I got a chance to see the latest movie in the "Purge" series tonight at a pre-screening; here are my thoughts: The Purge: Election Year My Grade: B+ _______________________________ The Purge series of films is an interesting one; in that it's a series of movies (almost an anthology one) born from a kick-off movie that's.... tepid at best. The first movie presented us with the notion of this world that at some point in the future America's leaders -"The New Founding Fathers of America" rebuilt a struggling nation with high crime and unemployment rates and huge budgets going to help the poor and needy by going with the "simple" idea of allowing everyone to "purge" themselves of their violent needs and tendencies on one night a year by making all crime, including murder, legal. The presented idea is that this lets everyone get these violent or anti-societal needs out of their system and not need to do it at other times of the year but, behind the scenes, those in charge really see it as a means of population control since the poor are most often the victims -not having the means to defend or protect themselves- and without the poor less money needs to go into government programs to support them. It's an interesting if ludicrous idea that doesn't hold much water; especially when we see this "future" society and see that it's not too much removed than present day (i.e. the technology, cars and such all more-or-less correspond to present day ones. Meaning it takes place in the present or very near future; meaning that these "NFFA" events occurred in an alternate past rather than a presented future.) But the first movie doesn't make much use of it, pretty much trapping the movie inside a single, rich family's, home as they protect a poor stranger from a group of "purgers" wanting to dispatch him. It's a glorified home-invasion story. But the movie was enough of a financial success -due to a small budget- that a sequel was given; a sequel that took the premise to it's logical point and where the movie series needs to stay. The sequel follows a former cop, played by Frank Grillo likely doing an audition role for The Punisher, who lost his son in a collision with a drunk-driver some time ago and is using Purge Night as an opportunity to kill the driver who managed to get off on a technicality. While out he comes across a young couple in the early stages of divorce and a mother and daughter caught outside after being nearly captured by a government-contractor rounding up people for "mass purgings" to increase the numbers for the night to give people the idea the concept is working (true crimes are on the decline either due to people not purging or most people staying inside in protection.) The movie follows our group as they try and to survive the night on "the street level" from both these government contractors rounding people up and other purgers as well as Grillo wrestling with his own issues along his arc; ultimately deciding to not kill the man when he ends up at his house. This action paying off when the man himself saves Grillo from being killed by the leader of the contractors just before the year's Purge ends. It plays off as a good survival-action movie that feels very much in the style of an 80s or 90s post-apocalyptic survival movie; something like "Escape from New York" or "Running Man." The Purge: Election Year - Continues that trend and feeling as well as bringing back Frank Grillo who didn't get to be The Punisher but is still a great and welcome presence in this movie. Seemingly set a year after the events of the previous movie, it's an Election Year and the two candidates up for President is a man who's a member of the "NFFA" party and speaks in grandness, religious rhetoric and praise for the (New) Founding Fathers (Hmmmm..... I wonder what party he's meant to represent?) the other candidate is an Independent Senator woman whose platform is one to end The Purge seeing it for what it is, designed to kill the less fortunate, and that it's a moral outrage for it to exist. Herself the sole survivor when her family was captured by a Purger 18 years earlier. Frank Grillo from the second movie is back and he heads up her security/Secret Service team and is set to protect her. The NFFA see her as a threat since she's strong in the polls so they arrange a plan to assassinate her. Usually during The Purge political figures are immune but that condition has been removed, the NFFA plan to capture the Senator and kill her during a religious ceremony near dawn -when The Purge ends. Grillo does the best he can to protect her given she's unwilling to partake in any heavy security or safety measures for fear of being seen as hypocritical or "above" her supporters and some members of his detail turn on him and he's forced to protect the Senator on the street during Purge Night. They run across a poor group of people who run a grocery store/deli in a poorer section of Washington D.C. as well as a woman known to be something of a folk-hero of Purge Night now working for an underground triage/protection group as usual Emergency Services aren't available on Purge Night. Part of this underground movement has plans of their own and our group gets caught-up in between protecting themselves and the Senator. The movie is, like the second one, a good ground-level action movie in an apocalyptic/dystopian setting as the group comes across Purgers as well as government officials set-out to kill the Senator they also find some unexpected allies in the very people The Purge is meant to rid the country of. There's probably some allegories we can make here but it's hard given that it's hard to recognize this universe as anything