Now I'll try to defend A HISTORY OF VIOLENCE and give my thoughts on the problems you had with the movie. Not that I think you are wrong, but again, sometimes we moviefans misinterpret something and instead we are led without help from our fellow colleagues.
*SPOILERS!!!*
*I believe honestly that the whole point of the son's story is raised by Cronenberg and his scriptwriter is one that relates to the film's probing about the very topic of violence in our society.
Notice how he was passive when the bully tried to pick a fight, and a reason to stomp him. He was able to defuse the situation.
Then once we learn the whole deal of Mr. Mortensen, notice how the son then beats the shit out of the bully later on. Cronenberg's question he raises is this: "Is violence a hereditary trait that we carry from generation to generation, or do we learn violence by example in society?"
The movie has no clear answer, but its up to the audience to answer it. Was that violent rage inside the son all along, or was he inspired by his father?
*As for the "convincing" aspect.....what if the protagonist tries to absolute convince himself most of all that his past never happened? Consider that whole sequence with him and his wife recreating their "non-existant" high school years with each other. It may seem like gentle foreplay between lovers, but is it simply Mortensen's attempt to mask who he once was?
Same as well, even if we both knew of sorts where the story was leading us, the fact that it convinced us means that as a film, it worked in totally persuading us that "Tom" is not "Joey".
*"I can understand that Tom is stressed out and wants to have sex. But his wife, who has just found out that he is a total fraud is kissing him passsionately. i am referring to the scene on the stairway."
A point that some folks have brought up, but one must consider that notice how even if Maria Bello knows that her love was indeed a fraud, they still care for each other, even if that passionate connection may never be renewed to the height that of which it was before the pivotal moment at the restaurant.
A critic pointed out that maybe the whole sex-starway sequence was only meant how instead of physically "fighting" each other over this, but instead that they only violently "loved". Of sorts breaking the tension between both.
*"The penultimate scene in philadelphia was more a comedy scene"
well, you got me there. The audience at my screening did laugh when Mr. Hurt friggin locked himself out of his own mansion, and then *boom*
