A History of Violencereviewed by Brian "The Naked Gun" Felts
Viggo Mortensen (Lord of the Rings Trilogy) stars as every bodies All-American next door neighbor Tom
Stall, who has a beautiful wife Edie, played by Maria Bello (Assault on Precinct 13,) and two great kids.
He runs the neighborhood diner and everything is great until two hoodlums show up and try to kill Tom and
the rest of the staff. However, with some quick thinking and brutal violence, Tom kills both of the men.
Tom becomes a national hero with his name in the paper and face on TV, which happens to bring 3 men from
Philadelphia, one of which is Carl Fogarty, played by Ed Harris (Apollo 13,) who claim to know Tom by another
name, Joey, and what to take him back to Philadelphia, to settle some unfinished business.
The cast was very strong. I enjoyed Viggo's portrayal of the anti-hero that his character became. He
also did a good job in the beginning of the movie showing glimpses of Joey, while being Tom, and at the
end of the movie when the rolls were reversed. Maria Bello was also quite nice as the small town wife
who was an angel during the day and a sex puppet at night. She has created one of the top ten sexiest
scenes in movie history by coming out of the bathroom in a cheerleader outfit, portraying a "sweet, innocent"
girl who is very naughty as she rubs her skirt and revealing her very white, pure panties. Very Sexy! She
also did a nice job acting, a role that reminded me of her performance in the movie Payback.
Ed Harris was quite intriguing as the mob boss Carl Fogarty. His performance was just menacing enough
to provide some real thrilling moments, particularly the scene at the mall that could have been over the
top but Harris kept it right on. Giving his character a physical deformity was a nice touch that was one
of the few decisions the writer or director made.
Earlier, I mentioned how Maria Bello's performance was similar to the one in Payback, which also starred
Mel Gibson. The entire movie actually reminded me of the same movie, mostly because of the good guy image
each leading actor had, and turning it around to play the bad guy. However, the stark difference between
the two movies is that in Payback there was a rise in tension from beginning until the climatic final scene.
In A History of Violence, the tension is jump started in the beginning scene when we are introduced to the
two hoodlums, then we are allowed a reprieve while we get to no the Tom Stall character, and the tension is
re-introduced with reappearance of the hoodlums. However, from this point on the tension never rises or falls,
which is both good and bad. Screenwriter Josh Olson adapted the story from the graphic novel written by Josh
Wagner and Vince Locke. The story is the week point and I don't know who to blame. My biggest problem is
that, to me, there was no climatic scene. At no point did I feel the tension rise as Tom/Joey confronted
his nemesis. The tension was steady, which was nice because there were scenes that involved Tom's son in
a fight at school that really had nothing to do with the main story. But when Tom/Joey final confronts
the men, instead of a long shootout or some decent action, it was a quick, bang, bang, bang, bad guys dead.
Which is probably what would happens in real life, at least the quickness of the fight, but totally not
exhilarating nor something I want to see at the movies, If I want reality, I will watch the news. I wanted
to be on the edge of my seat and I wasn't.
Then there is the ending. After Tom confronts the bad guy and tells Edie who he really is, he gets
a call from his brother and is forced to go back to Philadelphia and confront him. His brother, Richie,
played horribly by William Hurt (The Village,) is a mobster who was screwed over by his younger brother when
Joey was still with the mob, I think. It is never really explained. Anyway, the tension is still maintained
because I was expecting a huge shoot out or something, of course this was before I new who was his brother.
Once Hurt stumbled onto the screen, you could have phoned the movie in. More bang, bang, bang, bad guys dead.
I will say that the final scene redeemed itself if I read into the expression Maria Bello gave him when
he came back from this rampage. If, the look meant the opposite of what they talked about in the first
part of the movie, then it was a perfect ending, if it meant the same, then I am even more upset. It is
hard to talk about without completely giving it away, which I have already done so much I don't want to
do anymore.
I also have to say the sex scene in the hallway doesn't make sense to me and if someone will explain it
to me I will appreciate it.
Overall, I like this movie, because of the actors and not for the story. It will find its way into my video
collection but probably at a discounted price, if for nothing else to have a Maria Bello full frontal nudity
shot in the collection.
Brian - the Naked Gun |