[Previous entry: "New Mr Wiggles."] [Main Index] [Next entry: "Magazine editors pick top 40 magazine covers."]
10/17/2005 Entry: "I fail to understand why A History of Violence is getting such rave reivews."
I fail to understand why A History of Violence is getting such rave reivews. Its 90% something over at rottentomatoes.com. Its not weird like most Cronenberg films and is a fairly straightforward mobster movie. Not to mention the fighting is almost at the ninja-level with the hero able to take a bullet or two and still pull off martial-arts level chops. Mike Ward puts it best I think:
Director David Cronenberg's "A History of Violence" has no real heroes, no real lessons and no real resolution. Because of that, it leaves a lingering sense of "huh?" And it leaves you looking for a bar of soap afterward.
Replies: 2 comments
here's a review that sort of covers the appeal i guess...
http://www.2blowhards.com/archives/002304.html
"A History of Violence" may qualify as one of those films that resonate deeply -- as in "on a very primitive level" -- with guys. There was certainly some of that in the audience we saw the film with: guys nodding their heads in approval and clenching their fists in satisfaction. You could sense them thinking/feeling, "Yup, that's what it's like to be a guy. Chicks will never fully understand our drives, our needs, and our desires. They have no idea, and they never will." These guys were feeling stirred.
Posted by figo @ 10/17/2005 10:40 PM CST
I agree that A History of Violence does not deserve the raves it has been getting. I thought it was just OK. But I did find it interesting that it was a kind of reverse version of the Prodigal Son parable.
Posted by John @ 10/18/2005 04:20 AM CST
