And one thing's also very clear.

Jonny Greenwood, NOT THOM YORKE, is the brain behind Radiohead.

The score is entirely his vision, if you believe what Wiki says.

My gf just saw the film in theater, and she has gone crazy over it as well. She also said it's in the league of its own. I'm definitely checking it out this weekend.

I coulda gone with indulgent.

Matter of fact - - the first hour of There Will Be Blood is some seriously terrific indulgence.

The problem begins when the movie then becomes simple overindulgence. This is a talented filmmaker who has never made a really good movie (OK, I enjoyed Punch Drunk Love, but that was mostly due to Adam Sandler's bravura performance). It's actually quite frustrating as a moviegoer, to see a movie that has so much promise, from a guy who could make a masterpiece, and don't get me wrong - - I still have every hope that PeeTee will one day do so - - to see this movie writhe in overindulgent agony. (This from an avowed fanboy of melodrama. )

Someone asked me before I went to see There Will Be Blood if it was like a movie version of the TV series Dallas. Unfortunately, as it turns out, that comment was all too prescient. Even worse, I could have accepted that reality. However, as it turns out, There Will Be Blood is merely a parody of Dallas, right down to it's soapy heart...

7 out of 5. (For that great first hour*.)




{*Hopefully, in a future DVD release, we'll see the Director's Cut with an hour shaved off this trainwreck of a movie - - there's a cool 97 minute movie buried in the rubble.}

I am loving the reaction to this film. It had a very solid expansion this weekend for a film of its kind.

Seeing it tonight. Yay.

*don't read if you haven't seen the movie SPOILER alert*

A new day, and I'm still loving this movie.

I agree with bradley that it's uneven, but, if anything, the ending reinforces the "dramatic weight" of the movie. The ending (we'll pretend the ending begins when his son tells him he's going to Mexico, and Plainview hysterically yells "BASTARD FROM A BASKET") ties everything together. We finally learn what happened to Eli's brother, too.

"I drink your water, Eli. I drink it up. Everyday. I drink the blood of lamb from Bandy's tract."
...
"Did you think that your song and dance and your superstition would save you? I am the third revelation! I am who the lord has chosen. Because I'm smarter than you. I am older and wiser and I am not a false prophet, you sniveling boy. You're done for."

It's also interesting how, at the end of it all, Anderson connects Daniel's "weapon of choice" with the very first scene in the movie...

...bang bang Maxwell's silver hammer came down on her head
bang bang Maxwell's silver hammer made sure that she was dead...

Hmmm.

I'm going to have to think about this some more.

The film is essentially a one man show, and it's made impeccably well. I just don't think it finds its rhythm. It has a tough time deciding on a course to take... personally, I think the strongest story in here is the battle between the love of his son and his immense hatred for success beyond his own. He obviously has love to give but because he has no actual in-the-flesh relatives and no progeny he just can't seem to overcome it and any hope dies with Henry and the crippling/"abandonment" of H.W. to an extent.

I liked the ending a great deal (I loved his ultimate "success"/revenge by humiliating Eli in front of God right before the deed is done). Although I think the whole Eli story was terribly underdeveloped. Scenes like the one where Eli beats up on his dad (although excellent) just don't go anywhere. The unfortunate part of this is that PTA hints at Eli being an incredibly complex character from the beginning but doesn't develop him much past the point where Eli smacks his dad around.

So I guess I would say the film is a moving and excellent portrait of a complicated man, but it misses some deeper opportunities with the supporting cast.

I didn't think Eli was underdeveloped at all, esp. in a "one man show" like this. The finale logically progresses what PTA started way back in the scene where Eli asks if he can bless the well (and get Plainview to recognize him for it). That Eli is hardly a "man of Christ"...

I felt like the final scene makes an important assumption related to Eli's development. Eli's been working in radio, probably preaching Jesus' word mindlessly to whoever listens (instead of, say, applying it to personal situations as he was in the church). The atmosphere change, maybe, has caused a loss in faith.

