The Purge (2013)

It's the rare film that allows you to feel yourself physically getting dumber as you watch it. I suppose that's an impressive feat to have accomplished, as "The Purge" managed to do, but it's still not something I would be too proud of were I the makers of it. After all that puts them in league with "Transformers Revenge of The Fallen" and "Howard the Duck" in terms of creating something so apocalyptically stupid that you can feel the synapses in your brain firing back on themselves and imploding while it's playing.

I get it, you know. I'm not dense. I understand metaphor and the concept of a morality play. I can see what "The Purge" is trying to say: That the wealthy in this country have no concept of apathy for those who do not in turn posses wealth, and in fact they would rather them all die to relieve the haves of the horrible strain of having to lend any kind of reluctant, kicking and screaming help to the have-nots. And in the end, we are all horrible animals that will rip each other to pieces given the slightest provocation or opportunity, the odds of which go up exponentially the more wealth you have. I get it, "The Purge." It wasn't difficult to catch since you're about as stealthy with it as an air-horn in a library.

And you know what? Maybe they're right. There is probably something of a point to be made there. The wealth gap in this country is inexcusable, and there is such a massive focus on what is good for a microscopic fraction at the top that the surging masses of everyone else below them gets completely ignored.

But for crying rivers of blood, there is such a thing as subtlety. The best tales of social commentary don't shove symbolism and morals in your face in outrageous over-the-top antics that come across closer to parody than parallel. They are more sneaky with it. What they don't do is create an America where once every year, in an effort to cull the lower class/poor people/unemployed, for 12 hours all crime is completely legal in an activity called "The Purge." This, naturally, means that everyone with the money to have one barricades themselves inside their massive fortress of a home, while everyone else who doesn't have that luxury immediately goes out and kills anyone they can get their hands on in an orgy of blood, since that's what people like to do. Actually a number of rich people go out and hunt poorer people because hey, what are they gonna do? NOT kill someone? That's what any normal person would like to do, right? That's typical healthy behavior yeah? I mean, they're poor. It's not like they're human beings or anything.

Wow. That's so sneaky that I barely saw what you did there.

The amount of stupid contained in the description on the back of the DVD alone is enough to make my head hurt. That's just a dumb, DUMB plot. How in the hell was that even supposed to have come to pass in the film's far future setting of 2022? Did the Tea Party really become that powerful in that time frame? Actually I don't even think they'd go so far as to implement a policy of genocide on the poor, even though they'd probably like the thought even if they wouldn't say it out loud. I just don't think they'd be able to collect the votes to pass that particular legislation through the Senate. Or is this the end result of the Affordable Health Care Act? Is this what Ted Cruz is talking about when he says that's going to be the end of America? Are we going to starting Purging in less than a decade? I guess that's how it starts: First you have people getting health care, then soon we're all piles of bodies in the streets. Man, I had no idea.

Thanks, Obama.

Ethan Hawke is James, a successful maker of home security systems who has made like a good hard-working capitalist and made a lot of money selling his wares to other families on his block, all of whom live in mansions the size of a damn football field. Naturally he's got quite the elaborate setup when it comes to his own home security. This comes in handy when, during the Purge, his son Charlie (Max Burkholder) lets in a bloody homeless man who remains nameless throughout (Edwin Hodge) in an effort to save him from a mob led by a likewise nameless psycho in a mask (Rhys Wakefield). Psycho kindly informs James that unless he hands over the homeless guy, they'll bust in and kill James and his entire family.

That's the setup, but most of the film is following James and the rest of his family around in the dark as they attempt to navigate their impossibly large house in an effort to find the guy so they can throw him to the wolves. They try and work in some mild tension like it's attempting to be a horror film, but all it boils down to is someone suddenly appearing behind someone else accompanied by an orchestra sting like it's the scariest thing in the world, a cliche which is so transparent and worn out that at this point it's really no more frightening than a sneeze.

Pictured above - Every crap horror movie you've ever seen.

At no point did I give two craps about anyone in this story. James is a bland character with no personality to speak of. His wife Mary (Lena Headey) is a hypocritical harpy who condemns James for choosing to protect his family, calling him a terrible person when he agrees to let the stranger die so that they all may live, saying bullcrap like "What have we become?" when she's supported the Purge for years. I'm not saying that's the right choice for him to make, but that's because there IS no right choice to make in that situation. That's a lose-lose scenario, and he took the path that most people would: The one that keeps his family alive. That's an understandable decision for James to make, but Mary basically calls him a monster for making it. But that's not to say she's above expecting him to kill when the walls come down and the masked people start pouring in. Oh no. Then she's all about him becoming a killer. What a hypocrite. I can't stand characters like that. I wouldn't have minded as much if we weren't obviously meant to be on her side.

