Cool News
Moriarty Is Knocked Flat By THERE WILL BE BLOOD!
Hey, everyone. “Moriarty” here.
I fully anticipate this will be a film that will be hard for many people to choke down. Daniel Plainview, the character played by Lewis, is one of the most flawed and disturbing “heroes” in film history. But it’s obvious while watching the film that PTA fell in love with the character as he was writing him, flaws and all, and decided to follow him to whatever end occurred, not worrying about making it safe or whether or not we’ll “like” Plainview. It is unapologetic. It is clear-eyed in its purpose. In a way, it shocks me how direct the storytelling is. This is not a film like EL TOPO where you’re going to argue about what’s going on or what it means. PTA’s last two films, MAGNOLIA and PUNCH-DRUNK LOVE, were left turns into a sort of oblique artsy playfulness that was maddening to some viewers, and I got the feeling he was sort of going in circles waiting for his best work to arrive. HARD EIGHT and BOOGIE NIGHTS were both so authentic, so packed with energy and enthusiasm for storytelling, that I felt like all we needed to do was wait for him to find the right story to tell.
Imagine if Martin Scorsese had realized at some point that no one was going to give two shits about Leonardo Di Caprio in GANGS OF NEW YORK and decided instead to just make a three hour Bill The Butcher movie.
That’s THERE WILL BE BLOOD.
The first section of the film, told without dialogue, is raw filmmaking, beautiful and primal and powerful, and as I watched it unfold, I started to realize that this is not the same director we’ve seen in the past. PTA was one of many promising filmmakers who emerged in the late ‘90s with visual acumen that was obviously accrued from an encyclopedic knowledge of other films. He cribbed mercilessly, but I always thought he did it in a way that just added visual punch to very real and heartfelt characters that he wrote. The point of his films was not to do homage. There were just visual ideas he couldn’t resist throwing in as a lifelong film nut. It’s not a bad thing, per se, that I can watch BOOGIE NIGHTS and know immediately that he’s a fan of I AM CUBA.
But this year, I’ve seen many film fans express profound disappointment with Rodriguez and Tarantino for GRINDHOUSE, which they saw as wallowing in the past, drowning in homage. And although I had a great, great time with GRINDHOUSE, I can see why it would frustrate someone looking for growth from either of those filmmakers. Quentin’s enormously gifted, but I can see how some people must be furious to see him using those gifts for mimicry more than invention. He’s like the single greatest maker of movie mix-tapes ever.
With PTA, THERE WILL BE BLOOD is the moment where he matures past mimicry, past experimentation, into being the muscular and mature storyteller that I prayed he was going to become. I think it’s even safe to say that with this film, he has leapt past most of his peers in terms of technique and, more importantly, purpose. This is the work of a powerful artist in full bloom, and I have a feeling this is a film we’re going to be digesting for years to come.
By the time we’re properly introduced to Plainview, he’s already begun to prosper as an oil man. He travels with his son, H.W., played by the serious-faced Dillon Freasier, and the two of them make a formidable sales team. Plainview is portrayed from the very start as an expert manipulator, not above using his son to sell the image of stability and trustworthiness to people he despises in order to get whatever he wants from them.
One of the central questions of the film, in fact, is whether Plainview is even capable of love or any other normal human emotion. Is it possible that he loves nothing other than oil and money? Is it ambition that flows in his veins? Does avarice keep the heart beating? His loathing of all of humanity keeps bubbling up throughout the film like crude oil on untapped land, and it’s what makes the character so fascinating to me, so unexpected and so unlike the normal lead in a film. Plainview is a misanthrope, clearly illustrated by several incidents in the film, but he seems to have earned it honestly. One gets the feeling that this is a man who trusts only what he can hold in his hands, only what he can quantify. The ethereal business between people eludes him, frustrates him, makes him feel left out. He’s not wired to love, so he’s not wired to trust people who feel love. When he looks at a community, he doesn’t see all the benefits, all the human pleasures that come from having neighbors. All he sees are the motives, the agendas, the parasitic side of things. He is repulsed when he sees in others things he recognizes of himself. Watching him click into slick-ass salesman mode becomes morbidly hilarious once you start to understand Plainview. When he’s hustling people, he is both completely honest and utterly false at once. He’s like a great white shark wearing a human being mask that just barely covers that enormous razor-sharp smile.
Even so... the relationships he does forge with others, either by choice or by circumstance, are the heart of this film. Watching Plainview struggle to plug himself into humanity is the drama here. Don’t listen to the crazy talkback loony who wants you to believe this is some thinly veiled metaphor about America’s reliance on oil. Horsefeathers to you, loony. This isn’t a metaphor at all, except in the sense that we can always, hopefully, see some reflection of our own humanity in the great films. All of the movies that I consider truly great, truly essential, movies that I not only own but also frequently revisit... they are all movies that in some way impart something that I consider central to who we are a species. And THERE WILL BE BLOOD is all about behavior. It’s all about the little moments, the choices Plainview makes, the way he reacts to his encounters with others. There are four characters who make dramatic impacts on him over the course of this epic life’s journey we witness, and those four characters define the way the film bobs and weaves before finally building to an iconic final scene.
