A History Of Violence

[Neil]

Doesn't seem to have been touched on, so I'm jumping in.

David Cronenberg's A History of Violence is absolutely brilliant! The acting is absolutely amazing all around. The story is a powerful and honest examination of who we all are and who we think we are.

Interestingly, Cronenberg takes out the most obviously horrific (and seemingly Cronenbergian) subplot from the original graphic novel by John Wagner and Vince Locke. It's obvious he locked onto a very specific theme from the book and decided to boost that at the expence of the other. They're both interesting and worthwhile takes on the material.

I can't recommend the movie enough, though. Go see it.

[Grant]

Definatley planning on seeing this sometime this week.

[zombie]

I've been looking at some reviews, and it's interesting how some reviewers say this is a very complex movie, while others say it's empty. How can some people find so much in it, and others nothing worth mentioning?

I'm hoping to see this later today.

[berk]

I haven't read the comic, but the movie was excellent. Good story, well executed direction, good perfprmances all round. I particularly liked Ed Harris and the guy who played the oler of the two armed robbers, but I thiought everybody did a real good job, including Mortenson in the lead role. I was very impressed with the whole thing. Good movie.

[zombie]

Excellent film. I'm still thinking about it now, trying to grasp all the things Cronenberg may have been showing us. The more I think about it, the better the movies gets. I may have to see it again.

I saw it with my brother, and as soon as the credits came up at the end all he said was, "Whaaat?"

[Super Samurai]

How's the acting in this movie? I'm interested to see Viggo Mortenson in this movie.

[Grant]

I've been looking at some reviews, and it's interesting how some reviewers say this is a very complex movie, while others say it's empty. How can some people find so much in it, and others nothing worth mentioning?

Sometimes that says a lot about the person doing the reviewing.

[BlairH]

I saw the trailer and said it looked "meh", but got rightfully put in my place by a rabid movie buff.

[Neil]

Sometimes that says a lot about the person doing the reviewing.
I think there can be a lot there regarding what moves any given person and what their pet issues are. In a case like this, I'm not sure how a person, even if they didn't appreciate the issues and complexities shown by the movie, could miss them entirely, though. It's weird.

[zombie]

I think there can be a lot there regarding what moves any given person and what their pet issues are. In a case like this, I'm not sure how a person, even if they didn't appreciate the issues and complexities shown by the movie, could miss them entirely, though. It's weird.

Do you post on the Rue Morgue boards?

[Neil]

Do you post on the Rue Morgue boards?
Yep. That's me.

[tricksterpup]

WOw, i did not know this was based off a Comic book, but I am interested in seeing it before the fact.

[Lubichev]

Excellent film. I'm still thinking about it now, trying to grasp all the things Cronenberg may have been showing us. The more I think about it, the better the movies gets. I may have to see it again.

I saw it with my brother, and as soon as the credits came up at the end all he said was, "Whaaat?"
Yeah. It is a movie you really have to see more than once. Knowing how the story unfolds frees up the brain to take in all the little pieces that created the whole of this disturbing movie. ***** out of 5

[Jared]

(spoilers)

I thought it was okay, but after the torrent of rave reviews it's gotten, I was kinda dissapointed. Rather than feeling like I've seen one of the best movies of the year, a Cinematic Masterpiece, I feel like I just saw a pretty good but not great crime drama. I definatly felt like there was something missing from the story, perhaps the subplot from the graphic novel that was mentioned earlier would have helped? And I think it would have been better if the "is he or isn't he" aspect had played out a bit more. The bully angle with Tom's son started in just a silly way. The kid caught a pop fly that was hit right to him...during a game of gym class softball, yet the bully wants to beat his ass for it. Come on, at least it could have been a matter of the kid robbing him of a home run or making him look bad in front of his girlfriend or something. It just seemed too much of a contrivance, and the whole thing with the bully ended up going exactly as expected. And then there's Tom's escape at the end. Why try to strangle him, when you could just shoot him? No need to suddenly have action movie cliches in an otherwise very serious film. The performances were good, with the exception of the little girl, who let's just say won't ever be making Dakota Fanning money. The underlying theme of how violence can be alluring and repulsive at the same time was well-handled. You don't feel like the movie hitting you over the head with a message or subtext, nor it is so obscure that it might as well be nonexistant unless you're a fan of European indy films from 20 years ago.
The only other theme in the movie that I thought of would be that "violence begets violence." Which we've all seen and heard before. So I don't quite get how some are saying there were loads of depth and hidden meaning to every scene. Not only did I not see any of that, I didn't even get the impression Cronenburg was trying to imbue much of an illusion of depth. This was no David Lynch movie or Matrix sequel.