And naturally, the film ends with the rich neighbors coming to help James and his family, only to turn on them because they wanted to be the ones to kill them. Why is that? Well, because he's successful and made money off of them, that's why. Of course, this makes no sense since they're all rich anyway and becoming more rich would probably be applauded in that particular circle, especially considering that it's the poor people who are supposed to die according to this idiotic premise, but hey why would the movie start being not-stupid at the end? So the homeless guy ends up saving those who are still alive, and the Purge ends with the neighbors meekly walking back home as if everything isn't going to be horribly awkward from now on.

I pose a serious question: Have you ever seen a more punchable face? This is our villain, people...

I most admit that this film made me feel physically bad, and not in the way I believe the filmmakers were intending, either. I was so enraged at the notion that every single person, not matter who they are or where they're from, is inherently a psychopath who would gladly kill someone else if only they had half a chance. I'm no starry-eyed optimist or anything, but I generally believe that while the average person at their core may be selfish, they do not wish harm on others under normal circumstances, and the average person would probably not find the prospect of killing an attractive one.

And that's on top of it making me sick to my stomach due to a horrible script, terrible acting, and lack of any tension, horror or suspense. By the way, it must be said that the absolute fastest way to ensure that the audience knows that you don't really give a rat's ass about actually being scary is to simply slap stupid masks on the villains and have them prance around and shriek like a bunch of babbling lunatics. That doesn't make me afraid of them. That makes me wonder why they haven't been locked up because they're clearly insane and could not function in any kind of society, no matter how messed up it is.

Yeah, "The Purge," I played "BioShock," too. That was a good game. Stop ripping it off because you suck at it.

You know what "The Purge" is? I'll bet this is what paranoid, Right Wing fringe maniacs thinks everyone else thinks of them. It's like looking into Alex Jones' head. That's a scary place to be, and I feel like I need a shower.

For crying out loud, the trailer plays "America the Beautiful." FREAKING. SUBTLE.

THE BOTTOM LINE - I hated "The Purge." I hated, hated, hated, hated it. This movie would be laughed off as a pathetic failed attempt at a third-rate home invasion movie in the best of scenarios, but the fact that it's trying to say something but being terribly inept at doing so sinks it even lower into the hole that it dug itself with it's blunt instrument of clumsy allegory. This is a terrible film whose only market is vapid high school girls who might think it's really "deep" because they're stupid and "scary" because they've never seen an actual horror movie in their life.

Dredd (2012)

Sometimes it's difficult to lie to myself.

I'm an animal.

We all are animals. There are certain things, particular phrases, that can come up in conversation that will immediately cease any other thought processes in our brains besides the most basic Neanderthalic ones. For example: SEX. See? I now have your undivided attention.

But there's more than just the titillation of sexual deviancy, isn't there? There's also violence, which can cause just as strong of a knee-jerk reaction. I'm sure I can't speak for everyone here, but I can guarantee you that I, for one, am immediately paying attention to any movie that advertises that it contains people getting shot in the face.

I mean, for crying out loud. "Shot in the face." Is there a phrase in the English language more inherently hard-core than that? And I'm not talking one between the eyes, or the classic zombie standby of "shoot 'em in the head," because that always involves the top of the skull. No, I mean shot in the eyes/nose/mouth/we'll-need-your-driver's-license-to-ID-you area of the face. That's freaking brutal in an animalistic, dominating fashion. They don't kill you, they shoot you in the face. It's castration without breaking the Man Code.

So when I heard that "Dredd" had a lot of violence, I was mildly interested. But when I heard that there was a lot of people getting shot in the face, "Dredd" officially had my attention.

What? What more do you want from me? I already admitted I'm an animal.

And yes, "Dredd" does contain face-shooting. And while it may not have as many bullets specifically destined for people's mugs as one might expect, there's still a lot of bullets going into a lot of people. What that boils down to is that "Dredd" is fantastically entertaining in regards to amount of pure unadulterated bloodshed. If that's what you signed on for, you shall be quite pleasantly satisfied.

If that's not what you signed on for, I have no idea why you're watching this movie.

If anyone was worried about it, allow me to put your fears at rest - this has nothing to do with the cheesy, campy Sylvester Stallone "Judge Dredd" from the 90's. Having never read the comics it is based on, I can't comment on how accurate it is to its source material, but one thing is for sure - this new film is not messing around. It's dark, it's gritty, it's bloody as hell, and there's nothing goofy about it at any point, aside from the laughs some of the more over-the-top kills may generate in their absurdity.

No, seriously. Even with that helmet, it's still not goofy.

When Stallone said "I'm am the law!" it was funny. Some of that had to do with the fact that he can't move half of his face, making it sound more like "Ah am..DA LOG!" That tended to undermine the badassery of the character.

But in "Dredd," when Karl Urban says it, it's chilling. And a lot of that has to obviously do with the darker tone they went with, and the fact that Karl can pronounce words clearly, but more of it has to do with him giving an absolutely stone-cold, relentlessly brutal performance that is hands-down one of the most awesome action movie characters I've seen in years.

