"A History of Violence".... by History, of course they mean "Presently Occuring"... A History of Violence (2005) Directed by: David Cronenberg Writing credits (WGA): John Wagner (graphic novel) and Vince Locke Plot Outline: An average family is thrust into the spotlight after the father commits a seemingly self-defense murder at his diner. Cast: Viggo Mortensen .... Tom Stall/Joey Cusack Maria Bello .... Edie Stall Ed Harris .... Carl Fogarty William Hurt .... Richie Cusack Ashton Holmes .... Jack Stall Peter MacNeill .... Sheriff Sam Carney Stephen McHattie .... Leland Jones Greg Bryk .... William Orser Sumela Kay .... Judy Danvers Kyle Schmid .... Bobby Jordan Deborah Drakeford .... Charlotte Gerry Quigley .... Mick Heidi Hayes .... Sarah Stall Aidan Devine .... Charlie Roarke Bill MacDonald .... Frank Mulligan Review (Spoilers): That movie was STUPID AS HELL. There's just no meat to it. I can't give it a half star because the acting is very powerful, but they're not SAYING anything with this film. There's no MEAT to it. There's no HISTORY of violence!! There are tiny details that are thrown clumsily at the audience without any exploration, many plot devices that are introduced without explanation, and unnecessary scenes (like "Cheerleader Sex Romp") that waste everyone's time when they could be spending time showing what Joey's life was. You know.. HIS HISTORY!! OF VIOLENCE!! This is the most confusingly titled movie I've ever seen. No, I wasn't expecting an action film, I was expecting a psychological thriller and this wasn't it. It had the pace and scattershot direction of Napoleon Dynamite, without any climax or structure. When Joey fights with his brother, there's no sense of finality to it, there's no "here it comes, the final scene." And it couldn't have been more underplayed by the film's general lack of music. When Joey sits down with his family trying to fit back in and the scene fades out, I raised my hands in awe saying "Uh.. I guess that's the end?!" There's a difference between leaving things open to interpretation and just giving people a Creative Writing assignment. The film spent more time having people slowly walk from one part of the room to another, slowly sit down, slowly get up, slowly do menial tasks-- it's like 24 but there's no international espionage-- than set up or flesh out anything. What is the extent of Joey's psychological problems, is he actually schizofrenic, why did he leave the business, what did he do in the desert to himself, why does Jack have the same killer instincts as his father, how can the family just accept him back in, why does Edie have such bizarre sexual quirks, why is so much time wasted showing people NOT DOING ANYTHING ON CAMERA?! People do not move or act this slowly in real life, even when extremely deep in thought. Mr. Cronenberg just needed to pad the film out since the screenplay was thinner than the paper it was typed on. I mean, before the two men come into the diner there's almost 20 minutes of stupid crap that has nothing to do with the plot. WE UNDERSTAND THAT TOM IS AN EVERYDAY FAMILY MAN. We don't need to see Jack catching a fly ball, Tom having the most awkward sex filmed in an R movie in some time, or the two robbers spending FIVE MINUTES leaving a hotel in REAL TIME. I wonder if this film even had any editting done, it seems like they tried to throw in as much extra footage of nothing important as they could to stall for time. I give Cronenberg leeway because he's pretentious America's favorite little moviemaker, so I'm not going to give this movie a 0 and get his fans all mad. And I bet all sorts of people will come up with horsecrap allegories and metaphors to cover up their denial over just how dumb a film this was since THERE'S NOTHING TO THIS FILM. It's told as basic and unsurprising as possible, without resolving any of the mystery, or on the other side of the coin trying to act like the mystery isn't important. The film has no motive, and it has no reason for the audience to be interested. You have to force yourself to be engaged by History of Violence. I shouldn't have to be doing the work! Just a bad, bad, bad, overhyped movie. Don't care about the source material or what Cronenberg did in the past... not interested in History of The Guy Who Made Videodrome And How He's Such a Misunderstood Genius. I'm only interested in the History of Violence. Too bad I didn't get to see any of it!