Anybody who seriously believes the all-important "wow" factor has gone missing from certain movies lately can now finally end their drawn-out disputes. "A History of Violence," put mildly, blew me clear out of my chair! David Cronenberg has totally redefined the action genre and shaped it into something all his own.

He casts Viggo Mortensen as Tom Stall, a quiet family man and small-town diner owner who quickly becomes a reluctant hero after decisively silencing two would-be thieves. This story soon draws the heated attention of mobster Carl Fogarty who, along with his loyal followers, seems to feel that Tom may somehow be linked to their organization's shady past. As these men begin to methodically encircle Tom's frightened family, tensions rise and personal suspicions skyrocket. Is Tom Stall really the loving, dedicated husband and father he so adamantly professes? Or has his forgotten and abandoned prior life come back to haunt him in ways he could never possibly imagine?

Discovering the answers to those two questions are what ultimately makes experiencing this barn-burner of a motion picture so much unapologetic fun! I cannot truthfully remember the last time a movie like this generated so much adrenaline-fueled excitement. The principal performers, between Mortensen, the wonderful Ed Harris, and William Hurt, are all standouts. But the pacing is absolutely phenomenal. This is a movie that very literally flies off the screen. Cronenberg throws so much at you throughout the entire film's 96-minute running time, and yet you're still left hungering for more. The violence is straight-ahead and in-your-face. It more than earns its coveted "R" rating.

As far as the DVD, itself....you couldn't ask for a better package. The "Acts of Violence" documentary, along with three other featurettes, does an exceptional job at breaking down the deeply-layered particulars of the film. And you even get to hear Cronenberg, himself, interject his own thoughts as they relate to the film's storied production.

This is an overall great movie and one you're not likely to forget anytime soon. I know I certainly won't!

Truly one of the worst films I've ever seen. The people who have posted the same really make sense on this one. Shockingly bad acting, dreadful dialogue, so cliche-ridden there isn't any point in watching it past the first 20 or 30 minutes - you know everything that is going to happen. And those first 20 or 30 minutes set the pace: they crawl by, as we are introduced to the family and their fellow smalltown Mayberry inhabitants, every one of them straight from Central Casting and the prop room. The same sheriff we've all seen a zillion times saying the same lines. The same town, same stoic Reluctant Hero that is the head of America's Stupidest Family unwittingly pursued by the bad guys in black cars - standard fare, all the way down the line. Totally implausible dialogue spoken between family members in nearly every scene. A soundtrack generic as they come, and sound editing that defies any sense of natural dynamics. BTW there is no "twist" in the plot. If you call it a plot. The lack thereof, however, does not dissuade this director from filling the "storyline" with as many non sequiturs as possible. There is no profound message here that hasn't been recycled in hundreds of made-for-TV movies, usually better. I'm quite surprised, as I enjoyed Eastern Promises pretty well.

A young MOB killer tries to have a new clean, normal life
and 20 years later when two small time robber / killers try to
hurt his diner employees, he reverts to boyhood 'skills'.
That gets him press and the MOB comes looking for him.
They find him and his teen age son
who doesn't fall short of the tree.
His brother is an east coast boss who tries to kill him when he tries to make peace there,too. Sort of a Shakespeare tragedy of all MOB dead on stage...
Any ending here can't be classically happy.

While somewhat predictable, it's a great movie. I loved it. It keeps you going. I'm glad I have this movie in my collection. My only complaint is the movie was not long enough. I think they should have given us a little more background on Tom,i.e., how he came to be in the
Witness Protection Program. Well directed and put together. I recommend this movie to people who like action.

two stars primarily because Viggo is theee only decent aspect of the film and almost "gets" the transformation from mundane, humble Indiana married for 20 years but has no clue how to make the bed when his wife is promising something "different?" to some tough guy from who knows where in Philly with the brothers mansion and Richie (Hurt) cannot believe that the Turf n Track is STILL STANDING and it looks like a 5* elegant restaurant and DANG that accent is well, all I can say is FIRE THE NUMBNUTz dialect coach...Ed Harris has seen lol better dayz but you just do not harass an enemy like that when u really mean to whack him....history of violence??? HUH? no correlation IMHO for any type of storyline that provokes insight or follow-up except snapping at threatening situations...if u wanna see great action scenes with double lives...go see TRUE LIES..sorry Viggo luved Hidalgo and have been a fan since WITNESS...the Cronenberg commentary was interesting that he NEVER EVER storyboards....whoa what a concept but I bet he couldn't sleep a wink thinking about all the bloodletting scenes, only time he came alive in the discussion...

