A History of Violence

3

SteveN.Oct 3, 2005

Action scenes were very good, sex scenes were laughable, entire audience was booing at the end.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

AdamOct 3, 2005

Just a horrible movie. How could the critics be so wrong on this? How could they almost unanimously support such a horrible movie?

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

MonicaFOct 3, 2005

Are you guys kiddding? This was a HORRIBLE movie. The plot was horrible, the pace was horrible, the idea was horrible. It was slow and predictable. When we left the theater EVERYONE was saying how bad it was and atleast 15 people got up and Are you guys kiddding? This was a HORRIBLE movie. The plot was horrible, the pace was horrible, the idea was horrible. It was slow and predictable. When we left the theater EVERYONE was saying how bad it was and atleast 15 people got up and walked out DURING the movie. The ONLY saving grace in this movie is William Hurts 5 minutes on screen.. YES 5 MINUTES!!! Do not see this movie.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

PeterGOct 3, 2005

I agree with Chuck 76, except that I think it wasn't even worth a 6. Pointless story, dragging pace (96 minutes felt like 180), gratuitous violence (that just didn't WORK), sex scenes that lent almost nothing to the story (and I agree with Chuck 76, except that I think it wasn't even worth a 6. Pointless story, dragging pace (96 minutes felt like 180), gratuitous violence (that just didn't WORK), sex scenes that lent almost nothing to the story (and could have been cut by about 90%), amateurish plot twists, wretched character development, completely expected and uninspired opening. Not even good (not great, but reasonable) performances by Mortenson, Bello, and Harris are worth much. William Hurt is utterly laughable. The children are utterly forgettable. The villains are utterly ridiculous. And before you say "You just didn't get it", I had no trouble enjoying Sin City (which was chalked full of violence) or "getting" something like Requiem for a Dream (which dealt with a weighty subject much more intelligently). A History of Violence is disgusting not for its treatment and demonstration of violence, but for its offense to the senses and sensibilities of its audience. I couldn't wait for this to be over.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

JustinTOct 3, 2005

Bad acting, bad dialogue and writing, unsympathetic characters. Inexplicably changes direction and themes halfway through the movie, and the scenes of violence seem randomly punctuated throughout the film. Every predictable plot twist plays Bad acting, bad dialogue and writing, unsympathetic characters. Inexplicably changes direction and themes halfway through the movie, and the scenes of violence seem randomly punctuated throughout the film. Every predictable plot twist plays out exactly as expected. Ed Harris and Viggo Mortenen give especially bad performances, but they may not have had much to work with in the beginning. The threadbare story was excruciatingly drawn out and uninteresting. The scenes with the high school bully seemed particularily contrived and stale, and the sex scenes definitely don't have the intended effect. And talk about product placement.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

RobT.Oct 3, 2005

The story was not very interesting especially once the plot unfolded. Ed Harris, William Hurt, and Mario Bello did a great job acting; the others were below average probably due to the inconsistency of how their characters developed. Final The story was not very interesting especially once the plot unfolded. Ed Harris, William Hurt, and Mario Bello did a great job acting; the others were below average probably due to the inconsistency of how their characters developed. Final thought: A disappointing film that was loaded with potential.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

1

OwenDOct 3, 2005

This movie has replaced Alexander the Great as the worst movie I've ever seen. Poor acting, poor directing, and poor photography. After reading all of these glowing reviews, I persuaded some of my friends to see this movie with me. Now This movie has replaced Alexander the Great as the worst movie I've ever seen. Poor acting, poor directing, and poor photography. After reading all of these glowing reviews, I persuaded some of my friends to see this movie with me. Now I'm contimplating suing my city's newspaper for recommending this film. I've suffered inrreconsilabe damages, for the loss of my two hours that I will never get back. BAD MOVIE!!!… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

BettyW.Oct 3, 2005

This was a really bad movie, do not even waste your money to rent it.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

LisaR.Oct 3, 2005

Graphic violence and nudity thrown in to distract the viewers from a predictable movie headed towards stupidity as soon as Stall runs (hobbles) home to protect his family. Just plain stupid. The only worth-watching part was when William Hurt Graphic violence and nudity thrown in to distract the viewers from a predictable movie headed towards stupidity as soon as Stall runs (hobbles) home to protect his family. Just plain stupid. The only worth-watching part was when William Hurt entered the picture. Amazing how many people claim it's the best picture of the year. Tell me what's it like living with the mentality of a character in THE EMPEROR'S NEW CLOTHES? Learn to open your eyes and think for yourselves.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

