The Purge (2013)

[mattCR]

Title: The Purge

Tagline: One night a year, all crime is legal.

Genre: Science Fiction, Horror, Thriller

Director: James DeMonaco

Cast: Ethan Hawke, Lena Headey, Max Burkholder, Adelaide Kane, Edwin Hodge, Rhys Wakefield, Arija Bareikis, Tony Oller, Tom Yi, Chris Mulkey, Tisha French, Dana Bunch, Peter Gvozdas, John Weselcouch, Alicia Vela-Bailey, David Basila, Nathan Clarkson, Boima Blake, Jesse Jacobs, Mickey Facchinello, Chester Lockhart, Tyler Osterkamp, Rj Wolfe, Aaron Kuban, Karen Strassman, Cindy Robinson

Release: 2013-05-31

Runtime: 86

Plot: Given the country's overcrowded prisons, the U.S. government begins to allow 12-hour periods of time in which all illegal activity is legal. During one of these free-for-alls, a family must protect themselves from a home invasion.

In the future, 2017 ailing from a failing economy and unhappy people, 'The New Founding Fathers' assume the White House and institute 'the purge' a 12 hour period every year where all crime is legal. However, despite all crime being legal they don't seem to have much robbery, car thef, etc its pretty much all murder. Mostly murder of homeless people. Thanks to this system, there is less than 1% unemployment as the unemployed apparently can't afford good defense and get targeted. The film goes wildly downhill as the family we follow, after admitting a homeless person become targets. They then sit around while the criminals keep announcing that once they break in they are all dead. While our family has lots of weapons and all crime is legal, no one thinks to pickoff the murderous horde from behind their walls, thy just sit around and think about how to comply with them. Aggravating in its concept, which seems to be a weird veiled message that somehow in just 3 years, the next presidential election is such a referendum that lunatics come o power and everyone likes it.. Setting it so close to our current timeframe, combined with rather poor action and some laughable plotting, the film isn't a total loss.. There are still a few surprises, but not enough to save the production. D+

 

[Michael Elliott]

You forgot to mention that without the new "law," this here is pretty much just a remake of STRAW DOGS.

I admit that the trailer looked really stupid but I had high hopes going in just hoping the screenplay would do something smart with this new "law" that the U.S. has done. However, the film takes 40+ minutes for the viewer to get comfortable or used to this "law" and then the film does a backflip by throwing in all sorts of moral B.S. to make us question what they're trying to sell us. Then, on top of that, they throw in some political stuff that just makes things even worse.

What I hated the most is just how annoying the people here are. The son is someone I hoped they'd thrown out the door to the bad guys and his sister wasn't any brighter. I mean, why run off in a dark house like she did? Why can't the four of them ever seen to be able to stay in one place? I know they had a big house but as many times that they got separated or lost you'd think they were inside some castle. The villains were quite laughable. Worse of all is that there weren't ANY scares to be found.

Those expecting a horror film should probably stay at home as this here is certainly more thriller than anything else even with some graphic violence. Oh yeah, I also thought the film turned rather mean and cruel towards the end.

All in all this was a major disappointment to me.

* 1/2


BTW, since crime is legal and the poor are hated, shouldn't the poor really just come together to rob some banks or break into the homes of these rich people to try and gain money so that the following year they can be protected?

 

[Michael Elliott]

BTW#2, I heard this thing made back its budget in midnight screenings alone, which is pretty amazing. I just don't think word of mouth is going to be as strong as it was for the excellent SINISTER.

 

[mattCR]

Your "BTW" #1 was something I wondered instantly; couldn't you go into the house of the rich and wealthy, kill everyone there, and lay claim to everything they have? I mean, crime is legal in that period, isn't it? So, a quick removal of all their assets or forcing them to sign over deeds at gunpoint would be A-OK.

Seriously, when I heard the concept of "a 12 hour period where all crime is legal" in the trailers with not a lot more than that, I was waiting for some Mad-Max level action, where there is a near uprising yearly people killing their bosses; bankers; spouses.. and yet, the film focused in on just rich people killing poor people for sport. In fact, they suggest that the only reason the homeless person was in their neighborhood is that he was brought in just so they could hunt him (which BTW#4, if that's true, wouldn't that kidnapping and abduction have happened before the 12 hour window??)

The immediate cease fire at 7AM also struck me as completely ridiculous. Hell, the entire end of the film did. But if you get into that situation and you just tell everyone "go home" are you freaking kidding me? It's not like every bbq the rest of the year would be messed up.

Actually, that was the other big problem with this concept.. if society was so much better after this was legitimized (they say more civil) then how can their really be a stable economic force? I mean, I would assume all life insurance policies are for not in this world; so wouldn't that family be rendered near destitute? Just between the property loss, the loss of a spouse, etc.

I thought the setup for this was really interesting. And this could have went in some really cool directions, but it really didn't.

 

[TravisR]

Yep, it sucked.