I came into this movie expecting something engrossing and overall very rewarding, based on the word of what others have said about it. What I saw could only be called a mess. While I think Cronenberg is at many times a competent filmmaker, this is very much a terrible film. My biggest problem with it stems from the wife. She brings an unneccessary and ridiculous level of drama to every scene she's in, and really distracts from the plot. I wouldn't say that the film drags at any part, but what it does is ignore the aspects that would be the most interesting to the viewer. I was left wanting a lot more fight sequences, and possibly more interaction with the sheriff. It's sad that him and the brother were pushed aside in the story, as they could've in my opinion, saved the film from being a trainwreck. Bottom line, if you want to watch a good Cronenberg movie, give this a pass and check out some of his older stuff like Videodrome.

I finally got round to seeing this (on telly) and it's a great movie. Thoughtful, thought-provoking, unflinching. Cronenberg uses the theme of violence to explore other topics such as love, loyalty and redemption (notably all the family wear crosses). Excellent film, with great central performances from the always good Maria Bello and Viggo Mortensen.

I had seen this movie before, but wanted to own it. It will always be up there as one of my all time favorite movies. It has everything--action, violence (but not gratuitous), sex and a storyline that really makes one think about how we view violence, when it seems acceptable and who really is the "bad guy." The sex scene on the stairs was erotic without being "trashy." Very believable.

So much has been written about this film and the title. For most, the movie is about the way violence is encoded in our lives and how we all have an underlying current running through us. I think the movie is really the study of the relationship between the two main characters--Tom Stall (Viggo Mortensen) and Edie (Maria Bello).

These two actors are amazing the film, especially Bello, who deserves to become a household name. Their intereactions are always spot on as they drive the plot. The sideways glance, the tense look, the loving smile: every part means something.

These two characters are madly in love after seventeen or such years of marriage, and we see it through different ways. The first half of the movie is there to set up their relationship and the love they feel. But then everything is turned upside down, and we realize that these two people who have shared everything and love one another dearly really know nothing about what lies beneath. It's as if they have only shared a part of themselves.

It's this interaction and realization that makes the film so great. The plot almost seems beside the point; it's merely there to make use see the characters.

I give the film four stars instead of five because of some of the scenes were out of place, almost as if Cronenberg couldn't decide what kind of film to make. William Hurt is good at the end, for instance, but his character didn't fit. Watch the movie for the main characters' interactions and go along with the rest.

A lot has been written alread to discribe the plot and ideas of the film. I wish to only add that I consider this film a masterpiece. Yes, it is arguably too long, perhaps some unnecessary sex, unnecessary violence, but IMO, these are all within limits and not excessive and do contribute to the story.
The acting, filming, and themes are of film are amazingly well done. IMO, a modern masterpiece!
Highly recommended, but not to everyone.

I have no idea why people like this. When it comes to comic book movies, I always try to read the book first, and I LOVED "A History of Violence" (the graphic novel), so I thought I'd love this movie.

Boy was I wrong. The plot is like a spoof of the book. There's no real captivating moments or tension; events just happen bam-bam-bam. Viggo acting "crazed" actually had me laughing AT the character. The villains are terrible; again seeming more like a spoof of a real movie. I'm supposed take this seriously?

There are TWO too-long sex scenes that I ended up fast-forwarding through because they were BORING and POINTLESS. If I wanted to watch extremely watered-down with-your-clothes-on sex, I'd turn around in the movie theater. The scenes had nothing to do with the plot, and I do not recall such tedious moments in the book.

The ending was also terrible. The ending itself was stupid and cliche and the acting was again absolutely laughable. I've seen better portrayals of "scary crazy man" in high school musicals.

Apparently, a lot of people have a different opinion somehow. My advice? If you haven't seen it and want to, find a friend to borrow it from first, so you don't end up wasting money on a horrible movie.

