I just wanted the other side presented, and that wiki section refuted every point you made, with multiple sources.

Fair enough about presenting both sides. I'm not sure, however, that it could ever refute my personal experience watching the movie (i.e., the the trouble I had keeping track of, and caring about, the characters... the way I cringed at some of the dialog), and in some ways it supports my case of it being derivative by referencing critics' comparisons of the film to A Clockwork Orange and Lord of the Flies.

It's clearly an overwhelming set of positive recommendations though -- not all of which I would typically, blindly respect -- but overwhelming positive nonetheless, which also seems to reflect the opinion of many on this forum. Also, it speaks of the film relative to the horror genre a couple times, which makes me feel better. So it's all good. :)

Also, just to be clear, I did enjoy the film, but there were things about it that didn't impress me.


---
[Edit]

I keep a database of all the films I watch, and just for fun, I looked up my data on Battle Royale. I was curious if remembering things wrong. Here's my data:

Watched: 2/8/2013
Genre: Action
Tags: adventure, survival, deadly game/ immoral reality tv
Rating: 7/10
Inaccessibility: 3/10

I'm wondering if I went a little low on the inaccessibility, but basically 3/10 means, "only mildly shocking." Also, it's really rare that I don't use the term "horror," either for the genre or for a tag. Anyway, that was just my impression. Maybe I should add "horror" to the tags now. 7/10 ain't bad though.

It mentioned Clockwork Orange as a film that stirred controversy about real-life violence, as BR did, so I hardly think you can call that being "derivitive." The Lord of the Flies reference was in regard to making you wonder about what you would do in a similar circumstance, not in terms of deriving any actual content from the earlier film.

If this is going to be the basis of citing a film as derivitive, we might as well label every film made in the past 80 years as "derivitive."

Yeah, I agree. That's a road I definitely wouldn't want to go down.

And okay, maybe "derivitive" was the wrong word. Hopefully, even though you disagree, you understand the point I'm trying to make though, without getting overly-semantic about terminology.

Well, words DO have meanings. :p

Touché. :D

Good debate.

We are still searching for the 24th finalised film for the 2000s.

3 films are leading the race right now - Final Destination, Little Otik and The Orphanage.

And we have 3 others hot on their heels as well - The Devil's Backbone, Battle Royale and Hard Candy.

http://www.horror.com/forum/showthre...57593&page=120

Final Destination is so far out of place in that list of six....

I disagree. I am surprised it did not already make the list. I actually consider it to be an excellent film not just a "fun" film. The premise was one of the most unique and was very well-executed, in my opinion. Additionally, the character development was quite good. Also, I believe the score complimented the film quite well. Definitely, a worthy addition to the list, in my opinion.

Completely agree. Unique concept but formulaic plot. Bad acting. Stereotypical characters. Not in the same league as the others in consideration.

Also, if we don't have at least one film from the New French Extremists in our list, at least as Honorable Mentions, I will have lost all faith... IMO it's an indication that personal taste is trumping the choosing of noteworthy happenings of the decade.

Inside
Martyrs
Haute Tension
Frontiers
Trouble Every Day
Ils
In My Skin
Irreversible

Any of these could be in the top 24 discussion, and I can think of another half dozen where a case could be made.