Paul Dano plays two of those characters, the Sunday twins. Paul Sunday wanders into Plainview’s office one day and offers to outright sell him a piece of information. The location of a vast untapped reservoir of oil. A place where oil just bubbles up onto the ground, it’s so plentiful. I haven’t read Upton Sinclair’s novel OIL!, and I’m not going to pretend to have any idea how this is as an adaptation, but it certainly feels like PTA paints an authentic time and place with the first half of this film. When he’s setting up who Plainview is, he shows us the madness of oil mania in America. There’s an early scene where Plainview addresses all the citizens of a small town, but they’re so desperate, so crazed at the idea of making money off their land, that Plainview walks away. He doesn’t need the headache. He’s already a success. He knows how to do the job right, and that knowledge gives him a serenity, a power. He will make the land give him every drop of oil it has, no matter what. He will squeeze it and squeeze it and squeeze it, and he will always get it if it’s there. And he’s fair. He’s a good businessman, not some insane parody like Mr. Burns from THE SIMPSONS. He makes the people he deals with a lot of money. Plainview’s success story is genuine, earned. Plainview obviously deals with a lot of crackpots and when Paul Sunday turns up, selling this story with hints and vague statements, it would be easy to dismiss him. Plainview knows what to ask, though, knows precisely what information he needs to be able to tell if Paul is for real or not. The paltry sum he eventually pays Paul ends up looking like an even worse deal than Judas’s thirty pieces of silver once you factor in everything that happens because Plainview is sent to a tiny place called Little Boston in Isabella County.
Eli Sunday, the other brother, the one still living at home in Little Boston, is the role that Dano plays for most of the film, and he’s the main antagonist for Plainview. Eli is a holy man. Or, more precisely, Eli is a snake oil salesman who fancies himself a holy man. He’s got big ambitions for Little Boston and his role in the foundation of the town, and when Plainview shows up, Eli sees a way to piggyback his own ambitions onto Plainview’s plans for the area. What he doesn’t count on is how completely Plainview rejects religion, and in particular, the kind of religion that Eli is selling. From the moment they meet, these two are set on a collision course.
There’s his relationship with H.W., his adopted son, which I mentioned earlier. This is the trickiest one in the film, and I think the final sequence between the two of them can be interpreted several different ways. I think it’s a twisted moment of fatherly love, the only sort of expression that Plainview is capable of. I don’t see him rejecting H.W. Far from it. I think he is giving H.W. the precise ammunition he will need to be a success and compete against his father without holding back out of loyalty or affection. In some ways, this is the one character arc that PTA draws in haiku, leaving it open to interpretation. I think he connects the dots on a lot of the film, but he leaves some gaps in the H.W. story precisely so that you have to decide for yourself if Plainview’s a monster or just emotionally retarded.
The clues may lie in the way he deals with the fourth major character he plays off of, Henry, his “brother from another mother,” played to heartbreaking effect by Kevin J. O’Connor. Henry shows up and offers Plainview proof that they shared a father, and Plainview’s natural suspicions eventually give way to a real desire for family. Some of my favorite stuff in the film involves these two and a campfire conversation. And that may not sound like the most engrossing thing in the world, but the way PTA stages the entire film, every conversation is of nearly-biblical import, and every word spoken carries deadly weight.
Robert Elswit’s been working with PTA as his cinematographer for just over a decade, since PTA’s first film, and the relationship pays off here in a rich and remarkable visual palette that ably reflects the emotional landscape the screenplay lays out. The same is true of Jonny Greenwood’s brilliant score, unlike anything else I’ve heard in a theater this year. It doesn’t work like most film scoring, as direct punctuation to the images unfolding, but instead offers up a roiling, constantly simmering commentary on the larger primal forces at work just below the surface of the film. As Eli Sunday and Daniel Plainview butt heads once, then twice, building towards a conclusion that justifies the title PTA gave the film, Greenwood’s score builds towards an apocalypse of its own. It’s an amazing debut for Greenwood as a composer for narrative features, and I hope it leads to a lot more work for him, and that he continues to push the envelope in terms of how he approaches what can often times be the most clichéd and tired contribution to a film.
I’m not going to tell anyone that they aren’t smart enough to “get” THERE WILL BE BLOOD, or yell and stamp my feet if it doesn’t win major awards. I’m not going to dig in and demand that everyone take the same things from it that I do. All I’m going to do is observe that it’s rare I feel this strongly about a film after only one viewing. This resonated for days and days after I saw it, though, and there are scenes I can’t shake, dialogue I can’t stop replaying. More than that, there’s this feeling that I had while watching it... a feeling I used to get a lot more frequently. And I think I figured out why it’s less common for me these days.
