A History Of Violence

Before I go into this week's review, please notice a couple of new additions to the site...

1. Don't forget to vote in the poll. It's your responsibility as an American to vote.
   
2. Feel free to leave comments anywhere you can. There's a neat Guestbook comment section on the right side of the page or you can click on the Comment link at the end of each post.
3. There are dozens of links throughout the posting. Anything underlined can usually be clicked on for something extra, like a picture, trailer, music video, or link to a website.
4. I've enabled a program called Snap Shots. It allows you to drag your cursor over the link and a preview window will pop up from the link, showing you a little version of what's on the other side of the link. This is awesome when it comes to videos, since you can just drag your mouse over the link and play the little video that pops up as a result. Try it here, for example... See? Wasn't that awesome?! If it's just not your cup of meat, however, you can disable it once it pops up by clicking on the little gear in the upper-right-hand corner and clicking on the "Disable" box. If you wanna do that, fine. See if I try to make this more user-friendly for you any time soon. Big fat jerk. On to the show...

Coming into this movie, I immediately started to have flashbacks of Appaloosa and I'm pretty sure some form of PTSD kicked in. I think Ed Harris is a cool guy and I'd probably have a beer with him. Viggo, as well. I'm sure George W. Bush is also a pretty cool cat if you sat down for a Lone Star with him. But all three of these people do bad things. Suffice to say, my expectations of A History Of Violence were pretty low. However, one of my "kids" who I put in the military, one of my brighter, more promising ones, recommended I see this and I hate to disappoint. Even if I'd be disappointing a kid who regularly wore a shirt with a Pillsbury Dough Boy on it that looked alarmingly like Hitler, with a caption that read, "White Flour." So, for Cody, who's hating life (and me, most likely) in Mississippi, I give you this weeks review of...

Theatrical Release: September 2005

Genre: Thriller/Graphic Novel Adaptation

Sub-Genre: Ed Harris and Viggo Mortensen Go To White Castle

Starring: Viggo Mortensen and Ed Harris (fortunately, without Renee Zellweger), Maria Bello (in a surprising full-frontal bush shot), and William Hurt

Overview: Tom Stalls, an unassuming man in an unassuming town, thwarts the robbery and murder of two wackjobs in his diner and is rewarded by throngs of media coverage. With his face plastered all over the national news, some mobsters show up (headed by a cycloptic Ed Harris) assuming this unassuming man has assumed a new identity from his former life as a hitman. Viggo, of course, assumes these men are joking and assumes they've made a mistake. And everyone knows what happens when you assume: Viggo Mortensen punches your nasal cartilage into your brain and then shoots you in the top of your head. Turns out, Tom was a hired hitman named Joey Cusack and he's been living a George McFly-esque existence in small town Indiana.

Now the mob wants reparations for some funky shit that went down in the city and Tom just

wants to be left alone. Tom's past sins are a huge new nugget of information to his family. His family, by the way, comprised of: a smokin' hot wife, Edie, played by Maria Bello (seen at left, wearing my old cheerleading outfit); a nerdy, sexually ambiguous son; and a daughter so ridiculously blond and cute she makes Zuzu Bailey from It's A Wonderful Life look like a meth addict.

A History Of Violence is based on the graphic novel by John Wagner and Vince Locke. Some comic book adaptations... 'Scuse me... Some graphic novel adaptations work as films (Sin City; Constantine; Akira -- and trust me, Akira's gonna be bad ass when it's out next year). Most, however, are plagued by the eye-roll-inducing stigma that "You really gotta be into the comics to get it." (V for Vendetta; 300; The Watchmen -- unless you really think seeing Billy Crudup's

blue junk for two hours was necessary, that movie sucked blue balls). This film leans toward the latter category but as a standalone film, it's not too bad. If you had no idea it was based on a comic book novel (oops), you'd think it was just another action movie, and a decent one, at that. There are several shots, though, that give away the graphic novel influence of the movie and they sort of stand out as unorthodox bits of cinematography unless you're actively looking for camera angles that look more like comic panels. Once you start looking for them, you can pick them out everywhere. I'd recommend paying attention at one scene in particular, when the local sheriff stops the Philly mob boss's car on their way out of town. After a brief, "This is a good town. Don't let me catch you folks stinkin' it up with your East Coast bullshit" lecture, the sheriff lets them drive away and there's a really cool shot from the stationary viewpoint of the car hood over the rear quarter-panel of the Chrysler 300. It's noticeable and you should be able to pick out other comic-inspired scenes from that point. Even the movie poster (above) could've been inspired from a panel within the graphic novel, I don't know. I don't read graphic novels. I watch Family Feud and read the back of my box of Count Chocula, if I read at all.

