Talk:A History of Violence (film)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Film Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Films. This project is a central gathering of editors working to build comprehensive and detailed articles for film topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the priority scale.
Editing Guidelines Please remember these guidelines when editing a film article: If a non-film article already exists with the name of the film that you are trying to create an article for, disambiguate and use (film) in the title: Film Title (film) For more information see: Wikipedia:Naming conventions (films) When writing an article about a particular film, the general format should be a concise lead section, followed by a plot summary of no more than 900 words, production details, a cast list, a reception section, and references. Create an Infobox that tells all pertinent information about the film.
Additional Information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no Related task forces (nations and regions): Canadian cinema task force

Contents 1 film noir 2 Your opinion 3 Fair use rationale for Image:A history of violence dvd.jpg 4 Fair use rationale for Image:History of violence.jpg 5 Son had father's instinctive ability to act

[edit] film noir

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

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)