When you’re first falling in love with film, when you’re starting to realize you are a film geek, there are SO MANY amazing, classic, essential films and filmmakers that you need to catch up with. And thanks to video, I remember when I would fall in love with a filmmaker like Stanley Kubrick and I would be able to watch 2001, CLOCKWORK ORANGE, LOLITA, PATHS OF GLORY, THE KILLING, THE SHINING, and BARRY LYNDON all in the space of a week, all for the first time. Do you know what kind of a hole that left in the back of my skull? Once you’ve really caught up to a certain point, though, you don’t get to discover true classics as often, because there aren’t that many left. You don’t get to gobble up whole filmographies at once because you already have. That experience of having my brain chemistry altered by a film is more and more rare these days, and I suspect the same is true for many of you who are also rabid film freaks. You still hope you’re going to feel it whenever you put on some new film, but you’re starting to suspect that you’ve caught up... that you’re not going to get your head caved in as often... and it’s a little bit depressing.
Well, THERE WILL BE BLOOD was that sort of experience for me. It hit me that hard, that immediately. THERE WILL BE BLOOD restores my faith in American film in general. It is still possible to make a classic, a new film that tells a story in a unique way and that makes no apologies. This is not homage. It’s not post-modern. It’s not pastiche. It’s not a sequel. It’s not a remake. It’s not a reimagining. It’s not ironic. It’s not some ham-handed political screed. It’s not an excuse for style over substance. This is, simply put, a great story about a great character told confidently by a great filmmaker.
And these days, that sets it apart, an oasis of greatness that perfectly caps off a very strong year in film overall.
I’ve got a few more reviews to put up tonight and over the next few days (like THE ORPHANAGE and THE BUCKET LIST), a handful of films left to see (I just broke the 200 mark for 2007 today), and I’m sure I’ll be the very last person on the entire Internet to get to my “Favorites of 2007” list. Still, I’m hoping I can wrap up several pieces I’ve been brewing for a while now as I also find some time to enjoy the holiday.
In the meantime, Merry and Happy to all of you.
Drew McWeeny, Los Angeles
Drew McWeeny, Los Angeles
-
+ Expand All
-
Living in Wisconsin is tough, most independent film isn't shown around here so I have to wait to buy or rent it on DVD, I probably won't have a final list until March.
Glad to hear you loved it, I can't wait to see it myself. -
I take it you like the movie
-
in Dallas with all the rest of the Central Texas students who aren't back to school yet! I see the Ritz sold out already, WOOT!
-
Yay.
Should i wait for the DVD? -
Moriarty is the best writer at AICN.
-
I have not reached the point where I have discovered all the classics, not by a long shot (just watched Miller's Crossing last night), so it would be nice to see one as it actually comes out in theaters. I am pumped for TWBB. I have never been so excited to see a movie. I sincerely hope I will not be disappointed.
-
Don't know if I should drive to Dallas tomorrow to see it or wait for a wide release.
-
and the skywalker family will be first in line.. I saw this film a fantastic fest... It is a great fucking film...
-
I am so excited to see this!!! i thought the assassination of jesse james was the best but by all the reviews this sounds like it will knock my undies off the way only daniel day can :)
-
Dec 28, 2007 10:16:40 PM CST
All this breathless hyperbole makes me skeptical...
by stone cold killa
I can't help but think that all of this guy's films are about dumb assholes who make thoughtless decisions and how miserable their lives become. I'll catch it maybe if and when it's free and convenient.
-
that was really well put, moriarty, about film geeks and hoping to discover new greatness just about every time you watch a new movie. I've been experiencing that a lot lately myself. i also thought jesse james was ridiculously awesome, is it just me or does it seem like people are forgetting that movie...
-
he is the Colonel.
-
I don't believe you mentioned Mr. Lewis's performance. Care to elaborate?
-
Not where I live anyway. Fucking Midwest.
-
I'm a huge fan of Anderson, and 'Magnolia' is my favorite movie ever (I got to see it at the first BNAT!). But it troubled me a little as I heard more about "There Will Be Blood" and realized that it is significatly different than the original novel. The original novel focuses mostly on the son of Plainview (Ross in the novel) as he grows up watching his father accumulating his fortune at the expense of others, then eventually decides to actively work against him once he goes to and graduates from college. The father always lurks in the background and is very morally ambiguous, never really stepping forward and doing anything overtly evil or corrupt. His guilt is only hinted at, and the villians are made out to be his rivals, big oil conglomerates (as opposed to his privately run operation).
Anyway, this all bothered me a great deal, but it sounds like PTA has kind of made his own thing, which sounds brilliant when taken on its own merits. I'll be in line tomorrow night at the sneak peak in Dallas. And I encourage everyone to read the novel, which is a really great read.
Oh, I forgot, reading is for pussies. -
Seriously- i would like to enjoy a 3 hour movie- not battle myself into falling asleep at 2 AM
-
You had me at "Imagine if Martin Scorsese had...decided instead to just make a three hour Bill The Butcher movie." That would have been an awesome fucking movie, that. I've been waiting a long time for TWBB...if it sucks, I'm gonna have to kick somebody in the balls.
-
I agree that PTA has become a master of technique. The film has the confidence and sculpture of a masterpiece. Any idiot could walk out of the theater and shout "masterpiece" without really thinking about it, because it presents itself as one. As far as I'm concerned it rang hollow when it should have been fraught with meaning. Paul Dano over-acted and Daniel Day-Lewis created a work of art as opposed to a living, breathing human. Still, it's execution and technique are phenomenal, and some individual scenes are out-and-out brilliant. The soundtrack is fascinating (when it's not distracting). Just throw on the brakes a little and take it in before you rush to crown this King Of The Year, or worse.
