The CW's "Battle Royale" Adaptation is Dead

Network drops idea to adapt ultra-violent teen survival story and develops alternative

When the news broke last year that teen-centric TV network The CW was looking into adapting Battle Royale to cash in on the popularity of The Hunger Games, many fans of the 1999 book and infamous film were understandably concerned that the idea would not lend itself to a weekly television series, and that's after taking into account that the trademark ultra-violence found in both the book and films would need to be toned down considerably in order to meet broadcast content standards.

 

Battle Royale cover

 

It stands to reason that the fact it isn't happening anymore would mean that's the end of it and we can all move on, right? According to Entertainment Weekly, the series was never even in the planning stages from statements made by CW president Mark Pedowitz regarding the development status of the series:

 

"We are not planning to do anything with Battle Royale … nothing occurred … there’s nothing to talk about … nothing happened." 

 

Apparently, the closest the network ever got to Battle Royale was Pedowitz making phone calls to check on adaptation rights and that got leaked, meaning the series was never slated for production, with the network ultimately deciding to create its own spin on the trope in "The Selection," which mirrors Hunger Games in tone and plot with the difference of being set 300 years in the future according to The Hollywood Reporter.

 

Battle Royale Class

 

While this means Battle Royale is safe from the clutches of a network better known for teen-driven dramas and America's Next Top Model, I have to wonder if the idea of adapting Battle Royale for American TV is still being taken seriously in Hollywood despite the obvious issues with content.


Humberto Saabedra is the Editor-in-Chief of AnimeNews.bizPhoneNews.com and an occasional columnist for Ani.me. He can also be found musing on his favorite 2D girls at @AnimeNewsdotbiz.

Other Top News

22 Comments
Sort by: