[quote=Tick]
I'm glad not to see complaints that Hunger Games was just ripping off Battle Royale. :P Considering both are different versions of the Roman Colosseum. With some reality T.V. thrown in Hunger Games on top.I like both movies; they've got different strengths. Hunger Games isn't a realistic setting - I don't see how it'd happen anywhere in modern Earth - but it goes for a lot more believable reasons and detailed background/politics than Battle Royale. The Hunger Games do exactly what the Roman Colosseum did. It acts as morbid entertainment and crowd control simultaneously, to keep all the unhappy unwashed masses tame and maintain the status quo. What I do know from the films and books are pretty clever, particularly for a teen series, which usually assume the audience is brain dead.Also, the way it plays with reality T.V., also done before, is neat.
[/quote]

And I'm glad that you recognize the fact that I didn't voice any complaints about HG being a ripoff of BR, I simply saw both have basically the same premise with different settings and compared the two. One I liked and one I disliked. 

I wouldn't agree with what you're saying about HG's premise for the games being any more believable than BR, I'd say both are equally unbelievable because both are the same fucking premise, using arena deathmatches with children as a means of preventing rebellion. Stopping populations from rioting by constantly keeping them focused on brutal combat. It's an illogical concept that couldn't possibly work in realistic application. The difference between BR and HG is that BR embraces the ridiculousness of the concept where HG puts all this work into creating a reality where it would succeed while still failing to address the ultimate flaws of the concept.