This is a top-notch film. And it's impossible for me NOT to respect a film that questions the basic ethos of the action-film resumes of Charles Bronson, Steven Seagal, Jean-Claude Van Damme and pre-1980 Clint Eastwood by asking whether the so-called heroes of these films prevail because they have the forces of good and right on their side--or maybe because they're just a little bit better and more skillful at marshalling the forces of bad and wrong? Which is tragic, because it is a totally unnecessary and ridiculous mess that I am, to this day, ashamed to ever have seen. Parts of it were actually quite embarrassing. William Hurt's performance is a little weird - is his character supposed to be funny? In 2006 it was released on VHS, marking what is widely believed to be the last instance of a major motion picture to be released in that format, according to a 2008 report from the Los Angeles Times. Blue Velvet also showed there was something dark beyond the picket fence; but it was assured, poetic and contained a subconscious as well as visceral threat. Viggo Mortensen pulls this off pretty well. Every predictable plot twist plays Bad acting, bad dialogue and writing, unsympathetic characters. Jack reacts more like a wife would have than a son. The first portion or so is on the slow side and doesn't draw one in straight away. A History Of Violence works on so many levels with such convincing acting and a riveting story.
I should actually give it a 0 because I believe it may possible be one of the worst movies I have -ever- seen (including TV movies), but I gave it a 1 figuring some people may appreciate the soft-core p orn and brief moments of violence. Watch this film if you want to. The story amazes, and the ending at the dinner table is one of the most tense and thrilling scenes I've ever witnessed. No longer relevant after 2006. However, I had a problems. Mortensen plays the role close to his chest, he reminds you of the sort that their neighbor will eventually describe as "such a nice quiet guy. This movie does a brilliant job at subverting the viewers expectations. Small town family man and business owner Tom Stall (Viggo Mortensen) gets into more than he expected when he violently but understandably derails an attempt to rob his diner; nationwide notoriety, reporters and gangsters appear to threaten his perfect family life and maybe expose some less-than-savory truths that he'd vastly prefer remain submerged. All in all I was midly dissapointed. I just thought it seemed a bit too easy and over too quickly - a bit of an anti-climax. After the incident at the diner, revelations start to take place, and Tom will do anything he can to protect them. So when I had heard about A History of Violence, I've heard that A History of Violence has had it's aspects when it comes to body horror by David Cronenberg which does not have anything to do with body horror.
In terms of acting, Viggo Mortensen is great, as are Ed Harris and Maria Bello. Even the brass score adds energy and tension, and the ending was a nice touch as well, with its lack of resolution but hint of hope. If it kicks off feeling a little too made-for-TV (a little too saccharine on the domestic bliss angle? And the dialog was so contrived & stiff. I'm usually a very forgiving movie goer, but this one literally had me shaking my head several I'm a big fan of Viggo Mortensen & Ed Harris, but I thought this movie stunk big-time. Review of A History Of Violence. Cool as ever, he breezes into this role as if he was born for it, effortlessly stealing every single scene he`s in. Created May 16, 2017.
Joey's violent past has come back to haunt him and his -- or rather Tom's -- family and the scene opens shortly after Tom has returned from the hospital where he had been recovering from a bullet wound inflicted by a former associate. I mean this is a family who is finding out that their father/husband isn't who he says he is and it shatters the mold of the perfect small town family that they built through out their lives. In this performance, we see a good, simple man who cares about his family and community. Cronenberg has stated that he does not care for superhero comics/films, feeling they are all adolescent at their core, no matter how dark, edgy or intelligent critics and fans alike feel they are. But that's not necessarily good. It is very rare that a film is so compelling that it keeps my eyes absolutely glued to the screen from its opening sequence to its final frame. Best movie of the year. So when I had heard about A History of Violence, I've heard that it's going to be violent and yeah, I was right. I can't understand how it gained an 80+_rating - truly a horrible movie and a waste of some good acting talent. David Cronenberg's violent, brutal and extremely intelligent look into the nature of violence is nothing short of insightful, moving and at times shocking, shocking because it delivers a story so true and unflinchingly honest that turning away from the screen, turning away from the story would be near impossible. I will not tell you exactly what it contains, but I will say that it is no sort of "twist" ending and it is almost entirely silent. Will Tom/Joey have an honest conversation with his son, addressing the recent violent trends, and will this conversation be used to encourage or discourage the violent behaviour? The feature is surprisingly fast and utterly exhilarating to the core with its street ruggedness and raw brutality that grounds this stunning craft. It just becomes This film is so bad it is not even worthy of a score of 1.
Edie (Maria Bello) is like the Lorraine Bracco character in "Good Fellas" who admits to being turned-on when Henry (Ray Liotta) tells her to hide the gun. This movie was slow, unevenly directed, cinematically washed out, predictable and ultimately not very entertaining. Then there is the "acting".
It was like leave it to beaver. The movie examines the slippage between myth and realism. Just a horrible movie. I thought Tom`s relationship with his son was a little bit distant and I expected it to be later revealed that he was not the boy`s father, or maybe he was just struggling as his boy reaches adolescence - keen for him to stay on the right path. Its a difficult film - sometimes difficult films are good - great in this case. If you are into films, please do not listen to what you hear, and AVOID this film.