-
Seems like you've reviewed every other film that's been out in the last few weeks. Just wondering.
-
The hype for this started around the same time as all the hype for No Country For Old Men starting landing. My anticipation is paramount at this point. And , uh, wouldn't it be impossible to want to see Kill Bill 2 again after watching a Matix 3 midnight showing? Kill Bill 2 wasn't released until 6 months later. o_O OH WELL. Welcome to the hype. May it serve you well.
-
until he's done makin em'. i honestly cant see a bad film being made by him.
-
Not interested!
-
My Personal PTA Scorecard (out of 5): Hard Eight--5, Boogie Nights--4, Magnolia--2, Punch Drunk Love--3
I've seen thousands of movies, from popcorn to cerebral, but I just can't wrap my head around why anyone thinks this movie is worth a damn.Mr. McWeeny has crafted a lovely essay in its favor, but for me it's like listening to someone praise a Pollock painting for 4 hours -- I just want to be anywhere else. And, after a long day of work, that's exactly how I felt in the theater during this film.But no hate here -- if you can extract some enjoyment or artistic merit from this film, God bless you. -
that paragraph toward the end about devouring the classics really made me feel good. as a film geek in his mid-20's who didn't really start getting into classic films until college, i often feel hopelessly behind in my knowledge of classic filmmakers, and find myself plowing through this never-ending list of films i "need" to see, when i should be savoring this period, as i'll never get to experience these films for the first time again. kinda puts things into perspective. i'm officially psyched for this one, even though i'm not generally a fan of PTA (Boogie Nights aside).
-
Do it Academy, DO IT!
-
Because living in Fort Wayne, Indiana doesnt cut it.
-
i wasn't planning on trying to catch this livig in Kansas makes things difficult adn as a paid critic I get to see a lot of trash that comes through my local theatre that I want to eviserate adn can't really for fear of pissing off the sponser, os seeing a great movie often requires me driving several hours, so I was going to wait til DVD to see this, howeve you sold me mori on catching this in the theatre. I want to be able to tell my film geek kids adn film geek grandkids that i saw TWBB on the big screen in all it's wonderful glory. thanks for the review
-
Seen The orphanage, Juno, and then the main event there will blood in Lincoln Square. 9 hours at the movie theatre! I really enjoyed Blood. PTA elevated his game to a new level as did DDL... Paul Dano deserves major kudos for going toe to toe with DDL... Very intense. Congrats on the good work LADIES AND GENTLEMEN! Great review!
-
I loves me some Coens.
-
There always is. I can hardly wait to read his attack on Mori's review, while throwing in a jab at Bayformers.
-
It does have a cheesy 80s direct to video kind of title doesn't it... I'll see it mo.
-
... and freeze myself until this film comes out in my local cinema. Anticipation is such a bitch.
-
But hell no. DDL's performance in this movie is going to go down as one of the greatest of all time.
-
Keira? REALLY?
-
...you just don't like a great movie. TWBB is the best movie of the year, for me, Moriarty, and a ton of other critics. That's not "hype", that's all of our opinions. If you watch it and don't enjoy, don't try to make it seem like WE'RE the ones that have some sort of problem, like we're telling people that some shitty movie is fantastic for some inane reason. It just missed you, for some reason. Your loss.
-
I'm either entirely egrossed in his films or absolutely bored senseless. But, it's Amazing to see the depth he can get out of his actors in any given film.
That being said, can we just go ahead and give Daniel Day Lewis an honorary Oscar for "Best Actor To Always Pick a Good Role." The man does not do a lot of film, but every damn time he does one, the odds are he or the film get an Oscar nod. -
i'm skeptical. no irony?
-
Sorry that this is off topic
"Living in Wisconsin is tough, most independent film isn't shown around here so I have to wait to buy or rent it on DVD, I probably won't have a final list until March. Glad to hear you loved it, I can't wait to see it myself."
Greenleaf1 comments like this drive me nuts. There are two Landmark theaters, two other indie theaters along with the UWM student theater in Milwaukee and there are indie theaters in Madison. Also the Marcus theaters in the suburbs outside of Milwaukee and Waukesha both show larger indie movies. Now if you don't live near Milwaukee, Waukesha or Madison fine but don't treat Wisconsin like it is some complete cultural wasteland because it isn't. Go to the middle of any state away from large/college cities and my guess is that there aren't many indie theaters. -
There Will be Blood starts January 11th at the Oriental Theater in Milwaukee. Yeah a bit later than other places but it is playing.
-
Dec 29, 2007 9:22:33 AM CST
Moriarty prayed he would become "muscular and mature.." hehehe
by flickapoo
-
should be killed
-
its a phenomenal movie with oscar worthy performances by Hanks and Hoffman. Maybe people are just burnt out on political movies>? Or maybe its because it doesnt portray conservatives as massmurdering fascist bastards?
-
By the time they finally make it to my town, I stop caring. NCFOM didnt come out until about 3 weeks ago. There was maybe 3 people in the audience. Just go back to wide release.
