1. The Ending
Again, the winner here is Battle Royale in that it has an actual ending, and not a set-up for a lucrative franchise. Now, in fairness, they did make an inferior and superfluous sequel to Battle Royale, but the original film still provides us with a rewarding ending to the story. Beyond survival, The Hunger Games prisoners have achieved very little by films end, they have planted some seeds of rebellion that will pay off later, but their plight is largely the same as it was at the start of the film. For those that enjoy opening their wallets and shaking out its contents to Hollywood, they may prefer The Hunger Games approach. But for my money, Battle Royale wins another point for giving me a story with an ending. (And Ill deduct a half mark for the unnecessary sequel).
Conclusion:
The Hunger Games author Suzanne Collins claims to have never heard of Battle Royale before writing her novel, and says that the idea occurred to her while channel-surfing one day. One wonders what Japanese movie may have been playing on one of those channels that day, but nonetheless, she can be given the benefit of the doubt as Battle Royale isnt a universally known film, nor is it without its own influences. However, I dont think the producers of the film can be afforded the same good will. A remake of Battle Royale had been in production hell for years before The Hunger Games came along, and it stretches plausibility to suggest that none of the hundreds of people involved in the films production had seen Battle Royale. On the other hand, if they had seen Battle Royale, perhaps they wouldnt have made these 10 crucial mistakes, and The Hunger Games would have been a better film.
The chances of Battle Royale being remade are now slimmer than ever, as it will be unfairly perceived as a rip-off of The Hunger Games. Given Hollywoods spotty record for remakes, maybe they did us a favour. Suffice to say, if you liked The Hunger Games, and have never seen Battle Royale, I urge you to do so.