A History of Violence
To what extent should someone's past be buried and should they be allowed to create a new life for themselves?
I've been pondering this question a lot recently due to both the Louise Nichols case and the handing out of suppressed evidence after a jury of their peers had found the accused not guilty. Their lives have already been destroyed, they have admitted that they are not proud of what they did but should they not then be allowed to try to start a new life for themselves?
What about paedophiles who have done the time and have been allowed to reenter society. To what extent do they have a right to privacy and to try and become a functioning member of society and to what extent do the public have a right to be aware that someone who in the past has committed this heinous deed is living in proximity to their children?
How much can we put our past behind us and can we ever be allowed to escape the ghosts of our pasts?
The movie a History of Violence is not a movie for the weak of stomach with graphic displays of short powerful violence and horrific shots of the damage done (even by my standards). It also has sex scenes and full frontal nudity. I am undecided as to whether the sex and nudity is gratuitous or whether it does serve a worthwhile plot purpose. Anyway this whole movie is in essence about this putting the ghosts of the past to rest. Stop now if you are considering seeing this movie as I will give away plot details.
Joey Cusak is a notorious gangster from Philedelphia who decides to put his past behind him and becomes Tom Stall a diner owner in a small midwest town. He is living the American dream with a beautiful wife, geeky loner son, and gorgeous daughter, he is happy and content. At least until a couple of hardened murderers break into his diner and attempt to kill one of the waitresses. In a few brief seconds he becomes Joey again and ruthlessly dispatches both men. This lands him in the media spotlight as a reluctant hero. This in turn lands him in hot water as gangsters from Philly turn up after recognising Joey's face on tv and come to visit. When they try to take him back to Philly with them he goes Joey on them and three mobsters are dead.
It is then that Richie Cusak his older brother comes calling for him and Joey is off to Philly to try and make things right with his brother and so return to his quiet life. The only way that Tom can make it right though is to die something he isn't ready to do quite so in short order another four mobsters and his brother are dead.
All this time there are tensions at home with his beautiful wife, Edie, as she finds out that her beloved husband is in fact a hardened killer who has lied to her for their whole marriage. She rejects him and is furious and upset. The movie is finished with Tom returning home to a mixed greeting it is left to the audience to decide whether or not Edie will accept him back. It comes down to your view of love whether or not the love exhibited at the beginning of the movie is true and therefore will survive this major upheaval given time. Or whether this love is gone and the damage done will cause an irrepairable rift.
As a metaphor this movie is brilliant. The gangsters representing him coming to terms with his past and dealing with it rather than ignoring it. After he has killed his brother he goes down to the lake and cleanses himself. Washing himself clean of the past he is now ready to face the future as a new man. The past will always be with him but it can never come back to haunt or trouble him. He returns and is welcomed back for the man he is not for the man he was. Things will never return to the way they were but given time things will return to normalcy.
On the other hand taken literally this is very violent movie with many graphic scenes of the aftermath.
I've been pondering this question a lot recently due to both the Louise Nichols case and the handing out of suppressed evidence after a jury of their peers had found the accused not guilty. Their lives have already been destroyed, they have admitted that they are not proud of what they did but should they not then be allowed to try to start a new life for themselves?
What about paedophiles who have done the time and have been allowed to reenter society. To what extent do they have a right to privacy and to try and become a functioning member of society and to what extent do the public have a right to be aware that someone who in the past has committed this heinous deed is living in proximity to their children?
How much can we put our past behind us and can we ever be allowed to escape the ghosts of our pasts?
The movie a History of Violence is not a movie for the weak of stomach with graphic displays of short powerful violence and horrific shots of the damage done (even by my standards). It also has sex scenes and full frontal nudity. I am undecided as to whether the sex and nudity is gratuitous or whether it does serve a worthwhile plot purpose. Anyway this whole movie is in essence about this putting the ghosts of the past to rest. Stop now if you are considering seeing this movie as I will give away plot details.
Joey Cusak is a notorious gangster from Philedelphia who decides to put his past behind him and becomes Tom Stall a diner owner in a small midwest town. He is living the American dream with a beautiful wife, geeky loner son, and gorgeous daughter, he is happy and content. At least until a couple of hardened murderers break into his diner and attempt to kill one of the waitresses. In a few brief seconds he becomes Joey again and ruthlessly dispatches both men. This lands him in the media spotlight as a reluctant hero. This in turn lands him in hot water as gangsters from Philly turn up after recognising Joey's face on tv and come to visit. When they try to take him back to Philly with them he goes Joey on them and three mobsters are dead.
It is then that Richie Cusak his older brother comes calling for him and Joey is off to Philly to try and make things right with his brother and so return to his quiet life. The only way that Tom can make it right though is to die something he isn't ready to do quite so in short order another four mobsters and his brother are dead.
All this time there are tensions at home with his beautiful wife, Edie, as she finds out that her beloved husband is in fact a hardened killer who has lied to her for their whole marriage. She rejects him and is furious and upset. The movie is finished with Tom returning home to a mixed greeting it is left to the audience to decide whether or not Edie will accept him back. It comes down to your view of love whether or not the love exhibited at the beginning of the movie is true and therefore will survive this major upheaval given time. Or whether this love is gone and the damage done will cause an irrepairable rift.
As a metaphor this movie is brilliant. The gangsters representing him coming to terms with his past and dealing with it rather than ignoring it. After he has killed his brother he goes down to the lake and cleanses himself. Washing himself clean of the past he is now ready to face the future as a new man. The past will always be with him but it can never come back to haunt or trouble him. He returns and is welcomed back for the man he is not for the man he was. Things will never return to the way they were but given time things will return to normalcy.
On the other hand taken literally this is very violent movie with many graphic scenes of the aftermath.
1 Comments:
wow...a very good perspective on a mainstream movie. I haven't watched it yet but with your well structured synopsis, I think it's time for me to go to the video store and see it to myself. Great post!
Post a Comment
<< Home