Great film.I did feel there was something missing, but I didn't realize until the end of the film.They needed to explain Toms past more (maybe in the form of flashbacks or something), to tie the movie together better.You keep getting the feeling as you are watching it that it is leading up to showing you something from his past, but it never does.That was the only thing I thought hurt the movie.I loved the violence and nudity, (adds to the shock effect) and overall gave this movie an A-.Viggo Mortensen is climbing up my list of favorite actors.Hopefully there will be an extended directors cut or something like that released on dvd and help fill in some of the story.

Well that was something. I almost feel like calling it a bizarre masterpiece, but theres a few things I dislike about the movie, i'll write a review tomorrow but i'd have to give it an A- right now. All i'll say now is that Viggo deserves a nod no question about it, i'll be happy with just that since I feel that it will get totally shut out come oscar time.

This is certainly David Cronenberg's most accessible storyline in years, if not ever. Is that a good thing? Well, I say boo-yah! The theme of violence is very thoroughly, not to mention violently, explored. I really enjoyed this movie, and would have given it highest marks, except for the unfortunate choice of Viggo Mortensen as the lead. Sheesh! This guy is the male equivalent of Jessica Simpson - how does he keep gettin' work?!? The rest of the cast was outstanding - MmmmmMaria Bello (!), Ed Harris (natch!), and William Hurt (we don't see nearly enough of that guy these days!). Very, very well done.

4 out of 5.

For those that have seen it...

Is the 69 scene really that bad? I mean, by friend's mom is actually forbidding him to see it (and he's allowed to see R-rated movies) because she heard about this 69 scene, but is it really that bad? I bet it's no more than a couple of seconds and people are exaggerating, but can someone answer?

How old is your friend? If he's older than 16-then he's parentally whipped REALLY badly I'm 16, and other than illegal substances, I don't see how my parents could enforce any kind of censorship on me.

He's 16.

And, he's usually allowed to see R-rated movies, but I just don't get why he can't see this. Just seeing if I can get an answer from someone here, since torrino won't tell me.

It's realistic, I suppose, but you don't see anything graphic that I recall.

Is it long, though? I read somewhere that one of the scenes clocks in at about five minutes.

I'm excited.

It's a very specific type of sex scene, what with the intensity of the violence - not necessarily your typical 16 year old fantasy...

The 69 part of the sex scene goes on for no more then a few seconds and you dont see beaver or penis. Then theres another sex scene that last quite a bit, straight up viggo pounding his wife on the stairs, but yeah the 69 is nothing shocking, it goes by in a few seconds, felt kinda odd seeing that though cause you didnt really expect them to do that, kinda funny actually.

It's suggestive as all hell, but not really graphic. It leaves the X rated parts to the imagination.

It's an odd, yet sometimes brilliant film. A History of Violence is more than what I had hoped for. It's smart, sick, and entertaining all in one package. From the moment at the motel in the beginning (or whatever it was) to the less than stellar finale (unfortunately), my eyes were glued to the screen. Violence features some top-notch, Oscar-worthy performances that better not be overlooked. Viggo Mortenson played a convincing Tom Shall/Joey Cusack. It's kind of hard to tell what "mode" or frame-of-mind he's in during different parts of the film, making it better trying to guess whether he's still the American Hero, father-of-the-year type of guy or the deranged mobster from Philly (representin'!). William Hurt was also fantastic, despite having the smallest role of the main actors in the film. Another convincing (and entertaining) performance as Richie Cusack. Props to Ed Harris as well, even though I've seen better from him. He was kinda creepy, though (with the eye and all...). Sexy Maria Bello also had one hell of a performance as Tom Shall's wife, as well as a few interesting...scenes. Speaking of the infamous sex scenes in the film, I felt that it was wayyyy overhyped. Necessary? Not really. Especially for a scene to go on so long... it just wanted really that important. Nothing THAT extreme with those scenes at all. What is a real jaw-dropper, though (and I'm not exaggerating - my jaw dropped), was the death scenes. It works *so* much better than other films because it actually looks realistic and not fake like other movies do. Not like it's hard to watch any of them (for me, anyways), but it's intense stuff, and the title is well-earned. If I had any problem with it at all, it was the last 30 minutes. Unfortunately, most people are right when they said the last half an hour is very rushed, not everything is explained well-enough, and the finale was a bit of a letdown. Not quite the best film of the year, but definitely memorable, and definitely deserving of Oscar-recognition in the acting departments. B+

I find it telling that this horrible excuse for a mother will let her kid go to movies with this much violence but has a problem with a 69 sex scene between a wife and a husband in the film.

You can print this comment out and show it to her.

I dont know if I really had a problem with the ending, it's sometimes better to leave things to the imagination. Also the sex scene is basically there to show the emotion of it all, that sex scene on the stairs basically shows the anger and at the sametime the love they have.

Well the sex scenes are there to highlight the differences in Tom's character. Tom/Joe's sex life sort of pivots around his wife, who is more adventureous.

His Tom persona is through and through less agressive, even sexually... Joe practically rapes her. The wife falls between. I think this is what makes her capable of accepting Joe in many ways.

I don't think the Tom persona is a put on either. There was that moment before the 69 where he was sitting on the bed alone. He is completely and utterly absorbed into Tom. He is two people, he's not just lying.

BJs Grade:

A-

Not bad, Viggo was outstanding

Agree, I think the two sex scenes were used to contrast the changes in Mortensen and Bello's marriage after the revelation of his history comes out.

I think this is where the ending is questioned - where do the parents and the oldest kid go from here. All of them changed.

On the stairs, he did rape her. He first choked her than as she was crawling up the stairs smacking him, he forced himself on her. Her seeming acceptance didn't really come to the middle of the act. Even at the end, she wasn't fine again.

On the characters, I don't think they needed any more explaining.

Ed Harris was some kind of mob made man, William Hurt was some kind of middle man climbing the mob ladder. Viggio was some kind of killer. It doesn't matter why Viggio got mad at Ed Harris.

The story had more to do with him in the present with having that history of violence in balancing his new name / family and cleaning up those who wanted revenge.

*****************************

but the story isn't over. Didn't it seem that William Hurt was doing it to stay in someone's favor. Others should have known about him and probably wouldn't be happy about some of his killings.

That's an interesting interpretation. Incorrect, but interesting. Mature sexuality between long term partners, especially those living through this extreme life experience, may have depths of anger and violence often not revealed...

Did you see the movie?

Where is the line? In that scene, when he started there was no acceptance. How do you not know she was leaving him.

I don't think he raped her either. They were beating the shit out of each other but pretty early on she gave into the sexual advance. I thought that was pretty obvious.

I don't just read this board opinions from KJ, and nobody on my other board seems to think he raped her either.

No big deal but I was just going on with your practically raped.

I think technically, in real life, that would have been rape, that is all.

It wasn't rape. It was simply fucking instead of the regular lovemaking (for example, their infamous 69). The fucking just happened to come on the heels of a serious fight.

By her or him? She was full out assaulting him...