With Hunger Games taking over the world -- a phenomenon I have thus far resisted after attempting to start the first book -- there may be some recent interest in the Japanese Battle Royale franchise as the source of this fantasy teenage death match extravaganza.
The original novel holds somewhat of a special place in my psyche, as I read it when I was quite young (12 or so -- an age where I considered the 15 year old protagonist old and mature -- good God
!) and connected with it. For anyone interested, the english translation is seriously awful, but the book, despite its linguistic stiltedness, a is quite great piece of young adult literature. It captures the bizarre social milieu of adolescence, where young lives are mashed together in school for hours a day, and differential crowds form as everyone makes their first stab at defining themselves. The concept heightens the stakes, as deep-seated yearnings surface due the prospect of mortality. The narration focuses on our hero, Shuya, but switches perspectives constantly to a variety of major and minor characters, successfully introducing you to a wide swath of the social strata of the 15-year old school class as they face collective combat.
Beyond the pulp exploitation element of forcing teenagers to battle to death, the most interesting part of the book is the expression of lingering teenage crushes that dominate the class members[' psyches as they find themselves facing death.
Apparently the author has never produced anything else.
The film adaption, which seems to be the more respected work in the US, perhaps because it was initially banned, I always thought pales in comparison to the novel due to the lack of depth of characterization. However, it is a visually striking movie that features some brilliant and moving sequences sequences, attributable in part to its fantastic score.
It also introduces a sad middle-age teacher character, not present in the novel, who disrespected by this students and family, thus emphasizing to some extent with the crushing ennui that drives the murderous adults. This character appears again in flash-backs in the sequel, as his daughter seeks revenge on Shuya.
It is worth noting, that, in the novel, the US is seen somewhat as a beacon of freedom -- the source of rock and roll, Bruce Springsteen, free culture, etc. -- all central to Shuya's rebellious inspiration. While the US hardly features in the first film, interestingly, the director Fukusaku's, who died while filming the sequel, turns the novel's perspective on its head in the second film. He renders Shuya as a terrorist leader battling "adults" i.e. those with power. Indeed, Shuya, a US idolizer in the novel, becomes here a veritable Bin Laden level terrorist leader who challenges both his country and, the United States, and essentially every oppressive, twisted adult who runs the world. Thus, the novel and film sequel have little to nothing in common.
From what I can tell, the second film is generally regarded as a shitty cash-in, featuring a bizarre, incoherent, and morally queasy pro-terroist manifesto. While I would agree with the second statement, revisiting it in 2012 I was more impressed by its exploration of a the seeds of both the terrorist's psyche and those seeking violent revenge than outraged. For an international movie released in 2003, opening with a demolition of two twin towers is certainly a bold move. Following this with a look into the motivations of the terrorists responsible rather than a death-hunt for the perpetrators is even more shocking.
The subsequent narrative functions as a distillation of what might lead a group to perform such an attack. Rather than rehashing the death-match of the first film as a simple cash-in might, the sequel pits a new class of orphans -- many orphaned themselves due to Shuya's attack -- against Shuya and his terrorist group. The opening hour, in which the vast majority of the new students die in rapid succession, is pretty boring standard action fair. It is not that great, but it features a new element of teamwork and focuses on questioning if revenge is an appropriate response to terrorism -- new elements not seen in the first film or novel. You cannot accuse Fukusaku of repacking the original.
In the second half of the film, the question of terrorism, specifically terrorism against the US, is pressed heavily, as the surviving classmates, met with caring by Shuya and his followers, are forced to grapple with the question of whether to join Shuya's movement. Throughout, major characters repeat over and over a special list of countries: ones which the total the US has bombed since the end of WWII (see here: http://www.globalresearch.ca/list-of-countries-the-usa-has-bombed-since-the-end-of-world-war-ii/)
As the last work of a Japanese director who was 15 when nuclear weapons were detonated over Hiroshima and Nagasaki, this list becomes a horrifying refrain of US callousness. Where the US was seen as a land of freedom in the novel, here it becomes the hypocratic center of world power, extolling an ideal of freedom yet exercising violent dominion over the 6 billion + non-US residents throughout the world. Battlye Royale II essentially becomes an argument that the United States is a criminally insane nation who bombs any country they please, culminating in a missile strike on the island of teenage rebels led by Shuya.
While obviously I don't believe terrorism is successfully justified by the film, I do not see that as the director's intent. Instead, he seems most interested in exploring the psyche of a anti-US terrorist attacker. The argument that the US is a criminally insane nation certainly rings especially true in 2012. Released in 2003, Fukusaku's last work is a prescient prediction of a coming age in which the US will flippantly orders drone strikes on sovereign nations whenever it pleases and threatens nations seeking nuclear weapons when itself is the the holder of the largest nuclear arsenal in the world. All this, of course, is done in the name of fighting terror.
If one thought that removing W. Bush from office would usher in an age of US pacifism, think again. US criminal insanity has surely reached a new height with the Libyan experience, in which we immediately turned on a leader we had reached a nominal peace with (see here)
began arming Salafi terrorists (our new freedom fighters); used drone attacks to allow a mob to viscously kill him; and then boasted about it ("We came, we saw, he died.")
The surprise missile barrage on the compound in BR II thus proves an indelible prediction of US military derangement, not abating but escalating in the 21st century. Thus, BR II I think is a brave work of anti-USA expression from a country -- Japan -- who has mostly proven wholly complacent at least to America's face in the fact of two nuclear attacks. It is worth seeing for this reason alone.
The film improves in its final hour as our major characters face a life and death struggle with the attacking soldiers. One of the most poignant moments occurs when one such member of the faceless mob of slaughtered ascendents protests that he has a family too.
The most interesting of new classmate characters is the daughter of the original film's school teacher, who came to the island to seek revenge on Shuya.
Compelled instead to join Shuya's cause, in her final moments she reflects despondently on her indifferent treatment of her father before his death.
While a somewhat unnecessary coda in which Noriko reemerges mars the end of the film, its setting -- clearly a stand in for Afghanistan -- communicates clearly that the films overall message applies to the United States military efforts.
Ultimately, Battle Royale probably did not need a sequel, but the joint efforts of director and son certainly produce an interesting, challenging if disjointed film squarely targeting the United States anti-terror campaign.
- Lydgate
No comments:
Post a Comment