Kitano replacement left little to no explanation to what he was doing there. What adds to the confusion is when we find out he is there against his will, and we are left hints that he might have been one of the first BR survivors (yet nothing is fully revealed, nor ever will be). Although it is hard for any man to fill Tekashi's shoes, this person just does an awful job, and towards the end I just got confused to what his motivation and purpose was in the film.

What has also gone in this sequel, is the dark humour present in the random and senseless killings. Instead, this has been replaced with a very involved and heavy storyline, which makes the deaths much less enjoyable to watch (although there are still a few whoppers in there). What annoyed me most about this film however, was the extremeness of the anti American and pro terrorist underlying plot. Being from the UK it is all to refreshing to see a movie in which America is finally made to answer for it's injustices to the majority of the world, and a message which communicates that not all terrorists are evil and that many are just fighting for a cause the only way they know how...but BR2 took it too far even for me. Americans tend to hold the belief that all terrorists are evil, while BR2 holds the belief that all terrorists are freedom fighters, if you look somewhere in the middle then you'll find the truth in the way the world works.

Unfortunately, the deaths in this film are almost entirely from being shot at long distance, and hence removes the entertainment of the numerous different types of killings that was present in the first film. Following on from a film where a decapitated head had a grenade stuffed in it's mouth and was thrown through a window...I was expecting a little more gratuity than we are given. Towards the end of the film one is left feeling that they sacrificed everything that BR was about, in favour of making a heavily political anti American film.

Don't go into this movie expecting the lighthearted nature of the first film, this sequel is very much darker and deeper. And if you can get past the lameness of the Kitano replacement, the fact that Kawada and Korijima aren't in it, and can overlook the blatant anti American underlying tone, then you'll at least find this film entertaining. I would give this film 7/10, and would recommend you at least watch it. Just keep in mind that it's not as good as BR1, and nothing ever will be, and you may yet walk out the cinema with a smile.

Just Dire...

[SirStoneyOfBow · 3/10 · 17 December 2005]

I'm not going to go into great detail about this, but this is a terrible movie. Remove the intelligent satire and add a completely shoddy script, then make the movie drag past two hours so you get bored an hour into it. You'll wonder where they went with the references to America, and obviously gives an opinion on the Iraq war, it seemed a cheap remark. The original was smart, brutal and even had moments of humour. It was exciting to the end. BR2 has NOTHING remotely close - even the violence was predictable. Just forget this movie exists, it WILL pain you to watch it. What a waste. A real mess. You've been warned.

I can't believe I sat through the whole thing.

[abigailking90 · 1/10 · 21 June 2013]

I genuinely cant believe this movie is as bad as it is. The first movie had an actual story line. Around half way through I may have lost my will to live, it was so horrible. With the first being such a classic to some I'am appalled and amazed how just BAD this was. If I could give it less than 1 star, I would. There is literally NO interesting content in the entire movie. The voice acting was much worse, I feel like none of the characters developed at all, and it was so obvious what was going to happen I really don't know why I finished watching it. Save yourself the headache and stop at movie 1, or never watch the series at all. I can honestly say this is in the top 5 of the worst movies I've ever seen.

It was a cool movie. Interesting subject matter.

[xtckid_80 · 6/10 · 8 March 2006]

It was a decent movie. I was in awe of the body count in the first 30 minutes of the movie. It went a bit quicker than the first movie, but the deaths were unoriginal. Because in the first movie it was all about how they died and who killed them. There was drama in what happened and you felt a pang of sadness for each death. This time around a lot of the student's death was like a Rambo movie body count.

And for the people that say this movie is Anti-American it kind of is, but isn't. If it is Anti-American it's also Anti-Japanese. I think more to the point it focus' on more of the status quo. In the universe of this movie Japan sends random middle schoolers to fight each other to the death. So I feel this world is like ours but much more desperate and extreme. So yea, America is going to seem worse than it is. For all those people that might flame this thread. No country is perfect. There is always going to be someone that dislikes something about someone. I have heard many views on many different countries. Some love the US and move here, some hate the US and move to another country. And I think part of the point of the movie I got is that "one person's terrorist is another person's freedom fighter" and to best quote from the movie "6.3 Billion People...6.3 Billion Different types of freedom." Because when America was fighting for independence, we were terrorists to the British. So I feel this movie isn't Anti-American. It's Pro change.

