Talk:A History of Violence/Archive 1

Archive 1

References to use

Please add to the list references that can be used for the film article.

• Booker, M. Keith (2007). "A History of Violence". May Contain Graphic Material: Comic Books, Graphic Novels, and Film. Praeger. ISBN 0275993868.

film noir

maybe someone could point out the relationship to "film noir"

Your opinion

Did anyone else thing this movie was an absolute joke, and that the nationwide praise for it is some sort of prank on the American movie viewing public?

If anyone actually reads this, I'd be happy to list some of the reasons why I thought this movie was so incredibly bad.

This movie has a very large following, but the common response to criticism of it is "You just didn't get it," and that aspects that are usually hallmarks of poor cinema (stilted dialogue, stereotyped characters) found in the film are actually intensional for artistic reasons. I think a brief analysis of how fans are reading the movie would be interesting.209.11.161.235 18:37, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Although this is not the place to write a review of the film, I've always felt there was something off about the film - I hope someone familiar with the graphic novels and the film can shed some light on whether what appears to be bad elements of film on the surface are intentional and in some vein related to the graphic novel. I "just didn't get it" and I also don't get why there's no explanation for what seems an obvious handicap of the movie. Ranieldule 16:57, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

I have just watched the film, and didn't see this. Stilted dialogue ? Where ? Stereotypes - yes, but that may have been an attempt to give the film a mythic feel. -- Beardo 14:44, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Did anyone notice the name of the villian Harris plays: Carl Fogarty? How could that name in a film be taken seriously in the UK given that the real Carl Fogarty is actually a 4 time World Superbike motorcycle champion. A bit of oversight would have helped, or even, foregoing the changing of the characters name, from the graphic novel, in the first place. --Rastapopolis 15 January 2007.

Neither Carl nor Fogarty are uncommon names - I am sure there are other people with that name around. -- Beardo 04:59, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

What's really interesting here is that in Cronenberg's 'The Fly', Veronica Quaife becomes pregnant by Seth Brundle, and in the Fly II gives birth to main character 'Martin Brundle', namesake of the British F1 driver and commentator. There you go another link between Cronenberg and a British motor sports competitor. 82.70.155.252 (talk) 15:18, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Reminder: This talk page is for discussing how to improve this article. --Mrwojo 03:26, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Get some analysis of the two sex scenes into the film if you want to make it better. The first a highly voyeuristic scene involving a fantasy about an encounter that might have occurred if they'd met as teenagers, and the second a demonstration of Joey's technique of rough sex. Gomez2002 (talk) 15:23, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Tom/Joey: In this family, people don't solve their problems with their hands!

Jack: That's right, they just shoot people!

*Tom slaps Jack*

That's wonderful haha! Mallerd (talk) 22:00, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:A history of violence dvd.jpg

Image:A history of violence dvd.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 05:04, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:History of violence.jpg

Image:History of violence.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:48, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Son had father's instinctive ability to act

This is out of Ebert's review of the movie, and it is a fact that needs inclusion. Stillstudying 18:16, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

DurinsBane87 evidently did not read the review by Ebert, or he would have known everything you put in was either said by Ebert, or quoted from Cronenberg. Finishedwithschool 16:48, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

There was no reference to Ebert in the line i reverted. it was added later. And unless it was changed since the last tme I checked, it still hasn't been referenced properly. DurinsBane87 17:00, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Greetings DurinsBane87 - I looked at this article after reading about this issue on Stillstudying 's talk page. It appears to me that the article now clearly credits Ebert's article for the theory on Tom's son having inherited his propensity for swift and merciless violence. Having seen the movie, (and having been quite interested in it) I had followed Cronenberg's Darwinian theory, and I think that was pretty well mapped out in Ebert's article, and Still has done a decent job of crediting Ebert and Cronenberg. However, if you feel it needs more sourcing, feel free to link to the Ebert review on every sentence, since every one in that section is taken - and quoted where appropriate - out of Ebert's review. I do agree with you it is essential to source this thoroughly to avoid even the appearance of OR. old windy bear 14:14, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

"Quiz" section.

I'm going to remove this little bit as it's completely pointless. It only contains one piece of trivia (that this was the last film to be released on VHS in the US), which was already mentioned in the introduction anyway.

MrTrent9484 (talk) 00:53, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Why is this film so over the top rated???

I mean what so special with this film really? Former mafia gangster kills 2 guys now the gang is out for payback! (Yes Ed Harris we know you are evil when you showed your face/eye on screen! James Bond cartoon gangsters?) Hardly original! If you want a film to talk about try DEATH WISH w. Charles Bronson, now that was something else. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.150.23.66 (talk) 17:22, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

You....belong on the IMDb forum. Then again, they don't have that anymore, thank god! Alialiac (talk) 14:44, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

What makes it different is that the former mafia gangster has attempted to reform, to put that old life behind him, and live quietly as a socially-responsible family man and pillar of the community. But his old life will not lie down and die: when violence intrudes into his carefully constructed world, his old training as an expert killer slides effortlessly back into place, and he slays both the criminals with brutal efficiency. This is, as it were, the socially-responsible (~ -acceptable) use of violence, to repel attackers and preserve one's home and family; for which "Tom Stall" is rewarded. But when his son Jack fights back against his bullies, he is punished; reflecting society's uneasy and inconsistent attitude to retaliative violence -- the bullies who have been bothering Jack regularly up to this point are not punished at all.