-
I turned my back on the Oscars several years ago. They are completely irrelevant to me; and films in 2007 cememted that for me. The best film I've seen this year, Gone Baby Gone, won't be recognized by the Academy...and I hope that it DOESNT. Movies like No Country for Old Men, Memento, and I would suspect Blood are beyond award recognition. Look at Sir Ridley Scott for example; not one Oscar, yet his abilities and films dwarf most winning films.
-
I was an avid watcher of Oscar for 20 years or so, but I just didn't see the point. The real classics aren't recognized; and they are usually the ones that are remembered. More than the 'Best picture" winners.
-
impart something that you consider central to who we are a species?
-
by deadshot07 Dec 28th, 2007
09:45:21 PM
Moriarty is the best writer at AICN
-
try delaware. it's a 2 hour drive to philly for the closest indie theater. the local theater here reserves one screen for indie movies but they are VERY far behind the rest of the country.
-
I only wish the rest of the staff would quit and let him take over. Seriously, he's the only one who can write a competent and well-written review.
-
Well-written and poetic. I can't wait to see this movie.
-
Im so stoked to go, but like has been said, i guess id prefer a 7-8-9-or 10 pm screening instead, but hey, I guess the midnightness of it helps to make the viewing epic. I bought tix last night around 8, so i was surprised they werent sold out yet. Anyone thinking the same might want to try movietickets.com or follow the link from therewillbeblood.com
-
Being a Boogie Nights fan, it wasn't until I watched it a second time that I realized how good the script was. Punch Drunk was good but I haven't enjoyed it on DVD. I am looking forward to this. Especially if he's growing.
-
is that they have both made works that set the bar so high for what people expect from them, that they're afraid to even try anymore. So they make retro films and homages to genres because the retro film is kind of supposed to suck a bit, it requires a purposeful reduction in quality to make it authentically retro. So the bar is removed, and no one will go into the theater expecting Pulp Fiction 2, and people will just watch the film for what it is.
-
The coin flip scene in which (SPOILER) anton spares the gas station attendants life, for calling it correctly was magnificent. The amount of intensity, suspense, and fear in that one scene, that included no violence at all, just the suggestion, was some virtuoso shit. The entire film was shot perfectly, it was beautiful. A brutal, unforgiving story told with meticulous beauty...
-
Way overpraised. It's not the new Godfather, Casablanca or Citizen Cane. Perhaps you should have waited until you calmed down, Mori.
-
Was one of the most self indulgent over acted pieces of crap I have ever seen. Boogie Nights was entertaining but totally shallow. He is not a great director, he is a guy who tries to impersonate great directors.
-
fascinating guy
-
I'll admit, I skimmed, as I didn't want to hear too much plot info, as I'm seeing it tonight. However, i feel like a longer review like this is great, its sort of what i come here for. Variety offers smaller, concise reviews, but i come here for a serious geeky synopsis that no one else can provide...
-
there will be prosthetic penis.in julianne moore's cunt.
-
So pissed I'm going to have to wait another week, and I really hope it meets me incredibly high expectations. Honestly, the fact that so many reviewers are saying this is equal to Citizen Kane, and Kubrick's best films is putting this film on a very high pedestal for me.
-
Through an incredible series of coincidences, God has arranged for me to see this tonight in Miami, FL. Thanks God!
-
Second that as AICN's tiptop reviewer, Moriarty, terrific piece. Anderson's growth as a filmmaker and a writer has been a great joy to observe in this lifetime seeing as I wasn't lucky enough to live in the time of Huston, Ford, Wilder, etc.
-
I believe that people don't believe the hype for No Country because it's been THAT long that someone made a movie like this, THIS good. Also, there is hype for every movie that is considered 'great', and as people we get numb to it. No Country is an American masterpiece, as is Gone Baby Gone, and Zodiac. These films are above all awards, above all praise. They actually make people think about themselves differently after watching them. Also, No Country's advantage is that EVERY guy on the planet want's to be Anton Chigur on some level. It's the truth.
-
Fuck, dude, I live in Fort Wayne, Indiana. I doubt this will come to RAVE, but I'll keep my fingers crossed. Maybe Cinema Center? As a film geek I am ashamed to say I haven't been to Cinema Center yet, and I was BORN here. :(
-
But it looks like it won't happen until the new year. Soon though. I've enjoyed each of PTA's movies so far and "magnolia" is one of my very favourite movies ever. I adore that movie with a fiery passion. From start to finish, it is a big, bruising journey through a tumultuous 24-hour period in the lives of a handful of beautifully realized characters. Yes, the visual style is bombastic and there is heavy inspiration from Altman and Scorcese, among others, but for me, each of the characters are so believable, so convincingly wounded, that watching their lives take a strange turn for three hours is just bliss. It's pretty odd at times, but that's PTA's message. Life is fucked up. It's fucking odd and there's nothing any of us can do about it, except hold on and stay true to ourselves and try to extend the love we have to give to those around us. The mixture of Jon Brion's music with Aimee Mann's songs results in some of my favourite use of music not in an actual musical ever. Anyways, now I'm just going off on a tangent, which wasn't really the plan. I just love PTA's work so much and have long been inspired by his immense writing and directing talent. The fact that his latest movie is earning him the best reviews of his career and his shot at another Oscar nod is just glorious. Now if only this damn movie would open in a theater near me.