The movie isn't terrible. I'm slightly predisposed to dislike a movie featuring the Mortensen/Harris combo but I gave this a chance and they slightly redeemed themselves. Partly since this movie wasn't an Ed Harris project. It was, in fact, directed by David Cronenberg, who, according to my hastily done Google/IMDb research, is also responsible for Scanners ("Back... And to the left..."), The Dead Zone ("I gotta have more cowbell!"), Crash (1996, not that Oscar winner movie), and the only movie of his that I really liked (and I really like this one), The Fly. Check this out... And if you've never seen this movie, then you're a total Brundlefly...

But Mr. Cronenberg does not get a free pass for The Fly. Nor does he earn any brownie points for thought-induced head explosions in Scanners. There were a couple of questionable scenes in AHOV, points where I looked at the screen and said (out loud, to no one... sniffle), "What? No one reacts like that in real life!" Scenes of overly-dramatic Hollywood bullshit. Frinstance:

• In the opening scene, after the nameless killers annihilate the staff of the motel they just "checked out" of, one of them walks back inside to the scene of the crime and starts touching everything out of sheer curiosity! I've seen enough CSI to know (plus I read Encyclopedia Brown as a kid) that touching shit = fingerprints.

• Tom's pacifist son (read: pussy) sits on top of a big blue mailbox in front of the post office right on Main Street with cars driving everywhere and people walking all over the place - and smokes a joint. This isn't Haight-Ashbury, 1969. This is Indiana, 2005. Get in the back of the cruiser, son. Writing FAIL.

• While Tom is recuperating in the hospital, he's channel-surfing and discovers he's the lead story on every major news network. But when he gets home from the hospital that same night, there's ONE news reporter in his yard. And she's local. And it's Andrea Rich. (Horse Face!)

• After Edie learns that Tom was, in fact, a contract killer, she lies to the sheriff about knowing his past and then there's a weird sado-masochistic sex scene on the stairs whereby he chokes her (Tom, not the sheriff), she slaps him, he chokes her harder, she kicks him, and before you know it, there's angry penetration. While crying. Not a very hot sex scene. In fact, I needed to take a shower after watching it. Jesus, is Tom's wife bipolar? **Disclaimer: There's an earlier husband-on-wife sex scene early on in the film where Maria Bello wears the cheerleader outfit above. Now that one is definitely HOT.**

• Tom's estranged brother, Richie, calls after The Secret's out and speaks this line to Joey/Tom, honest to God, "Hey bro-him. You're still pretty good with the killing..." Give. Me. A break. That's some crap Michael Scott would write.

Actually, the more I think about the idiocy of this movie, it loses another point. It was a 6. Now it's a 5. Bad writing, overacting on the part of the son, and the message is so transparent, it's about as effective as an ABC After School Special. I get it. The title alone kinda implies the message, just pick one from any of these no-brainers:

- Violence begets violence.

- You can't escape your past, you can only run from it temporarily.

- The best way to disable your attacker is always an open hand chop to the throat.

Same ol', same ol'... Next time I feel like watching a Viggo Mortensen movie, I'm just gonna order the action figure. It comes with a shotgun, cleft chin, cowboy boots, and kung fu grip.

Overall: 5 out of 10. A little predictable but with some really cool scenes of ass kicking and watching Ed Harris get shot in the chest at close range with a double-barrel 12-gauge. God bless America. Tom Stall's Body Count: 8 (including his own brother, who deserved to die for saying something so asinine as, "You're still pretty good with the killing." Here, I'm gonna rewrite that line, off the top of my head, so it's better. Ready? "Looks to me like your old habits die hard." See that? A million dollars, please!

Best Scene: In the beginning, the two nutjobs who storm into Tom's restaurant lock the door and start barking orders at gunpoint. When it gets out of hand, and it gets there pretty quickly, Tom has to take control of the situation by smashing a full pot of coffee into the eye of the gunman, (this is when I switch over to my Garth Algar from Wayne's World voice) then he rolls over the diner counter, Jackie Chan style, grabs the gun off the floor and does this wicked spin move, blasts the other crazy guy - boom boom! - who I was 99% sure was the kid from the movie Dutch but it turned out it wasn't, he goes flying backwards out the window and then the coffee-face guy grabs his ankle knife which everybody has, right? and stabs Tom in the foot - whoa! - then Tom turns around and shoots that guy in the top of his bald head. Boom!

What my wife said: "It has Ed Harris and Viggo Mortensen? No thanks."