Seriously, this guy is terrifying. Ice doesn't come close to how cold he is. The systematic, ruthless proficiency with which he executes anyone violating the law is both scary and scary awesome to watch. And it's not because he's some invincible superhero who can't be shot like James Bond or Schwarzenegger in "Commando" or something; he's just that good at killing, and his tactics and equipment are so superior that nobody can touch him.

The fact that he never once takes off his helmet, so you never see any more of his face than his mouth makes him come across like this anonymous, nameless demon that exists only for punishing those opposed to him. If there's a soul in Dredd, it's buried under the weight of his station. Once again, it's a chilling performance.

Those flames reflected in his visor? Yeah, those are people. People he just set ON FIRE.

I've been a fan of Karl Urban for a long time now, and I've always been bummed out that he's not more of a star than he is. Of course, after his phenomenal turn as Bones in "Star Trek" he's getting more attention, and rightly so, but I've been a big fan of his since "The Two Towers" in 2002. And yeah, after that there was the frankly underrated "Doom" and "Chronicles of Riddick," in which he was great, but he didn't get a movie where he was the star until 2007's bomb that wasn't that bad "Pathfinder." Even in "Star Trek" he's not really in the foreground. In a way, "Dredd" is the first Karl Urban vehicle that has the potential to actually be noticed, a mere decade after he broke into the big leagues.. And for his sake, since he's a really good actor, I hope this is really successful, because I'm freaking tired of nobody knowing who Karl Urban is!

Holding their own in the film are the two other leads, the lovely and talented Olivia Thirlby, and the also talented and usually lovely (in everything but this) Lena Headey. Thirlby plays Anderson, a rookie judge who is also a powerful physic, and Headey is the villain, a former prostitute turned savage drug lord Ma-Ma. Whereas Thirlby is cute and somewhat vulnerable (at least until she begins proving herself and becomes formidable), Headey is an absolute monster, both in appearance and actions. Her scarred visage, jagged teeth and snarling fury is certainly a step away from her character in "Game of Thrones," and I can't help but feel that if Cersei went through the busted transporter in "The Enemy Within," Ma-Ma is what would come out a couple minutes later.

"I'm Queen Cersei. I'M QUEEN CERSEI!!!"

Wow. Didn't think I'd fit a ToS reference in there.

I'm a fan of both of these actresses, and I'm glad to see them getting great roles like this. Thirlby gets to play a rookie cop who, shock of all shocks, isn't annoying, comic relief, or incompetent, which is like a miracle. And of course Headey matches and even one-ups Urban's cruelty with some delightful scene-chewing villainy. The surprising thing is how often the fact that an action movie is made or broken by its villain is lost on so many films. Ma-Ma could have been a "Die Hard" baddy. Not the dude from "Die Hard 4," though. One of the good ones. The Grubers. If they smoked meth. And were chicks.

So yes, there is plenty of hardcore, face-shooting action going on. However, now is the part where I have to inject just a bit of negativity into this entry. And this mostly has to do with lack of variety.

While it is indeed cool to see Dredd shooting lots of people with his absurdly OP pistol of 1000 different kinds of horrifyingly deadly ammo, there came a point late in the film when it began it get a bit stale. And that's a weird thing to say, considering there was a lot of different gear being used, but almost every fight is ended with someone getting shot to pieces. There were few instances when Dredd or Anderson didn't use a gun.

"Aggravated assault on a Judge. Rookie? Judge 'em."

"Put many bullets inside them."

"We've trained you well."

I really didn't notice until later in the film, during Dredd's only fistfight, that there had been virtually no hand to hand combat at all. And while that wasn't a deal-breaker, that fight was so good, and the finishing move so shockingly brutal that I found myself thinking that I wanted to see more of that. After seeing Dredd do things to a man's trachea that I'm not sure is 100% medically possible, I was interested to know what the hell else he could do with his hands.

Then again, one of the primary rules of being a Judge is to never lose your gun, so I guess by hardly ever having to not shoot someone, he's doing his job right. It was just a little disappointing that there wasn't more of that action movie staple. Maybe I was just spoiled by "The Expendables 2," which is very possible.

I also feel I must bring up the abuse of CGI blood. While witnessing the path of a bullet through a person's jaw in super slow motion is indeed something to behold, it's so overtly computerized that it lacks the impact that it should have. Especially since "Dredd," while loaded with CGI, seems like a movie that would be laden with practical effects. Is building a fake head and shooting it so much to ask nowadays?

Face shooting is still awesome, though. That, I cannot take away.

THE BOTTOM LINE - "Dredd" is a fun, action packed movie which plays out like a ride through a futuristic, Ridley Scott designed sci-fi slaughterhouse as envisioned by Sam Peckinpah. If you want to see good actors making things die, here's your movie. While I didn't like it as much as "The Expendables 2," in pure tradecraft and execution, it's one of the more effective action thrillers of the year. Recommended.