- Studio: New Line Cinema
- Release Date: Sep 23, 2005
User Score
7.0
out of 10
Generally favorable reviews- based on 585 Ratings
User score distribution:
-
Positive: 405 out of 585
-
Mixed: 46 out of 585
-
Negative: 134 out of 585
Review this movie
-
-
Please sign in or create an account before writing a review.
-
-
Submit
-
Check Spelling
- User score
- Most active
- By date
- Most helpful
- Most Clicked
-
MonicaFOct 3, 20052Are you guys kiddding? This was a HORRIBLE movie. The plot was horrible, the pace was horrible, the idea was horrible. It was slow and predictable. When we left the theater EVERYONE was saying how bad it was and atleast 15 people got up and walked out DURING the movie. The ONLY saving grace in this movie is William Hurts 5 minutes on screen.. YES 5 MINUTES!!! Do not see this movie.
-
-
AdamOct 3, 20052Just a horrible movie. How could the critics be so wrong on this? How could they almost unanimously support such a horrible movie?
-
-
JeremyK.Jan 10, 20063
-
-
ElieOct 1, 20050This was the worst movie I have ever seen. The writing was the biggest bunch of hack tripe I have ever heard. I cannot believe even one critic liked this. Don't see this. It will make you angry.
-
-
BradB.Oct 17, 20054Croenenberg's direction is uneven, slow, and prodding....he gets very little out of his actors, especially the five year old girl. William Hurt was miscast as Joey's "Philly" brother. D - movie from a B list director.
-
-
JustinTOct 3, 20052
-
-
FantasyOct 5, 20051
-
-
ScottM.Oct 6, 20052If I ever see another Cronenberg Movie again shoot me please.He really is the most overrated Director ever his films are at best okay.But his choice of poor actors and bad scripts is key to confusing the audience along a really offbeat journey.If you think this is good you best start watching some decent films please this is rubbish of the highest order!
-
-
JohnstonOct 8, 20050This film is so bad it is not even worthy of a score of 1. The first 5 minutes are predictable and from there it disintergrates before your very eyes. It loses all credibility after 30 minutes from which there is no escape. It just becomes more awful by the frame. The ending is so preposterous it is not even worth commenting about. The director needs a reality check? Avoid at all costs.
-
-
ChadBJan 4, 20062TERRIBLE. I'm not usually bothered by violence in movies, but this was just random extreme violence and uncomfortable sex scenes. I was about to walk out and ask for my money back when the movie inexplicably ended.
-
-
RadCompanyDotNetFeb 7, 20063
-
-
IsabelC.Mar 20, 20063
-
-
JoelMar 9, 20061Bad acting, bad writing. Nothing thrilling, no big plot twist to be had, just random violence and unneccessary, uncomfortable sex scenes. Horrible.
-
-
IanK.Apr 2, 20061
-
-
AaronS.Jul 24, 20060You've got to be kidding. This is a dopey, unrealistic, wooden movie that thinks showing a few scalps blowing off makes it a dangerous, deep look at violence. That scene on the stairs or in the locker room. If you thought that was an insight into the human condition, or even marginal acting, you should stick to Scary Movie.
-
-
SP.Jun 8, 20070
-
-
DavidS.Feb 15, 20102This was hilarious. but that's not necessarily good. the final scene had me in tears almost. the highschool son subplot was so incredibly over the top. it was like leave it to beaver. oh man, and the gratuitous dress-up cheerleader sex at the beginning. classic. reviewers are bought and sold man. i can't believe this. seriously, only watch this movie if you just got some dank.
-
-
JerrryS.Oct 1, 20052The movie was done halfway thru and it kept going on. They add a main charater with no background near the end just to kill him. What was with the last scene where the passed the meatloaf and then it ends. Just like meatloaf, this movie was plain and a was of a meal. Not even worth a DVD rental.