tangible. Usually in apocalyptic/dystopian movies the time period (whether the future or an alternate present) is presented to us in such a manner it's unrecognizable as our own world making it easier to to accept what is going on under suspension of disbelief. "It's the future so, sure." But here the movie presents itself as taking place in either an alternate present or a near-future in the way it looks, the technology we see, and such it's a harder pill to swallow. The movie makes up for it, however, being fun on a level to watch and actually giving us a group of characters to follow and root for. It's not uncommon in this genre of movie for the secondary characters for the two main "heroes" to play into certain tropes or cliches and for you to not be able to wait for these people to die. (A trope "Cabin in the Woods" plays with.) Rarely are these characters given any kind of set-up or humanity to them they're there to play a role. The wise-cracker, the slut, the man-xplainer; in The Purge: Election Year (as well as Anarchy) this doesn't happen, all of the characters are likable and you understand more than you would a character in any other genre of action/horror. There's really not a character here that I hated or wanted to see killed. They almost fit into cliches, roles, or tropes but not to an annoying or obvious enough degree since they were given depth before the action begins. Frank Grillo, like in the previous movie, does a great job in the action scenes as well as the personal ones and Elizabeth Mitchel also does a good job as the Senator set on her goals and morals and in making her seem like a person so many people would respect and follow, as well as the opposing party dislike. The movie's a bit silly and extreme when we meet-up with the NFAA group; but only because it's again where the premise of this world begins to fall apart. The things being said and such *almost* makes sense in the way some of our political leaders, and their supporters, behave but it's hard to mix in violent murder with that. The movie also has a couple pointless jump-scares in it (instigated more by a music sting than an actual visual surprise) which, honestly, feels beneath this series considering how it avoids the tropes with its characters, how well the action scenes are done and it's not exactly a jump-scare sort of movie. It's only slightly in the "horror" genre, more just the Violent Dystopia genre. But, in the end, it's a good sit. You have to really suspend your disbelief for the premise to work and there's a few goofy "showcase"/"artsy" scenes done for the sake of... "art" but there's some good action and good characters here. Plus, Frank Grillo kicks ass. So if you liked the second movie you'll like this one. If you didn't like the first movie and didn't see the second I'd suggest watching the second as it bares little resemblance to it's predecessor and then base that on whether you should see the third. Me, I await seeing the next "Purge" movie, more to see how/where they go with the premise given the ending of this movie or if they'll perhaps show us on how "The Purge" began or that very first Purge Night.
B. I'm not going to analyze it too hard because my main reason for watching it was to see Elizabeth Mitchell look pretty for a couple of hours. Check. Otherwise it's Purge 2 with more politics.
I was thinking about that the whole time I was watching. It may just be about being too poor or too stubborn for most. But, no, there's no onscreen reason for it.
No, because this is something not in question. It's a reality we have to accept, as absurd as it is, that this world is -largely- okay with The Purge. It's also meant to be a means of getting rid of the poor. who are unlikely to be able to afford trips out of the country for one night a year. The movie does show us people visiting from out of the country in order to take part in The Purge; implying you need-not be a citizen in order to Purge. She did look pretty. But more than that, she just did a good job in the role; main reason I watched the movie? To see Frank Grillo kick ass, and kick ass he did!
I was disappointed with this film. I do think its political stances both helped and hurt the film. I think it helped the film by taking a side, while I think most horror films or films in general don't do that, or are more subtle about it. The Purge franchise has a unique vision, and an ideological stance and that was cool and refreshing compared to other horror films. That being said, I think once they went into building the world of the Purge, the mythology, and its politics, it went away from being a horror film and turned more into a political thriller. The crazy, anarchic thrills promised in the previous films, and sometimes delivered, were diluted in Election Year. It took a backseat to sermonizing. I actually got bored as the film went on. I was hoping there would be a twist, something subversive or transgressive that would happen to flip the film on its head, but that really didn't happen. I also don't think the politics were handled as well as they could've been, though I do give Election Year points for having the guts to say anything at all. I also don't think the supporting characters, the heroes in particular were handled that well either. I would have liked a bit more complexity in discussing the politics and in how the characters reacted to the Purge, Elizabeth Mitchell's senator, and so on. I rank Election Year second in the trilogy, behind Anarchy. I only put it over the first film because it did have high ambitions. Unfortunately I don't think it met them, but at least it tried, and that makes it stand out from standard horror films.