-
...that is accessible to ALL audiences and has the level of depth and "artistry" that all the arthouse fans here love, one that can be labeled a blockbuster and still retain the level of substance the artsy moviegoers crave.
-
Not to mention that here in Madison, we have one of only 2 Sundance Theaters in the country. They have Real Butter!
-
Moriarty, your writing has gotten better over the years, but you're still a smug bastard. And how someone would write a movie about oil prospecting and not be reflecting on this country's current energy consumption is beyond me; PTA coyly 'denies' (i.e. admits) to this concern in a Rollins interview that can be seen on youtube.
-
When was the last time a movie like that came around? It's a great question.. I'm trying to think what that movie could be.. Forrest Gump?
-
Thanks for writing "spoiler" halfway through the sentence in which you apparently lay out a big fucking spoiler. Go back to ruining peoples' days at your day job at Blockbuster, and leave the movie commentary to people who don't want to rob us of an experience. Assclown.
-
One of the best I've read on this site. I think the movie is one well-honed example of crafting a character study on film. Sadly, I did not enjoy the story as much as most folks, but, in spite of that, it is nearly a perfect movie and I am seeing it again tonight (especially after reading this review) at the sneak. For me, as far as story and character go, No Country for Old Men tops my list.
-
Nominated thrice. In '92, he lost to Jonathan Demme. In 2001, he lost to Soderbergh, and in 2002 he lost to Ron Howard. he was nominated for BHD, though, and the nom was the surprise in and of itself. Maybe that's what you were thinking of.
-
Dude. First of all, i dont play the whole, lets cyber fight and call each other names that you would never, ever call me in my face....
Secondly, I handled my spoiler warning fine. Are you retarded? If so, im sorry. If not, than once you read "(SPOILER)" you should have been able to figure out what was coming next....a spoiler! Also, its not like I really gave that much away anyway, and the warning was there. So braintag, eat a bag of dicks dude. You are wrong. -
Magnolia was embarrassingly silly and self indulgent, but Punch Drunk was like a whole new director.I'm looking forward to TWBB..he's at least out there taking chances which cinema desperately needs at this time.
-
..quick Animal Asshole impression.
-
I think the pixar films bring a level of depth and artistry to blockbuster cinema. And at least the first LOTR film. Personally, I would also add recent Spielberg flicks Minority Report and A.I. But yeah, it's sadly uncommon.
-
Hope this is better than No Country for Old Men. Greatest movie of the year my ass. Pretentious filmmaking at it's most glaring. Every shot screams "Look how well shot and beautiful I am!" and sticks around for about a second after the scene is supposed to end. The title and point beaten over your head by a tired-looking Tommy Lee Jones. An ending that doesn't stop when the movie is over. A main storyline that's not so much ended as abandoned. And that main storyline hinges on one of the dumbest decisions in film history. If this is the best movie of the year, then this is the worst movie year in history. So yeah, I hope TWBB is better...but I'm not holding my breath.
-
...jonathon quayle higgins would say, OH MY GOD!!! thanks for another great review MORI. got the book OIL! for xmas, on chapterVII the strike..great read so far. can't wait for PTA, TICHENOR, ELSWITT and GREENWOOD to blow me away! NO COUNTRY was great, JESSE JAMES was FANTASTIC and now THERE WILL BE BLOOD. PTA has NEVER let me down, EVER. (also got KETCHUMs book, the girl next door for xmas)
-
My friend just called me telling me she got tickets. I don't see why the website, and phone calling them would tell me they ARE sold out. I'm even more frustrated now, as I easily could have seen this.
-
Dec 29, 2007 7:56:44 PM CST
Still feeling pissed off from Magnolia. That was years ago.
by tallboy66
Yes, the movie is that fucking bad. Hopefully, this'll be good. Me likey Boogie Nights.
-
I love PTA including this film but the idea that PTA will ever sweep the Oscars is a joke. PTA and Oscars dont go together.
-
...is exactly how I felt about PUNCH DRUNK LOVE, my favorite PTA film so far. I actually think that's his best work, up to now. I am hoping that I will feel the same way about THERE WILL BE BLOOD. Your passionate review makes me think I will.
-
The closest showing I'm pulling up for the next two weeks is almost 100 miles away. WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH THE STUDIO? I want to see this so bad I quiver in the loins. And Hollywood wonders why internet piracy is so rampant!
-
Clearly you didn't "get" No Country. The movie was about Tommy Lee Jones's character from the start. The other characters exist as a contrast. The entire point (hence, the name of the movie) is that Jone's character got old and useless and lazy, while the young men are making things happen (his own father and grandfather died young in the line of duty). The moral: Being old and useless sucks. Better to die while you're can still something important with your life.
-
quite a few empty seats - one right beside me. they were selling tickets at the door (apparently moved it to a larger theatre).