I just rented and watched this movie, and I seriously can't believe the good reviews it's gotten, and not just from here. It's a movie with a plot so full of holes, it should have been called "Moth-eaten". Dumb overacting, silly scenes between Tom and Edie, and I don't believe for a minute it would have taken so long for the bad guys to find Tom, especially since he was living in a small town! A total waste of time, IMO.

Not the sort of desscription you'd expect from a typical thriller these days. Not a car chase in sight, no explosions and certainly not an action/adventure film. And hardly a happy, predictable ending either. So what exactly do we have?

The answer is a very good psychological thriller with a mobster background underlying the plot, but this is really of secondary importance. The whole film centres around an apparently happily married family man carving out a modest living for some years as a diner proprietor. But as the film draws you in, it eventually becomes clear there is a lot more going on beneath the surface of our humble protagonist than he is letting on. So it is basically a story of a man who had a secret past that by some sheer bad luck was to catch up with him, just when he thought the ghost of that past was safely buried.

David Cronenberg always makes interesting films, but AHOV is quite a departure from his familiar science fiction/horror projects over the last 3 decades. There is some gore present but a lot less than what Cronenberg fans have been used to. Instead, we have an absorbing plot and fine acting all round to keep this viewer and I suspect a lot more thriller fans totally engrossed.

Definitely recommended.

What a great movie! Viggo Mortensen was superb at showing what is going on in Tom Stall's head, in very subtle shades. Maria Bello plays the perfect counterpoint as his thoroughly believable wife - fine, fine acting. The casting is perfect throughout, and the acting is what carries this whole thing forward. I didn't want to see this movie because I don't normally enjoy movies with graphic violence, but this one was different. 5 stars all the way! I don't know why this movie is getting low reviews, must be the old art movie vs action movie expectation or something. This is one is art.

I really enjoyed this movie because it was well written, and was very believable.

I rate it a 4 because of the way the movie ended.

I won't give that part away; I'll let you see it for yourself.

Give it a shot. It's worth the price, and I'm sure you'll enjoy it.

Also remember this when reading a critic's critique: A critic is one with NO talent, judging those WITH talent.

--James Michael Collins--

I like viggo, but this was just awful. The acting was awful. The dialogue was awful. The required amount of belief that needed to be suspended was tremendous (it was not all that plausible a plot). Pacing could have been better. This was a huge disappointment for me, and I'm still shocked that this got rave reviews in various places. Really, a bad, bad movie. BTW, it has nothing to do with the violence. I don't mind violence :)

I will say the performances in this movie, particularly by Mortensen, Ed Harris and William Hurt are excellent. But c'mon, this movie is absurd. First, how can a "hitman" who has been out of commission for nearly 20 years somehow remember all these moves and execute them perfectly without a training regimine that would create at least some suspicion among his family?! Give me a break. This movie is ridiculous.

The movie was great up till the stupidest ending of a movie I ever saw. Ruined it for me.

In a small quiet town, diner owner Tom Stall (Viggo Mortensen) was just minding his business working until two criminals interrupt what happens to be closing time taking the diner hostage. Tom kills off the two crooks and becomes a local hero especially with his wife Edie (Maria Bello), son Jack (Ashton Holmes) and daughter Sarah (Heidi Hayes). However, a mysterious man named Carl Fogarty (Ed Harris) and fellow mobster Richie Cusack (William Hurt) starts stalking Tom as they refer to him as a person named Joey but Tom doesn't even know what they are talking about even strange talk about the old days in Philadelphia. But is Tom really who he think he is? does he have a mistaken identity? can he find a way to solve what is really behind his secret past?

A thrilling and smart psychological action drama thriller based on a DC/Vertigo graphic novel is wonderfully directed by masterful filmmaker David Cronenberg (the man who brought you "Videodrome", "Dead Ringers" "Scanners", "The Fly", "Crash 1996", "Eastern Promises", "The Brood" and "Rabid") brings another excellent film of his. The performances are nothing but great and the direction is well done. Howard Shore's score is riviting and graphic bloody violence shown, this is truly the best movie of 2005 and another winner from Cronenberg.

