Comments on: A History of Violence

By: Jackie Cognac

Jackie Cognac — Tue, 25 Jul 2006 23:18:50 +0000

THIS IS ONE HELL OF AN AWESOME SITE FIRST OF ALL. I REALLY LOVE THE LAYOUT OF
THE WHOLE THING BUT……….
PLEASE TELL ME YOU
THINK ABOUT THIS PIC OF ANGELINA ON MY DEDICATION PAGE TO HER

By: Shotgun Opera » Bookgasm

Shotgun Opera » Bookgasm — Fri, 02 Jun 2006 12:56:38 +0000

[...] Did you like Viggo Mortensen in A HISTORY OF VIOLENCE? What about Angelina Jolie in MR. AND MRS. SMITH or Uma Thurman in KILL BILL? Then you’ll love Victor Gischler’s SHOTGUN OPERA, a maniacally paced, over-the-top Grand Guignol of guns, killing, guns, more killing, more guns, more killing, and did I say there were guns involved? If shooting a gun is the aria in this opera, then they are sung well and loud, but perhaps the libretto needs a little tinkering. [...]

By: Richard

Richard — Thu, 23 Mar 2006 22:06:09 +0000

Cronenberg definitely knows people’s squeamish thresholds. And to amend an earlier post, I wouldn’t actually say he uses violence and gore so much as a more vague creation one could call “physiolgical horror” or some kind of “physical insanity” that is more disturbing simply because there’s no context for it.

It’s definitely not for everyone so I don’t fault Brian or anyone else from shying away. But I still stand by A HISTORY OF VIOLENCE, even for non-fans of Cronenberg.

By: Brian

Brian — Thu, 23 Mar 2006 15:31:01 +0000

Don’t get me wrong that I think Cronenberg is some sort of hack…I pretty much put him in my (fairly small) list of GREAT ARTISTS I JUST DON’T GET. Some day I might really dig his stuff, but I can’t ignore that there are certain things that I’m really squeamish about and he always seems to hit those for me.

I feel similarly about Todd Solondz. I gave his first two a try but, after HAPPINESS, I’ll never go back.

Who knows, though? 20 years ago I hated Elvis Costello and Steely Dan.

By: Allan

Allan — Thu, 23 Mar 2006 13:48:37 +0000

I CAN”T WAIT for Slither. It’s actually higher up on my “gotta-see” list than Snakes on a Plane.

As for complaining about Cronenberg’s obsession with the visceral, all I can say is I highly doubt we would be talking about him now if it weren’t for his personal fixations. In many cases the difference between an artist and a hack is that the artist is compelled to expose their obsessions to the world over and over again, while the hack is content to go with the flow and forsake their own creative desires to give the audience what it wants.

I’m not saying you have to buy what Cronenberg is selling, but I think you do him a disservice by describing him as only a purveyor of perverse violence. Clearly the esteem with which he is held in the creative community is proof that his films are more than a collection of grisly special effects–they are all sub-textual goldmines that reward the viewer with new ideas and insights every time you watch them. Cronenberg makes violent films because that is how he is best able to get the themes that fascinate him across, and I for one am very glad he does.

And, for the record, the non-violent (physically if not emotional) The King of Comedy is my favorite Scorsese movie.

By: Louis Fowler

Louis Fowler — Thu, 23 Mar 2006 00:10:51 +0000

Am I the only one who is enthusiastically excited for SLITHER???

By: Brian

Brian — Wed, 22 Mar 2006 23:35:25 +0000

I like the horror, and I like the funny, over-the-top gore (Evil Dead and such, though I shan’t be catching SLITHER, even with Jenna Fischer in it), but I’ve never really had much of a stomach for the realistic, even if it’s sort of in a fantastical context, like THE FLY or EXISTENZ (which was just a really, really negative experience for me).

And Rod, remember, for every KUNDUN, there’s an AFTER HOURS…

…okay, maybe not, but I heard THE AVIATOR wasn’t half bad.

By: Louis Fowler

Louis Fowler — Wed, 22 Mar 2006 22:19:28 +0000

Are you not a gore / horror fan, Brian?

By: Richard

Richard — Wed, 22 Mar 2006 21:21:10 +0000

Well, you’re clearly not a Cronenberg fan but it would be a shame if your prejudice prevented you from seeing one of the most provocative movies in recent years. Cronenberg’s use of violence and gore has been fetishistic in the past, no doubt, but that’s not the case here.

By: Rod Lott

Rod Lott — Wed, 22 Mar 2006 21:04:36 +0000

Yeah, the ones not worth seeing!

By: Brian

Brian — Wed, 22 Mar 2006 20:33:25 +0000

I understand the theory of showing the consequences of violence in that context, I guess I just have issue with what seems to me to be Cronenberg’s obsession. It’s almost as if he approaches every script looking to make sure that there’s something in there he can make disturbing and possibly nauseating. Scorcese’s given us a lot of violence over the years, but he’s still able to give us the occasional flick without an icepick in the skull or heads crushed in vices.

By: Richard

Richard — Wed, 22 Mar 2006 19:28:26 +0000

Given Viggo’s heroic deeds where the audience surely feels a giddiness, Cronenberg felt it important to show the audience the results/aftermath. This is a critical study of the human (and American) response to violence. Without showing the consequences, it wouldn’t work. In fact, the entire film is about the consequences of violence.

This is a stand-alone film in Cronenberg’s filmography and shouldn’t be compared to his past works, or have his past works be held against this film. It’s definitely one of his best films but not because it’s different than his others. VIDEODROME and THE FLY are also among his best. That’s my 2cents, at least.

By: Louis Fowler

Louis Fowler — Wed, 22 Mar 2006 19:27:59 +0000

You forgot to mention it’s other selling point–Maria Bello in a cheerleader outfit.

By: Rod Lott

Rod Lott — Wed, 22 Mar 2006 17:14:45 +0000

Don’t forget his role as the evil Dr. Wimmer in JASON X!

By: Ryun

Ryun — Wed, 22 Mar 2006 16:45:52 +0000

“up for a couple of Oscars”

“modern-day Western”

“the line between good and bad is blurred”

“classic”

Man, David Cronenberg’s gone nowhere but downhill since he was the evil Dr. Decker in “Nightbreed.”

By: Rod Lott

Rod Lott — Wed, 22 Mar 2006 16:36:16 +0000

I don’t understand it, either, but here the gore shots serve an entirely different purpose. They’re quick, but serve as a reminder that violence is not something to be glorified.

By: Brian

Brian — Wed, 22 Mar 2006 16:29:36 +0000

and if it wasn’t for the one or two gore shots, I’d be really interested in seeing this. I just don’t understand Cronenberg’s obsession with ensuring a place for gore in every one of his projects, regardless of the genre. I may eventually see it, but Munich and Good Night and Good Luck are a lot higher on my rental list.