Question for those who've seen the movie : Was the time-line off or did I mis-understand something. Dialogue indicates that this takes place a year, maybe two, years after "The Purge: Anarchy." In that movie we're told that the Purge has been going on for 8 years. (Which seems like a short-time for so much of the "mental programing/reconditioning" to take hold on the population; namely the "cult-like" behavior of the "NFAA" supporters. But in this movie it seems implied from Elizabeth Mitchel's character that the Purge has been going on for 18 years, considering her experiences with it in childhood prompted her platform in her campaign. It really doesn't seem that 10 years have passed between Anarchy and Election Year; but it seems odd for this level of retcon. So was her character's family killed in a purge? Or just as part of the chaos and crime problems in the past that led-up to the Purge being necessary.
Ugh. I agree with the Yankee fan. I think the easiest way to explain it is red necks, I mean people want to protect their garbage, I mean stuff so they stay and guard it. However most Americans don't even have passports, so who knows.
I think the problem with the movie is that it's concept is so hard to swallow AND for it to be a world so close to ours. Usually when we get these dystopian type movies in the near-future there's not only a pretty significant time-gap of a couple of decades but the society we're presented with is obviously one that's been living in this for a while and is already fairly dystopian. Look at, "The Running Man" or "Escape from New York." Ludicrous premises on both counts but it's accepted because the near-future we're shown is obviously one of a collapsed society rebuilding. Running Man is probably the "closest" movie off the top of my head that I can think of that presents us with a wild premise for a future society that matches The Purge. In The Running Man death-row inmates are put on a popular game show where they must survive an overnight stay in the ruins of Los Angeles while being hunted by themed pursuers. The pursuers are selected by a studio-audience who selects the pursuer based on the likelihood they'll catch the inmate and kill them. If the inmate survives the night he gets a full pardon. This game show is supported by the government and privately operated incarceration system. The game show even has gone as far as to give the audience the belief that a group of inmates survived and are enjoying life on a resort beach -in reality they're dead, but their survival was manufactured to keep the show interesting- they even fake the death of Arnold Schwarzenegger's character who is the most successful "running man" they've had and even kills those after him. (And the entire reason he's in there is due to government manipulating the truth.) It's a pretty ridiculous premise but we're kind-of shown this future that's unlike our present and we're told things about the state of government and the position of corporations in they system. Escape From New York has the entirety of Manhattan island as a prison where serious prisoners are placed and allowed to run free and do whatever; the island being devoid of a standing, civilized, population. The sequel "Escape from LA" presents us with a future with a theologian president who makes Christianity the official religion of the land and anyone who doesn't abide by it is exiled to the remains of Los Angeles. All pretty ridiculous premises but accepted because we're shown a future so different from our present. But in The Purge movies we're shown a future that's very much like our present and likely how things will look in a few years, from the clothing, the technology, the look of the people and the cities. All pretty much present-day and yet here's this rather far-fetched and ridiculous premise and things aren't removed from us enough for it to be accepted. Now, I think it works for these movies because the 2nd and 3rd movies are fun in seeing the "survival horror" elements take-place and I think it works akin to 80s/90s dystopian action movies like Running Man and Escape from LA; but the series doesn't quite buy enough suspension of disbelief for the whole thing to work. It's not too ridiculous to accept an evangelical political party set on only catering to the rich and seeing the poor people as dispensable and necessary to dispose of for the better of the rich. Hell, we're pretty much already *living* in that. But there's a big leap from indifference to the poor and wanting to eliminate government support programs to making murder legal for one night a year so the poor can be killed of. Especially with the notion this happens in a few years. I think the series could do well with a prequel to show us what led-up to this because society must have been an utter disaster with very high crime-rates and a society on the verge of collapse from trying to curb crime and keep up government programs to support the poor. And it'd have to presented as a dystopian present that leads to the idea of The Purge through a group of "New Founding Fathers" being elected into all levels of office on local, state and Federal levels to present the idea of The Purge and get enough of Congressmen and citizens to vote in favor of it to make it a new Amendment, ratify it, and put the plan into action. It'd be really interesting to see all of that happen and what the world was like either before the first Purge or during the first Purge because it would seem on some level "it works" enough for there to be people in support of it. But I don't think 8 years is enough to turn around the state of the country before The Purge into what it is in the movies. Which may be the reason for the continuity/time-line shift it seems the third movie suggests, to mean it's been going on long enough that people see it as a way of life, people have grown up with it and are entirely programed to accept it and for people to have experienced it long enough to be ready to be done with it. And 8 years isn't enough time for all of that. Again, I think the franchise is interesting and really could hold a lot of promise and be interesting but we need more to cement the idea into making sense. And now we've got this timeline hiccup.
