:: A History of Violence

What does it take to become ‘an American hero’? Killing two criminals who hold up your diner with determination and efficiency, as Tom Stall (Viggo Mortensen) discovers in David Cronenberg’s ironic look at the nature of violence, the aptly titled, ‘A History of Violence’.

Tom Stall, a quiet, reserved diner owner, is living the ‘American dream’ in idyllic, semi-rural Millbrook, Indiana, on a small farm with his perfect wife, Edie (Maria Bello) and his two children, Jack (Ashton Holmes) and Sarah (Heidi Hayes). Life couldn’t be better. ‘I’m the luckiest son of a bitch alive’, Tom whispers to his wife. However, his ‘little house on the prairie’ existence is shattered when two bloodthirsty criminals hold up his diner. To his family’s surprise, Tom effectively disarms and viciously kills the villains, protecting his staff and customers from their threat, although normally Tom has the complacency of a monk and wouldn’t hurt a fly.

This act of violence catapults Tom into the limelight on national television as a local hero. While trying to hide from his new found notoriety, Tom is confronted by a mob of Philadelphia hoodlums who saw him on TV, led by Carl Fogarty (Ed Harris), claiming that he is ‘Joey Cusack’, a man that they have been searching for years and allegedly gave Fogarty a nasty scar which runs the entirety of his face, rendering him blind in one eye. Is Tom in a Hitchcock-esque situation of mistaken identity? Or is there something he is hiding?

A History of Violence began with such functionality that by the time the gangsters arrived, I was begging for some twist of fate to upset their picture book lives. Mortensen casts away his ‘Lord of the Rings’ acting (stiff with bad accent, however handy with a sword) to grace this film with an insight into a complex character, a loving family man who has many secrets. One character who I would have liked to see more of was the disturbing Philadelphia mafia boss, Richie Cusack (William Hurt) who gave an excellent performance.

A History of Violence raises the question whether violence should be celebrated. We all know the answer, or Cronenberg’s answer at least. It’s a hidden part of each and every one of us, glorifying and exciting us. Jack, Tom’s son, although angry at his father for not practising what he preached, that there are better ways than violence, finds the hidden urge inside him to confront his own menace. Although the violence was very graphic, the film wasn’t one big blood bath, as I was expecting by the name. Instead it was more reminiscent of David Koepp’s ‘The Secret Window’ with an agenda hidden to the audience to keep us guessing. This film is worthy of watching, even if you’re not a fan of Cronenberg’s previous movies.