A History of Violence -- Deeper Themes...

Films/DVD Asylum

Movies from comedy to drama to your favorite Hollyweird Star.

Roger Ebert says this film is not plot driven, it's character driven. I disagree. This film is THEME driven. While it's adapted from a graphic novel (adult comic book), it's much more than a stylish and dark thriller, or oddly gripping yet not altogether plausible tale, as some reviewers have stated. I think it's much more than any of these. "A History of Violence" is an allegory that asks the question: "Can we forgive each other for our sins if Jesus never died for them?"
Cronenberg is a survivalist, a professed Darwinian. I firmly believe that this is a movie about our coming to grips with the duality of our human nature without the possibility of divine redemption. Only we can raise each other up and lift ourselves out of the primordial ooze of our potentially violent human nature. Only by recognizing that we have both a dark and a light side -- a violent and a peaceful side -- that only we can take responsibility for and forgive, are we going to be able to redeem the human race. There is no God to do it for us. Or so "A History of Violence" has me a thinking. And here's why...
Viggo Mortensen's character at the top of the movie is a family man named Tom Stall. We soon find out that his real identity is Joey Cusack, a former gangster who (in his words) "died" in the desert and was "reborn" when he met his wife. The fact that he was "reborn" after "dying" is fairly strong evidence that his character is meant to conjure thoughts of Jesus, however the most overt element of association for me was the fact that his initials are J.C. Joey Cusack as Jesus "died" so that he could rebirth himself as a peaceful, innocent, CHRISTIAN man (he wears a one inch crucifix around his neck).
Unfortunately for him, he couldn't. He couldn't rebirth himself because he never really died -- he just sublimated his anger and violence, "almost believing" that he really was this peaceful family man.
This has interesting ramifications for us as humans, I believe Cronenberg is postulating. If "Jesus" didn't really die, who is there to forgive us our sins and trespasses? Since "Jesus" never died, he couldn't be reborn an innocent. Unfortunately for him, Joey Cusack's violent roots come back to haunt him after some gangsters see him on TV and find out where he has been all these years since he left the life of violent crime. Once Joey Cusack does what he must (extreme violence) to eradicate the threat to his new life, he wreaks havoc on his family. VIOLENT havoc. And the question is, can THEY forgive HIM?
I believe this is the crux (pun intended) of the film. Since "Jesus" didn't really die, the only ones who can forgive us are the people around us. We humans, ultimately, must forgive each other's sins; we must forgive our dark side.
The final frame of the film has JC coming back to his family (as they are sitting at the dinner table after leaving them), without a word, to wipe out his enemies. Will they forgive him? Or will this be his "last supper," after which he will be dead to them forever? And by refusing to acknowledge his dark side, are they going to be able to deal with their own? The son, a pacifist, has a dark side that makes itself known quite dramatically... what will happen to him if the family can't forgive the father's dark side?
Seen in this light, "A History of Violence" is much more than a violent or strangely engaging-in-typical-Cronenberg-fashion movie. Very much like "Fight Club," it looks deep beneath the surface of human behavior ... but only if we look beneath the surface of the film.

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

McShane Design

Topic - A History of Violence -- Deeper Themes... - tpcarter 20:45:46 10/28/05 (6)

nice theory but... - tunenut 14:02:57 10/31/05 (2)

You could be right... - tpcarter 17:17:30 10/31/05 (1)

there is no wrong interpretation - tunenut 17:56:53 10/31/05 (0)

Very nice post... - SF tech 14:38:37 10/29/05 (0)

A cheezy teen flick with pretensions. The dialogue is, perhaps, the worst - tinear 06:20:59 10/29/05 (1)

Re: A cheezy teen flick with pretensions. The dialogue is, perhaps, the worst - tpcarter 12:18:47 10/29/05 (0)

You can not post to an archived thread.