criterionforum.org

Matt wrote: Tue Jul 15, 2025 7:14 pm

Randall Maysin Again wrote:Finally, Maria Bello finds a "much-deserved" place in the collection! Haha. I like this movie though.

Okay, I’ll bite. What’s your beef with Maria Bello? I think she’s exceptionally good in this and elsewhere as well, including Coyote Ugly if that’s what you’re gonna snark about.

She was his lost love and she didn’t know it.

Oh I don't know, she just strikes me as a second-rate dumb dum. I also remember finding the actor who plays Mortensen's (oldest? is there more than one?) son in this being kind of lousy. I'm not always thrilled by the performances in Cronenberg films, though sometimes they are pleasing. i.e. I thought literally everyone sucked in A Dangerous Method, except for Viggo. Fassbender was too dorky and earnest, though maybe that's what Cronenberg was going for, I'm not sure. And Keira Knightley, uhhhh, clearly has some insecurities about being a quote "serious" dramatic actress--at least in a demanding role like this one. I haven't watched a Maria Bello movie in like a million years though.

TechnicolorAcid wrote: Tue Jul 15, 2025 7:22 pm She was his lost love and she didn’t know it.

Nein. She's no Cameron Diaz.

Josh Olson: part of the pantheon of Los Angeles area video store clerks turned successful screenwriters. Such a shame he has almost no produced and credited work beyond this

I was somewhat surprise that Maria Bello's careers kinda went to second tier and direct to DVD/streaming films and then settling down in NCIS after having strong back to back to back performances in Auto Focus, The Cooler, A History of Violence and Thank You for Smoking. She was really good in the latter two and thought her career would be one of doing solid indie films. Of course, Hollywood is Hollywood and actors have to pay their bills, so at least she has had steady work over the past 20 years.

History of Violence is one of those Cronenberg films I really like due to the cast but I've forgotten how short it is. Just scrapping a little over 90 minutes, the film is straight to the point, which is why I feel the it works as Viggo carries that twist from family man to former mafia/mobster guy with one of his best acting performances. I do remember on the kids being extremely annoying in the film, but this was one most irksome tropes from the 2000's with films having the know it all, whiny little brat distracting from the main story (War of the Worlds, The Day the Earth Stood Still remake, Knowing). Overall, glad A History of Violence joins the collection and could hope that they added a digital code to the great graphic novel it was based on.

Agreed. The son (and his terrible performance) completely ruins the movie for me. The daughter isn’t great either. It’s unfortunate because it’s an otherwise solid movie was nary a wasted moment.

dx23 wrote: Tue Jul 15, 2025 8:33 pm I was somewhat surprise that Maria Bello's careers kinda went to second tier and direct to DVD/streaming films and then settling down in NCIS after having strong back to back to back performances in Auto Focus, The Cooler, A History of Violence and Thank You for Smoking. She was really good in the latter two and thought her career would be one of doing solid indie films. Of course, Hollywood is Hollywood and actors have to pay their bills, so at least she has had steady work over the past 20 years.

She had a somewhat noteworthy role as a West Coast art-monster/villain

Spoiler

with a memorably gruesome death scene

in the Netflix series Beef a couple of years ago, which I am now learning won her a Critics' Choice Award and an Emmy nomination, so that's something at least. I always liked her in this.

Bello also starred in an American version of the Helen Mirren series "Prime Suspect" that NBC buried and cancelled. It's easy to look at her fairly unexceptional resume and consider it a reflection of her talent, but that's unfair. She only broke through when she was already in her thirties, and she was probably only offered roles that more established actresses around her age like Gwyneth Paltrow, Charlize Theron, Scarlett Johansson, or Uma Thurman had turned down. She's worked steadily for more than 30 years and has moved into production (always a smart move for career longevity). She's also been very active in fundraising for good causes. I don't think these are the hallmarks of a "dumb dum" [sic].

A peak Cronenberg for me and one of my absolute favorites. It was always my impression that this was Cronenberg's second attempt at Total Recall, this time not based on PKD's story, yet thematically strikingly similar. So if you ever wondered what Cronenberg's version of TR would look like, this is probably it, minus the Sci-Fi props and settings. I have always marveled at how masterfully Cronenberg combined such diverse moods and genres —dread, comedy, grotesque violence, drama, suspense, and slapstick—into a relentless and relatively short movie, while maintaining its strong emotional core.
Improbably, it was also one of his films that suffered the longest without a decent representation on home video. So I am overjoyed about this coming from CC! The cover, on the other hand, is #-o

If he made nothing but crime movies after this I wouldn’t complain.

I would agree that the kid actors are not convincing but Maria Bello had good chemistry with Viggo Mortensen and was absolutely fine in the role. On the other hand, I've always found William Hurt's performance jarring and I've seen the film three times. Harris was menacing while Hurt came across as cartoonish by comparison.