[zombie]

The bully angle with Tom's son started in just a silly way. The kid caught a pop fly that was hit right to him...during a game of gym class softball, yet the bully wants to beat his ass for it.

I've known people like that, so I didn't have a problem with it.

[Arune Singh]

I thought it was atrocious.

The motivation for all he characters seemed so lacking. I'm not saying that I need to be hit over the head with exposition, but everyone seemed like robots and there wasn't any feeling of passion. The sex was explicit for no reason- I don't think it established anything and it was odd to watch. The plot itself felt boring too- there wasn't anything about it that made me think on a deeper level, excited me or surprised me. And the end... well, this trend of non-endings pisses me off. In my mind, it IS important how his wife reacts and we never get to see that.

I did like the close combat fight scenes, but this movie really disappointed me.

[Karl J. Barnes]

I left the theater empty..not of emotion or feeling, but wonder. I followed the story well enough, I believe. I just didn't seem to have the ephinany that others seemed to have had.

The story came off realistic enough, until the final fight between the two brothers. I actually thought that Tom/Joey would die and thus ending his History of Violence, yet this didn't happen.

I had the feeling at the end that Tom would be let back into the family, if not with open loving arms, at least with an uneasy love. I just didn't feel any cathartic release. So I left the theater, knowing what was said, but not feeling the impact of it all.

[HomerJay]

The sex was explicit for no reason- I don't think it established anything...
I don't think you could be more wrong. Certain scenes were established before Tom's act of heroism and then deliberately mirrored afterward.
- Tom's son's encounters with the bully
- The customers (lack there of before, then full after) in the diner
- The "cheerleader" sex scene vs. the rough sex scene

The plot itself felt boring too- there wasn't anything about it that made me think on a deeper level, excited me or surprised me. And the end... well, this trend of non-endings pisses me off. In my mind, it IS important how his wife reacts and we never get to see that.
I did like the close combat fight scenes, but this movie really disappointed me.
I've come to the conclusion that whether or not you liked this film depends heavily on what you were expecting going in. If you wanted a straight-up thriller (like I expect you were judging by what you said you liked and what you didn't), you left scratching your head. If you were expecting something a bit more that tries to say something about the human condition (like most Cronenberg films) you walked away satisfied.

[Arune Singh]

Nah, I expected a movie that challenged my perceptions and left me thinking (FIGHT CLUB is what comes to mind), without cowtowing to the mainstream.

[Schellenberg]

Briefly: "Twin Peaks" cracks heads with "Summersby" and "Once Upon a Time in the West," and they all fall down and sit there looking confused. A big, stinky, steaming heap of man-with-a-past cliches that have all been done better in other movies. Two of the most embarrassing sex scenes since "Enemy at the Gates." And William Hurt--what the hell? They could have saved seventy-five cents and landed a better performance from John Malkovich. Rotten. Just plain rotten. Scorsese, Jonathan Demme, or even John Woo could have saved it, but, hey, it was CUH-RONENBERG'S SHOW. Maybe next time at least he'll borrow Scorsese's cutter.

But if you like crushed noses and blown-off jaws, or if you're all for jumping on runaway critical bandwagons, you'll love it. Mmm mmm.

[Davideaux]

I loved this movie.

The violence was poetic, fluid and quick. There was an air of menace throughout the movie that left me intrigued.

[hoffmandu]

I was way dissappointed with HOV as a whole. The bully angle was lame and poorly acted. The weak son angle was more of the same, overacted bunkness. The flick drug on a little too long, and the extended sex scenes got to be almost awkward.
However, it is worth a rent. Viggo did well (though he is looking a little old, all those cigs I guess), Ed Harris was as cool as he always is, and William Hurt's performance was probably his best (it was nominated for an Oscar).
I wouldn't watch it again, but definitely worth a single viewing.

[Apathy Boy]

I thought the movie was great. Loved how the suspense built throughout the film. The non-ending was a cop-out, though.

But hey, we got full-frontal nudity from Maria Bello, so I can't complain too much.

[LtMarvel]

Hmm...the book is better than the movie.


Imagine that.