This DVD contains a bevy of fine extras like audio commentary from director David Cronenberg, "Acts of Violence" documentary that takes a behind the scenes look at the film, three featurettes, Deleted scene and trailer.

This movie was amazing: The back story, the outstanding characters and their acting, the violence. Nearly everything was gold.

I can't fathom the reason why this rating is rather low. The movie had very few flaws if any.

Things take place in a small, quiet town where you'd be a fool not to know everyone around you. Everyone's children grow up, and go to school with each other, and they press on as decent citizens just trying to make decent of themselves, settle down and have sex like rabbits do.

David Cronenberg's character, Tom Stall is a decent man, making a decent living, running a coffee shop, down the road from his house. He's a great man with a extremely shady past; he used to kill people who didn't agree with him. Putting that in the past, he's made and raised outlandishly great children, and does right by them, up until he smacks his boy for talking back.

The movie is NO stranger to violence either. Everyone seems to be after Tom, for his less-than-innocent past, and for good reason. He gives them what they want, WHEN he wants and that's that. Some mobsters come to his diner, scaring his wife s.h.i.t.l.e.s.s., trying to rape an innocent female worker, with nice breasts, and harasses the pants off of everyone. Tom demands that they come to terms, that they are all closed up and the dumbest of them all, says, "COFFEE!!"

If it were my diner, I'd call the cops, to escort this loser out of my diner, and back onto the streets, where they all belong! But no, Tom wimps out, caving in, and giving them what they want, to shut the the F up. I don't blame him personally, and would have handled it much differently, never giving in. But I digress...Tom ends up smashing a coffee pot, right into the guy with a bad, bad eye (Tom barb-wired him up in the past XD), and makes sure these royal asspains don't return.

But they do. Once. And they go to his house to retrieve what they want; Tom. He ends up shooting two of the bastards, and his son shoots the one with 1 1/2 eyes. Like father, like son I suppose. Long ago though, Tom had another identity: the name escapes me momentarily, but like I've said, he's done some dark stuff in his yesteryears.

The sex scene in this movie later on is super-hot and super-steamy. Tom removes his wife's black panties, and lifts up her black dress. As her thighs yearn for a man strong enough, to be inside of her, she grows anxious, and all the hornier. He finally pulls his faithful, tried-and-true blue jeans down, just below his nice arse, and humps the brains, right out of his attractive wife's head, like nobody's business. Had it lasted another 1 minute or so, I would have seriously had to play a more active role in the situation at hand. =^)

Overall, I think this is worth a BUY not a RENT, and you'd be good to watch it as soon as you make this worthy purchase. I know I will!

Cover Art: B-
Dialogue: A-
Story: A
Characters: A
Length: A
Overall: A

4.6 stars.

This is a movie worth watching. I love action movies and this one definitely peaked my couriosity. I wished it had a better ending, but the movie is well worth its money.

I love action movies with a good story and heart. I also like Viggo Mortenson and Maria Bello a lot. This movie has everything one would expect in this type of action movie with a twist. It kept my interest from beginning to end.

This movie as a metaphor of American society is to the art of cinema what a Miles Davis or John Coltrane composition is to music, or a Kaiga painting is to Japanese art, or an unexpected winning Bobby Fischer or Bent Larsen move is to chess. Its very power lies in the utter subtlety and understatement of its intrusive imaginative truths, and in the skill and necessity with which these truths are forced out into the open and acted out as an unerring narrative (or drama) about what lies underneath the human and the American condition. And what lies beneath it is the manifold terror of violence -- which is an enduring, ugly, almost inexorable existential subtext and leitmotif of the human - and especially of the American way of life.

There is no longer a need to get excited about violence in the U.S., for in its many and various sublimated forms it is to be found everywhere. We are trained not to see it but it is always there: in our national bloodstream, in our collective DNA, in our fantasies, in our passive-aggressive natures. All of its multi-layered, multidimensional, and hydra-headed components emerge and intersect in subtle ways in this movie. It is in our past, in our present, and sure to be in our future. It is the grim reaper of American society. The movie shows how violence stalks us from every dark corner of our consciousness. First it is far away and buried deep in our past; then it is close up, intimate, and then from out of nowhere it is suddenly "in our faces." It is in our homes, our cities and on our farms. There is no way to insulate ourselves from it, or hide from it. Indeed it is within us; it oozes from our skins. It is in our children heads. As domestic terrorists and meth-amphetamine labs, it is in our pastoral rural communities too.

