A History of Violence

Hardly credible fight choreography that is commonplace in Amerikkkan films extolling violence in a culture that pretends to be revolted by it. Plot focuses on whether the central character has a hidden past rather than whether these gangsters are trying to whack a guy for whacking their “made men” who think he’s somebody else. The effects of violence on the family was worth exploring, but the film made that a side show.

Most disappointing film I’ve seen in a long time. Strong cast, but the dialogue is bizarre, contrived and forced, and everyone’s actions inexplicable. I felt like Tommy Wiseau must have written a second movie I didn’t know about. For instance, it becomes apparent that Tom/Joey maybe had a past no one knows about, and suddenly his innocent wimpy son who loves him turns and accuses him of being a horrible gangster? How could he have known the nature of his father’s previous life? We never even find that out, really. Then the local cop comes to question him, having decided that he must have a double life. The wife says no, he is who he says he is. The cop and says, “well I’ll be damned“, and goes away. But while the audience knew that the wife might not support his claim, the cop didn’t know! The cop would expect her to support Tom! She’s his wife! Why would the cop suddenly say what he did, then smile and say “call me if you need anything at all” like everybody’s friends again? Then Tom/Joey goes to Philadelphia and kills his mobster brother, comes home and his wife takes him back into the fold. But she didn’t even know he went to Philadelphia! He basically had just raped her! She acts out a lovely subtle change of heart, but for no reason we can see! All he did was disappear for a couple days and come back in the same stinky clothes! God help me, it was cathartic writing that, but I still may never recover. Viggo, how could you? :b

Super cheesy and weird.

During the first part of the film I thought that I was watching Viggo Mortensen with Stephen McHattie (Leland). The actor playing McHattie's accomplice looked so much like Mortensen that he could have been a double. That caused a big problem. Why didn't Leland recognize Tom? This was because of just plain idiotic casting. A major fail. Because of that I spent half the movie wondering if they were the same guy. Also, Leland was dispatched in such a way that he could have reappeared as a mute - a concept that also hung over the movie. Were it not for that, this movie would have been better. As it is, it's great and I recommend it, but the two above mistakes keep it from being a 5.

This is a mob crime drama especially interesting as a construction from horror or monster movie tropes. I agree very much with the Joe Morgenstern (WSJ) RT quote. There are “miscalculations" in some scenes and dialogue that caused in me, for example, the same type of reaction I might have in a monster movie when watching a lead character make some predictably fateful or fatal move or blunder. That said, this same feature makes some of the dialogue, characters, and sub plotting, come off stilted or unreal for a given situation if taken as attempt at genuine drama. Regardless, the movie makes fun heroes to watch throughout.

Predicitable, ackward staircase sex sceen and a very odd ending. Graphic violence I will give you that, but otherwise a bad movie.

My adjectives for it: enthralling, intimate, familiar, evocative, thought-provoking.

This movies is so predictable and full of cliches it is astounding it ever got made. It was a cringeworthy experience as I was embarrassed for the people in the movie to be forced to play these horrible parts with tired, recycled plot lines, with stereotype characters. Save your money.

Terrible. Poor acting. Fight scenes were scripted, edited (cut and pasted each blow), and amateur. Wish I could choose no stars.

The trailer was good. The film sucked. The characters are weak. The acting is weak. The story is lame and I just don't believe ANY of it. At least the score was adequate.