Well, the first movie was a low-rent siege movie that barely scratched the surface of the concept. Basically, Grillo-less murder porn. The second was a grindhouse post-apocalyptic (for a day) movie that explored the conceit a bit more, though still firmly rooted in murder porn. Grillo plays Mad Max. The third dips into political thriller territory but doesn't get too heavy with an audience that may not be aware that the Presidential election doesn't occur in May. Grillo plays Jack Bauer. With the over-zealous ginger acolyte and the NFFA chanting, I thought the movie series may be heading into supernatural shenanigans toward the end. Like a reveal that all of the Purges were just bloody sacrifices to some nameless Elder God, but looks like I was wrong.
Yeah, the first movie brought out the idea of the concept but pretty much did nothing with it. You can take the concept of "The Purge" out of it and pretty much nothing would change. I wasn't expecting any super-natural stuff at the end, it seemed to more-or-less be in line with the stuff presented in the first two movies with some in the community taking The Purge to religious extremes which, again, seems like not enough time has passed to indoctrinate people that much into the idea of this; that they think it's that's much of a religious, ritual, cleansing. It's a small thing, but I liked it. In the scene near the end of the movie when they're in the church and the Minister brings out Mitchell's character and reveals her, we see his congregation and one of them is a middle-aged man and he does sort of a little, "Yes!" fist pump. It was humorous to me because it really did make me think of the contentious political climate we live in; it's not hard at all to believe that if at some congregation of Republicans the leader of the ceremony brought out Hillary Clinton or even President Obama and said, "I'm totally going to kill this person right now!" there's wouldn't be more than a few people in the audience very happy to hear it and be all for it, this would be even more the case if it was at something akin to a political rally and Trump was doing it as part of his campaigning. So, while the very concept of "The Purge" is way out in left field some of the sentiments in it feel very much real. I suspect most people know the presidential election doesn't occur in May. It's easy to make fun of how ignorant Americans are when it comes to the election and process and everything but that's simply judging from nightly television or internet videos of hosts going around asking people on the street questions. And, well, editing plays a huge role in that. If they ask 300 people this question 290 of them are going to get it right and in the segment all you're going to see is the 10 who got it wrong and maybe two or three who were right for variety. But I'd think most people would realize that we didn't elect a new President just a couple months ago. It's likely whatever "revolution" took place that changed the government so radically and added "The Purge" also changed the time elections are held. It *is* interesting that the elections are presented as so fair and as "working." You'd think if the NFFA were so controlling and intent on the goals they'd be able to fix or rig the election in their favor. I was reading something earlier that the creator of the movies isn't sure he'll do a fourth one, but didn't seem committal one way or another. He seemed to thing a "trilogy" was his goal which would make sense given that the third movie ended with The Purge ending; but there's no real feeling of a "story" or an "arc" here between the movies and it just feels like an anthology series with one character appearing in two movies and another in all three. (Though only slightly in the second and third.) But with the "ending" of The Purge and the death of The Stranger from the first movie it'd be interesting to see where the franchise goes. If it goes into the past it'd be interesting to see an earlier Purge where maybe things would have been more violent before the "benefits" of the Purge eliminating the poor and criminals took root. Or if it goes into the future it's easy to say that the Executive Action taken by the Senator was overruled (they don't last forever, an action taken by the President still has to sooner or later get put in stone by Congress, and can be overwritten by Congress.) I do hope the series goes forward, again, I think it is an interesting and fun one.