I watched the movie with low expectations...

[hellfire_30 · 1/10 · 11 February 2007]

The original Battle Royale was a breath of Fresh air, profound ideas mixed with insane slaughter. Although lacking in the huge budgets that most Hollywood crap automatically receives, the film still manages to convey a sense of gritty realism, it was also backed up by a solid foundation of a plot that although fairly simple is extremely engaging. Characters that you actually cared about, and a sheer brutal originality that shocks yet leaves you breathless in awe. How the heck did they come up with it.

You could then imagine my pleasant surprise when hearing about the sequel. I was thrilled beyond words. However reality began to kick in with a sharp thud, and sequels more often that not tend to be shockingly bad, marring the original movie. However this was the sequel to Battle Royale, and rather than dismiss the movie I instead delved further, and did a bit of research. Again however reality reared its ugly head, my hopes were dashed as I found countless negative opinions all confirming what I had feared- Battle Royale II was a steaming pile of crap.

With such bad publicity surrounding it, I though long and hard about seeing this movie. But again my endless supply of optimism shone through- this is the sequel to BATTLE ROYALE I told myself, how bad can it be. So I defied my gut instincts and rented it, going into the movie with low expectations... Yet even with my expectations set astoundingly low, the movie some how manages to go below them. As the movie ended I stood dumb founded, what the hell have I just witnessed I asked myself. The answer was Battle Royale II- quite frankly one of the worse movies ever created.

A reform in the BR act means that participating students now are tasked with killing terrorists that include past winners of the competition. These terrorists are rather conveniently located on a deserted island, and the new group of ill fated rowdy students are sent their after a routine prep talk reminiscent of the first movie.

The rather average introduction quickly descends into a pure mess at about twenty or so minutes in. The plot also suffers through out and has more so many holes it could be called a sieve. But the real icing on the cake are the characters, under-developed and 2D would be a compliment. Every couple of minute a student dies, and the survivor's mourning is so cheesy and unrealistic that you will literally laugh at first, and then slowly begin to detest each and every succeeding death/mourn scene littered within the film. There are so many is unbelievable and annoying.

The ending which couldn't have come sooner; which is saying something because I spend half the time looking at the clock on my wall praying for time to go just a tad faster, is as you would expect from a movie of this calibre suitably bad to tie in with the general shoddiness of the film. A happy 'riding into the sunset' ending with a cheesier than a ton of Stilton narration that reeks of crapness.

The ultimate snore fest and to put in bluntly hard to even recommend to people you despise, not even they deserve this. Watch at your own peril, you have been warned.

Pretty Good

[eddyj0314 · 7/10 · 16 January 2007]

I will get this out into the open, I watched the movie without English Subtitles, so dialog was out. However, upon reading the previous comment, I began to think, and, yes, I agree with all of it. But you have to keep in mind, not every movie has the Hollywood Billion Dollar Budget. So with this, special effects and things of the like will suffer. This aside it was a good movie, but perhaps the sequel visa-vis Battle Royale one, the first is better. This movie is much more of a Rambo whereas the first was more of a Splinter Cell one on one kind of thing. My only hope is that they put the second movie in book form as I find them more enjoyable. For those of you who have not READ the first one, DO SO!! There are slight changes and surprises which were not doable in movie form.

Enjoy hitting yourself repeatedly over the head with a hammer?

[chimerical26 · 1/10 · 24 July 2006]

By the time you get 1 hour into this movie you'll be either turning it off or as in my case begging the guy with the DVD remote to fast forward through the rest of it and eventually getting so painfully bored you just stand up and walk out saying "I'm sorry but I just can't watch anymore of this" Enjoy hitting yourself repeatedly over the head with a hammer? Then you may enjoy the torture of watching this.

I enjoyed the first one but the general point of Battle Royale is that it has frantic intense emotion throughout and that there is some hope that a winner may emerge. This movie felt like it was a bunch of depressed self-absorbed idiots trying to appear emotional. It was like watching someone play Metal Gear Solid. Lots of action and shooting and once they clear a level you get a 40 minute cutscene except the cutscenes were diabolically boring and stupid and the shooting was just a load of seen it all before.