-
-
DannW.Oct 1, 20052
-
-
ElaineM.Oct 15, 20053The dialogue was so awful I was embarrassed for the actors. Mortenson gives a good performance, given what he had to work with, and Hurt is great. All in all, a huge disappointment. How the movie critics do fawn over Cronenberg!
-
-
DudDOct 15, 20051People in the movie burst out with laughter at the supposedly dramatic points of the movie. Contrarily, I wanted to burst out with rage at the stupidity of the movie. A real flop.
-
-
NicMOct 10, 20053I am not quite sure why this is getting such strong reviews. The film is very cliche and despite Viggo's amazing performance, I found the script to be flat. The critic's are getting shabby lately.
-
-
MikeDOct 10, 20052
-
-
LibbyF.Oct 10, 20053
-
-
ChrisC.Oct 2, 20053
-
-
MarkC.Oct 22, 20050I want my money and time back. The acting was beyond wooden, the story was pointless, and the writing was horrible. The people who think this movie is great are the ones who think that's what the "cool" people are saying.
-
-
CraigA.Oct 24, 20051
-
-
RamonaCOct 25, 20051Starts out sensational and self destructs. Overrated and overhyped trailer trash of a movie. Avoid.
-
-
RichardCOct 29, 20050Terrible. Random sex scenes and enough violence to make Sin City look like Mr. Rodger's Neighborhood combine to make the most pointless and disturbing movie I've ever seen.
-
-
MorganM.Oct 3, 20050
-
-
LisaR.Oct 3, 20052
-
-
BettyW.Oct 3, 20052This was a really bad movie, do not even waste your money to rent it.
-
-
OwenDOct 3, 20051
-
-
PeterGOct 3, 20052
-
-
SteveN.Oct 3, 20053Action scenes were very good, sex scenes were laughable, entire audience was booing at the end.
-
-
RachelI.Oct 4, 20052There's no denying it: this movie's bad. A completely unsubtle, predictable piece of trash. Acting so bad it hurts. An action-drama with training wheels.
-
-
MarkOct 4, 20051
-
-
ErikB.Oct 6, 20054Awesome violent action scenes. Crap downtimes. I love how we spent 10 minutes at the beginning getting to know the bad guys who got killed in about 15 seconds.
-
-
LoriK.Oct 6, 20051This was quite possibly the worst movie ever made - no character development, no plot, terrible - disappointing - acting, horrible script, and basically no point. I laughed all the way through this ridiculous film and I don't think it was supposed to be a comedy...ooops. The only parts that were not difficult to sit through were the fight scenes and the graphics.
-
-
JuniorB.Oct 7, 20050I subscribe to the KISS principal so I'll keep this quite brief.....THIS MOVIE SUCKS!!!! Read all of the other comments that trash this flick and there is no more to be said.
-
-
SriV.Oct 8, 20050This is among the worst movies I've ever seen. It is basically composed of a few scenes of graphic violence + some scenes of sex + lots of garbage. I don't know how it got such high ratings here.
-
-
JesseJ.Oct 8, 20050The only thing "beautiful" about this movie, is that I will never, ever have to see it again.
-
-
MichelleS.Oct 8, 20053The screenplay is inauthentic and the acting is laughable. The movie stinks.
-
-
HollisH.Oct 8, 20050
-
-
walterc.Oct 8, 20054Film had great potential for the first 1/2, but got sappy afer that including a number of unnintended laughs from the audience. Some great acting out of Hurt and Harris, but not enough to bouy the rest of the film.
-
-
JaneOct 9, 20050In a word - Awful!
-
-
JackM.Oct 9, 20053Okay script but very weak directing that seemed downright amateurish at times. This is definitely a case of "The Emperor's New Clothes."
-
-
DarkmageJan 13, 20064
-
-
KevinK.Jan 3, 20061This movie was a complete joke. I saw it because it got good reviews and the trailer seemed thrilling. Oh was I surprised, not with a killer plot and precise dialogue, rather with laughable violence, raunchy nudity, and foreshadowing so bold that a blind person could see it. Don't even rent this movie. Your time's better spent reading a good book.
