A History of Violence

[4 High]

I loved this, but im a big Cronenberg fan.

[fish2plus2]

I liked this movie very much. Darwinism baby.

[Peter666]

Like so many modern films, it tries to be significant but lacks punch due to unsympathetic characters and a sometimes incredulous plot.

But the film was watchable because it at least attempted to have some characters and a plot, unlike "Spider", which is one of the most boring films ever made.

[HoldingFolding]

William Hurt
Worst. Gangster. Ever.

I thought the movie was OK up until his farcical entrance, what were they thinking when they cast him?

[pauliewalnuts]

[ QUOTE ]
William Hurt
Worst. Gangster. Ever.

I thought the movie was OK up until his farcical entrance, what were they thinking when they cast him?

[/ QUOTE ]

Couldnt agree more. His character was one of the most ridiculous I've ever seen. It was like the movie turned into Walker: Texas Ranger as soon as Viggo got to his brother's mansion. The dialogue in that scene was unbelievably bad.

[bigt439]

Two of my house mates saw this movie together and when they came back home they couldn't stop talking about how amazing it was. I considered them to be pretty solid judges of movies and started to get pretty excited about it. When I saw it I felt that it was almost laughably bad. Having said that, I probably would have been mildly entertained and given it a "meh" review had it not been so hyped up, but man was I expecting more.

The plot is over the top and uncreative and the acting is pretty average. The ending is terrible and the complete lack of any sort of twist at any point is pretty dissapointing. You can figure out where the movie is going from the title alone, and if you couldn't, they gave you ample foreshadowing to figure it out. Very average all around and that's being generous.

[entertainme]

[ QUOTE ]
Dead Ringers is a masterpiece, as is Videodrome.

Spider, The Brood and The Fly are very good movies, as are some others he's made.

A History of Violence was interesting to me, but not great.

[/ QUOTE ]

Videodrome is high on the list of freakiest movies I've ever seen. It was a really really long time ago, but I remember it being very disturbing.

[Borodog]

The hate for this movie is surprising to me. It certainly wasn't great by any stretch of the imagination, but for what it was, it was an enjoyable flick.

[UMTerp]

I think the "hate", if you can call it that, was based on all the critical acclaim it got. I watched it as soon as it got released to DVD last year (this year?) because it looked "different" from most of the movies that get those kind of reviews. Was it good? Sure, it was better than your average drama/thriller movie. I was entertained, and I certainly don't think it was a waste of 2 hours by any stretch.

But for the life of me, I can't understand where this: http://moviecitynews.com/awards/2006.../00_chart.html came from. It wasn't that good. And how William Hurt got on Oscar nomination for 10 minutes of goofiness on the screen still baffles me.

So did I "hate" it? No, not by any stretch. But I do think it was the most overrated movie of 2005.

[fish2plus2]

William Hurts oscar nomination was unusual. He most have banged some of the people in charge of picking them. That said, I really liked this movie right from the beginning all the way to the end.