That, or he has realized his own sins (greed, jealousy, and a commitment to himself over the community). He knows he can't pretend to help people overcome their transgressions, when he has sinned himself. He wants to "come clean" and lead a new life, so he approaches Plainview with an interest in doing business.

Nonetheless, when he realizes that the land to drill isn't there, he breaks into tears and starts a tirade about how the lord isn't with him. He's been fooled. He can't lead a life in oil, and, after denouncing his religion, has no future as a preacher either. He may have "realized" his sins, but they are still a part of him. He is still greedy, still jealous. He searches peace of mind and success, but is willing to buy them at the expense of others (because, as the film points out, oil brings deafness, death, etc). His life is as tragic as Plainview's. But, whereas Plainview arguably accomplishes his goal in life, Eli dies before finding any meaning or clarity in his life, still at battle with himself.

But, yeah, I loved the interaction between Eli and his father. His family's speechless reaction, to see their Jesus-adoring son call his elder an "idiot" for being jipped by Plainview, is perfect. And, the more I think about the ending, the more I love how it eerily echoes the baptism scene.

Thanks for that. And now I must throw myself off a cliff.

Seriously thats as fucking retarded as people who still think Cliff Burton was the sole force behind Metallica.

Okay, maybe that wasn't a super wise thing to say.

Nonetheless, I still stand by it. Kinda. Musically, he is. Thom Yorke gives Radiohead its edge. He gives Radiohead coolness, social relevance, a face - if you will. He is the band's spokesperson. But, musically? I'd argue Greenwood. Thom Yorke's whine hasn't changed since The Bends, but Greenwood has always been in the back, leading O' Brien, Selway, and the other Greenwood, and providing a soundscape for Yorke's voice and lyrics.

Just think about The Bends. The centerpiece of every song was not a Thom Yorke vocal solo, but a Greenwood-created riff. OK Computer? Same thing.

Like Wyclef Jean (not Lauryn Hill or Pras, the hack) made The Fugees musically interesting, Jonny Greenwood is the guy with "the ear" in the band. Which isn't to say that Thom Yorke isn't talented - he is. He just doesn't have Greenwood's ear for melody.

This was a very...interesting...film. I think it's one of the more difficult movies I've ever seen to actually nail down a concise opinion on. First of all, aside from the fact that Daniel Plainview is an incredibly fascinating, exciting protagonist, Daniel Day-Lewis gives an astonishing performance and basically is this movie. This is certainly one of the best examples of acting in recent years. Paul Dano is impressive as Eli (although I was really confused when he first appeared as Paul...Paul *was* a real person, right?), but no other actors ever register. The direction by Paul Thomas Anderson is excellent, but I do feel that the movie could have been paced better. Although the climax is a truly memorable scene, it did sort of seem to drag at points before that. Like I said before, I'm really having a difficult time actually saying what I thought of the film. It's undeniably great in several aspects, but other parts of it felt forced and underdeveloped. And, of course, I also found it rather strange at times. This is the kind of movie I feel like you really need to stew over and think about for a while. I'd say it's about a low A- for me.

Yes, Paul is a real person as confirmed by Plainview in the final minutes.

It's like a Jacob-Esau thing going on with Paul and Eli.

Where are you guys seeing this movie? It's not playing anywhere near me. When is the bloody expansion!!??

Dude, go to the ArcLight on Hollywood.

Christian, you saw it?

What's the Jacob-Esau thing? I'm lost. Should I be?

Also, did anyone else feel like the musical score was about to make them start having a panic attack or something? It was really, really intense, and it was kind of like that the entire movie.

In an interview, PTA said that originally, Paul Dano was only gonna play Paul, but the actor who was to play Eli was not doing a very good job, so they replaced him with none other than Dano, since Paul's part was so small.

I'm thinking that it would have been a much stronger film, if they'd gone with a much better actor to play Eli, so that the Daniel/Eli dynamic had the force that the screenplay was clearly trying for, but rarely achieving.

I'm thinking Edward Norton...