That's a good question. I hadn't thought about that. But that being said, we don't know if Canada or Mexico is allowing Americans in. Nor do we know what the immigration/emigration rules that the New Founding Fathers established. We know they allow murder tourism for Purge Night, but we don't know the details by that. Maybe those are special cases that are allowed in for Purge Night. Who knows if they stay beyond that? Plus its easier said than done to say people can just up and leave a place even if the New Founding Fathers allowed them to. I think Trekker is on to something regarding a Purge prequel. I was wondering a little about that myself, how this world came to be. And it seems like the best choice to go with a Purge 4 since Election Year ended the Purge. I don't know why they actually ended Election Year like that, I was expecting (really hoping) that there would be a twist, that the good guys wouldn't win, and that Purge went forward. Perhaps it would've been neat to see Mitchell's character get beaten fairly at the polls. I think that would've been funny and perhaps more of an indictment of today's times than even this film seemed to be aiming at. Though similar to Trekker's sentiments again, I was expecting the New Founding Fathers to just rig the election. I mean I thought Mitchell's character was very naïve to have such faith in the process, a process created by the authoritarian New Founders.
I'm not a horror fan, and haven't seen the 2 or 3rd and barely remember the bits of the first i watched with a friend when I was half asleep. But the whole purge idea was really interesting to me. And to see the film makers of a hugely successful franchise end it with the purge ending is interesting. I hope they do a "Purge: The Beginning" because that would be interesting to watch, and it's clear that they make tons of money and we will get several more of them.
That's probably it. Anyone who flees the country during the Purge is probably going to come back to a pile of rubble that was once their home. And while I haven't seen Election Year, I do believe it mentions "Purge insurance", amirite? So perhaps anyone who leaves the country during this time will have their Purge insurance cancelled. Then it would be less painful to stay at home and wait out the Purge, since at least then you'll have any damage to your home covered, as opposed to leaving the country and then coming back to find that you are now homeless.
Indeed, remember the real purpose of The Purge is to rid society of the poor which takes some burden off of social services and opens up jobs for other people, ensuring a sudden yearly need for employment. But it's too easy to say, "why don't people just leave the country for the night?" when the people The Purge most impacts is the poor who don't have the money or resources to leave the country for one night. If you're near a border it might be easy but if you live anywhere else leaving the country for a single night is going to be an expensive ordeal as you can bet airlines raise rates on Purge Day. Rich people may decide to take a trip the day of The Purge or for that whole week but it's not necessary for them since the rich either going to live in a protected/gated community and/or be able to afford the system that barricades their house. "Purge Insurance" is mentioned it's what pulls one of the main characters into the story, the carriers of his Purge Insurance raise his rates the day before The Purge and if he's unable to meet the new rate then he won't have insurance so he takes to defending his store himself The "problem" I see with that and with your scenario is usually insurance rates are a contractual thing and can't just be raised out of the blue without something happening to cause the raise, like making a claim. Any raise would have to come at renewal and be given a couple months ahead of time. But, maybe the NFFA gave insurance companies a lot more leverage and allows them to raise rates out of the clear-blue sky the night before The Purge. I mean, hell, look at our OWN world where people are claiming all sorts of voter fraud during the primaries and we don't live in a corrupt wor.... as corrupt of a world as The Purge takes place in. If there's another movie in a forward progression I suspect the ending of The Purge simply won't stick. Executive Actions aren't set in stone, they're not even set in paper. It's set in a dry-mark board. They can be undone or ended as easily as they're done. Without Congressional approval and backing an Executive Action isn't going to last very long and if the NFFA maintained a control of the future-Congress then they can easily keep The Purge going. (This, of course, assumes Executive Actions and law-making works the same in The Purge world as it does ours. But you'd think they'd more-or-less would, that the NFFA would have given themselves a means of preventing The Purge from ending. Which is sort of another thing, if I understand correctly The Purge was made a Constitutional Amendment which is even harder to put a halt on for any length of time, let alone make it stick. It'd have to be over-turned by another Amendment and considering the hurdle it is to do that (which is a big one that'd have to crossed for The Purge Amendment to even be enacted) it's now a fact of The Purge can't just be "stopped" if it's something of a Constitutional Right. Again, maybe blurred or held for a bit but not for long.