0

MorganM.Oct 3, 2005

This is one of the worst movies I have ever seen. In a movie every scene is supposed to relate to either the end or the charactor or a turning point to either the postive or nagative. To have sex scenes with none of the above criteria is at This is one of the worst movies I have ever seen. In a movie every scene is supposed to relate to either the end or the charactor or a turning point to either the postive or nagative. To have sex scenes with none of the above criteria is at less bad writing and is more then likly titlation(SP) for it's own sake. Unfortuneatly, even sex for sex sakes they don't manage to do well. Mortensen and Bello are just not attractive.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

KristinaE.Oct 2, 2005

Bad. Boring. Repetitve. Bland. Unconvincing. Comic book and dramatic script at wrong times. Emotions were toyed with. Very drawn out, contained not much more than an exact replica of the trailer. Funny, to the point W.Hurt = A.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

GlenFOct 2, 2005

The violence is fun but the acting is laughable at times. Very surprised at the praise this movie recieved. It's also very predictable.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

3

CesarOct 2, 2005

Just saw it, and generally unimpressed. Although the performances are very good, the pace is broken and the violence gets so its laugh out loud funny. Not so good for a psychological drama.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

MichaelD.Oct 2, 2005

Hugely overblown. It has a great story but it develops far too quickly and nonsensically. Nothing is natural or real in the dialogue. Cliches abound. I believe it tries to be too many things. For example, it seems like an unhappy marriage of Hugely overblown. It has a great story but it develops far too quickly and nonsensically. Nothing is natural or real in the dialogue. Cliches abound. I believe it tries to be too many things. For example, it seems like an unhappy marriage of an earthly thriller and a "Kill Bill"-style thriller, that leaves you feeling detached from either aspect. Still, interesting and worth the rental.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

3

ChrisC.Oct 2, 2005

I'm a big fan of Viggo Mortensen & Ed Harris, but I thought this movie stunk big-time. I too am amazed it's getting great reviews. 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. I too am amazed it's getting great reviews. I'm usually a very forgiving movie goer, but this one literally had me shaking my head several times. I feel the acting was sub-par by the minor characters, like the town cop (I've seen soaps with better acting). And the dialog was so contrived & stiff. It sounded rehearsed. Plus, the worst part was the family reaction to the big secret. They loved their father dearly, then they turned on him (on a dime)? C'mon, now. He saved their lives, and he's been a loving husband for over 15 years. This is simply retarded.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

NickHOct 2, 2005

Did you like "The Exorcism of Emily Rose"? Planning on seeing "Into the Blue" this week? Have you seen, and loved, "Just Like Heaven" and "cry_wolf"? Then don't see this movie. If you like your movies generic, formulaic, and uninspired Did you like "The Exorcism of Emily Rose"? Planning on seeing "Into the Blue" this week? Have you seen, and loved, "Just Like Heaven" and "cry_wolf"? Then don't see this movie. If you like your movies generic, formulaic, and uninspired stay at home and rent "Robots". This is, hands down, one of the best movies of the year. Cronenberg strikes again with another whacked-out and amazing movie. Mortensen proves he's more than Aragorn in his great preformance. Hurt, Harris, and Bello are great in their supporting roles. Realize that this movie is NOT for everyone, before you go. Just because it's called "A History of Violence" doesn't mean it's an action movie, get it through your head before you go. It's not conventional, it's way out there... but, if you didn't know that when you heard Cronenberg in the trailers - stay out of the theatres.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

DannW.Oct 1, 2005

I am absolutely stunned that people love this movie. The film is resoundingly terrible from the first scene in which the family speaks dialog that is laughable with pacing which is excruciating. Both child actors are so bad they are hard to I am absolutely stunned that people love this movie. The film is resoundingly terrible from the first scene in which the family speaks dialog that is laughable with pacing which is excruciating. Both child actors are so bad they are hard to watch. On exiting from the theater, I heard another patron say, "This is a whole new breed of terrible movie," and I agree. Both Viggo and Bello are good enough actors that they are able to give some credibility to their unspeakable dialog, but they cannot save this film. The pacing is slow, the "suspense" is tedious, and there is nothing "deep" to be had.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

JayM.Oct 1, 2005

Cronenberg's most complete and successful film to date, fabulous performances by the whole cast, wow wauw! So not a Hollywood production, this is a @#$! real movie!

