Want personalized picks that fit your family?

Set preferences to see our top age-appropriate picks for your kids.

Get age-based picks

Parent reviews for Battle Royale

Common Sense says

Ultraviolent Japanese cult movie came before Hunger Games.
Based on our expert review

Parents say

age 17+
Based on 3 reviews

Kids say

age 15+
Based on 37 reviews
Adult Written byYoungAtheist November 15, 2013

Some Real Insight

It is fairly violent, yes, but more mature teenagers will be able to grasp the underlying themes of it. I feel as if most people on this site focus too much on whether it's a appropriate and not enough on what the actual content is. The entire premise is posing questions. When it comes down to it, can you trust anyone? Do you know who your real friends are? Stop being overly concerned about whether something is "appropriate" and start actually thinking about the film. It's mostly a "what if" scenario. And might I also add that the reviewer got parts of the plot wrong? There were 42 students, and their bus wasn't "hijacked". That would imply that an outside force was involved. The government was the one employing the program. Though the movie focuses on main character Shuya Nanahara (Male Student No. 15) and Noriko Nakagawa (Female Student No. 15), it gives sight from a variety of points of view throughout the variety of the class. As well as posing questions about who can be trusted when it came down to the nitty gritty, the film also voiced a message about the dangers of totalitarianism, and the nature of a corrupt system. If one were to read the novel that the movie was based on, there would also be a taste of seeing the United States from a different light (as The Republic of Greater East Asia is a great rival to the "American Imperialists). Overall, I don't think that age should really be a judge for this particular movie as much as maturity should. Do you believe your child is competent to wrap their head around the deeper meanings of the film? Then let them watch it (and DEFINITELY let them read the novel; it is so much better). Although, if you're talking a minimum age, I would say that it should be treated as a PG-13 movie. But really, read the novel. It's a million times better, and you quite literally get to know every single character in one way or another. And if you think The Hunger Games has a better story than Battle Royale, then you are obviously not mature enough to comprehend the latter. In conclusion, if Cato and Kazuo Kiriyama (the boy in the movie who doesn't talk; the one who Kawada said had "signed up willingly for this sh**", though his character is different in the novel) were to get into a battle, Kazuo would win. He's smarter, more resourceful, and has a much better technique in approaching the game. Not to mention the Battle Royale characters actually have substance. Sigh. And yeah, Shogo Kawada smokes almost the entire time that he's on screen, but he's really not the worst role model in the world. He's loyal, driven, highly intelligent, and a pretty good leader. He had the makings of a true freedom fighter, and he's the type that you wouldn't mind letting your daughter go out with (well, after you got to know him).

This title contains:

Positive role models
Violence & scariness
Sexy stuff
Language
Drinking, Drugs & Smoking
Adult Written byM B November 20, 2016

Boring ultraviolent movie

This film has a similar scenario to that of Hunger Games However it is ultraviolent. But this film is ultraviolent with completely explicit violence and unlike Hunger Games the main reason for the film seems to be to display violence. Again unlike Hunger Games there is no hint of any revolt by people to prevent the massacre where this latter is one of the redeeming features of the 2nd rate film Hunger Games. Some critics claimed the film was humorous and was "dark comedy" and a "horror film". I could not find anything amusing or humorous about the film neither did I find the film frightening in the least degree. Nor is there any character development in the film nor are relations between the school children developed to any significant degree; there are too many of them at 40 initially to be able to follow individuals. The relentless slaughter is boring as there is no progression of any kind. The actors in the film really are for the most part 15 year old actors and actresses. I think this film "Battle Royale" is a very bad film and is one of the worst examples of modern film making.
Adult Written bydempsey dalheim April 28, 2015

Great Movie Buuut..

It is really gory soo... yeah. This film is definitely not for kids!

This title contains:

Positive Messages
Positive role models
Violence & scariness
Sexy stuff
Language
Drinking, Drugs & Smoking