Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'DVD' started by David (C), Dec 2, 2005.
From Davis DVD Rumor Mill
The first one is too "TV movie of the week" for me.
The second one is too "Vin Diesel action crap" for me.
The third one is just weird and looks like a bad PS job.
But I haven't even seen the movie yet, so what do I know.
The image on the third is, more or less, the one sheet.
I prefer the “center / over the counter” one. For some reason it puts me in the mind set of a Japanese ad campaign for the film.
I'm going to have to go with option three as waaay better. It's the only image with any class at all, and this movie is more of a classy drama than a pumped out Asian action romp or a movie-of-the-week "family issues" flick.
If you haven't seen it, I highly recommend giving it a rental. Personally, I think it's Cronenberg's best work ever. Absolutely a masterpiece. Better yet, go find that art theater near you still playing it. It's a helluva experience.
Glad to hear the DVD is going to be a full-blown special edition, although this is one of those rare movies that is so outstanding that a barebones disc would be compelling enough on it's own to get a buy from me.
Anyway... New Line guys, please give us the theatrical poster art, aka Option #3!
Option 3, please. As stated earlier, it has a 'classy' aspect which accurately suggests that the film is more than it seems. Thank you, New Line and David Cronenberg, for investing time and money into this very excellent film.
link This featurette bothers me since I read a quote from the director stating that the Cannes Premiere Version would be used for the United States.
Strange... New Line decided to go with none of the three cover art options above! They instead chose this one:
This must be the worst of the four options, I must say. I respect that New Line is seeking a larger audience for this attention-deserving film, but I'd rather not see a compromise in quality, if at all possible...
The new REVISED DVD artwork is so horrible, so utterly B-movie that I was compelled to voice my dissatisfaction at New Line's contact us page.
I've been encouraging my friends to do the same. If there is a better way to get New Line to acknowledge this atrocity (well, may be its not THAT serious!) then please post back here.
Here's the message I sent:
Someone please review "a history of violence" dvd soon!
btw, did new line include a dts track?
I normally care little about such matters, but my curiosity having been picked by the 3 artworks posted above, I have to say that 4th and actual one is absolutely TERRIBLE. And funny, because it reeks of a desperate attempt to reel in a crowd that will end up hating the movie anyway. But what the hey, as long as they buy it, right?
I wish I worked at a rental store so I could hear the complaints of people who rent it based on critical buzz and end up hating it. Call me sick but I'd find it funny.
I'll let you know... people are already asking about it at work, very curious... most of them titillated by the poster art and the promise in the title.
I loved the film, and hope I find it funny when people misunderstand it.
Bummer... all my favorite movies from 2005 (The New World, Kingdom of Heaven, A History of Violence) have been totally written off, ignored, misunderstood, or hated by the public.
if people would just stick to poster art the world would be a better place.
Amen, Elijah, Amen. The KINGDOM OF HEAVEN Director's Cut is so good it makes me wonder if the powers-that-be at Fox even bothered seeing it before ordering it to be cut down by an hour.
There are reviews at www.dvdmg.com, www.dvdreview.com and www.dvdfile.com
I've all but worshipped Cronenberg's work for most of his career, but I CAN'T be the only one who found this movie horrendously simplistic and embarrassingly overacted. The entire subplot with the teenage son and his "ripped from a bad 80's movie" tormentors was just too much to overcome. I very nearly walked out and can't for the life of me understand what people see in this movie. I realize I should probably see the damn thing again, just in case, but I don't know if I have the courage.
The only saving grace is it's revitalized Cronenberg's career.
Greg, putting it in the context of Cronenberg's previous work doesn't help this film. The simplicity you described might be the best thing going for it; maybe you'd like the film better if you watched it a second time and let go of the fact that this isn't Naked Lunch or The Fly.
It's very consistant with Cronenberg's other films in that he always makes movies about humans having identity crisises: they have lost the normal plane of reality and are behaving like someone else, (Naked Lunch, Videodrome, eXistenZ), a physical/psychological transformation is robbing them of their humanity (The Dead Zone, The Fly), or something similar.
A History of Violence is about how individuality is submerged beneath other people's perceptions of who you are, based on what you do, not the unseen "you" lurking within you soul. John Stall is defined by the fact that he is capable of killing people with great ease, and it re-writes everyone's perception of his identity - even he isn't sure if he's Joey Cusack.
That's a very disturbing subject for an action thriller, but a brilliant one.
Besides that, the actual simplicity of the writing and shooting and acting of the film was superbly economical. The whole film adds up brilliantly - to nothing.
The subplot with the teenage son... Cliche? Possibly. Necessary? Yes. It served a purpose in the film that could not have been served by anyone else as effectively. It's not my favorite story element, but I understand why it's there.
The acting: overacting by William Hurt, definately. All the rest: hell no! All of the them, Hurt included, are pitch-perfect. It's the best ensemble acting I've seen since... I dunno how long. The Hours?
But the main reason I liked the film: it's a damned entertaining story, damned well told, and it scared the crap out of me while filling my brain with ideas. I loved it. I bought a copy and it arrived today and I'm happy!
I got my copy early and watched the film last week. It looked and sounded fine. The only extra I got to was the comparision between the US and Overseas versions, which is merely a few frames of blood. Cronenberg mentions that they had toyed with the idea of putting both versions of the film on this disc, but decided against it when they took a second look at the footage in the international cut and realized it wasn't worth it.
I really enjoyed the film. William Hurt and Ed Harris were great. I almost wish someone would make a film with these two characters, but make it a black comedy. A sick, violent black comedy.