0 of 0 users found this helpful

0

ElieOct 1, 2005

This was the worst movie I have ever seen. The writing was the biggest bunch of hack tripe I have ever heard. I cannot believe even one critic liked this. Don't see this. It will make you angry.

0 of 1 users found this helpful

10

AlexE.Oct 1, 2005

You don't realize just how much this movie has affected you until it is over, the credits are rolling, Howard Shore's subtly haunting score is playing softly, and you realize that for the first time in a long time, a movie has You don't realize just how much this movie has affected you until it is over, the credits are rolling, Howard Shore's subtly haunting score is playing softly, and you realize that for the first time in a long time, a movie has caused you to feel physically and emotionally uncomfortable. The final scene in this film is heartbreaking, chilling, and incredibly unsettling. 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. That one scene is enough to put this movie well onto my "Best of 2005" list, but the rest is what really cements its place. Cronenberg plays the audience like a fiddle for an hour and a half, taking our desensitization against violence on film and throwing it in our faces so that we can no longer look away. The experience of watching this in a crowded theater is exhilarating, as it seems the entire audience is sharing something very, very powerful. Great work from Viggo Mortensen, Maria Bello, William Hurt, and Ed Harris. See this if you have wondered where serious mainstream cinema has been hiding.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

MarcR.Oct 1, 2005

I don't get to the theater as much anymore, but when I do I want my precious time, not to mention almost ten bucks a ticket, to be worth it. So I check out what the critics and others are saying and try to give the pros their respect I don't get to the theater as much anymore, but when I do I want my precious time, not to mention almost ten bucks a ticket, to be worth it. So I check out what the critics and others are saying and try to give the pros their respect and the benefit of the doubt. But every time I pass up a movie rated poorly for one that is critically acclaimed I wind up sitting there wishing I went to see the movie all the critics panned. This movie was slow, unevenly directed, cinematically washed out, predictable and ultimately not very entertaining. Next time I go to the movies I'm going to skip the due diligence and ignore the critics until after I've seen it. Maybe I'll be pleasantly surprised and get my money's worth.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

JerrryS.Oct 1, 2005

The movie was done halfway thru and it kept going on. They add a main charater with no background near the end just to kill him. What was with the last scene where the passed the meatloaf and then it ends. Just like meatloaf, this movie was The movie was done halfway thru and it kept going on. They add a main charater with no background near the end just to kill him. What was with the last scene where the passed the meatloaf and then it ends. Just like meatloaf, this movie was plain and a was of a meal. Not even worth a DVD rental.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

7

JudyT.Sep 30, 2005

Undecided whether or not I really liked this movie, but the acting elevated the predictable story. It's an incomplete movie with an unsatisfying ending.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

lucas.Sep 29, 2005

Beautiful, disturbing, insanely multilayered story, pierce right through the heart of the effect of violence (perpetrated or undergoed) on "normal" people. Never backs down for a moment, never wimps out, but the violence (and there's Beautiful, disturbing, insanely multilayered story, pierce right through the heart of the effect of violence (perpetrated or undergoed) on "normal" people. Never backs down for a moment, never wimps out, but the violence (and there's some very bloody moment) is not the "cool" variant seen in about one million movies since "Reservoir Dogs" - it's swift, merciless, scary. Outstanding performance from everyone involved (Cronenberg confirm his status as the best director of actors around), and I appreciated immensely the lack of any visual pretension - there's plenty of style here, but it's all about the substance. Don't dare to miss this one!… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

8

JohnB.Sep 29, 2005

Fine acting. Cronenberg both gets under the skin and forces viewers to think a bit more than most films. Unnecessarily graphic but worth the price of admission. Wonderful side characters and superb performance by Mortenson. Plot a bit thin.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

jaket.Sep 28, 2005

Great movie...I just saw Broken Flowers and was bored to death by Bill Murray blankly staring at a television set for two hours. That was a pointless piece of garbage. This film is Broken Flower's foil. Although the movie gets a bit Great movie...I just saw Broken Flowers and was bored to death by Bill Murray blankly staring at a television set for two hours. That was a pointless piece of garbage. This film is Broken Flower's foil. Although the movie gets a bit strange midway, it all comes together in the end. I was suprised at how fast the plot was moving, but by the end of the movie, I realized that this was 97 minutes of pure entertainment. Superb acting (especially from William Hurt), and ingenious use of violence makes this film one of the year's best. If you are tired of Thumbsucker, Broken Flowers, Garden State and tired movies about middle aged men finding themselves in the midst of a midlige crisis, do yourself a favor and see this movie.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

