Last weekend, Richard & I placed the DVD of David Cronenberg's "History of Violence" into our player, fully anticipating to be amazed yet again by the Canadian auteur director. How completely and utterly surprised we were when the film turned out to be so ... disappointing.

Did we see the same film that everyone else purportedly saw? We felt that the dialogue was trite and the plot contrived, resulting in something that felt more "movie of the week" than an artful exploration into mankind's relationship to violence & aggression. Sure, this film had the classic Cronenberg touches: splatter, comic book gore and unconventional sex. William Hurt's rather baroque portrayal of Richie Stalls was thoroughly enjoyable. Ed Harris was equally effective as the wounded baddie who badgers Tom & his family. However, the rest of the film just didn't hang together.

Frankly, I've always felt that Cronenberg has more "misses" than "hits" in his oeuvre. Yes, he's a clever guy. He was unquestionably on the cinematic vanguard with such offerings as "Videodrome" and "Naked Lunch". I loved "Spider", too. But "History of Violence" falls way short of the mark. I understand fully why this film was shut out of the Oscars.

Let's not forget that Cronenberg was also a very, very B-movie director in the 70's, responsible for such cult classics as "Rabid" and "Shivers". These schlocky films are fun, but they're a long way from good. Case in point: the lead actress in "Rabid" is 70's porn star Marilyn Chambers. I mean, c'mon...

Sorry, Dave. Love ya, but this ain't one of your better efforts.