EDIT: Rather than just be a smart ass, I'll expand a little bit. I'm willing to suspend disbelief but the core concept doesn't even make sense. How does this stop most murders? Sure, if you're planning to off your wife or something, you wait until the purge and she gets got but what about all the spur of the moment murders? Like where a guy steps on someone's sneaker and they start shooting each other. Those killings are still going to occur. Not to mention that by letting people kill once a year, you're going to create bloodlust in some people that won't wait a year. Plus, the purge devalues human life to the point that many people's moral compasses will basically say "Eh, you kill people in the purge, might as well do it now too" and that won't curb murders either.

I think the world is a pretty dark place where a huge chunk of people are self-absorbed enough and don't care about others enough that they MAY go along with a crazy idea like this but once they saw the results (and with a bodycount that must be over a hundred million, it's impossible for everyone not to be very aware of the results), I find it hard to believe that most people would not be sickened by the purge. Even the people who have, in less than a decade, developed some kind of near religious fervor for the new America would not be behind this.

In the realm of finding something nice, I liked seeing TV character actor Chris Mulkey as one of the neighbors and Ethan Hawke did as well as he could with the material.

I can't believe I'm saying this but I wish I saw The Internship instead of this.

 

[Michael Elliott]

I agree on all points by you guys. If Matt was my neighbor and he killed my wife (not that I'd ever get married) at 6:55am, am I really going to be friendly with him for the next year and wait to seek vengeance on him?

Another really idiotic but predictable moment was when the boyfriend went to "talk" to the father. There was never any reason to make one believe he would do this other than the dumb plot twist and did anyone really think the girlfriend would have been okay with this?

I think the "Purge Introduction" said that officials over a 10 couldn't be harmed. I would like some info on who exactly couldn't be killed. I'd also like to know what "Level 4" weapons are legal and which ones are not.

The political bullshit I mentioned was all over the place but I'm not sure if anyone else noticed that the homeless man was a war vet. Right when I saw his dog tags it was pretty clear how everything was going to go. With that said, one wonders why he didn't talk to the family when he entered the house even after the idiot boyfriend did what he did. Oh yeah, the screenplay had to throw in a "mystery" as to who he was and what he was going to do.

 

[TravisR]

The political bullshit I mentioned was all over the place but I'm not sure if anyone else noticed that the homeless man was a war vet. Right when I saw his dog tags it was pretty clear how everything was going to go.

Also, he was black and the vast majority of the other characters were white. I feel the need to point this out because it was such a deeply subtle artistic stroke that I fear some viewers might have missed it.

 

[DaveF]

BTW, since crime is legal and the poor are hated, shouldn't the poor really just come together to rob some banks or break into the homes of these rich people to try and gain money so that the following year they can be protected?

thats not the story? The previews suggest its a poor steal from the rich tale -- annual equalizations keep the wealth distributed and society happy. The message I assumed was a wacky morality rant on "socialism"

 

[mattCR]

thats not the story? The previews suggest its a poor steal from the rich tale -- annual equalizations keep the wealth distributed and society happy. The message I assumed was a wacky morality rant on "socialism"

It is a wacky rant on something.. but it's rich people hunting the poor people and blaming them for being poor.

 

[TravisR]

I like how it pretends to be an indictment of violence in society but when the bad guys get killed, it's presented in a way where the audience is supposed to cheer like it's an action movie.

Every now and then, I see a bad movie that just irritates the hell out of me and this is one of them.

 

[Ronald Epstein]

Question...is this a subtitled foreign film or American made?

 

[TravisR]

^ It's American made. And as a nation, we should be deeply ashamed of that.

 

[Ronald Epstein]

Hahaha. Okay, Travis. Think I know to stay away from this.

 

[DaveF]

The previews looked terrible, but I thought maybe there was something to it, a hidden gem. So thanks for suffering that I don't have to I can save my time and money on this.

 

[Paul D G]

I wound up seeing this today, unfortunately. I went to see something else but Fandango screwed up the showtimes so I would up walking in on the middle of my film. Since that film wasn't showing in another cinema and this was just about to start I went with it.

I'm totally willing to go with the concept in films like this, silly as they may be, and see what comes of it. But this film did nothing with it. In fact the premise was largely unnecessary until the last 15 minutes or so (and the only surprise in the film was that that scenario wasn't how it played out to begin with).

I hated the family. I wasn't on their side at all. The daughter kept wandering off, disappearing for long stretches. The son was all around annoying - I was expecting some Home Alone antics due to his robot building skills, but no. And who the hell hides in a dark room then turns on a flashlight and scans the room for bad guys?

The terrorized/trapped in the house genre has some pretty good films but this, in no way, was one of them. I wouldn't even advise waiting for cable for this one.

 

[Colin Jacobson]

I didn't hate this as much as you guys did - "Man of Steel" exhausted my hate quotient for the month - but I didn't think it was good. It was just too stupid. As noted, the basic premise is illogical. Yeah, the filmmakers do try to convince us that if humans get out their aggressions for 12 hours a year then they'll be docile and happy 8772 hours of the year, but that makes no sense.

And if unemployment is non-existent, why are there so many poor people on whom the rich can prey?

There's a good psychological thriller buried underneath idiotic plotting, dopey characters, and horror movie tropes.

BTW, I didn't see it as a "Straw Dogs" remake. Both featured home invasions but other than that, they weren't similar, IMO...

 

[paul_austin]

so this was basically the 'red hour' from Star Trek "the Return of the Archons" except it's annual....