BRII: Requiem

[mrusty5 · 8/10 · 3 July 2010]

In 2000, Kinji Fukasaku released a controversial but amazing film called Battle Royale, based on a novel, in which 42 ninth graders are placed on a remote island and forced to kill each other until one remained. Three years on, the sequel Battle Royale II was released. However, it lacked the same quality of the first film.

Kinji Fukasaku died during filming of the sequel and his son Kenta took control of the film as director and screenwriter. The end result is what could be called a bit of a mess - little character development, overacting, overbearing political subtexts, too much violence without a just cause behind it, and tons of explosions that would make people think Michael Bay invaded the set.

In the sequel, a survivor of the Battle Royale game Shuya Nanahara has declared "war on all adults" and formed a large terrorist group of outcast kids called the Wild Seven. They bomb the Shinjuku District in Tokyo and kill many people. In response, the Japanese government alters the BR Game to BRII - and sends a new class of 42 outcast ninth graders to the Wild Seven's island base to kill Nanahara. The kids are given military suits and weapons, but for an odd reason are given the familiar explosive collars to wear and there are pointless Death Zone elements on the island. While it seems the filmmakers tried to incorporate elements from the past film to keep the kids going, they are generally unnecessary and I thought the prospect of sending these kids to attack a terrorist group daunting enough.

Among the kids are the main hero Takuma Aoi who seems to have no real motive; and Shiori Kitano, the daughter of the teacher from the first film who personally wishes to kill Nanahara for her father's death. However, Takuma, Nanahara and Shiori are generally the only characters in this whole film that gain some form of character development. The rest of the kids and members of the Wild Seven are just there to shoot guns and die. There are some characters who had potential, like the comic relief character, a girl who has diabetes, and a kid whose sister is a member of the Wild Seven, but it feels like the filmmakers weren't motivated enough to give them much development or focus. The first film's entire cast had enough character development and screen time to make them likable, even though most had only one scene before dying.

Rounding up the film's cast as the resident adult bad guy is Riki Takeuchi as, well, Riki Takeuchi. However, his acting is hilariously overdone and crazy, which I think doesn't really fit into the gloomy atmosphere of the film. Perhaps his acting was supposed to match his character trait like Kitano's was in BR, but I still find him a bit out of place.

There are some political messages which are not as subtle as the first film's were. The opening scene of the Shinjuku District collapsing is very similar to 9/11, and there is a large amount of negativity towards America in the film, possibly hinting at the objected choice of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. However, the problem with this film is that it can be tricky to support either side of the war - the kids and the adults are just as bad a each other. The adults kidnapped kids and forced them to kill each other, and the kids are now killing adults and bombing buildings, and what's more, the adults seek revenge and send more kids to kill those who are getting revenge on them! Despite these problems, BRII can be an enjoyable film. The acting, aside from perhaps Takeuchi's madness, is pretty good, the film has an awesome soundtrack, and some of the more positive messages can let the audience leave feeling somewhat satisfied. I recommend this film if you are a BR fan or a Fukasaku fan, although if you are a hardcore BR fan, then the sequel may come out as a disappointment.

Terrible unnecessary sequel

[RaidersOfTheLostCommunist · 2/10 · 5 August 2022]

The first movie is a masterpiece, still one of my top 5 favorite movies of all time. This is coming from a die hard fan here.

This sequel is terrible, it is boring, slow, annoying, and just completely unnecessary. The story is the same as the first,

The scene where the kids are getting lectured about the games and given instruction literally goes on for at least 40 minutes.

It is just a ton of screaming, people freaking out, and more screaming. The blonde hair dude who is the main character is probably the most annoying character I've seen in a while. All he does is scream in a high pitch voice.

Anyways, this movie is boring and terrible.

Just stick with the first movie, it is a masterpiece.

2/10.

Nutty, over the top and quite entertaining

[deastman_uk · 1 November 2003]

This does build up well from the first film, even if it borrows heavily from Saving Private Ryan to start with. The initial set of unlucky volunteers are decimated in their first mission in the new game, leaving the old heroes, who are now terrorists, with a problem.

The whole thing is overblown, and could have done with tighter editing. As usual, there are some interesting characters, strange humour and stuff that just doesn't work.

There is a little too much sentimentality and not enough Beat Takashi.