March 10, 2006

History of Violence

I don't undertand how History of Violence could have an 87% score on Rottentomatoes. It was boring as hell. The only thing about it that was unpredictable was how there were absolutely no twists in it. It's a fracking thriller! There are supposed to be twists!

Ugh. What a waste of time that movie was. Even the soundtrack was boring. It sounded like leftovers from the Lord of the Rings soundtrack. Why? Because the same guy did both scores. 

Sad. Boring. Uninspired. Avoid. 

Posted by jherr at March 10, 2006 08:14 AM
Comments

I could not disagree with you more on this one. I thought the acting (with the exception of the little girl) was great.
It was more of an extreme character study than a thriller.

Posted by: bsaz at March 10, 2006 08:52 AM

I think it would have been better as a parody of a character study with Charlie Sheen in the lead role. The son talking to Dad about how he could be whacked is a great cut scene opportunity. As is his rant about 'killing Joey in the desert'. There would be an awesome cut scene parody of Jim Morrison in the movie The Doors. Then we could cut back to the present and have him say that he really wanted to be a broadway dancer and have a good cut scene there. Then cut back and have him talk about how he settled for the prarie life.

Oy! I'm on a roll here. Call my agent. I'm gonna be a producahh!

Anyway, as it stands, lots of dropped balls. Not a lot of real character work. What happened with the son? What's his arc? And the wife? Just window dressing. And that's sad because I loved her in The Cooler. She was criminally underused here.

Posted by: jherr at March 10, 2006 11:15 AM

huh. I am not sure we saw the same movie. I'll warn Hollywood you are coming and probably bringing your sci-fi with you.

Posted by: bsaz at March 10, 2006 01:32 PM

yeah yeah - and for the most part dear Jack I agree with you, but I was still amazed at the sex scene - I'm mean I've never seen 69 as a sex scene in a movie not rated X. ... not that i've ever seen a movie rated about an R :)

Posted by: Lori Herrington at March 10, 2006 01:54 PM

Seriously, it's like we saw two entirely different films.

The one that Lori and I saw bored us senseless. We were ready to turn it off about half way through. The only thing Lori liked about it was Vigo's ass.

Where was the study? The only stuff that was interesting in that way was the difference in sex styles. As 'Tom' they were sharing oral sex, but when he was 'Joey' there was a lot more violence and he was only in it for himself.

Posted by: jherr at March 10, 2006 01:56 PM

I disagree. The second sex scene was violent on BOTH sides. I thought Maria Bello was great. Yeah, we saw different movies.

Posted by: bsaz at March 10, 2006 02:02 PM

She was enjoying herself. That's true. Whether she was entirely satisfied is another. Especially given her quick departure from the scene.

So tell me what you LIKED about it?

Posted by: jherr at March 10, 2006 03:01 PM

I wonder my dear Bsaz if you saw the movie in the theater early on? See we waited for DVD not really by choice but because going to see it just never happened, and well we've heard over and over how great it was, so we were both disappointed. Its like when I saw gone with the wind - I had such high expectations i could only be disappointed. I understand the films significance but I remember being so bored. I'd probably like it better now that I'm older, this was when I was a teen, but the experience of realizing I didn't like something everyone else did has stuck with me.

Posted by: Lori Herrington at March 10, 2006 06:42 PM
Post a comment

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)


Remember me?