(Which reminds me of 3:10 to Yuma, with two equally strong actors in the leads - - and which we discussed here how it would have been interesting to see them switch roles. Imagine There Will Be Blood with a pair of actors you could consider switching...)

Another point I'd like to raise, is the over-rating of Daniel Day Lewis' performance in this movie...

Sure he's great, but I would call this his weakest performance to date. You can actually see him acting at numerous points in this film - - something I've never seen from him before. Not that it's really his fault, since he pretty much has to carry the screenplay's inherent weaknesses all by himself...

I've finally settled on making this my #3 of 2007. But in most years, it probably would have been #1.
There were five films that I absolutely LOVED in 2007...most years don't have more than two.

I was about to go see it with my old man on Sunday, but it was raining too hard. Next week I suppose...

It's playing in Seattle (two hours away), but there's no other reason to go and realistically, I can't devote an entire weekend to being over there until the MLB season starts up again. So I still have to wait until late January/early February.

I've read the first 37 pages of the script (really couldn't wait) and I'm wondering if I should read more. I'm thinking not, but if it takes too long to get here...

Okay, so I'll admit that I did not love it. It's one of those brilliant pieces of work that just doesn't click for you. But it really is great. I'll name all the great shit first.

First of all, DDL. Faaaaantastic. Best performance all year, I think (I think I've said this sentence every week for the last three or four weeks now, keeps getting better and better). Such a powerful performance, there's not much to say. Paul Dino is also impressive in his role, but clearly overshadowed.

Second, the final 15 minutes or so of the film = brilliant. I mean, wow. Probably the best fifteen minutes of '07. All of DDL's lines are delivered to perfection ("I drink your milkshake!", "Bastard from a basket!"). The entire conversation between him and H.W., the entire interaction between Daniel and Eli, the end...just phenomenal.

Third, the technical stuff. This is not something I look for in films (as you all know), but when I really get effected by it, I'll praise the hell out of it. Some excellent cinematography. And the score...whoa. Although I think it wasn't right to make the score so intense wayyy early in the film, when you don't know Daniel's character well. But otherwise, it's incredibly effective and memorable.

Now, you know what I didn't like? Basically, it's too simple. And I don't really wanna compare this to No Country for Old Men, but this kinda shows how effective No Country was - that I'm still thinkin' about it. Basically, No Country made me think afterwards. A lot. It blew my mind. There Will Be Blood was an intense viewing, and it's something that's in your head as you walk out the door, perhaps 'till you get home. The next day? You remember that it's just a straight-forward film that didn't have too much brilliance hidden in it - everything was just shown. But then again, it's a character piece and it's really different from No Country, so on its own merit, it's fuckin' excellent. It's one of the "best" films of the year, and certainly high up on my favorites for the year at the same time, but not quite equal on both lists. It'd be like the best film (or second) of '07, but not quite in my top 10 of the year. Not really disappointed about it since this film kinda came out of nowhere for me and I did think it was great. But I didn't find it to be as memorable as some did and will.

Maybe I gotta think about it some more...

***1/2

No Country for Old Men is more complex in terms of its story, but I think There Will Be Blood is more complex in terms of its themes and ideas. Even if you couldn't catch everything, it's very obvious that there was a SHITLOAD of stuff beneath the surface in this film; whether it referred to a growing America, humanity in general, businesses like oil, or a bit of everything, the film had a lot of deeper meaning, whereas NCFOM's deeper meaning only existed in the last couple of scenes. The rest was just intense-as-fuck storytelling.

Both are fantastic. And I'll be delighted if either win Best Picture. I just think TWBB deserves it more.

YOu shouldn't be. It just felt like that to me. Jacob received Isaac's blessing by being crafty and the first one pretty much to approach his father. I guess the father in this case is Daniel. Paul was the first one to approach Daniel regarding the oil, he got the money, and according to Daniel, is now the owner of a large corporation. Eli, on the other hand, was too late in providing info to Daniel (in fact, he competed with him, rather than cooperating) and he got squat.