I’ve been interested in A History of Violence for several reasons. First of all the trailer is riveting without giving too much away. Secondly, it’s a Cronenberg film. Thirdly, the cast looks fantastic with Viggo Mortensen in the lead trying to recover from Hildago.
The early reviews for the film are now making their way in, and they look really good! Here’s what some of the critics have to say:
“Cronenberg’s movie manages to have its cake and eat it — impersonating an action flick in its staccato mayhem while questioning these violent attractions every step of the way.”
J. Hoberman, VILLAGE VOICE“It should delight mainstream audiences who prefer their action pictures to have some depth of character, several twists in the plot and a satisfying conclusion.”
Ray Bennett, HOLLYWOOD REPORTER“A ruthless lesson about the power of violence, and the ways in which it’s passed down from generation to generation: subtly, insidiously, and quite effectively.”
Scott Weinberg, EFILMCRITIC.COM
As of this moment A History of Violence is holding a 79% rating on Rotten Tomatoes which solidifies it’s spot as the film I’m most looking forward to seeing this weekend.
OK…so the movie was somewhat of a disappointment. I agree the opening was stretched a bit far with too much focus on the two bad guys (I think the point here was to show violence..hence the movies’ title). The development of Tom Stall was weak…should have dropped in scenes from his wicked past. The acting was average across the board. The closeups on the exit wounds and facial damage was commendable. But I walked out of this movie saying…”no real suspense, no real ending, too much left to question.” It went nowhere. At the end, couldn’t the wife have said, “mashed potatoes, honey?” That might have been the closure I needed.
Hey Peter! Are you back from seeing the film yet?
I have had better dumps than this film.
If You are an insomniac then you need to see this film.
If you havent laughed in 10 years then you need to see this film.
If you want to make out with your girlfriend at the back of the cinema then you need to see this film.
If you have serious issues and are on the verge of killing someone then dont watch this film cos you are very likely going to pound someones face in when leaving the cinema.
To the guy that said ‘most women dont shave’. You need to date more. If your a girl then buy yourself a gillette venus.
I have a PH.D. in film from the University of Southern Alaska (Juneau Campus).
I also don’t shave and have flap-jack breasts.
I would rather eat out a donkey’s diahrrea-stained ass than watch this movie again. The only thing that disturbs me more than the thought of this film is the way the critics have responded to it. I will never read another review ever again by someone other than me.
One of the worst movies I’ve ever seen…
Story is boring ( the first 20min almost made me fall asleep)
AND NOTHING HAPPENS….ok they fuck twice in the movie but HEY I could have watched a bad porn if I wanted to see a 39 year old woman in a cheerleader dress gets satisfied by a rather ugly guy…
OH somebodys gettin shot Oh 9 people get killed in that movie … oke come on… I’ve seen psychos shootin randomly people before….
CRAP don’t watch it…seriously … CRAP
I’d really love to know the education levels completed by the people who reviewed this movie here. Despite what any of these sophists say, A History of Violence is a very good film. Being part of a minority that disparages a popular thing doesn’t make you right or elite; sometimes, it makes you stupid.
Why the long dragged out opening scene, with characters that had little to do with the plot of the movie? Gee, possibly because the movie’s focus and impact extends beyond that of the mere plot and actually has to do with things outside of the movie?
Why the gratuitous sex scenes? The same reason for the gratuitious violence (something i didn’t hear anyone complaining about – oh wait, some people only stayed “for the blood”). And did someone actually downgrade the movie because the main actress needed to “shave” and had “flapjack” breasts? Wow, maybe if you got out there and actually saw people other than pornstars on your monitor and your 18 yr-old insecure girlfriend naked, you’d realize most women don’t shave.
What’s that? This is an example of Hollywood reusing a theme – the bad guy with redeeming qualities? Besides the fact that there are only so many good themes, almost all of which are taken directly from ancient Greek theatre, this movie isn’t about a protagonist who’s “bad” with “redeeming” qualities – it’s about an apparently “good” guy and the reality that everyone has dark histories and impulses. If any of you actually knew anything about D. Cronenburg, you’d realize the last thing he cares about is redemption.
Of course, I shouldn’t expect much from anyone who says that a movie is bad, with the exception of a few minutes of gore.
Simone *winks* at Peter.
The main reason I am seeing this movie is because of Viggo. Awwwwww….
This movie is indicative of the shallow sways of fashionable film culture. In short… It was horrible. I am not at all surprised that hoards of people will flock to the theatres and convince themselves they are witnessing cinematic genius.. The basic premise is so low, it is almost plebian.. How long will Hollywood milk the ignorant public with the same bad guy (with redeeming qualities) theme.. shallow filmgoers love to be duped by the same tricks over and over again….
I will end with this quote… It certainly applies to the quality of writing that I saw from History of Violence.
The reason the world is not in order is because superficial writing is increasing and concrete practice is declining. People advance with their own opinions, valuing what is novel and strange, in order to mislead the common folk and gain fame. They merely confuse people’s intelligence and dull people’s senses, so that people devote much of their time and energy to competing in conventional writing and flowery compositions in order to achieve fame; they no longer remember that there are such things as honoring the fundamental, valuing truth, and returning to simplicity and purity.
Wang Yangming
Believe me, Simone, it´s worth spending your money. When many people agree a film it´s bad, it has to have something good. And viceversa.
I haven´t ever seen a bad movie from David Cronemberg. And I can proudly say I have seen EVERY movie of this man.
Of course those teenagers who love Joss Whedon shouldn´t see movies like this.
