Wow! What a bizarre film! Unfortunately the few funny moments there were were quite overshadowed by it's completely weird and random vibe throughout.

There is definitely an excellent idea hidden in the background of the film. Unfortunately, it's difficult to find it.

Like the great film, it's made with a great deal of visible affection both in front of and behind the camera.

It is neither dumb nor smart enough to be fun, and spends way too much time with its boring human characters.

The Pruitt-Igoe housing development in St. Louis is the focus of this film, but it could have just as soon been Cabrini-Green in Chicago or any one of a number of similar projects across the American big cities. It's an exploration as to why these huge public housing projects became hellish instead of the paradises they were originally envisioned. Fortunately, the filmmakers don't pick any one or two simple answers but talk about the multitude of issues that led to the projects failing...and ultimately being demolished. Among the problems discussed in the film were the lack of jobs as businesses and middle classes migrated to the suburbs, the increase of violence and vandalism, lack of maintenance, segregation as well as the insane notion that in order to get public assistance that fathers could not remain in the home! This documentary is depressing and few folks would enjoy watching it. Now I am NOT saying it's bad and it's good for folks to become familiar with the issues that come up in the film. But it's just not the sort of thing most people would choose to watch and is probably more a film that educators might show to sociology or other such classes in order to explain the failures of these programs. Interesting and well made...despite it being such a terrible story.

*MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS*Urban planning is never static; things are constantly changing. It is the appreciation of why certain projects lead to complete failure and some succeed. The cliché "We learn about the past in order to learn about the future" is a very prominent theme embedded within this documentary. In some aspects, the Pruitt-Igoe Myth is more lament than examination. Through the survivors' tales of death both literal and figurative, Benjamin Balcom's dismal score portrays everything as it is out to be. Directed by Chad Freidrichs, this grim but powerful documentary covers the domestic turmoil by punitive public welfare policies and the processes of mass suburbanization that emptied American cities. The Pruitt-Igoe housing had high hopes but empty promises. This housing project created the dream of a wonderful life. Although it did assert the importance of community, it backfired in vandalism, vacancy, and crime. The film starts off with Solvester Brown, a former resident of Igoe-Pruitt, revisiting the area for the first time in over 30 years. The plot he went to was almost unrecognizable; it consisted of a vacant "mini-forest" surrounded by piles upon piles of junk and mounds of concrete. The movie then cuts to a housing project video advertising the project, promising indoor plumbing, electric lights and other things expected in the 20th century. The sight that Brown witnessed did not match the promise that the planners put forth. Post WWII and the beginning of the Cold War, the Pruitt-Igoe housing project was created in response to the national urban renewal process of the 50's/60's. St. Louis's urban renewal plan was one of the most ambitious. Having major influence for coalition due to their wealth and power, civic leaders and politicians viewed the slums as eyesores and the downtown area was of their full interest. Urban reformers pressed lawmakers to input new clean modern homes to re-energize depression-era housing projects installed by war. The 1949 Housing Act was installed to bulldoze the slums and incorporated 800,000 homes within the United States that were supposed to ensure safe and affordable mortgages to low-income communities. The federal government funded the production of the project but didn't put money into the maintenance. So slumlords took advantage of the distressed residents and played a part with the worsening conditions of the apartments. Slumlords would pack as many people as they could within these buildings because they knew these people were desperate. World War II took a toll on St. Louis's economy. From 1970 to 1980, the population had decreased by 28 percent, beating Cleveland's and Detroit's downfall. Post war, urban growth reversed. The cities were losing the working middle class, their industrial base, and overall investment. National suburbanization policies, or urban flight, was made possible by the same housing act for Pruitt-Igoe. The appeal of the suburbs became the mainstream, and many families sprawled to the newly developed areas outside the city in hopes for more opportunities and overall a better life. Due to the disinvestment to the city and increase demand for the suburbs, land tax decreased in urban areas and thus leading to less money for maintenance. The unfortunate lower class that was left behind within the slowly rotting public housing. As if it couldn't get worse, the welfare department mandated that families living within the housing project qualify for aid only if there is not an able bodied male present. Women and children were the only residents allowed to reside. Families had to sacrifice a father figure in order for everyone to have somewhere to sleep. Televisions and phones were also violations of receiving aid. These harsh regulations created even more isolation than the community of Pruitt-Igoe was already in. This sense of hopelessness and alienation created a sense of imprisonment that further made people products of their environment, consisting of vandalism and no sense of safety. In short, this figurative prison is the effects of the welfare The residents of Pruitt Igoe found themselves in a prison they could not escape because of their income restraints.Pruitt was essentially clean at first, but maintenance declined shortly. There was never an adequate provision for maintenance. Solvester Brown recalled scratch-proof elevators evolving into urine-smelling that did not operate. Brown and his brother would be stuck in an elevator all day and would eventually have to pry the doors open and climb rope from floor to floor. The slumlords did not have sufficient amount of money to fund the operations nor did the state of Missouri. A representative from the St. Louis Housing Authority was interviewed in regards to the lack of federal investment of operations within the housing and he claimed that they "simply do not have enough money to operate as well as we should". He in front of a poor incinerator with mounds of garbage piling up as he was making this statement. Although the Pruitt-Igoe had the stereotype of a bad, unsafe place, the adversities that the residents dealt with created a strong sense of community. Everyone knew everyone, they were never alone. The implosion was devastating because the project was the solution, and it was very painful moment of trust to see that failure. This documentary portrayed the Pruitt-Igoe housing project well in the aspect of that it was a symbol for failed public housing as well as the proceed failure of well intentioned government policies in general. This shines a light on the responsibility for not for just the urban planners but for the country to learn from those failures and do better.

