Originality is nice, but it doesn't always mean quality

Rating: 3/10 (27 September 2013)

In the future, the USA has become almost utopia-like: crime and violence are almost nonexistent, unemployment is at 1%, economy is blooming... The motive? The purge, a 12-hour period once per year where every crime is legalized and people are allowed to (and supposed to) release their pent-up frustrations and anger by killing ('purging').
Now, as original a concept as that is, there was one thing that crossed my mind as soon as it was explained: WTF IS THE SENSE IN THAT?!
To let a 'law' like that pass means to throw away every ethic and moral society has ever upheld. Moreover, the results make no sense: how do you get people to follow the 12-hour rule? Why would criminals wait for AN ENTIRE YEAR for a measly 12-hour legality (ie.: what difference is there from what they always did anyway)? How is making people kill each other supposed to make the economy bloom (besides gun and security industries, of course), unemployment decrease or anything else? Society's values have downgraded enough that they willingly commit monstrosities during the Purge, but are apparently perfect for AN ENTIRE YEAR in-between?
There is no way this can be viewed as a 'possible reality', or even realistic at all. As anything other than a fantasy this fails, but even as a fantasy it still has many problems.
The film focuses on a security system salesman (Ethan Hawke) and his family during the night. His (stupid) son lets an injured man inside their fortified house, making them the target of a murderous cult.
Right away we are introduced more idiocy.
-A very idiotic, short-lived and pretty much useless subplot about the daughter's boyfriend; it has no other reason than to have a few 'teen- love' scenes.
-The cultists are just your stereotypical movie psychopaths, like the ones from 'The Strangers'. The leader is an always smiling, smooth talking proper boy; combined with the almost religious tone of the group, he ends up as nothing but a typical religious fanatic leader.
-The son (Max Burkholder). My God, how frustrating it was to see him. He is shown as highly intelligent, but he is responsible for everything wrong happening to the family. Why did he let the man inside and, knowing their lives (not just his, but his parent's and his sister's) depended on finding him, why did he hide him away?! Is he a savant, or did he have amnesia and not remember every other year's Purge?
-Seeing as how willing the people are to accept the Purge (and, as such, throwing their moral values away), the characters actions are often contradictorily moralistic. If Hawke was so in-favor of Purge law before, why was he so unwilling to Purge himself? At best he is a hypocrite, which does not help making him likable.
Ethan Hawke and Lena Headey are well cast, as far as looks goes (they play everyday normal people, and look like so); acting wise, Headey does a good job (being the closest to evoking real emotion) whereas Hawke ends up becoming just your usual action hero. Rhys Wakefield (the cultist leader) is clichè but unnerving, Edwin Hodger (the injured guy) is okay, and the children (Adelaine Kane and Max Burkholder) are far too annoying (though the fault goes more to their characters than their weak acting).
The entire social commentary the movie seems to aim towards is absurd, the entire concept is original but ludicrous and illogical, the execution is weak and the final 'plot twist' is predictable (though not unbelievable). Whoever came up with that idea, or whoever sees this as anything other than fantasy, is seriously reality-challenged. Either that, or secretly a sociopath; after all, for such an idea to work it would require the entire society to be composed of sociopaths.