With uncommon skill, depth and subtlety, this movie demonstrates that in the U.S., no one is ever far away from either the next "staged" or the next "random act" of violence. Our lives are centered on and shaped not by what we pretend is the main problem, "violence in the streets", but on how to avoid the structural violence implicit in the very American condition: The movie makes clear that the center of gravity of violence in our society is the passive aggressive violence closer to home in our own minds. Our conscious lives are no longer regulated by or animated by violent acts per se, but by how best to pretend there is no violence inherent in the American condition. And that, to the extent we are willing to admit to this at all, that we are animated by the lie that its cumulative historical impact on us, that is on who we are, and on our way of thinking and acting, and on our community as a whole, has nothing at all to do with how violent our society is, has become, and has always been. That is to say, it is about the continuing lie that past violence has no present day consequences.

We keep telling ourselves in so many different ways that all of this homegrown American violence is external to the American condition: that it has nothing to do with America's ugly accumulated history of violence. All these images of America being a violent land, is just so much anti-American propaganda working overtime. This image of us as being a violent nation is a mirage, a figmentation of overly active and fertile imaginations, a pure anomaly, an aberration completely alien to, and having nothing to do with the American condition. Yet, each morning, we cannot trust our own neighbors enough not to walk our kids to the corner school bus stop. To do otherwise is to risk the chance that they will be abducted, raped and murdered by the nearest local sexual predator. And oddly enough, the statistics bare us out on taking this profoundly prudent defensive measure.

As the movie underscores, every American instinct is an instinct whistling pass our own self-made graveyard, with one foot in a camp of colossal collective denial about how violence has not colonized our very existence; and the other attributing what violence there is to safe acceptable but far away targets -- "distanced" so that they do not contaminate our pristine thoughts of ourselves. It does not matter much that the character "Joey" or "Tom Stall" (superbly played by Viggo Mortensen), had a violent past, for as Americans, we all know that we too all also have a collective violent past, the one defined by the trail of violence left in the wake of our nation's violent history. To wit:

There is the unspeakable and psychologically still unresolved genocide against Native Americans, slavery and the still unresolved century of violence against the Negro (a half century of Apartheid and segregation, Jim Crow and lynching, and now voluntary re-segregation) that still shapes and animates the social lives of all Americans; a Civil War that the South lost on the battlefield but actually won in the hearts and minds of most white Americans, and which is still being fought just beneath the American consciousness, labor and race riots from the early 1800s forwards; two world wars, and a series of lesser ones -- from Vietnam to Panama and Grenada, and now on to Afghanistan and Iraq -- and the wars within the organized crime underworld that have become a signature of the American way of life.

Then there are the perpetual, unending wars: wars on drugs, on terror and on the poor, that is the class and culture wars; and of course within them, the war against abortions, the war between the rice and the poor, and always, the wars against the Jews and the Zionists. And then there is the war of the corporations against the rest of us - especially the oil and drug companies - not to mention just plain raw violence as in "domestic in-the-home-violence," continued racial violence, prison violence, and an annual crop of serial killers; street crime -- dope, whores, drive-by shootings, gang revenge, 7/11 stick-ups, mob violence and cop killings - an epidemic of sexual predators, killers and abductors, school, job and restaurants mass killings, and political assassinations, to name just a few.

America has not only been colonized by its own homegrown history of violence, but has been shocked into a perpetual fearful defensive state of existence. It has been defined and shaped by, then numbed by, and now collectively compartmentalized by, its casual ability to accept its own homegrown violence. Today, any political demagogue who can make 911 the predicate of a sentence, no matter how incompetent or illiterate, is surely to be elected U.S. President.