-
Can't help but be a bit disappointed. Paul Dano almost singlehandedly ruined the movie for me. I hated his performance. The climax of the film just made me (and the theater I was with) laugh, which I don't believe was the intended effect. Still, there is no denying the ridiculous awesomeness of Daniel Day-Lewis. I believe that he is an alien God sent down to earth to inspire the human race. Again, I have to hate on the ending. To put it simply (and spoiler free), it just didn't satisfy me. I think it's because Eli Sunday wasn't really a strong antagonist. As played by Paul Dano, he was more like a one dimensional, sniveling, whiny bitch whore. Planview needed someone that could match him toe to toe. Still, so many great moments. Everyone should go see it. And for goodness sakes, bring the kids.
-
Paul Thomas Anderson's best film. One of the best American films ever made. One of the best performances ever given. It restored my faith in cinema. Anderson can now be spoken of in the same breath as Terrence Malick, Stanley Kubrick, Robert Altman and John Huston. The man is brilliant, and the film is magnificent. What Moriarty is speaking about - that feeling - I perfectly understand. In the simplest terms, Anderson has just bitch-slapped the entire industry and reminded them what a f***ing movie is.
-
Dec 30, 2007 2:51:08 AM CST
just saw it in philly ***PROBABLE SPOILERS**fair warning???***
by wilsonfisk89
Fantastic film, going to take a while to sink in. It really is a stellar feat of filmmaking, PTA has a lot going for him. So many layers, themes, and yes, subtext. Such beautiful camerawork, deft editing, jeez, its 3:42 and i;m rambling. Late ass movie. Questions linger about the third act, as in, whats it mean. I thought it was a fine third act, and a fine ending to the story, but like Magnolia, pretty surprising. Oh and this is not a "Bill the Butcher" film by any means. DP is a fascinating character, haunting even, but not at all like BTB. He is a fucking legend in action though in this film, commands the screen like verrrry few have ever. The scene in which he confronts the standard oil man in the restaurant, his campfire monolouge to his 'brother', his pulpit scene, every single scene is made memorable by some serious, serious good acting. Sorry for the stream of incherance, awesome film. Ok flame on people, i gg to sleep..
-
and just having seen the film, this is the best. great job, for real.
-
the ending is going to make you laugh. "Draiiiiiinage". You'll see. Trust me. Day-Lewis is insane. He needs to be in a screwball comedy.
-
in a total black humor sort of way
-
is pissing me off the more I think about it.
-
but it completely did not work for me. I did not want to laugh at the ending. Completely took away from any emotional power. PTA should have reigned in Dano and even Day-Lewis a bit too. SPOILERISH SPOILERISH SPOILERISH I should have been terrified of Planview.
-
Dec 30, 2007 3:43:37 AM CST
I think I watched this movie in a different way than most...
by blindambition238
Judging from some of the reviews I've read and comments here, it seems that the general consensus is that the movie was intended as a melodrama, which of course is fine, but surprises me since found the entire thing to be a bleakly hilarious critique of human nature. We're presented with someone who as a matter of factly states his disdain for the human race and through his own actions and experiences in the films seems to be proven right. SPOILER--- The final scene was sort of the punchline for me since we see that the man who banked on people being selfish creatures has prospered over the guy who had been banking on the goodness of people. Plainview is of course only prosperous in the material sense due to his wheelings and dealings but still better off than the preacher who ended up with nothing.
-
...absolutely perfect. The people yucked it up as Daniel humiliated Eli. And then the final blows come and the air went out of the room. And then suddenly the last punchline isn't so funny anymore. Manipulative stuff for sure, but still very effective and well told.
-
I'm not sure Plainview is in any way proven right. I just think he sees what he wants to see just as Eli sees what he wants to see. Plainview is emotionally murdered by his inability to accept his son's love (which is there). Eli's physically murdered by his inability to see Plainview isn't a good man to be preyed upon, but an evil man whose better at being evil than he is.
-
That interpretation does make sense and fits but im sticking to mine since I dont want to have to go back to the cinema and rewaych it again.
-
I think there's room for multiple takes on a movie. I get what you're saying about the dark humor in the film though. It's definitely there. And you can't exactly call the film tragic. It lies in the realm of infernal comedy.
-
... when I saw it, I was one of about six people in a theater on the Paramount lot. And when the final scene reaches its punchline, not only did I laugh, but I stood up to clap. I think that scene is hilarious, harrowing, and illuminating.
-
Nobody I know is watching this movie because they think it is an outright horror movie or spin-off of Saw. That and I haven't seen a trailer, poster, or showing anywhere in my area. I love Moriarty's reviews though, so I'll definitely be giving this a look-see. Great writing, Mort!
-
And as for the killer's performance in Ten Little Indians? Well, judge for yourself.
-
to finally do inglorious, or at least something amazing
-
Kubrik influences defintely but the film both visually and thematically was far more harsh than any Malick film.
-
A toast, Jedediah, to love on my terms. Those are the only terms anybody ever knows - his own. -CITIZEN KANE
-
It seems this movie is being coronated as the best movie of the year. However, most of us are unable to make an accessment, as it is unavailable for viewing in our little backwaters. Is it fair to drop a cinematic bomb on the last week of the year in a few "select cities", for the express purpose of getting an Oscar nod? It's sneaky, manipulative and the tactic has Karl Rove written all over it. I say a movie should be in wide release for the year it is nominated, not snuck though the backdoor at the last moment courtesy of a midnight showing in Austin or whatever.
