>Gosling threatens to kick the dude's teeth in and shows who
>he really is before any of the threats to mulligan.

I'm not suggesting that Driver was a peace and love dude, but I do see him sort of like Bardem in NCFOM, this principled killer.

Loudmouth in the diner was threatening to reveal his identity, speak to him about professional stuff on personal time, and Driver had to bark a little to temper that situation. Compare using some sort of WWE-threat (kick your teeth down your throat, was it?) to the controlled workmanlike intensity with which he threatens Christina Hendricks. It was for show.

But anyway, he's maintaining his cool, keeping the monster in him at bay, and then he's threatened and someone he cares for is threatened, and the werewolf comes out.

Sure, the diner scene might have hinted at the psychopath that lies within in, but that switch was ultimately flipped for good once the stakes became unmistakable.

I'm not saying that monster wasn't always there. But for the audience, who had this innocent notion of Driver for much of the first half of the movie, and certainly for Mulligan's character, who had that same notion until the elevator scene, I guess, the violence needed to be that extreme, that "over the top" to emphasize what was on the line for the Driver and to really puncture that initial impression we / she had of him. That was my point in my first reply to you: the over-the-toppness of it all served a thematic point.

>The
>violence isn't because mulligan is threatened; its because
>that is who he is.

It's both who he is and because of her. They're not mutually exclusive. She's the trigger for the violence inside him.

>As for less violence, I would hardly say that Refn and takashi
>miike are par for the course indiewise. Especially American
>directors.

Just going off of what you said . . .