history of violence

The first thing that attracted me was definitely the cool title. I've seen too many of David Cronenberg's bad films, and I always thought he was a too-named director. Whether it was his early famed visually disgusting film "Fly", It's still the best-selling psychopath movie "Crash". However, as "A History of Violence" slowly passed before my eyes, Croneberg's image began to grow taller than ever. Therefore, my advice is: watch this film without any preconceived notions.

The opening of the film seems to be an ordinary serial killer story. I didn't expect that the "ruthless" partner who seems to be the protagonist of the film would be killed by the really vicious male protagonist when they robbed the real protagonist's fast food restaurant within 10 minutes of the opening. I just want to say so much, because if you say too much about the plot, it's definitely unfair to the audience who haven't seen the movie.

Violence as a timeless film theme has never been more attractive to me, and a person's duality has never been so adeptly changing and constantly changing in reality. From an ordinary person to a tough killer, there is only a thin line, and Cronenberg expresses the slender state of this "line" so movingly and so cleverly. He set up a puzzle without being pretentious. The male protagonist is calm enough like "Lone Killer", and he has a normal Ang Lee-style middle-class ethical family. His movements are more swift like Kitano Takeshi, and there is no conflict between human nature. Not only thin, after watching such a good film, what else is there to be picky about?

View more about A History of Violence reviews