This is really one of the worst movies I have ever seen! The acting is just ridiculously bad from every character, i think the sheriff did the best part ha ha. And what about that sex scene on the stairs Jesus, nobody would like that ha ha. Really one of the worst acting I've seen in years! Trough the whole movie it was sh*t.. waste of my time! Sorry, i had to say this, i even made an account to say this ha ha! But seriously, why is this movie rated with a 7,5? Thats just crazy, they should destroy it. Cheers

Despite sitting through this film to its conclusion I have to say it is currently overrated on IMDb and while I didn't quite hate the film I didn't quite like it enough to rate it much higher than I have. I found some of the scripting to be quite cringe worthy and unrealistic and some of the early scenes were quite poorly acted out especially in relation to those stories that relating to the family and children. On the plus side in the action/violent scenes and the development of the main character,who was acted more bearably than other characters throughout, was interesting. The one plus in terms of the story and style of presentation in violent/ tense scenes was that there were some minor reflections of the movie and TV series Fargo which kept me just about interested enough to stay watching to the end.

David Cronenberg's film is a visceral look at the effects of violence on normal, everyday family life; charting how it ripples out from a single act of violence until it becomes all encompassing and prevalent. Typically for a Cronenberg film, it doesn't shy from the scenes that other movie makers avoid; here we get some violent shootings and explicit sex scenes, but it's nothing compared to some of the director's earlier fare like THE FLY. Instead, A HISTORY OF VIOLENCE is a surprisingly subtle, well-acted thriller that builds the suspense scene by scene, has many interesting and surprising plot twists, and keeps you engaged throughout.Viggo Mortensen fits the small-town hero role like a glove, and handles his part with aplomb; he's especially good when handling more complicated scenes later on in the movie. Some great actors ably support him, although Maria Bello, as his wife, fails to make her character the remotest bit likable. Instead, the actor playing Viggo's son is superb, Ed Harris excels as a scarred gangster, and William Hurt turns up right at the end in a creepy showdown.Cronenberg's direction is as assured as ever, although his customary coldness is apparent in one or two repellent moments. The various acts of violence are handled very well and are surprisingly restrained given the director's pedigree, but this doesn't detract from their impact. All in all this is a very well-handled thriller that has a number of interesting, compelling themes, including identity, doing what is right, and, surprise, surprise, violence. Cronenberg's maturest work yet.

I admire the director Cronenberg and like most of his works, but A History of Violence is not about violence, it is exploitation of violence in sick, disgusting manner. There is something wrong with the way of handling violence and sex of this film. Even the sex scenes between the couple is somehow different, crude and nasty. In real life, it is OK maybe, but the question is what is the point? If it is to show us the passion between them, there are lots of ways to do that. I think this movie is an example of violence porn. The movie starts out well with a powerful opening scene, good atmosphere like a modern Western, amazing villains, but then it turns into a nasty B movie in the end. I love B movies from 90s and 80s especially, but it doesn't fit here. The cinematography here is very well done, Ed Harris was the real star of the movie for me. However, our anti hero and his origin story don't work because of all those sickness and sadism and it is like the movie glorifies his nasty actions and probably want us to accept his acts and root for him. The story with memory loss or secret identity themes make no sense here. Sorry, but this movie is not Total Recall which is a real masterpiece. The man who appears in the final act doesn't add anything to the story in spite of that great actor who was wasted here. The final act that reminds you a bad B movie is another violence porn, softer this time. Our anti hero is not another manly man unfortunately. His violent actions cause some sick and sadistic moments, so what would you do if your anti hero is a hateful man? I was with Ed Harris's character though. By the way, I disagree with the idea that A History of Violence is a deep or thought provoking film. This film is no Shakespeare, it is like a violent action movie for video with some great actors and good cinematography. I enjoyed some parts, but overall I was disgusted. One final word, I think Eastern Promises is a better film.