A History of Violence

 
Complex examination of violence; not for kids.
  • Review Date: March 13, 2006
  • Rated: R
  • Genre: Drama
  • Release Year: 2005
  • Running Time: 96 minutes

What parents need to know

Positive messages

Mobsters are brutal, killers ruthless, and even the well intentioned dad has to murder his enemies.

Violence

The film's title speaks to its concerns, and the fight scenes are rough.

Sex

Sexual imagery ranges from tender to rough, twice quite explicit.

Language

Gangster talk, frequent uses of "f--k."

Consumerism
Not applicable
Drinking, drugs, & smoking

Smoking, drinking, some drug use.

Parents Need to Know

Parents need to know that this movie is not for kids. It features brutal, deft violence (based on a graphic novel, the film's title is indicative of its focus). It opens with a scene showing dead, bloody bodies (after the murders take place), then shows frequent violent acts, including bone-cracking martial arts, hand-to-hand fighting (one character has his nose pushed through his skull), shooting, knifing, and strangling. It also includes fairly explicit sexual material (including passionate kissing, a cunnilingus scene, and a frankly rough intercourse scene on a stairway). Characters curse frequently, smoke, drink, and do drugs.

What's the story?

In A HISTORY OF VIOLENCE, Tom Stall (Viggo Mortensen) runs a popular diner in sleepy-town Millbrook, Indiana, loves his wife Edie (Maria Bello) and their two kids, six-year-old Sarah (Heidi Hayes) and adolescent Jack (Ashton Holmes). The collapse of Tom and Edie's domestic serenity begins when two killers swagger into the diner at closing time one evening, demanding coffee and looking for trouble. When it appears certain they mean to murder an exceptionally helpless-looking victim, Tom reveals extraordinary fighting skills, killing both assailants. This attracts tabloidy media attention and within hours, a visit from Irish mobster Carl Fogarty (Ed Harris), who insists Tom is \"Joey,\" a thug from back in the day in Philadelphia who, no small thing, left Carl blind in one eye and badly scarred. While Tom works to resolve his own identity, his son Jack is only beginning to understand his own. Finding that his own past might be a collection of lies, the boy is also faced with daily and increased bullying at school. He finally fights back, revealing his own frightening capacity for violence.

Is it any good?

QUALITY
 

Smart and compelling, A History of Violence is not for kids. David Cronenberg's film -- based on John Wagner and Vince Locke's graphic novel -- moves with a deliberate, sometimes difficult slowness, featuring sets and performances as such, not quite real, more emblems than lived-in experiences. Each moment seems equally strange, fragile and vaguely artificial. History soon breaks open into a meditation not only on sensationalism and violence, but also, and more emphatically, on identity and masculinity, as these notions are entangled in U.S. self-puffing mythology. The plot problem has to do with Tom's re-identification: is he lying when he denies being Joey? Is Carl mistaken? And how else to explain Tom's killer skills?

The movie examines the slippage between myth and realism. While it's easy to be thrilled by the hard-hitting and frequently explosive action (fantastic action-movie action), the film also asks you to step back and contemplate the ideals, costs, and bodies in play. Tom's mutation into a killer is surely startling. And Edie's struggle to believe him and also to protect her children is surely poignant (Bello is stunning). But the more crucial point has to do with what you want to see: a revenge picture, a familial resolution, a heroic triumph, a just punishment, or maybe some hysterical combination of all. If A History of Violence is, to some extent, a history of U.S. excesses and self-images, it is also a critique of unself-conscious consumption of same

Families can talk about...

  • Families can talk about the way violence destroys families in the film. Not only does Tom's current family come to distrust him once he kills the men in the diner and is identified as a former gangster, but also, his relationship with his brother, premised on violent macho codes, can only end badly. How does the movie suggest that violence is "hereditary"? How is also not so much "genetic" (as Jack's transformation when he stands up to the bullies seems as metaphorical as it is literal), but more culturally conditioned? How does the movie critique media (movies, tv news) as they celebrate violence as a means to masculine identity?

Movie details

Theatrical release date:September 23, 2005
DVD release date:March 14, 2006
Cast:Maria Bello, Viggo Mortensen, William Hurt
Directors:David Cronenberg, Douglas Aarniokoski
Studio:New Line
Genre:Drama
Run time:96 minutes
MPAA rating:R
MPAA explanation:strong brutal violence, graphic sexuality, nudity, language and some drug use

This review of A History of Violence was written by

Common Sense Media's unbiased ratings are conducted by expert reviewers and aren't influenced by the product's creators or by any of our funders, affiliates, or partners.

Quality

Our star rating assesses the media's overall quality.

Find out more

Learning ratings

  • Best: Really engaging; great learning approach.
  • Very Good: Engaging; good learning approach.
  • Good: Pretty engaging; good learning approach.
  • Fair: Somewhat engaging; OK learning approach.
  • Not for Learning: Not recommended for learning.
  • Not for Kids: Not age-appropriate for kids; not recommended for learning.

Find out more

About our buy links

When you use our links to make a purchase, Common Sense Media earns a small affiliate fee from Amazon or iTunes. As a nonprofit organization, these funds help us continue providing independent, ad-free services for educators, families, and kids while the price you pay remains the same. Thank you for your support.
Read more

See more about how we rate and review.

About Our Rating System

The age displayed for each title is the minimum one for which it's developmentally appropriate. We recently updated all of our reviews to show only this age, rather than the multi-color "slider." Get more information about our ratings.

What parents and kids say

See all user reviews

Share your thoughts with other parents and kids Write a user review

A safe community is important to us. Please observe our guidelines

Teen, 16 years old Written byCurbspaget April 9, 2008
age 0+
 

Very, very, very bad.

I watched this movie after reading the book (which is very different and much better), and thought it was horrible. I think the book was a little more violent, but I don't understand what was up with the whole sex scene. That was no where in the book.
Adult Written byjlwilliamson April 9, 2008
Adult Written bydavidr1998 July 17, 2015
age 16+
 

Good Film

This movie great. It should not be seen by anyone under 16.

Poll

Did our review help you make an informed decision about this product?

Digital Compass