Review: "The Purge"

One night of unrestrained, perfectly legal violence. For this future version of America, this Purge is a Holiday in the vein of the 4th of July. We faced the collapse of our country, and our leaders "solved" it all - by allowing us to bludgeon each other during a 12 hour period once a year. Low unemployment, low crime, no government debt. Clearly, this works.

The Purge is not about how this night came to be, who implemented it or how it should be taken down, but instead what could potentially happen during it. A well off white family attempts to go through the night, guarded with what has been billed as a tight security system, in peace. Unfortunately, the young son lets a poor black man, who is being chased by psychopathic hunters, in. The hunters threaten the family, causing them to confront the morality of the nights events directly.


These hunters are young, also white and also well off. They firmly believe in the principles of this night, and will go to great lengths to kill one man, despite the fact that they could just leave their safe / guarded neighborhood and go to the other side of town. An across the board license to kill goes both ways, and by leaving the area of privilege would actually (gasp) put them in the real world, where they aren't really safe. Hunting for game in your backyard doesn't make you a badass, but as long as you can pretend like one with your prep school friends...

On the surface, the movie is about our violent tendencies and "need" to let it out. In the world these characters inhabit, this is how the government marketed the plan to its citizens. How can one 12 hour period of violence create economic stability for a nation? Population control and literal class warfare, it seems. Those who are well off can afford to protect themselves and live in the neighborhoods that don't see most of the violence. Those who are the neediest are left to fight off anyone and everyone who believes they caused the near destruction of America years before.

Remember that argument about teachers making SOOOO much money from taxpayers, implying that they ALONE were causing our downfall? Or how about organizations like ACORN being demonized, only to be vindicated after the fact? But those wars we spent all of your money on? No, those were necessary. We couldn't spend it on health care for all or education - things that could pull a nation out of despair - not while dirty looking foreigners worship falsely. No, the REAL problem is that you need release. Enough to make you forget. BIG TIME. Either the New Founding Fathers were evil men covering their butts, or just backward thinking dummies. Which is worse?

One of the silliest movies of the year is also one of the more surprising ones. An exaggerated yet prophetic horror film for liberals, a home invasion thriller for everyone else. I understand it is getting a sequel. More violence will be had, but hopefully they'll sneak in some of the elements that made the first one a tad thoughtful. A tad, mind you. Can have us thinking too hard...

2/5 *s (though, 3/5 feels right as well)

Review: "Pain & Gain"

A movie might be based on real events, but the director doesn’t have to treat it what happened as gospel. A good example would be Tony Scott’s Domino, based on the real life Domino Harvey. The story is completely fictional (if you can follow it) but the filmmakers weren’t interested in telling a straight bio pic, opting instead to express her balls out personality through a fantastical tale. They didn’t get the truth of what happened, but rather the truth of her. And, for me, this is of most importance.

Now, a filmmaker doesn’t have to treat a person’s story as the final word, but a level of respect for the subjects involved doesn’t hurt. Unfortunately for the real life people behind Pain & Gain, Michael Bay is their storyteller.

The criminal acts of Daniel Lugo remind me of something straight out of a TV documentary; a bizarre and sordid series of events, featuring greedy sociopaths out for their dreams at all costs. Daniel was a con man, using charisma and quick thinking to gut people of as much money as he could get from them. Any opportunity to get a head, he took. He was also obsessed with fitness, working at a gym as a trainer. This guy, in a way, is the ultimate embodiment of American Capitalism. He gets two gym regulars to join him on a poorly thought out kidnapping of a wealthy man, which, despite their best “efforts”, actually nets them some coin. But, instead of stopping there, they get the itch to go again...

Throughout the movie, it’s made clear that what we are watching actually happened (a title scroll appears a few times, at very odd moments). However, I’m sure that some things were changed up to fit with the vision of the movie. But, I’m not really concerned with that. What got me most was the tone. The trailers billed this as if Daniel was gonna be some kind of anti hero, taking away from a guy that doesn’t deserve it. While the movie is mostly from the perspective of the criminals (occasionally shifting to narration from other characters), there really aren’t any reasons to like these guys at all. They are truly despicable people, caring only about themselves. To feature them as protagonists (and having well liked actors play them) is a pretty bold move.

And Michael Bay is a pretty bold guy. He presents the story with his usual blend of superficial humor - like what you would expect from Crank, but on a more juvenile level - which completely messed with the head of the audience. The crowd I watched this with did not know how to react. Do we laugh when they fail to kill a drunk Tony Shalhoub? Is "Ha Ha! The priest has the hots for The Rock!" an appropriate response in a movie where a couple is dismembered and stuffed into barrels? It was really fun experiencing something so conflicting.

So, with a movie based on real events, told with the criminals as the leads and in a darkly comedic style, does Michael Bay care about the victims or not? More importantly, should a filmmaker care? Martin Scorsese’s Casino featured a real life hitman, staging the very hit he did in real life. It was an almost abhorrent casting choice, but it plays out quickly and ugly - probably how it actually happened. Hannibal Lecter is shown as being intelligent and charismatic, but will also kill if given the chance. The exploits of Lugo and his meathead friends are awful and disturbing, but expressed with an almost “can you believe this happened” kind if chuckle. Bay couldn't care less about whose feelings he's hurting, as long as he's amused. And that amuses me.

A director doesn’t HAVE to care about the real life participants or show respect, but it would be nice. Michael Bay, however, is probably not a nice guy. Wrecking balls as robot testicles shows what he thinks of his audience, and Pain & Gain shows that he’s willing to prank them with something odd and confounding. And, you know what, I relate to that. Maybe I shouldn’t treat this movie as the gospel of Michael Bay, but...

4/5 *s

Review: "Hot Cakes"

Cross posted from InvadeNola, where this will be appearing on June 16:

On the first episode of the #TeamNOLAFilmpodcast, we discussed the need for a real investment in local filmmakers and their projects. We have so many out of town productions coming IN to the area which is great, but not enough local projects coming OUT. Do producers need a good example of what New Orleans talent can make?

"I have been waiting all morning for a man with half a heart."

Marty, fresh out of prison, visits his regular post jail release diner.  His body language says he's yearning for a calmer future, but the scars on his face suggest something different; something deeper. Two other ex cons see this as well, and soon the three men are conversing over plates of pancakes. But there is more to their encounter than just short stacks...

Described as a sort of neo noir / urban western, "Hot Cakes" has a surreal nature to it; at times like Lynch, other times like Aronofsky. The appropriately timed music, the cryptic at times dialogue, the interesting framing (there is a Knight suit behind Marty in some shots) and even the setting - which comes off like a purgatory type meeting place for these characters - all makes the audience ask "what's this all leading to?" and "what does this all mean?".

Well, what DOES it all mean? What IS it leading to? A fortune teller in the diner is drawn to Marty, and makes a startling prediction for him; will it turn out to be correct? Will Marty be forced into a compromising position? His new friends certainly wish to pull him back into his harsh past. Will they succeed? The film's aesthetic gives everything - including eating breakfast - a sense of impending doom. And by the time the end credits roll, this sense still lingers; things just don't look good for Marty, in OR out of the diner. Is he in trouble no matter what? I absolutely loved this.

"No one should ever come here. I had teeth when I came here."

My only complaint is that it ended. I would like to see what the director Jo Custer could do with a feature length script. She's an example of the kind of local talent who deserve a shot. For Hollywood South to move forward, out of town producers bringing projects to the area need to make a meaningful investment in local filmmakers. Is an example of good local work needed? I just provided one.

4/5 *'s