-
-
JamesB.Mar 10, 20064Awful Rendition Of A Awesome Graphic Novel, The Only Thing I Liked About This Movie Was The No Holds Barred Violence That Ensues. Other Than That Don't Waste Your Time With This Movie Read The Book Instead.
-
-
molotovMar 15, 20062The great trailer and critics' raves made this a must-see. But, in reality, it just ain't so. Badly written; badly directed. There's just no depth to the thing, resulting in an incredibly empty viewing experience. Almost laughably bad.
-
-
c4logicC.Mar 19, 20062
-
-
MikeP.Mar 19, 20061The only "history" worth noting in this overrated, almost unbearable film is the 1 hour and forty minutes of mine I wasted watching it.
-
-
PhengY.Apr 21, 20060Truly repulsive and inane. My little brother can produce and direct a better movie of the same name if it were a contest. Am I missing something that the critics are seeing.
-
-
MarkP.Apr 23, 20064I too am astonished at how well this movie was received by critics, especially since I typically favour critical darlings. Moreover, I am astonished that many user comments found herein have unreservedly proclaimed this movie a "masterpiece." Frankly, to those of you who have accused the individuals who responded poorly to this movie as
-
-
BradK.Apr 3, 20063Awful acting. Trite story. Awkward script. The only redeeming factor is the visceral thrill of the violence, which only takes you so far. I have never disagreed more with the critics than on this one. The dialogue between the high school students deserves special mention for its gag-inducing powers.
-
-
LanceC.Jun 4, 20062
-
-
David.S.Aug 4, 20062
-
-
RirenFeb 3, 20074
-
-
IHJun 6, 20072
-
-
DannyDec 9, 20082Pretty bad movie, expected a lot better from the initial critics responses. Could have been a TV movie alright. The family just seemed so fake, I couldn't relate with them. Overall I 'd avoid this movie.
-
-
RebBOct 11, 20052
-
-
nigelOct 10, 20052I agree, it was totally awful. Worst movie to get good reviews ever.
-
-
LarryOct 13, 20050
-
-
AlexO.Oct 14, 20050
-
-
CherSNov 5, 20050Pop some corn at home and skip the lines. Silly movie, and some things just don't add up. No crowd at this movie, the word must be out.
-
-
JessK.Nov 8, 20050I don't know anyone who liked this movie.
-
-
KurtS.Oct 18, 20051I
-
-
JosephF.Dec 17, 20051
-
-
CesarOct 2, 20053Just saw it, and generally unimpressed. Although the performances are very good, the pace is broken and the violence gets so its laugh out loud funny. Not so good for a psychological drama.
-
-
tedb.Oct 22, 20052WAY WAY WAY Overrated.
-
-
BruceL.Oct 28, 20052
-
-
JohnMOct 29, 20053
-
-
SharonF.Oct 30, 20050This was one of the worst movies I have ever seen! The dialog was terrible, the scenes were choppy, the female character was overly emotional and some of the action didn't may any sense. We made fun of it all the way through, whoever wrote this script needs to take some lessons from Tarantino.
-
-
BrianNOct 3, 20050I walked out on this movie, first time I've done so in 15 years. We were laughing through the first 20 minutes. One of the most contrived, cliched character developments in film in a very long time. The only thing missing in the film's first act is a paper boy throwing the paper in the front lawn and a milkman dropping the bottles off to the missis. Sorry and pathetic.
-
-
RichardG.Oct 3, 20054
-
-
DeerkCOct 4, 20054
-
-
DWOct 4, 20053Another film foolishly overrated by the critics, I suppose out of some clouded deference for Cronenberg. From the in-B-movies-only unfeeling bad guys of the beginning, through V. Mortenson's bad performance (that only serves its tricky purpose) and poorly executed action sequences, the movie is both inhuman and a stylistic mess. An idea squandered.
