 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
24.58.20.188
Overall it was pretty dull. Neither the violence or the pair of over extended (and fairly graphic) sex scenes made this one all that interesting. After it is revealed that the protagonist isn't the small-town-everyman that he has led the locals to believe, the movie begins to get predicatble in a hurry. (This revelation happens in the first 30 minutes so its hardly a spoiler.)Possible spoilers ahead, buyer beware! As we begin to realize that Vigo isn't the typical family man we think he is, the director leads us through a series of events which illustrate how violent behavior can be passed down through the generations. While it wasn't totally spoon fed, this theme wasn't delivered very subtly, a la metaphors or a similar techinque. I didn't have a problem with the violence, but after a couple of "episodes" it got a bit repetative. (I suppose one could argue that the repetition is intended to show how violence can become more "routine" once it begins to seep into your life.) Another theme was the strengh and acceptance of family which I though was executed a little better. Perhaps this worked better because the director used less blatant means to make his point.
The acting in History of Violence wasn't so great either, especially in the the cases of the son and the wife. Neither were very convincing and were actually comical in a few places, although I don't think that was the director's intention! The scene where the wife barfed and the scence where the son asked his old man if would "wack" him actually had me laughing out loud. Don't they screen movies anymore before they release them? On a more positive note, the final scene of the movie was a bit of a surprise. I don't know if it was actually a pleasant surprise as it seemed a bit forced. Overall I give History of Violence a C+.
Follow Ups:
I agree , it was apparent early on he was really Joey, but I still thought it was a pretty good flick. Too bad William Hurt's part was so short....I've always liked his films.
nt
I agree with some of your points, but the movie was still more interesting than typical Hollywood fare. Compare it, for example, to Stealth, Monster-In-Law, or Sahara . . . (yes, I refused to see all three).Yes, the plot breaks down at times (why didn't Maria call the police when Ed and thugs have the standoff in Viggo's frontyard!!), but at least it has a fairly coherent plot with occasional lapses, rather than total absence of plot feasibility.
You're totally right about kid asking whether Viggo would "whack" him! On the other hand, I think most of us enjoyed Viggo's "whacking" the gangsters.
I'm also glad to see Viggo have the opportunity to do something quite different from LOR trilogy. Hildalgo was so crummy that Viggo didn't have a chance.
regards, townsend
Maybe my bachelor brain just wasn't impressed with the sex but the violence was good and to a point. I was a tad let down with the ending. It made me feel the movie had intentionally been cut short. Perhaps it was done on purpose because all I could think of were the many possibilities of what could happen next.For the first time I thought Harris over did it a bit. Viggo was good and so was the high school bully. The rest was middling at best.
I'm sending Maria Bello a donation for B cups.
your review since so many folks have liked it.
I'm going to see the Nicholas Cage gunrunning movie 'cause... my wife wants to! She asked me when I was going to it and I said it looked predicatble and that I'd probably skip it, even though I like a tasty action-mindless film, occasionally. She was displeased. Live with 'em your whole life and you'll still be surprised.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