But even knowing that this is our history, the movie demonstrates with disturbing skill that somehow we still have learned to live in a cocoon of self-imposed denial, a virtual mental Potemkin village. We have trained ourselves to compartmentalize as Edie (Maria Bello) who played the role of "Joey's" wife, was forced to do. And thus we have become numb to the pervasiveness of the violence that is an integral part of us, and our ethos. As a nation, we have crawled into the fetal position, waiting to be rescued from ourselves by some imaginary moral hero. It seems we have no choice but to endure, deny and accept our lot; and then try to live through the denial of the knowledge that we have created the very incubator for our own self-destructive and violent society.

The great irony of U.S. society, which this movie draws out in the only way good art is supposed to do -- with great subtlety and understatement - is that we only become animated; act surprised; we only react when violence shows up uninvited (that is unforced from the subconscious) at the dinner table of a well-adjusted, white, suburban, middle-class, Middle American family. For instance, as the BTK killer did at the geographic center of America, Kansas, where not coincidentally the movie was situated. Or, as Ted Kaczynski did at the idyllic foothills of the Montana mountains. Or indeed as Timothy Mc Veigh did in the bombing of the Murrah Building "in out-of-the-way" Oklahoma City.) Otherwise "the violence that we see and (that we are)" ceases to be real to us.

After this subtle, understated, David Cronenberg movie, "The History of Violence," we no longer have the comfort zone of taking the national fetal position and waiting to be rescued. For those with the courage to see it, he has shaken and disturbed this nation's conscience to it very core. His art reverberated deep inside the brain. It is a scary truth that sticks there. It cannot be easily expelled, ejected or excommunicated.

The very act of raising this hidden truth openly -- especially about the cumulative violence of the past - will undoubtedly be seen, by those willing to see, as an unpatriotic betrayal of the highest order. Put simply, to admit to ourselves that our society rests on an edifice of violence, structural and otherwise that is then covered up by denials and lies; is to admit that violence is the only true and enduring constant in the American way of life. This, in the end, is an intolerable truth and an almost unbearable betrayal of the deepest held national unconscious secret. Yet it is a truth from which we can no longer recoil, shrink and then hide. It takes, not just an extraordinary artist, but a great artist, to be able to drill this message back into the brain-dead and morally challenged American conscience as David Cronenberg has done. One does not get hit with the full force of the message until long after he has left the theater: and then boom, like a ton of bricks you are shaken forever!

That important truths such as this, "that the psychological impact accumulated violence has had on the American psyche" can only be told through the most sophisticated and carefully coded art forms, shows in devastating relief how fragile the American way of life has become. Teetering as it does on a thin precipice of proto-Fascist political maneuverings and rumblings, self-styled hero worshipping, and on a thick veneer of pretend humanity, all of which is backup by state and societally-sanctioned violence or the threat of violence at every level, we are a nation rapidly spinning out of control and down into the vortex of full-scale Fascist-like tyranny.

Fear, but especially the fear of violence, is forcing us to eat our young, and to consume our own democratic institutions. From the purse-snatching ghetto thugs, to organized crime, to intimidation by crooked street cops, their rent-a-cop auxiliaries and security mercenaries, to sexual predators, and inner city gang violence, to law enforcement officers that are supposed to defend us -- such as the IRS, CIA, DIA, FBI, Homeland Security, etc. -- by home-grown criminals and terrorists, and ultimately by the American military, we are slowly and almost imperceptively becoming the police state we keep telling ourselves we are not. Strangely all of these agencies mandated to defend us from violence against ourselves, are more and more beginning to look suspiciously like Nazis in Halloween masks, salivating while anxiously awaiting with their attack dogs, high voltage tasers, hollow-point bullets and automatic weapons for the last democratic restraints to be stripped away.

This movie captures the full essence of the impact violence has had on contemporary American history both as it is played out "one random act at a time," and as its accumulates, and is encapsulated as systemic and structural violence over an embarrassingly long period of time. And it does so in a way that is so subtle, so deep, so stunning, so honest, so original, so moving, and so economical that it staggers the imagination into silence.

If there is a better American movie in history, I have not yet seen it.

Fifty stars!

David Cronenberg (The Fly (Two-Disc Collector's Edition), Videodrome - Criterion Collection) is an artful and masterful director. There's no denying it. The man behind such films as Dead Ringers - Criterion Collection, Naked Lunch - Criterion Collection and Shivers comes with this film, a stark difference from his fist films of the century.