Not sure I could disagree with anything more. Hurt is incredible in what is an intentionally comic perf, and the out of nowhere Oscar nom he received for the film is the best thing the Academy has done in my lifetime

One of the best things about this movie is how the final confrontation between brothers is played a little like a Looney Tunes animation.

Doesn't the uncensored version basically have just a few more frames of a guy whose jaw has been shot off?

pistolwink wrote: Tue Jul 15, 2025 11:53 pm Doesn't the uncensored version basically have just a few more frames of a guy whose jaw has been shot off?

Unsure if it's "spoilers" but:

Spoiler

Wikipedia wrote:The U.S. and European versions differ on only two fight scenes - one where Tom breaks the nose of one of Fogarty's thugs and one where he stomps on the throat of one of Richie Cusack's thugs. Both scenes display more blood flowing or gushing out of the victims in the European version. In addition, a more pronounced bone-crushing sound effect is used when Tom stomps on the thug's throat.

I would however like to know if it's the uncensored version for the purposes of posterity.

Going back to the extra features, it seems that almost everything from the DVD/BD versions is transferred to this Criterion release. Any reason we don't get the European version other than in the extras? Film is celebrating it's 20th anniversary. Would love to see more meat added to the extra features here instead of just getting recycled ones.

It wouldn't be hard for Criterion to get some scholarly schtuff out of the seemingly countless Cronenberg experts in the world...

Big Ben wrote: Wed Jul 16, 2025 12:07 am

pistolwink wrote: Tue Jul 15, 2025 11:53 pm Doesn't the uncensored version basically have just a few more frames of a guy whose jaw has been shot off?

Unsure if it's "spoilers" but:

Spoiler

Wikipedia wrote:The U.S. and European versions differ on only two fight scenes - one where Tom breaks the nose of one of Fogarty's thugs and one where he stomps on the throat of one of Richie Cusack's thugs. Both scenes display more blood flowing or gushing out of the victims in the European version. In addition, a more pronounced bone-crushing sound effect is used when Tom stomps on the thug's throat.

I would however like to know if it's the uncensored version for the purposes of posterity.

"logically" this should be the uncut/uncensored version. Metropolitan in France released it - but if the Blu-Ray was slightly better than the US Blu-Ray it was still waxy (I bought both; first the US then the French one when it came out, but the said-so upgrade was very slight)- lack of grain and film-like "texture". I sincerely hope that this new 4K UHD/Blu-Ray will at last give us a great picture quality.

Perhaps the scene at Hurt's compound will play better for me on a revisit. I wasn't a fan of the shift in tone in general so I'll allow for perhaps being unfair to Hurt. Been a decade or more since I've seen the film.

Comparison between Criterion and WB releases:

Spoiler

Criterion:

WB:

There’s a recorded conversation between Lee Kline and DoP Peter Suschitzky, who oversaw this restoration, on YouTube posted by Il Cinema Ritrovato. I haven’t watched it all the way through yet but I reckon there’s got to be some specific discussion about this film and the new restoration.

I watched that conversation the other day and there wasnt anything specific about the film or its restoration. It was just a quick review of Suschitzky's career.

domino harvey wrote: Tue Jul 15, 2025 11:39 pm Not sure I could disagree with anything more. Hurt is incredible in what is an intentionally comic perf, and the out of nowhere Oscar nom he received for the film is the best thing the Academy has done in my lifetime

Hurt makes the film worth watching in one 5-minute scene. I've tried to like this film, in the theater upon release and a 2-3 times since then. Script/dialogue lacks zazz or something. The scenario feels overly familiar without any personality to differentiate it. So much portent that it becomes leaden. Until Hurt shows up. He goes big, brilliantly, and it saves the film from being a nondescript broodfest all the way through. Eastern Promises is definitely my preferred Cronenberg-for-hire genre film. I'd rather see the actors chewing it up with great lines instead of slow-talking banalities while looking pained.

Hurt probably doesn't get talked about enough as being one of the great actors of his era, despite being showered with awards during his heyday. I've watched a few of his later films recently by happenstance--ones where he had small roles. He's always memorable. Great presence. Unusual line readings that feel in the moment.

Hurt is one of my favorite actors for the reasons you state, despite only being in one of my favorite films (and not even close to the best part about it!)

Hmmm...Sunshine?

Finch wrote: Wed Jul 16, 2025 1:36 am Perhaps the scene at Hurt's compound will play better for me on a revisit. I wasn't a fan of the shift in tone in general so I'll allow for perhaps being unfair to Hurt. Been a decade or more since I've seen the film.

I agree -- I really hated Hurt's over the top foolishness here (although it did pay off in that glorious line "how did you fuck that up?!?!?"), it stuck out like a sore thumb in all the worst ways. A rare performance miscalculation from Cronenberg. I just sat there wishing Ed Harris had been called back to play both roles as twins, a la Paul Dano in THERE WILL BE BLOOD.