-
-
pacoweOct 5, 20054I'm surprised at the positive reviews this film is garnering. I enjoyed the film somewhat, but only because I thought certain parts were intentionally humorous. The more I think about the overacting, the slow pace, the gratuitous sex scenes and the ultraviolence, the more I dislike the film.
-
-
RobkOct 6, 20054A suprisingly bad film. The film overall had a lack of directing, which is surprising since this film was directed by the same man who directed Crash. The acting needed to be so much more and the plot itself missed a few twists and turn that the story desperatly needed. I was looking forward to seeing this movie, but now that I've seen it I wish I'd never heard of A History of Violence.
-
-
EricK.Oct 7, 20052
-
-
SteveOct 9, 20053Not sure what film the critics were watching. It was pretty much average as far as movies go--nothing special. I had such high expectations after reading some of the reviews that I was thoroughly disapponted, and thus the especially low score.
-
-
DavisNov 13, 20061
-
-
JeffB.Jan 16, 20062this movie uses every cliche in the book to drive the plot, and is so unoriginal, i found my self laughing out loud at parts that were supposed to be serious. and the acting is pitiful.
-
-
AdamJan 27, 20063
-
-
JamesL.Mar 15, 20061Proof that I will never take the 'expert' reviews seriously again. This was crap in its finest form. I just finished watching it 10 minutes ago; Ed Harris is the only memorable actor. The rest of them are melodramatic waste of space. Don't do it! Save your $ or suffer crap in its finest form ever.
-
-
MarcM.Mar 15, 20062
-
-
markMar 16, 20061
-
-
KiwiClayMar 19, 20062Absolute Rubbish. Marketed as a violent art house rumination on violence and identity, but really all it was at the end of the day was a hamfisted, ham-acted, poorly written comic book movie. Avoid.
-
-
RizzoMar 31, 20061People are trying to pass this film off as intellectual. I agree that it may have a deeper meaning; however, as pessimistic as it may sound, most Americans do not get it upon watching the movie. Most just like the violence and the sex. The deeper meaning of the movie did not outweigh the fact that I found it unrealist and cheap.
-
-
VictoriaH.Apr 12, 20060I only watched this film, because I liked Viggo in "Hildago." This movie is a clunker. It is no better than a stupid Steven Segal flick. Watch this only if you like Cronenberg's fatalistic, dark view of existence where the 'hero' goes from a corn-fed Jimmy Stewart wannabe to a Steven Segal killing machine.
-
-
CarolynB.Apr 16, 20063The "professional" reviewers must be blinded by Cronenberg's reputation; otherwise, why the 81 ranking? We "users" are much closer to the mark, although I obviously think the ranking of 5.9 is still too high. This story has as many holes in the plot as it has holes in the bad guys' heads.
-
-
SteveA.Apr 21, 20064
-
-
MiKEApr 2, 20064If you make a "serious" movie, stick to it. The ending just falls apart. The main character becomes a super hero at the end. Killed the mood to the whole movie. The acting was ok. and so was the story. But once you see the trailer, you know what the movie is about.
-
-
B.V.Apr 4, 20061
-
-
JenniferRMay 11, 20064
-
-
KCJun 21, 20061
-
-
PJW.Aug 19, 20062Awful. Easily the most lame portrayal of evolution and sociology of violence. Terrible script and horrible acting. Awful.
-
-
KevinAJul 17, 20071Metacritic needs to get an "Incomplete" rating. I watched 15 minutes of this and turned it off - the writing, the acting, everything was so unbelievable, so unbelievably lame (yes, lame) that I could not even get to the first turning point. Oy.
-
-
IanC.Jan 16, 20081
-
-
90Cronenberg holds up a mirror, but he leaves it up to us to recoil at what we see.
-
80Clever and fast-paced thriller.
-
70Lack of depth, complexity or strangeness make this a relatively routine entry for the director.