Talk:Battle Royale (novel)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Spanish Translation[edit]

There a spanish translation of the book (no manga) Battle Royale? Please answer me soon, please

Stolen Literature?[edit]

So are we never to mention The Hunger Games? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wickedxjade (talk • contribs) 09:26, 9 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mean Battle Royale stole the concept from The Hunger Games? Because BR was published nine years earlier — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.141.75.139 (talk) 23:51, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As was The Most Dangerous Game, The Running Man and The Long Walk. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.7.231.3 (talk) 09:47, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hunger Games[edit]

I don't think any mention of The Hunger Games being similar should be included in this article. The "controversy" is critiquing of The Hunger Games and should not be dragged into Battle Royale. I haven't seen any other article that lists works that take plot elements from it.

However it should be included on Battle Royale (film), because of the controversy the American remake has been shelved (this is very notable). I also have no problem with it being included on Battle Royale (manga), only because the English adaptation of the manga changes "the Program" to be a reality TV show, thus making another similarity to Hunger Games. What do other editors think? Xfansd (talk) 04:16, 27 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean it shouldn't be included? Are you an idiot or some Hunger Games partisan? That is news baby, BIG TIME NEWS that this Battle Royale is so similar in concept and plot, yet HG author Collins claims she never heard of BR???!!!??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.124.35.29 (talk) 16:47, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

People talk about Battle Royale as though god himself wrote it and handed it down to you. I saw the movie and was not impressed. You pick on the Hunger Games yet Stepehen King Under his pen name Ricard Bachman wrote the Long Walk and the Running Man years before and the premise of combining totalatarian governments who punish or kill thier people for sport and televise it seems to be his idea. Lets not forget the Most Dangerous Game which showed us innocent people being hunter for sport by a mad hunter on an island. Also in 1971 a film called Punishmnet Park explored similiar concepts....So no Battle Royale is not scripture and The Hunger Games is no Rip Off....My Point being is that other people had similiar idea's years before Battle Royale saw print...... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.7.231.3 (talk) 09:45, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

while this article devotes time to saying that hunger games has nothing to do with BR, but is considered a rip off by some, the hunger games article doesnt even mention BR. i guess that speaks volumes on the perception of things. 84.215.194.129 (talk) 13:15, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Battle Royale. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:20, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Requested move 3 October 2017[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved. Anarchyte (work | talk) 00:22, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

– The novel is not the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC of the term "Battle Royale". It receives only 30% 25.2% of the page views of ambiguous topics,[1] and it has no greater claim to long-term significance than either the film adaptation, or the general concept of the battle royal, which is commonly spelled "Battle Royale". It's likely the current setup is misdirecting many readers who were actually looking for other topics.--Cúchullain t/c 19:28, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support - While the article battle royal is a dicdef of dubious notability, I do support bringing the disambiguation to the primary namespace per the nominator's concerns. While it may have once been the primary topic, Battle royale game has started to take off as a genre, making it more hazy.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 19:56, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support move. Especially given the popularity of the film adaptation and various other uses of the term, the novel is no longer the primary topic.  ONR  (talk)  20:29, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support The term "battle royale" was being used back in the 1800s— Preceding unsigned comment added by Tronvillain (talk • contribs)
    • That should technically not matter, due to WP:NOTDICTIONARY. But, it's debatable whether the book, movie, or something else is the primary topic.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 13:24, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per detailed nomination, Zxcvbnm and ONR. —Roman Spinner (talk)(contribs) 02:39, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- Netoholic @ 19:07, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 06:47, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Theme section[edit]

I feel like the article is incomplete sans a Theme section, given its premise. Are there any reliable sources that discuss the book's theme? Patience, Slightlymad (talk) 04:14, 6 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Battle_Royale_(novel)&oldid=1206189053"