Bland orchestral music that didn't seem in keeping with the tone of the film. Over the top romantic/sexual scene earlier in film. Stretched out "let's all stare at each other" ending. Gangsters were pretty good characters (as in feeling authentic). Wouldn't watch again

One of the best movie ever!

No idea how this film got a 7.4 on IMBD. No real twists or thrill. Each character seems awfully awkward throughout. Solid 5/10 at best.

Absolutely awful film. Slowest film and poor acting

The cinematography and music is completely over the top and the improvised martial arts moves are cringey. The plot is slow and uninteresting. The last 15 minutes drags on to the point of boredom. The entire movie itself is underwhelming and sleep inducing.

A slow, methodically paced movie that raises more questions than it gives answers. Gritty, intense, & a welcome change of pace for me.

Great Movie. Fresh storyline and acting make this a captivating film from start to end. Mortensen and Harris steal the show!

It's slowburn, though unlike many other slowburn films, it's runtime is perfect, and really doenst include any unnecessary scenes. The acting is superb, the few action and gore there is, manages to be perfectly executed, and the whole drama, script and characters are pretty convincing.

I don't get why people don't get this movie. It's a great movie. It's not a kitchen sink drama. It mocks that illusion actually. So David Cronenberg! It doesn't sentimentalise relationships, but at the same time keeps them at the centre of the story. The plot moves cleanly, crisply and at pace. I believe and accept all the characters in their universe and I get the balance between Tom and Edie, and I don't accept any view that criticises or judges the feelings between them. It doesn't overindulge the audience but keeps them a little at distance so they can decide where their sympathies lie. Which is maybe what some viewers don't like. And after a brief 97 minutes (who said it was slow?) it ends exactly where it should. You could ask What Next? for each one of them after the vignette concludes..

Well, thats 96 minutes of my life I'm not getting back! This film had a mind numbingly slow start, the most predictable middle and an awful ending. Don't bother wasting your time watching it, you'd have more fun painting your hallway then watching it dry! How this is rated so highly is beyond me!

About as convincing as a 60 dollar note. Paved with predictability! This time it’s the armchair critics who’ve got it right. Don’t waste your time with it.

Can’t understand how this has such a high rating, it never really got going. A thin and predictable plot, and overall not very well acted barring Ed Harris who carries the scenes he’s in. Left me wanting. Very disappointing

Just dumb. Terrible script. Slow. Characters say one thing then do the exact opposite - stupid. This is a late Saturday night watch after many beers when your brain doesn't want to be challenged.

Far and away Viggo and Ed’s best film.

It’s so unbelievably stupid and poorly acted but in a weird way it makes you want to watch it more. The fact it’s supposed to be serious makes it all the more funny

Some of the worst acting I’ve ever seen.

Too much gratious violence for our tastes. No need for the rough sex. Actually poorly written.

Tom Stall had the perfect life... until he became a hero. A History of Violence is a 2005 action thriller film directed by David Cronenberg 🔫 Not bad, but not my favourite either 😉 It’s ok, but I feel mixed about this one 😉 I’d recommend it if you like this genre, but if not then probably give it a miss 👍🏼👎🏼 An average family is thrust into the spotlight after the father commits a seemingly self-defense murder at his diner.

So many aspects of this movie failed. Over acted, poorly directed and poor screenplay.

How did this get such a high rating ? I spent 90 minutes waiting for it to get going… it didn’t. Poor dialogue and character development.