Who would enjoy this movie: Fans of the comic book... 'Scuse me again... I mean "graphic novel." A1C Cody Baker. Guys who call each other "brah." That dude at work with the weird scar around his neck who gets real quiet, real quick and walks out of the room when someone starts talking about The Sopranos.

Watch it if you like: Jean-Claude Van Damme movies. Killing rat scum bags. Head shots (50 points).

Next in the Q: Many movies coming... I watched The Dark Crystal the other day when I was home sick. I haven't seen this movie in more than a decade but as an adult, it's a completely different experience. I invite everyone to join my group, wesley bLoggs , on Facebook (click on the link) and post their insights or childhood memories of The Dark Crystal. I'm fascinated with my generation's perception of this incredibly unique movie. Check out the trailer...

The Dark Crystal (Theatrical Trailer)

This is supposed to be a fucking family movie!

Beyond that: Mat recommended American Psycho, Shelly and Damen suggested Bury My Heart At Wounded Knee, my wife and I wanna watch Role Models, and Angie even suggested I review Milk. I'll get to them all, people, just bear with me. Thanks, everyone!

Appaloosa

I know it's taken me a little while to get on to the next movie and for all my readers (I have 4 now!), I'm really sorry. I had family visits, my weekend with my daughter, some awesome weather, all while battling a severe case of laziness. I enjoy reviewing these as much as you enjoy reading them but it's a whole lot easier to find the time to watch a movie (2 hours, maybe) than it is to find the necessary 4-6 hours (uninterrupted) to crank out these literary gems. Now add this factor to that equation: My friend Shelly, who I've known since I was 14, recommended this movie to me. As I remember her email, she said she saw this movie recently and wanted to know what I thought of it. As is the process, I Q'ed it up, sat on my ass for a week, then watched it. Being as that Shelly is my friend, I didn't know how to delicately tell her that watching this movie (that she asked me to see!) nearly made my eyes bleed. I thought she'd said she enjoyed it. You can imagine my anxiety and subsequent lack of motivation to post this review. So two days ago I sent Shelly an email and came clean. I told her I wouldn't mention her name at all but I couldn't lie and I couldn't not write a review of a movie this steamingly bad. I mean it's a real 3-coiler of a turd. Lo and behold, Shelly replied and said...

No please say all the negative you want...I did not like the movie remember? I just wondered what your opinion was...I'm glad you did not. Renee Zelwigger (not sure if that is correct) really irritated me throughout the entire movie, she seemed like a weak spineless woman...YUCK! You can absolutely mention me as long as you tell them I thought it was awful and one more thing...you have to spell my name right..Shelly...:)

Apparently I've misspelled Shelly's name incorrectly for a number of years... My bad. I also really love how Shelly insists I tell "them" she thought it was awful. THEM. Like I have an audience. Look, I'm a realist... Here's who's reading this blog, ready? 

Rachel. Cara. My wife. And Shelly (this time, anyway). 

That's it. I'd love to have a "them" but I know I'll always just have a handful of people giggling at my ridiculous ramblings. This week, the honor goes to Appaloosa, a movie written, produced, directed, and starring Ed Harris. Now in real life, an Appaloosa is a breed of horse known for it's leopard-spotted coat. Both of them smell like shit anyway (my apologies to the horses)...

Theatrical Release: October 2008... That was like, yesterday...

Genre: Western? Love story? It's kinda hard to tell...

 

Sub-genre: Bromance Western

 

Starring: Ed Harris and his horseshoe hairline, Viggo Mortensen and the world's worst facial hair, a fuglier-than-usual Renee Zellweger (we'll get to her, don't worry), and Jeremy Irons... Wait, what? Jeremy Irons? In a cowboy flick? Isn't he INCREDIBLY British? 

The overview: Two hired guns (Harris and Mortensen) enforce the law in 1880's New Mexico Territory. While trying to legally arrest the man responsible for gunning down Appaloosa's former sheriff, someone who used to look like Renee Zellweger gets off at the train stop in town to start a new life here. Why she chose this town is never explained but she does manage to scare the audience with her Frankenstein-sucked-on-a-lemon good looks and she also manages to capture the heart of the new sheriff, Virgil Cole (Harris). After the love interest is introduced, things get pretty lame, pretty quickly. 

While Westerns might not be your cup of meat, sometimes you stumble upon one that's just a little different and a little better. Back To The Future Part III. Young Guns. Unforgiven. Maybe not necessarily in that order but you get my drift. There have been so many Westerns made, you'd think all the good story lines had been made into movies already. Well, you're right. Appaloosa is not a good story. I take that back... It might be a good story, since it was based on the book of the same title, written by Robert B. Parker. Apaloosa the movie, though, is a hodgepodge of unlikely events, unexplained decisions, and many noticeably omitted Western staples. Let's just start from the beginning, shall we?...