Nuff said!
SAVE YOUR MONEY. This was the worst movie I’ve seen in a long time, yet the mainstream reviewers seem to think it√¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s fairly good. I can’t stress enough how bad it was. At points in the movie where you should have felt an emotional pull, people were scoffing/laughing. The only conversation I heard on the way out of the theatre matched my own thoughts… “Horrible.” If nothing else, the movie was good for a laugh. I can’t believe Viggo was on the Daily Show saying, “this is the best movie I’ve ever made.” Obviously he’s been paid to say that.
You couldn’t pay me to see this again! It was just HORRIBLE.
Should I still see this movie or just go and see something else?
It would make my day if I could meet personally with the past 8 reviewers and shake each of their hands. They have all tried, in vain, to find the correct words to describe how terrible this movie is and I applaud their efforts. Honestly, I actually recommend people to see this movie just so they can appreciate the difficulty in articulating how horrid this film really is. This film displays, but is certainly not limited to, the following faults and deficiencies:
– irrelevant character development: What was the point of the dragged out opening scene!? It goes on forever to illustrate trivial details about a motel robbery by characters that have almost NOTHING to do with the movie.
– gratuitous sex scenes: Everyone in the theatre was laughing at how terrible and inappropriate these scenes were. I mean, the audience got the point within the first 30secs that they were about to fuck. Is it necessary to drag the scene on for like 5 minutes after the fact? Yeah, I know people 69 when they fuck, and so do 95% of the people that are over 14. It is NOT appropriate to spend precious, relevant movie minutes belaboring the obvious.
– inappropriate, contrived nudity: Sometimes, nudity fits into a scene and is passable as appropriate and tasteful, and sometimes, it seems extremely contrived, clumsy, and borderline vulgar. I guess you know which category this movie’s nudity scenes fall into.
– terrible plot flow/development: The plot seems so choppy that you’d think the director forgot to edit the damn thing. Some of the scenes are so random that they leave you thinking you fell asleep at some point in the movie and woke up half an hour later.
– credibility: Yes, I know this is a movie, but I seriously doubt that if Ed Harris was planning on killing “Joey”, he would have taken the time to ask him if he “had any last words”. By the same token, if Richie really wanted Joey dead, perhaps he would have just shot him, instead of trying to have him garroted (seeing as how he IS a deadly assassin). Pretty amazing how Joey dodges bullets too, eh?
– terrible characters/casting: Were they for real with that “Richie” character? Could they not find anyone better than Maria Bello? The mullet bully? Was this movie on a tight budget?
I really could go on forever about what a steaming pile of donkey dung this movie is, but I believe I’ve identified enough elements that drive the point home. Thanks to those who took the time to rip this movie apart, it made the small segment of my life and the 10 bucks I wasted feel somewhat worth it.
Awful movie, I’ve never been so fooled by critical reviews in my life. Completely random gratuitous sex scenes thrown in to try and save the cliche plot, unbelievable [in a bad way] acting, wasted characters not developed at all, unreal dialogue, etc., etc., etc. Viggo Mortensen better get his ass in gear if he hopes to make up the tradgedies that are Hildalgo and this worthless pile of cow dung.
I agree completely. I am usually easily entertained and I seriously considered walking out myself. We laughed through the entire movie which seemed to last for hours. We finally got out realizing it was under 2 hours long and couldn’t believe it. This was a huge waste of money, time, film, popcorn, coke….blablablah. This was the worst movie EVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I’ve never been fooled by a trailer so badly. From the trailer you’d think the ‘A History of Violence’ would show you something. I feel obliged to warn you not to be fooled. With the exception of a couple minutes of gore, the movie was HORRENDOUS.
this is the worst fucking movie ever. the ending is the worst fucking ending ever. the only thing keeping me from leaving the theater was the intense amounts of blood
Horrible horrible horrible horrible horrible movie.
I cannot say enough times how horrible this movie was.
simply awful in every respect, dialogue, casting, plot development, believability, direction, editing, pacing…the whole thing was shit.
Did anyone else notice the “tail” that Viggo appears to have during the sex scene on the stairs?
I feel like I’ve been “Punked”….this has got to be one of the worst films with the most 5 star reviews I’ve ever seen…can we say poor casting? can we say idiotic plot development? can we say over acted and gratuitous sex scenes, predictable and over-tried….really, was this Ashton Kutchner’s best punk ever?…
this movie honestly sucked, whats with the spontanous crying, throwing up? And the father son relationship was so slack. The mullet bully? I honestly don’t think the director of this pile of shit, no’s a lot about highschools, I mean honestly. The gay brother scenes, the viscous disgusting sex scenes featuring the UGLYEST actress, with flapjack breasts, and the .5 second nude scene? WTF how inappropriate, and shave for God’s sake. I saw this movie on the big screen, and the entire theatre laughed the entire time, Never in my life have I seen a movie trying so hard to be serious, and failing at the same time. Is it a comedy? no one in the theatre could tell, I heard the words “Oh my, thats gay”, and “gross” (nude seen) , and random comments about how much this movie sucked, on my way out. the director of this “movie” needs to be shot.
Did you hear the story that Cronenberg actually brought his wife on set and had sex with her in front of the cast to show them how it was done? That man…
Viggo Mortensen and Ed Harris in one movie? Heck, count me in! ;-)
Can’t wait to see this!
This is a great flick. One of the year’s best in my opinion. While Broken Flowers and L’enfant were good, A History of Violence should have won the Palm D’or at Cannes. If I recall right, it got a much longer and louder standing ovation.