A History of Violence: Critic Reviews

There's not a scene wasted in the 97-minute unspooling, not a detour that doesn't tell, surprise, horrify, delight.

A masterpiece of indirection and pure visceral thrills, David Cronenberg's latest mindblower is the feel-good, feel-bad movie of the year.

Violence is in the spirit of the hardest-hitting film noir offerings from the '50s, but far more explicit.

Packed inside David Cronenberg's latest film, which presents itself as gift-wrapped, shoot-'em-up entertainment, is a sobering reflection on our culture's attitude toward violence.

The movie's brilliance resides in its use of cinematic convention to shatter an illusion of social normalcy.

Cronenberg's movie manages to have its cake and eat it -- impersonating an action flick in its staccato mayhem while questioning these violent attractions every step of the way.

A lot is going on in David Cronenberg's masterful A History of Violence, and you'll miss it if you blink.

A History of Violence is shrewd, penetrating and, yes, entertaining. It's also one of the best films of the year.

[A] vigorously sublime take on guilt and innocence, the damned and the redeemed.

A remarkably convincing examination of heroism, hero worship, and the seductive allure of villainy.

This is not a movie about plot, but about character. It is about how people turn out the way they do, and about whether the world sometimes functions like a fool's paradise.

Cronenberg crafts a remarkably interesting thriller, with suspense that is less about what's coming around the corner--often, we know--and more about Tom's slow transformation in the face of terror.

Cronenberg isn't engaging in parody or irony. Nor is he nihilistically pandering to our worst impulses: the filmmaking is too measured and too intelligent. He implicitly respects us and our responses, even when those responses are silly or disturbing.

Cronenberg's movie is eerily compelling and darkly humorous. And chilling -- to the bone.

The first half of the story -- the one shrouded in doubt -- is much more effective than the second half, which is shrouded in bloodletting.

At the very least it's oddly admirable, at its best it's both passionate and disturbing, two words that come close to describing all of Cronenberg's work.

It's rare to find a filmmaker who can deliver such a message and keep us riveted every minute of screen time. But Cronenberg manages it, making A History of Violence one of his best, and most realistic, films ever.

Mr. Cronenberg has imbued his narrative with a style of personal conviction that is found in only the greatest auteurs.

Coming from Cronenberg, the question arises: Is that all there is?

A History of Violence is solid entertainment value for the money, but those who think it's saying anything new or profound are kidding themselves.

David Cronenberg's adaptation of the underwritten graphic novel of the same name is a spare, mean movie of shocking violence and wrenching moral dilemmas.

It is an assured, potent statement from an auteur who isn't afraid to pack deep thoughts into a movie made for a wide audience.

Cronenberg, like Count Basie on the piano or Hemingway on the page, has mastered the art of economy, paring down his work to its thematic essentials without any loss, and even some gain, in textured complexity.

An absolutely sensational piece of filmmaking.

As the title indicates, this is not a sedate art film. It contains moments of sharp, vicious mayhem and there is a body count. But the strength of the movie lies in its psychological complexity and depth.