The Pruitt Igoe Myth What was meant to be an innovative solution to St. Louis's low class housing woes turned into a disaster of unimaginable heights. The St. Louis Pruitt Igoe housing project has been widely unrecognized as an issue of such devastating proportions. The significance of this disaster was portrayed through The Pruitt Igo Myth, which finally brought attention to this controversial issue regarding public housing. The documentary argued that the housing project was founded on the government's good intentions to help the city, yet was bound to fail from the beginning. Further, the documentary argued that the project failed in large part due to the economic downturn in St. Louis and the change in the structuring of city housing. Although the public housing system had its downfalls, such as breaking up the family structure, the interviews with previous Pruitt Igoe residents showed there was a community feeling to Pruitt Igoe that many will never forget. Through original research and interviews with those involved, The Pruitt Igoe Myth served to enlighten viewers regarding issues of urban renewal and the restructuring of St. Louis to benefit those in positions of power.In the 1940's, the slums of St. Louis were a significant problem for the low-class communities in the city and needed to be dealt with in a way that would not leave the cities residents abandoned. Slumlords let conditions worsen to the point of no return. They used this issue to their advantage as they made a profit from the residents. The government and city officials agreed that the slums were an eye-sore that was detrimental to the city and this issue needed to be dealt with in a productive way. The government had an idea of urban renewal and came up with the 1949 Housing Act that funded slum clearance, FHA insured mortgage programs, as well as funded the construction of over 800,000 public housing units across the U.S. Pruitt Igoe consisted of 33 high-rise buildings that were supposed to provide safe and affordable homes for the low-class community to live comfortably. The issue that this documentary made apparent is that the Housing Act provided the funds to build these projects but did not provide funding to maintain them.During the post war times, St. Louis's economy was at a terribly, steady downfall. The population drastically declined between the 1930's and the 1940's. The film described the upward growth that allowed people to leave the harsh urban areas and spread out to the newly developed suburban areas on the outskirts of town. Many middle class families left the cities in hopes of better communities and properties. This led to less property and city taxes in the urban areas, ultimately resulting in less city maintenance. Abandoned lower class individuals were stuck with deteriorating public housing and had to deal with vandals and increasing crime. The welfare department also began setting rules and regulations for the people who were receiving aid; these rules led to the creation of more issues. The department made the rule that any family having an able bodied adult male present was not allowed to receive aid and live in the housing projects. Only single women with children and no spouse were aloud to reside there. Too many children were raised without a fatherly figure so that the rest of the family could have a roof over their heads. The welfare department also said that they were not allowed to have televisions or phones in their homes either. This was a way for the government to further isolate the people they had already isolated from the rest of the community. Social conflict theory, based on Marxist thinking, can be applied to this situation. It seems as though this housing project was a way to keep the poor in poverty, while benefiting the interests of the wealthy and those in control of the system. This sense of hopelessness and isolation led to a prison like environment that only further hampered the sense of family ties that were so desired. The residents of Pruitt Igoe found themselves in a prison they could not escape because of their income restraints.The documentary did a good job of covering every side of the story when it comes to interviews with residents that once lived there and people of power that were involved in making decisions about the housing unit. The interviews throughout the documentary gave viewers first hand accounts of the stories of the residents at Pruitt Igoe. Contrasting interviews from residents with that of the public housing officers, showed that although the conditions were not optimal, residents saw Pruitt Igoe as their home where they created lifelong memories, especially the female resident interviewees. It is important to hear the residents' perspective because they were the ones that were first hand living in the conditions that were seen as awful to the outside eye. Regardless of this, many of the interviewed residents saw Pruitt Igoe as a home, where they had their own rooms and had a bed to sleep on at night. These children made memories just as other neighborhood children did. They made friends, got into fights occasionally, but in the end they made lasting memories with other children in the same situation as themselves. The male and female interviewees had slightly different views on the housing units, as it seems the males felt more pressure to take on the father figure role of the family, which sometimes led to violent interactions between residents. One of the male interviewees showed that Pruitt Igoe was more of a nightmare to him because he lost his brother to violence within the community there. This showed how unstable the environment really was, and how much pressure the males felt to put on a display of extreme masculinity in order to survive.The Pruitt Igoe Myth shed a painfully real incident to light that could have ultimately been avoided but ended up only being a learning experience.

Like most documentaries that come out today, this asks the wrong questions and places blame in the wrong areas. I could go on forever but choose not to.I don't exactly know what the "myth" is in the documentary. Most of the blame looks like it is trying to be aimed at government, which is mostly wrong. This documentary is also dangerous (like most are) because it chooses only the information it wants to present. And I'm not saying that I know all of the facts, because I don't. But what people never do is look things up for themselves. they just take the information that is given to them on a platter and say , "oh, that's horrible. How can people do that?" etc...The real problems are never solved, and real questions are never asked. How did all of the windows break? Did the government do it? Why were things set on fire? Why did people urinate everywhere? Did the government come in and do that? Did the government come in and throw bottles at the policemen and firemen when they tried to put the fires out? I'm sure things were not like the grand ballroom at the housing complex, but who said it had to be? Tenants got mad when rent went up because people were leaving. Why did they leave? Not a hard question to answer. They should be going around yelling and protesting at each other for the rent going up because tenant's behavior caused people to leave which made rent rise. But lets blame society for poor planning and support.This needs to focus on one of the biggest problems facing society today, which is entitlement. It was bad then and it's only getting worse every day.