I finally got around to seeing this -- Rhinotainment

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 22:22:17 03/21/06 Tue
Author: Rocket
Subject: I finally got around to seeing this
In reply to: The Rhino 's message, "A History of Violence" on 18:21:31 10/19/05 Wed

Maybe I had built it up too strongly in my mind, but I didn't enjoy it as much as I thought I would.

I thought it was good, but not great and certainly not worthy of Best Picture nominations it received at many of the film award groups.

I liked the premise a lot. The director did a good job of playing the audience: Is he or isn't he the guy Ed Harris thinks he is?

I liked Viggo in the role, as well as the actor who played his son. Maria Bello was okay, although I've liked her more in other movies (like "The Cooler").

But... some things really bothered me.

I would have really expected the movie to clue the user in on certain details, like which event sent the lead character into hiding in the first place? Was it simply because of what he did to Ed Harris, or had the guilt of his profession been the catalyst?

With the movie only being 90 minutes long, there was plenty of time for stuff like this.

I also felt that characters often acted in a fashion that simply didn't make sense. Viggo Mortenson appeared as nervous as a pre-teen before having sex with his wife of many years. I know there was the kinky role-playing element from his wife, but jeez... he was more timid than the 40 year-old virgin.

I was completely unimpressed with William Hurt. His villian portrayal was reminiscent of the standard heels from Steven Segall movies, complete with goofy one-liners and non-reactions to his hench-men being offed. In fact, the ending reminded me A LOT of a vintage Segall flick.

And while I'm not a prude, I felt some of the sex and violence scenes were so gratuitious that they seemed to almost be done as a satire. I know that with the subject matter, the violence needed to be highlighted, but can't someone get shot without the camera showing a close-up of them with half of their face hanging off like a bed-sheet on a clothesline.

Maybe I just wasn't in the right mood, or maybe my expectations were too high. Otherwise, I'd have to say that this film was hyped a tad bit too much.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

Absolutely Fair criticisms...all of them (NT) -- CC, 17:26:38 03/26/06 Sun