I could go on, but that'll do for a start.

Nuttyskin (talk) 16:12, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 20:33, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

---

A History of Violence (film) → A History of Violence – It is a primary topic judging by page views in comparison to the novel and album. That Ole Cheesy Dude ^{(Talk to the hand!)} 00:04, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

• [1] (film). [2] (book moved page).

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Could I remind people that when you do move a page like this that you update the incoming links or you effectively orphan the moved the article. I've fixed the main ones but there might be more. (Emperor (talk) 01:54, 25 August 2011 (UTC))

Link deleted for actor

Not a major edit; I've removed the link for Ian Matthews as it linked to a musician who is definitely not the Ian Matthews of the cast. That is all.70.72.85.7 (talk) 04:52, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

The eyes

I cant believe that there is no mention of the exchange of looks at the end of the final scene. For me it is the most important part of the final scene. There is the acceptance by the children of their father followed by an exchange of looks between the husband and wife, with the final expression of the husband being an ambiguous one that could be interpreted a couple of ways; as either pain at his wifes look or pained relief at it. I say this considering the scene after the "cheerleader" sex scene where the husband explains he knew his wife loved him simply from her eyes. I'd put something in myself but I guess it qualifies as "original research" and so unencyclopedic unless there are other web or written references to it and I cant find any. But I mention it anyway in case anyone else has any or if there are other thoughts on that specific exchange.... beardybloke (talk) 11:07, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Nah, the look means "Ima kill you bitch this dinner tastes like shit." Alialiac (talk) 14:35, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on A History of Violence. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080128201426/http://www.villagevoice.com:80/take/seven.php?page=winners&category=1 to http://www.villagevoice.com/take/seven.php?page=winners&category=1

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 22:53, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on A History of Violence. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131104210317/http://www.cahiersducinema.com/PALMARES-2000.html to http://www.cahiersducinema.com/PALMARES-2000.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:48, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

"The Killers" and "Out of the Past"

"A History of Violence" seems to be a loose re-make of "The Killers" and "Out of the Past", two classic film noir films. This immediately occurred to me in the diner scene where Ed Harris badgers the star of the film. And of course "The Killers" was derived from an Ernest Hemingway short story. I think this should be mentioned in that it could explain the popularity of the modern film version. 75.4.34.74 (talk) 17:18, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Find a RS that discusses this, and it can be included. Grandpallama (talk) 20:36, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Final scene.

I earlier made a minor addition to the details of the final scene, which was arbitrarily deleted. I'm making it again. If there's an issue, let us know what it is. Hanoi Road (talk) 23:15, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Not arbitrary, and the issue was stated in the reversion. Per WP:FILMPLOT, Do not make analytic, synthetic, interpretive, explanatory, or evaluative claims about information found in a primary source. Please do not re-add text which interprets the meaning of the scene. Grandpallama (talk) 23:26, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

There is nothing 'analytic' about referencing something that is clearly signposted for the viewer. Watch the scene again. It could not be clearer. In fact read some reviews, all of which point this out as a key moment in Stall's re-establishment. Hanoi Road (talk) 23:48, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

If you want to include an interpretive description of the scene, it must be accompanied by a RS describing the scene in that manner. It is "interpretive" and "explanatory" to describe the scene in the manner you are attempting. Grandpallama (talk) 23:53, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Stating the essentials of the plot is not interpretation, not does it require a source, reliable or otherwise. Hanoi Road (talk) 23:57, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Happy to discuss your interpretation of 'analysis', 'inference', etc. I argue that this is merely storyline, and not what you suggest. Beyond that, it is obvious. Hanoi Road (talk) 00:00, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Where in the movie does it state that "the family is prepared to accept him back as the man they have always known, forgiving him"? A time stamp would be nice. If you can't start with a direct quote of the source, then it's your original interpretation. Also, "it appears" is a dead giveaway that it's an interpretation. DonQuixote (talk) 00:02, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

Describing what a scene "means" is inherently interpretive. Please follow the guidelines at WP:FILMPLOT, and include a RS to support your interpretation if you wish to include it. Do not continue to mischaracterize my edits as vandalism. Grandpallama (talk) 00:04, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

Would you prefer I say, "It is obvious"? I can do that, if you find the scene confusing. Hanoi Road (talk) 00:05, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

If you have to say that "it's obvious" rather than citing a reliable source, then it's definitely your original interpretation. Wikipedia works by citing and summarising reliable sources. DonQuixote (talk) 00:08, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

In which case, I suggest that the film itself is the most reliable source. I repeat that the film does not "end" with the family sitting "tensely" around the table. It ends - significantly - by Tom Stall/Joey Cusack's daughter passing him a plate. There is then a significant pause. His son, after some thought, passes him a communal plate of food. The film ends there.

Will concede that my original change could be construed as interpretative, so suggest this to follow existing wording: "His young daughter passes him an empty plate. After a moment, his son passes him some food". This is actually how the film ends. Anyone rusty on the details can check out "A History of Violence, Final Scene", thoughtfully uploaded by a Youtuber. If nobody objects, I'll make that change. Hanoi Road (talk) 19:28, 2 November 2020 (UTC)