A History of Violence is about a man who, after becoming a local hero, is hounded by a couple of mobsters who believe he is someone else.

The strength in this movie isn't the script alone, it's the directing of one David Cronenberg. A movie that you should see, maybe it'll spark your interest in the often overlooked David Cronenberg.

The DVD includes a commentary from the director, a few featurettes going over every aspect of the filmmaking, a "Too Commercial for Cannes" feature, a deleted scene, and the behind the scenes of that deleted scenes.

Highly recommended.

Tom Stall runs a diner in a small town. He is well liked by the people and well loved by his family. His stock goes up even more when he thwarts a violent hold up in his diner by killing the two criminals.

But the news coverage gets the attention of even more violent thugs from Philadelphia, thugs who claim that Tom Stall was known other than the former gangster Joey Cusack. Tom vehemently denies the charges, but over the course of the film, you learn that there is nonetheless a history of violence.

The acting is great, the plot is disturbing, and the conclusion will have you thinking for a long time. I thought it was a well made movie.

I've got no problem with movie violence and there is plenty of rapid fire,neck breaking, high adreniline nastiness here. Well filmed and seemingly full of trhills and promise, this film falls in that it kills off the notable antagonists before we get to develop a good hatred for them,then adding insult to injury, director Cronenberg barely explains it at all with a convoluted real identity/past life yarn.Viggo Mortensen stars as Tom Stall,a mild mannered diner owner in small town Indiana who's quiet life unravels after a violent confrontation with two armed robbers.
Maria Bello wins as Mortensens sexy wife,Ed Harris places with a good faux Philly mob accent, John Hurt shows up but delivers a very unimpressive role as a heavyweight.

Director: David Cronenberg, Viggo Mortensen, Maria Bello, Ed Harris, William Hurt.
History of Violence is a repugnant bloodbath, which pretty much directs this movie throughout. Tom Stall (Mortensen,) a family man who lives in a small town who becomes a hero after he stops a potentially burglary in his restaurant. Noted for his civil measures, Stall and his family find their lives irretrievably intruded upon, first by the media and secondly by some gangsters who wind up claiming that Stall is a mob guy with a taste for killing.
This is a Cronenberg, revenge movie that works well, because of the great acting. Each scene is loaded with substantial detail, building up character profiles without cluttering the story with unnecessary dialogue. This is a film enhanced with big issues, big violence, big production, illusions of civilization, sex, death, and in the end what I consider animalistic and harsh, uncaring natures--BUT THE FILM WORKS AND WORKS WELL.

Reading the well-expressed reviews here is almost as good an experience as watching the movie itself. I saw the plethora of one-star reviews and thought "oh, these are people who don't know Cronenberg and are turned off by the violence." To the contrary, most of them are Cronenberg fans who feel like he screwed this one up. There's some very good criticism about the flatness of the dialog (Viggo Mortensen's Tom Stall is indeed fairly monosyllabic), the gratuitous nudity (I agree with that - the point where that occurred was fairly odd) and, in general, a healthy skepticism about whatever type of 'message' the four- and five-star reviewers see in this work.

That aside, I liked - did not love - the film. Honestly, we watched it as a trial run for the upcoming and very intriguing 'Eastern Promises,' which again features Cronenberg directing Mortensen. We figured if we could stomach 'Violence,' we'll pay the $9.75 to catch 'Promises' on the big screen.

I was happy to see that Maria Bello got a Golden Globe nomination + scooped up some Critic Circle awards. That's justly deserved. She's beautiful and spectacular here - she's got to sell the audience on the revulsion she feels when her husband turns out to be not who she thought. And, wow, does she make that work. She's the movie's standout. William Hurt got an Oscar nomination, but he's got no more than an extended cameo, tinged with some over-the-top hamminess.

This was a very intriguing movie, for the most part. It had some things that really turned me off, but also things that made it extremely interesting at times.

I liked the fact that the action, although violent at times, was not overdone. Most of the movie is pretty low-key.

