The Good: Excellent characters and development, Good acting, Engaging story, Good direction
The Bad: Moments of cliche
The Basics: When a decent man is put in a situation that involves violence in self-defense, his life begins to spiral out of control.
The first thing to impress me about A History Of Violence was the relative intelligence of the characters. The police aren't portrayed as idiots, the women aren't portrayed as weak and helpless, and the protagonist seems to realize the severity of his actions. For one reason or another, I have managed to watch a lot of disappointing movies and television lately. Fortunately, A History Of Violence bucked that trend and offered me a solidly entertaining diversion that is still making me think.
While Tom Stall enjoys life and love with his wife and two children, the rest of the world does what it is doing. Killers come and go and at school, Tom's son Jack finds himself talking his way out of a fight with a bully. Unfortunately for Tom, one night at closing at his diner two killers enter and menace his customers. Tom defends the patrons and the waitress there and in the process dispatches the two killers.
Unfortunately for Tom, this sets off a series of events that cause his life and the life of his family members to unravel. A menacing stranger, Fogarty, comes to town and calls Tom by another name, which Tom denies. Even after the police investigate Fogarty and find out his ties to organized crime and Edie (Tom's wife) gets a restraining order, Fogarty menaces Tom and his family. Jack gets into a fight in school, Fogarty makes his play and Tom's life is turned upside down.
What works exceptionally well in A History Of Violence are the characters. Tom Stall does not want to glorify violence and his anger at his son for getting into a fight at school seems very genuine. Tom seems educated, articulate and deliberately pacifistic, which are traits that are effectively shared with his son, Jack.
The transformation that occurs after the initial act of desperate heroism is telling and very real. A History Of Violence plays out the "is he or isn't he" aspect of Tom's nature quite effectively for a significant amount of time and I think it would be a shame to ruin that in this review. However, it is fair to say that A History Of Violence is all about exploring the consequences of aggression and rage. Tom's playful attitude with his wife is wonderfully sundered once the door to violence is opened. When Jack makes an angry crack about how the family deals with problems, Tom's reaction is very natural given line that he has crossed.
This is a family that has not solved problems with violence, so when one member of the family commits an act of violence - even in self-defense and the defense of others - the family suffers. It's refreshing to see a young person (Jack, in this case) freak out when he sees his mother running around with a shotgun. In school, Jack has a wonderful exchange with a girl about how scary it is for Tom to have killed two people.
That level of realism follows throughout the movie. In the diner scene when Tom is called upon to save the patrons, he does not walk away unscathed; one of the two career criminals knifes him. That played out as very real. And when Tom is called another name repeatedly by Fogarty, even though he is a local celebrity, Sheriff Sam starts asking Tom questions. That level of detail and intelligence was remarkably refreshing and real.
And Edie is wonderful in how she knows Tom. She acts independently of him when Tom is threatened and that seems both loving and realistic. She's intelligent and she can see what has happened when the door to violence is opened. Unfortunately, her intelligence lapses at one of the dumbest times in the movie; after her family is menaced, she turns her back on her very young daughter while out in the mall. That did not "read" right at all.
Similarly, there are scenes near the climax of the movie featuring hard core criminals who are ruthless that lack the realism and tone of the rest of the movie. It's a shame, too, because in order to resolve the film, the writers and director sacrifice the realism of the rest of the piece. It goes back to the old question from Star Wars: A New Hope; "How does the Empire maintain control when the stormtroopers can't seem to hit anyone they shoot at?"
Where the movie ends, though, makes sense on a character level and it is a thoroughly appropriate ending (though had it ended a few minutes earlier with a very different character resolution, I would have been equally satisfied). It's a powerful movie with an excellent exploration of the way violence escalates, even when it begins benignly.
Part of what makes the movie work so well is the acting. It's always a pleasure for me to see Stephen McHattie getting work and having him open A History Of Violence is both wonderful and effectively creepy. Ashton Holmes does an excellent job as Jack. He is articulate and funny and he plays disarming remarkably well when his character is bullied.
Maria Bello is equally good as Edie. She plays loving, angry, protective and curious as appropriate wonderfully. She is able to modulate between moods with the flicker of her eyes and a subtle change in her glance. She emotes very well and helps act as a very human foil to Tom. Her last appearance in the movie is riveting.
It is Viggo Mortensen who carries much of the movie with his acting. Mortensen is good at modulating between the mild mannered man he portrays with a sense of permanence and realism and the man who engages his protective instinct. Mortensen plays instinctual very well, making his ability to react very real. He plays Tom with great humanity.
This was the first movie directed by David Cronenberg that I have seen (I saw him act on "Alias") and I have to say I was impressed. I was equally impressed on the DVD to see that the deleted scene, which was a dream sequence, was deleted because he felt it did not fit (I agree). Also, he argued against a U.S. and International DVD release as the international version simply had two shots that had a little more blood and an enhanced sound effect. I respect Cronenberg's directoral choices in this movie.
A History Of Violence, as the title suggests, is not for everyone. Squeamish about blood and sex? This movie is not for you. The sex is not gratuitous and the differences in the ways it happens throughout the movie are very telling. And effective. I remain impressed by A History Of Violence and I recommend it for anyone who wants a decent character exploration on violence and its effect on a family.
For other stories where revenge is an important aspect, be sure to check out my reviews of:
Payback
The Last House On The Left
Unforgiven
8/10
For other film reviews, be sure to visit my Movie Review Index Page for a complete listing of all the films I have reviewed!
© 2012, 2006 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |
No comments:
Post a Comment