Strong and Moving!

Redundant and unnecessary.

I don't have all the words right now but this film is a work of art.

Don't listen to the negative reviews

This film, best described as a Docufiction, (or dramatic mockumentary), is very well done. The delivery was solely through the use of hand- held cameras. Also allowing the highly motivated amateur cast to represent themselves through emotional improvised dialogue was very effective. Some of the actors were real activists/police officers of the time.There are some excellent, articulate arguments delivered by the cast throughout, Even the ones who stumbled over their words and could not adequately explain their reasoning, only made this film more believable because everyone would react differently to such a stressful situation.Apparently the scene were one of the prisoners is shot for throwing rocks at the national guardsmen was unscripted. The BBC cameraman who freaks out really thinks the man has been killed. Obviously the whole crew was very invested in the message behind this film.Unfortunately this film only serves as a reminder of how totally powerless we really are. Once accused of breaking a 'law', no matter what checks and balances are in place, we're at the mercy of the system. This film seeks to challenge that concept but we know nothing has changed over the years. The powerful, wealthy, and implicitly corrupt, will always rule over us. Decades have passed since this film was shot and the message of heavy-handed governance is only reinforced.The concepts suggested here is already our reality. People can be jailed without charges, tried by people totally isolated from the average citizen, and be sentenced to inhuman punishments.You may think you have certain rights, but they can be taken away at any time. These rights are only respected if you follow every rule, except that some rules contradict the others. In essence - the system will always win.I thought the concept of the State giving the political prisoners the choice between two punishments was flawed. Sure, the chance to beat a very long sentences in jail by trekking through the desert in a game of hide and seek with armed soldiers and police might sound attractive. But the goal was so undefined. It was almost laughable that 'option B' involves the State forcing the 'contestant' to overcome severe adversity while striving to reach the American flag - a flag these 'kids' hate. And for what purpose? I actually can't remember the first group being explicitly told they would be set free if they reached the flag therefore what benefit were they going to gain. I find it hard to believe a 'majority' of intelligent political prisoners chose this option (as quoted by the BBC reporter) without demanding clarification of the rules.On the other hand I can see how the use of 'option B' would indeed benefit the State. Their police and quasi-military home defense force get realistic training on how to track people down, arrest them under a variety of circumstances, and teach them how to process prisoners through to a prison. I don't think 'option B' was supposed to be a death sentence - although they surely knew the contestant had a higher likelihood of being hurt or killed though. The director must also have thought this concept was a stretch as he employed the killing of a deputy as motivation for the police and national guardsmen to act more violently.Punishment Park is really powerful film, but lets not fool ourselves that it contains a message we don't already know. We let our government to these things to us because revolution has become a romantic notion. And much, much worse, rebelling would interfere with our important schedules.

I was 16 in 1968 and got involved with all of the 'hippy' stuff, which for me/us, mainly consisted of going to lots of concerts and getting altered quite a bit - we had a lot of fun in a (believe it or not) simpler time. I attended several peaceful (for the most part) anti-war protests in Chicago in 1969 and got involved with a group of students at my high school (Lane Tech) who were trying to change the dress code and several other restrictive parts of the setting there; a few kids were even involved in SDS (a pretty radical group).I think this film, though well-made for the time and depicting a fairly accurate account of the conflict between true radicals and the 'establishment' (in the tribunal scenes) fails badly with the 'punishment park' part, a ridiculous and implausible scenario where young people convicted of conspiracy against the government are sent off into the dessert on foot and without water and then hunted down and executed by the police and National Guardsmen. In depicting law enforcement as such totally brutal cowards, the film does a disservice to the credibility of real events back then such as Kent State and the 1968 Democratic convention.Anyway, for me, the totally black/white stereotypical portrayals of law enforcement in this film ruin the credibility of the message so I'll pass on saying this is a good movie.

It kicks you in the stomach. There are other films with more convincing characters, a more realistic story, and maybe even more depth concerning political invocations. But then again, most of these are not directed by Peter Watkins. Maybe the one true genius artist of British Film to emerge out of the 1960s, Watkins has made quite a bunch of rarely seen films that perfectly capture the spirit of the outer-aesthetic world - the world of political ongoings, social problems and governmental solutions. Thus, his work is probably less "filmic" than, say, political, which some may call a weakening of their inherent artistic quality. Then again, why shouldn't art allow itself to become engaged? Watkins dares. And succeeds. You won't feel well with this one. You won't feel happy. Actually, you won't really like the film; it is uncompromising, honest, direct, unashamed; a smash in your face, in short. You can't help getting angry, you can't resist to let the things you see touch you. That is what makes Watkins' films so rewarding.

This extraordinary pseudo-documentary, made in 1971, perfectly captures the zeitgeist of America today...which makes it all the more scary and relevant. "subversives" (college students, hippies, black activists, academics) are being rounded up by the government and given lengthy prison terms for what amount to thought crimes and social protest. As an alternative to life in prison, these convicted "criminals" are offered three days in "Punishment Park". Their objective inside the park is to make their way to the American flag where freedom awaits them. Not surprisingly, the Punishment Park option is a dirty lie. This brilliant film from Peter Watkins even pre-dates "Battle Royale" and "Series 7", though its angle of attack is more blatantly political. Shot in '71, it looks and feels as fresh as anything made today. The performances are exemplary and the direction is razer sharp. The narrative cuts back and forth between various groups trying to survive the harsh conditions of the park and the McCarthy-like trials that convicted them. Today, this film still retains its power. In '71, there was nothing but nothing quite like it. This is a masterpiece that succeeds on a dozen levels. It has the balls that most people today have lost.