What I didn't care for, or thought stretched credibility, was our hero's wife, who was way too big-city-hard looking and profane to be some small-town country girl who would marry such a nice guy as "Tom." Speaking of profanity, 14 uses of the Lord's name in vain in less than 80 minutes was offensive, at least to me.

William Hurt gets third billing in the film but only shows up with 14 minutes left! Granted, his role is a memorable one, however. Ed Harris also had few lines for someone who gets good billing. Another guy I thought was pretty cool was the sheriff, played by Peter MacNeill. He had bigger roles than Harris or Hurt but got no billing.
Go figure.

Overall, offensive material notwithstanding, this was a unique film and one I would would watch again.

This movie is one of those uncomfortable -to -watch -at- times movies but you cant stop watching it. The acting is superb, especially by the always perfect Viggo Mortensen. His expressions are always believable and I cannot belieive he was not nominated for an Oscar for this role. This movie is tense at times and you are always left wondering, especially at the ending, which I thought was done very smartly. I would not categorize this as an action movie, but there are some pretty brutal scenes in here and one pretty explicit sex scene that was pretty unconventional and brutal and sexy all at the same time. One of the best movies of last year.

I don't understand it, maybe I got the wrong movie. I went on the various websites and read the reviews and heard good things in the past about the film. This movie had good reviews. Had a pretty good cast. But, after watching for about 10-20 minutes; things kind of go south. The dialogue is flat. Character/Goons show up and then suddenly get killed. The main character Viggo, kind of just stands there and doesn't really say anything throughout the film. History of Violence just felt like one of those made for TV USA movies.

I don't even feel like this movie is worth my time, for me to go into detail about all of the elementary plot elements and B-movie acting.

Horrible, horrible, horrible. You can shrug off my negative review; personally I hate reading those "this movie sucks" reviews, also. But, I couldn't live with myself if I didn't warn other souls about yet another uninspiring, American movie murder-fest. Life is just too short.

EDITED: I am reading some of the other Amazon reviews, it must be a conspiracy on the part of the film-makers. People must be paid to post positive reviews about this film. I guess if my million dollar acting/directing career were on the line, I guess I would do it to. That is the only way I can explain how I was duped into watching this.

I have always been known to love a good action/thriller flick. And this didn't let me down. It was everything an action/thriller is meant to be. The narrative is a sprint. David Cronenberg just straps you in and takes you for a spin through the beautiful roads of a small town in Indiana. There are no pit stops or rest areas. This is not a marathon but a sprint.

One of the most beautiful aspects of this movie, is the characterization of the 'bad guys'. Ed Harris and William Hurt play these with an exquisite blend of coldness and creepiness, that has been very rarely been seen on film. Also the shorter length of the movie (96 min) was a refreshing change.

Tom Stall is your ideal family man. Great father, great husband and a diner owner who is loved by the people of this small town. The family portrait is disturbed one day when two criminals on a murder spree turn up at Tom Stall's diner. He reacts with alacrity to save his female worker and send these criminals to their fate. With that comes the swarm of TV cameras. And that brings some visitors from out of town. What follows is a peek into Tom Stall's past.

Is he the family man that his wife, kids, community and us believe him to be?

Warning: It has some serious graphic violence. Not over drawn out gore but authentic depictions of violence which may make you squirm.

I should also mention that this movie contains one of the most intense sex scenes seen on film in the recent past. As with all the best scenes of this nature, it is not about the nudity but about the two people involved in it.

This movie surprised the H E L L out of me! Great action, but much more below the surface going on. What could have been an average thriller turned out to be an engrossing story. Much better than I expected. The DVD transfer is very good!

The commentary this film has about human nature is stunning! Those seeking the "average" hollywood shoot 'em up or action flick may be disappointed; however, those seeking a film with actual substance and something to talk about later will be in for a treat! This isnt your normal good guy kills the bad guys and it's over movie...it goes far beyond that. The script and cinematography are both great! Also, if you are shunning this film because of the director, think again. (At least it's not David LYNCH... HAHA!... who could NEVER make a film of this caliber!)

Dont mind the negative reviews, most of which view it as boring. Seems they were expecting something less...the average shoot 'em up, I guess.

Interesting story, excellent actors!
I don`t understand how people say the story or the dialogues are dull,
for me they were realistic.