Average User Score: 5.3Jun 10, 2013From the producers of Paranormal Activity (as is all horror films these days) The Purge tells the story of a near future were crime is at anFrom the producers of Paranormal Activity (as is all horror films these days) The Purge tells the story of a near future were crime is at an all time low and unemployment stands at under 1% of the US population, to compensate for one night a year all crime (including murder) is legal for 12 hours allowing society some kind of release.
The film revolves around the Sandin family who are confronted by a group of college students hunting a man on the night of the Purge who the family had allowed into their home after lockdown. The Purgers (lead by Rhys Wakefield) drastically try to break into the family’s home causing James (Ethan Hawke) and Mary (Lena Headey) to protect their children from the invaders in order to survive the night.
The main problem with the film is the premise itself, whilst interesting is filled with flaws and holes that just make the whole idea ridiculous. Such as what happens to the serial killers and career criminals of this world? Do they just control their urges to kill or steal for the other 364 days until the next Purge, as well what if someone has a heart attack on the night of The Purge? Is it just a case of bad luck you chose the wrong night to need medical care?
Despite the flaws of the premise, the film repeatedly ignores the possibilities of the premise, instead of exploring the ideas behind the Purge or the events that occur on the night of the Purge from different perspectives and situations. Instead the film settles for a typical home invasion story that although done well, is nothing we haven’t seen done in many other films. The Purge in the end seems to only be the premise of this film to stop the age old question of “Why don’t they just call the police?” in home invasion films.
To the films credit it is quite subtle, there’s a running theme that the Purge is just an excuse for the upper classes to exterminate the poor, driven by all the attackers wearing prep school blazers and the person they are chasing wearing dog tags around his neck. The film also contains some strong performances, especially from Ethan Hawke (Training Day, Lord of War) and Lena Headey (Dredd, Game of Thrones) who carry the film throughout. The film also has a twist near the end which allows the audience to get inside the heads of the people during this night.
That cant be said for the leader of the Purger’s played by Rhys Wakefield (Sanctum, Home and Away)whose performance is slightly cringe worthy, hes trying to be psychotic yet in control of the proceedings but it just comes across as a amateur dramatics’ version of The Joker. He just never seems like a really threat and just a creepy next door neighbour.
The film also contains some bizarre and just plain weird set pieces, such as the families’ son who builds a spy camera on a chard baby doll on the top of a rhino tank from Warhammer 40,000. The thing looks like a demented contraption from Sid’s bedroom in Toy Story.
Overall, The Purge is an ok home invasion film, there are moments of suspense and a couple of jump scares are effective. The wasted potential of the premise is the films main downfall which could have lead to a more effective and possible original film then what we got in the end.… Expand
Average User Score: 5.4May 27, 2013This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. It’s the final Hangover to deal with for the Wolfpack, four years after the original film was a surprise major hit at the box office hit making its stars household names in the process the team have reunited to finish what they started. The second film was met with mix reviews, some claiming the film was just the same recycled plot and jokes from the first one and many giving the film rave reviews clearly happy to have more of the same from the WolfPack. Director Todd Phillips has been insistent that this final entry in the trilogy will be different and not another rehash of the first film again. Has he lived up to his promise or is it just the same film for the second time?
Well yes, to give its film its credit the film does deviate from the tested narrative that has been used in the previous two instalments adopting a crime narrative in which Stu (Ed Helms), Phil (Bradley Cooper) and Alan (Zach Galifanakis) have to track down the infamous Mr Chow (Ken Jeong) in order to rescue Doug (Justin Bartha) from a crime lord called Marshall (John Goodman). This plot inevitably sends the group to Las Vegas, whilst tying up all the loose ends that you didn’t even remember from the previous films, such as who Alan bought the drugs from in the original (From Marshall). Most of these tying up loose ends are very unnecessary and feel as if they were just added to tie the film back the original in order for them to have some reason to return to Vegas.
Given the new premise you would think that the film would capitalise on this and take the series to a interesting and hopefully hilarious finale, they sadly do not. The humour is still the same gross out OTT humour as in the first two instalments, possibly a tiny bit more restrained but they more than make up for that in the final post credit scene (more on that later). John Goodman who even in a film as bad as it could be would still be entertaining is great in his minor role as Marshall is criminally underused and you beg for him to have more screen time then he actually does, criminally underused.
The films main problem is the increased role given to Ken Jeong as Leslie Chow, he was fine in the first film as he was only on screen for a grand total of 10 minutes and his wacky/camp persona was tolerable. In the second he had a greater role and became irritating very quickly, however in this he has equal billing with the rest of the cast and is intolerable including, It’s the same joke’s over and over again (including the classic small penis gem from the second film) and even though Jeong looks as if hes enjoying himself it just seems this film is just a tester for a Chow spin off.
Where as in the first and second film the cast seemed to be having fun and at least enjoying themselves, in this film it’s clear that no one cares about their performance and is there simply because they are contractually obliged to be in this film. The performances are all phoned in especially Bradley Cooper who looks as if he’s on autopilot for the film, hoping that doing this won’t damage his Oscar chances in the future.
The film ends on a climatic note at Alan’s wedding and it seems that the series has reached its conclusion, but then comes a post credit scene that makes the entire film incredibly pointless, A scene plays in which all three members of the Wolfpack wake up after Alan’s wedding in a destroyed room, including the monkey from the second film, Stu with breast implants and a naked Mr Chow who alleged sent them a drugged wedding cake. This is terrible for the simple reason that this is the final film in this series and this ending just contradicts the whole film in order to make two or three cheap gags that have been made consistently throughout the previous two films.
In conclusion, Hangover Three attempts to try something new but turns into a bit of a mess recycling jokes and clichés from the first two films, the cast are gliding through this film waiting for it to finally end and they can move onto new projects. This will probably be the last time we see the Wolfpack (until a horrendous remake in 10 years time) and it has to go down as a missed opportunity for the franchise.… Expand