I'm a horror fan and I do think Purge overall is one of the better horror franchises over the last 20 years, mainly because of the premise which I think is pretty cool, and I like that the franchise has something to say, even if I don't think it conveys its ideas as well as it could. All that being said, I think Purge: Anarchy (the second film) does the best job with the premise. I also think that both the first and second films are more horror than Election Year. Often horror films make me feel, or should, but the Purge series makes me think, so I give it credit for that. It looks like Election Year will do very well at the box office so there is no way they won't do other films. And this is the danger zone now because I think greed might trump whatever vision the film makers originally had. Really you can just pump out a ton of Purge films every few years, just shifting the setting from city to city. As it stands we got a series that at least has a middle and end. The most logical thing for me would be to tell the beginning. Though if they go that route, I can't see them stopping and eventually the franchise will be diluted. Also Trekker, Once again you're laying out some good ideas. However I do think the series leaves a lot of wiggle room to play with their political and legal system. It is similar to ours but I don't assume that it is exactly like ours or that the NFFA Constitution is a carbon copy of the US Constitution. I mean they've even moved election day, so we don't know what other changes they have made. Heck, we don't know much power the president has in this system, though they must possess some since Senator Roan says she can end the Purge. As for going forward, the end of the film, with pro-Purge forces attacking could be the way they go forward. I mean the film series could go into a second (or third? fourth?) Civil War route and the Purge could continue in the part of the country still controlled by pro-Purge or NFFA forces. And as it stands with Election Year, the NFFA itself has not been overturned, just the Purge. It does stand to reason for me how the NFFA allowed Roan to get as far as she did to challenge them? Perhaps they thought she was a kook and no one would take her seriously? I really would like a prequel film or a novel or comic book series or something going into how the NFFA came to power and how they came up with the Purge, and also why the people bought into it.
I think calling it a "horror" series is a bit inaccurate. I'm just not sure it fits because usually with horror you have super-natural elements. Zombies, ghosts, vampires, etc. Not a dystopian society. I think "Dystopian Suspense" works, or just "suspense," though the movie tries for a horror look/feel when it comes to the costumes the Purgers wear. Moving forward, I don't think we need for it to get too "serious" or involved with plot arcs and such with a "civil war" or so forth, I think it should just more or less continue as something of an anthology series (with the only common thread being The Purge and maybe Frank Grillo) and for them to just come up with excuses or reasons for not only the Purge to resume but for it to remain interesting or giving Frank (The Stranger... Leo?) things to do while out and even a reason to be out on Purge Night. Hell, have him take up something of a vigilante/hero role and just having him out there fighting Purgers and trying to protect the innocents trapped outside. Maybe in the next film just have the NFFA just initiate The Purge anyway, ignoring the President's orders. Or have the population carry it out without it being sanctioned by the government, figuring that too large of a group of people purging would be more than the city/government services can handle. There's directions for it to go and I don't think it need get bogged down with "story" and arcs and such. I watched the first one earlier this evening, and while I still find it pretty decent it really fumbles the ball with not doing quite enough with the premise and the leader of the "Purgers" is just too over the top to take seriously.
I just got back from seeing this. The dialog is cringe inducing. From stuff like "I want my candy, cocksucker" to "These are my white folk." or whatever the lines were. I thought we were going to get some backstory on Laney, but nope. There must have been a deleted plotline or something. These movies are all so radically different, it's hard to believe the same guy wrote and directed all three of them. And is the Purge 25 years old or 8 or 6 or 10? They just make up numbers in every movie. I though the acting was pretty good with what shitty lines they were given and I thought the costumes and masks were great. I think it's better than The Purge, but still unsatisfying. Anarchy is the best of the three by far in my opinion.
I see what you're saying Trekker, however Election Year has already laid on the potential story arc stuff the way it developed the mythology. Purge 3 could have just been another Purge Night in a different city but the film makers decided to make it something deeper, to perhaps be a twisted mirror of contemporary times in the US. So they've already crossed that threshold. To return to the Purge they are going to have to explain what happened to President Roan. Now that could just be in the opening credits, but still they are going to have to take that step, since they went in the direction they did. I disagree with your definition of what horror is. Horror is more varied than how you described it, and there is horror without any supernatural stuff in it at all. The Purge started out as a home invasion/survival horror series but morphed into a political commentary/satire with horror/thriller aspects. But the root of the Purge franchise is horror. I think it would be wise for them to not go too far away from their roots.
I also didn't like the dialogue. It was pretty bad at times, unconvincing. I did like the costumes as well, though I don't think there was enough crazy Purgers out there in Election Year. They really need to really go crazy with it and have some fun.