A History of Violence

(2005) dir. David Cronenberg
viewed: 04/08/06

I had been meaning to see this film in the theater and never made it. It was on a lot of top 10 lists and recommended to me by many people by word of mouth. I like Cronenberg pretty well, myself. It seemed like a pretty sure bet.

And it is. It’s a good, solid noir. It’s well-filmed, mysterious, and Viggo Mortensen, Ed Harris, and others are very good in it. I liked it. I recommend it.

But though it was solidly “good”, I don’t know that it was “great”. The only semi-not-good thing about it is Maria Bello, who probably performs the most unbelievable vomiting scene that I can recall. She looks good. She looks right for the part and has her moments. I think it’s just one of those “expectations” things. When you hear a lot of great things, you expect more. And the converse of course works too. Even though it was good, it was a little of a let-down.

That said, it’s still good stuff. There seems, particularly from the title, an idea of violence as a legacy or something. There are aspects of this in the film. Though mostly a pacifist, Mortensen’s ability and capacity for violence are returned upon him. His son embodies this as does his treatment of his wife in one scene. Violence ultimately solves the problems for them. This is the sort of thing that is sometimes explored in Westerns. And in a sense, this could easily have been turned into a Western in many ways. I don’t know that the film makes a specific commentary on this or if it does that it’s very strong. It’s imbued in the film’s title and it’s a key point that many people recognize. Many people thought that this film was pretty violent. In reality, there are a few key scenes and shots, whose potency is effected by the strength of the narrative and the film-making. I mean, has anyone ever seen a Takeshi Miike film? Violence is…ah nevermind.