Chuck76Sep 27, 2005

I'm really surprised at the ratings this film is getting, I thought the acting was terrible at times and the plot as thin a cigarette paper. One of thoses movies you'll look back on and think "it wasn't that good actually". I'm really surprised at the ratings this film is getting, I thought the acting was terrible at times and the plot as thin a cigarette paper. One of thoses movies you'll look back on and think "it wasn't that good actually". Very average.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

ChristinaV.Sep 27, 2005

There is not one wasted moment in this superb film.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

DeWayneP.Sep 25, 2005

Excellent film. May not be everyone's cup of tea, because it's talks about our relationship to violence and how it reflects who we are as a society. Seeing how seductive our temptations are towards violence and how we use it for Excellent film. May not be everyone's cup of tea, because it's talks about our relationship to violence and how it reflects who we are as a society. Seeing how seductive our temptations are towards violence and how we use it for sexual fulfilment, revenge, as well as how we decide right (whistle-blower) from wrong (stool pigeon), or is it the other way around? One should approach this film not as an entertaining enterprise i.e. a Mel Gibson film, but as a film to give us pause and reflection as to who we are and have been. And it's okay, we can be reflective and critical and still be American...really...It's only a movie.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

MontySep 24, 2005

Intriguing but ultimately pointless yarn - about a small-town family thrust into a cycle of violence - is elevated somewhat by solid cast and the assured hand of director David Cronenberg. Viggo Mortensen plays gentle family man, Tom Stahl, Intriguing but ultimately pointless yarn - about a small-town family thrust into a cycle of violence - is elevated somewhat by solid cast and the assured hand of director David Cronenberg. Viggo Mortensen plays gentle family man, Tom Stahl, accused of leading a double life after he manages to overpower two killers who appear in his diner. Cronenberg, as usual, strives for profound themes but he never manages to get the plot or characters out of first gear.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

NormG.Sep 24, 2005

The backdrop of History of Violence is a small quiet Indiana town and family. So when the Violence comes the contrast is sharp and startling. You just don't know what is lurking below the surface. Though the story is predictable, the The backdrop of History of Violence is a small quiet Indiana town and family. So when the Violence comes the contrast is sharp and startling. You just don't know what is lurking below the surface. Though the story is predictable, the direction and performances keeps it from degenerating into tired gratuitous action-movie clichés. The scene that ends the film at first left me puzzled then it chilled and soon became almost redemptive. You won't know what hit you.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

JaySep 23, 2005

Masterful compelling, unpredictable, intelligent, funny and of course violent with a purpose, this masterpiece of an art film diguising as a mainstream modern western dtamatic thriller is by far one if not the best film of the year, Viggo,Masterful compelling, unpredictable, intelligent, funny and of course violent with a purpose, this masterpiece of an art film diguising as a mainstream modern western dtamatic thriller is by far one if not the best film of the year, Viggo, Maria, Ed Harris William Hur, Cronenberg and the rest of the cast and crew should be proud of such contribution and collaboration of producing great art.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

AaronSep 23, 2005

"A History Of Violence" is something of a masterpiece and just about the best film Cronenberg has ever made. To reveal anything more would do the film a disservice. So far, it's the best picture of 2005 and something really spectacular "A History Of Violence" is something of a masterpiece and just about the best film Cronenberg has ever made. To reveal anything more would do the film a disservice. So far, it's the best picture of 2005 and something really spectacular will have to come out to displace it as such for me.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

EricS.Sep 23, 2005

Saw this at the Toronto International Film Festival. Phenomenal! Some of Cronenberg's best work yet, which is saying quite a lot. Feels like equal parts classic western, gangster film, family drama, small town Frank Capra movie, coming Saw this at the Toronto International Film Festival. Phenomenal! Some of Cronenberg's best work yet, which is saying quite a lot. Feels like equal parts classic western, gangster film, family drama, small town Frank Capra movie, coming of age story, and black comedy. Easily the best movie I've seen so far this year. It will be hard to surpass it.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

A History of Violence

User Reviews