The movie opens with Jeremy Irons killing three dudes on horseback. Ok. Jeremy Irons is a Shakespearean actor, classically trained, who is more believable in a monocle and black turtleneck than as any kind of Old West outlaw. I overlooked this... Not five minutes later, I noticed one of the extras (a kid) look directly into the camera! I even accepted Viggo Mortensen's obviously glued on mustache. But when I saw Renee Zellweger walk on the screen...  Well, I turned to my wife and said, "Shit. I hate this movie already." I'll spend a little time later on going over why Renee Shovelface should retire and start a more promising career at a turkey farm taking the blind birds out to shit. 

This movie could've been good. It started out like any other Western but morphed into a badly written Old West love story with one awkward kiss. It seems as if Ed Harris really might've loved the book and in the interest of getting the film made, he was forced to chop probably another 45 minutes worth of movie he wanted to make since it was already nearly two hours long. Unfortunately, the cut or never-made scenes were probably the ones needed to establish the relationships between the characters. Ed Harris plays Virgil Cole, a stoic, leathery, no-shit-takin' sheriff. He's certainly the toughest guy in the cast but ultimately ends up playing the biggest pussy. He somehow turns into a 12-year-old boy whenever he has to talk to Allie French (Zellweger) but throughout the movie, I don't recall seeing the two of them embrace or kiss or cry over one another or do anything other than hold hands and talk about each other like they were in junior high. Here's an actual line, spoken by Virgil to his deputy, understudy, and best friend, Everett Hitch (Mortensen) when Hitch mentioned the new girl had asked about him... 

"Did she ask about me in a liking way?"

Jesus, Virgil. Are you kidding me? Why don't you just slip her a note between classes that says "Do you like me? Check yes or no!" There are several Virgil Cole-ism's sprinkled throughout this movie, actually. And not to deviate here, but check the poll question to the right to vote for the best one. Moving on... 

The relationships between the three main characters are confusing at best and mistaken for indifference at worst. There are also many many many plot holes to look over (why did Allie choose Appaloosa to relocate to? Why didn't Bragg's gang just kill the witness before trial?) but I think the most irritating thing about this movie for me was that I didn't believe anything like this would ever happen. Here's a quick rundown of some more horse-shit I was asked to believe...

• Virgil and Allie buy a house after two dates.
  
• When given the opportunity to let Indians kill the outlaws Virgil and Everett are after, they run the Indians off so they can arrest the people they were about to kill. Then Virgil says they shouldn't kill each other while there are Indians around. Wait... If your plan was to kill them, why did you run off the Indians? They were just about to kill those douchebags FOR you!
• After Virgil realizes that Allie will fuck anything that moves, he still comes back to her. Over and over. I guess real cowboys are into Sloppy 2nds. And 3rds. And 47ths. Cuz really... She got around.
• There's almost no swearing in the movie. Not like what I've come to expect from watching Deadwood. "God damn quagmire of piss and bullshit!" Now that's good writing!

And the other two glaring omissions: gunfights and whores. There are no less than seven conversations between Virgil and Everett about their feelings throughout the whole film. Yet there are only two gunfights and one (likable, prophetic) whore. And the whore only fucks one guy in the movie, which is one or two less than Allie French, who's just a regular slut, I guess. 

I guess I just didn't get this movie. I've read a lot of reviews that claimed it was a good ol' fashioned Western but I strongly disagree. I'm not exaggerating when I say Virgil and Everett talk about their feelings nonstop. It happens over and over. It's noticeable and you'll roll your eyes too, after the umpteenth time it happens. The tagline for this movie, which is on the movie poster itself, is "Feelings Get You Killed" For a movie with that tagline, they sure do spend an awful lot of time openly discussing theirs. And I'm a 21st century guy, I'm OK with crying and talking about women in a respectful manner and all that happy horseshit but I refuse to believe this was commonplace during these times and in this kind of place. Feelings might get you killed but talking about them everywhere you go will certainly get your ass kicked. When I think of a good Western movie, I think of a former gunslinger coming out of retirement to exact revenge for a injustice that just doesn't sit right with him (see: Unforgiven). Or something like that. Gimme Clint Eastwood, man. This whole movie felt more like a case study in muted homosexual attraction in the late 19th century frontier towns. Or at best, like a watered down Brokeback Mountain with a woman thrown in the mix. For the record, I didn't like Brokeback because I don't like love stories. And thinking about it now, I realize that's why I didn't like this movie. It was a love story that happened to be a Western but it tried too hard to be both and didn't have the right elements to be either... Not enough chemistry between Zellweger and Harris to be a love story (not to mention her obvious recent facial surgery) and not enough grit, violence, spitting, swearing, or gunslinging to be a proper Western. 

Ed Harris's attempt to cram all this information from the book succeeded in leaving out the character definition. You can move the story along this way but it's far more important to explain to the audience WHY Everett gets upset when Virgil starts seeing Allie more. His initial reaction borders on homoerotic jealousy. If it weren't for my wife mentioning the student-teacher relationship between Virgil and Everett, I would've assumed that there was sexual tension simmering between those two. Nothing led me to believe otherwise! And because the relationship between the two was never explained fully, I almost missed a crucial point to the story. And what's supposed to be between Virgil and Allie is... Well... I never see it. He stays with her even though she doesn't do anything for him, and when I say that, I mean she doesn't do so much as cook him breakfast. She just tries to get it on with Everett... Which is also an unnecessary, unexplained plot twist that results in nothing happening later on. Allie is already with the Big Dog in Appaloosa, Sheriff Virgil Cole. Her trying to kiss Everett made no sense. If he reciprocated, then OK, now we got us a love triangle movie on our hands... But he pushed her away and it was brought up later in the movie as casually as if Everett had said, "By the way, I got new boots today... Oh, and your girl tried to get on my junk earlier." Instead, this movie went bad at every turn. Every opportunity to right this ship was missed. I think Ed Harris wanted it to be both a love story and an action Western. Instead, he failed at making a movie that did either genre very well. I don't want to only blame Ed Harris, though... Not everyone can pull off the writer/producer/director/actor quadfecta. But for the record, Clint Eastwood makes phenomenal movies. Is Ed Harris trying too hard to be Clint Eastwood? Or does Renee Zellweger suck so bad that her mere presence on a movie set will turn the whole film to garbage? Could she possibly have The Fecal Touch? Like the opposite of The Midas Touch. Everything she touches turns to shit...

And about Renee Zellweger... Casting her in this movie was a huge mistake. Her character is unlikeable for starters but Renee Zellweger is just a bad actress to begin with. There it is, folks. And because of Allie's dubious moral character and Renee Zellweger's obvious recent Botox and cheek implant surgery 20 minutes before coming to the set, the whole movie almost becomes unwatchable. I'm not kidding! Her face is so conspiculously worked on, you can still see sutures behind her ears and once I was pretty sure I saw her dragging her an IV. For those of you who find/found her attractive in the past, you'll wanna avoid this one altogether. Here's a fun game you can play at home... Which one of the pictures below is Renee Zellwegger in Appaloosa? Take your time...

Overall: 4 out of 10. It gets points for Ed Harris trying so hard and for actually pulling it off (by "pulling it off" I mean "making a movie"). Hell, I can't even make dinner AND do the dishes. Kudos to you, Ed, for wearing so many hats. Speaking of Ed Harris, here's my theory on why I still haven't read a negative review of this movie... He must be about the sweetest guy you'd ever wanna meet. Nobody disliked this movie but me! But I think most critics reviews are hackneyed and ass-kissing anyway.

And while thinking about it more, I give all the credit for saving this movie from being kindling to Viggo Mortensen. Awesome mustache aside, Viggo plays Everett perfectly and if you're forced to watch this movie you can still get some enjoyment out of watching him act. His lines are few but his presence is immense. He's always carrying around his 8-gauge shotgun and every scene he's in you can watch him studying his surroundings. His mannerisms, his posture, his walk, his poker face... He's an awesome actor who still put everything into playing this character. A sequel about Everett Hitch (provided it was written, produced, and directed by anyone else) would be worth seeing.

Best Scene: After Virgil gets the lowdown from Everett about Allie trying to get a 19th-century mustache ride from him, she asks Virgil, "So you're gonna believe his word over mine. Is that it?" To which Virgil replies, "That is correct." 

 

What my wife said: Actually, Jessi got increasingly pissed at this movie for the same reason(s) I did: Renee Zellweger. Here's a few of the gems she shouted at the TV...

"Goddammit, Renee Zellweger..."

"I hope they shoot her... Crazy bitch."

After Allie bitches about Virgil always being gone doing lawman stuff: 

"That's what he does, ya dumb fuck!"

 

Who would enjoy this movie: If you like Louis L'Amour books, you'd probably like Appaloosa.

Watch it if you like: Spaghetti Westerns. 

Next in the Q: Pineapple Express. The triumphant return of the stoner movie!

 

**Thanks to Google, Wikipedia, YouTube and IMDB for various bits of reference**