-
In the previews, I get the impression that Plainview is a clone of the bad guy in Deadwood, what's-his-face.
-
that people are actually making comments like "LOOKS LIKE A CLONE OF THE GUY FROM DEADWOOD" and, a personal quote from the No Country boards "JAVIERS CHARACTER IS JUST TERMINATOR 2+TWO-FACE"
-
Birdy, perhaps you would have better stated your point by saying something like, "has incompetence become so rampant..." Anyhow, I since a nerve was struck. I've only seen the trailer for this "There Will Be Blah", but the main character was very reminiscent of the protagonist in "Deadwood". So very sorry.
-
"Imagine if Martin Scorsese had realized at some point that no one was going to give two shits about Leonardo Di Caprio in GANGS OF NEW YORK and decided instead to just make a three hour Bill The Butcher movie."
Bravo Mori! BRAV-fucking-O for saying that, it's the goddamn truth!!
-
It's impossible to not get a little depressed sometimes as a film buff, and that's why seeing a film like this is so neccessary for someone like me. You mentioned seeing every Kubrick film in the space of a week. Well, I did the same thing...minus Barry Lyndon. I was still pretty young at the time, and I assumed it wouldn't jolt me the way other Kubrick films had...so I waited.
And when I finally DID see Barry Lyndon...my God, it blew me away. In fact, it became my absolute personal favorite Kubrick film right then and there. I felt like I had stumbled upon some lost tomb in Egypt that noone had ever seen. The high lasted for weeks.
I got the same thrill when I saw No Country for Old Men. Without giving away TOO much, it hit me during the scene when Brolin sits in his room waiting...and then escapes through an open window into the street...and gets into a truck and tells the driver to drive away...you know where I'm going with this.
God, that scene...I felt as though lighting had struck me. The hairs on my neck stood straight up for what must have been the next 20 minutes. I was literally panting in my seat, whispering "God bless the Coens" to myself over and over.
I'm still talking about that film...and I will be until I see something that stimulates that same feeling of "luckiness"...luckiness to be alive and watching movies...that I got from No Country (and Inland Empire before that, and Pan's Labyrinth before that, and Children of Men before that...).
Film is the greatest drug in the world, and to hear that There Will Be Blood contains the spark, the juice, that we hunger for every time those images start to wash over us...well, I couldn't ask for more out of life!
The only thing I ask is that Paul Thomas Anderson (and the Coens, and David Fincher, and Alfonso Cuaron, and Quentin Tarantino, and Todd Haynes, and every other filmmaker who strives to create and communicate imagistic BLISS) keeps making movies, and studios keep financing them.
Here's to a great '08!! -
was that I found the ending hilarious and illuminating, but not harrowing. I wanted it to be harrowing and take my breath away, but unfortunately it just didn't. Perhaps part of the reason was because I felt like Dano was overacting. I don't know. I'm just mad I didn't get to have the experience you guys seem to have had.
-
it's a shame he didn't do Heart of Darkness. for a 40s movie that would have been hardcore. Welles was a 70s filmmaker stuck in the 40s/50s. couldve gave us so much more... but that nazi studio system
-
I would suggest that if you think this has anything to do with the filmmaking to Malick, you are only looking at surfaces. The filmmaking couldn't be more fundamentally and thematically different. I'd say you're the one who is clueless here, M-o-M. You want to talk about JESSE JAMES and the influence of Malick, maybe, but not this one. Not. At. All.
-
I saw it last night in Chicago, and I can't stop thinking about the movie. It's refreshing to see a movie that is engaging as a whole instead of in parts. It seems many of you are already comparing it to PTA's past work or other directors' past work. I was amazed by how much this movie is a thing on its own. Sure we like to play connect the dots in regards to directors' cinematic influences, yet all I thought about during the movie was what I was watching. What an engaging movie. It really is going to divide audiences, yet I mean that in a good way. It doesn't matter if you're a fan of Boogie Nights but not Punch Drunk Love, or if you're a diehard fan of Altman, or if you've been disappointed in PTA's other films but the trailer and critical praises have you interested enough to check it out - this movie is going to really connect with (and surprise) some people. I think that PTA and crew succeeded brilliantly at what they set out to accomplish, even if the woman sleeping beside me in the theater thought differently.
-
Just kidding. Can't wait to see this. Good review.
-
Excellent comments! Having read the book, I was prepared to be disappointed, but there were so many moments within the film that provoked a sense of deepfelt awe and odd jealousy, like listening to a magnificent, carefully orchestrated cocaphony (I'm thinking Nine Inch Nails), that left me breathless. There were moments in Inland Empire (Harry Dean Stanton was great), but Lynch's potboiler was nothing compared to the Coen Brother's accomplishment.
-
I will be able to enjoy the movie's ending better once I watch it again. The film is settling down in my system. Can't stop thinking about it. That's always a good sign.
-
The music and the tone was very much akin to Stanley's sensibilities. I would argue that PTA just took it a step further and refused to make it obvious whether or not it was okay to laugh. That last scene is damning in so many ways, both funny and disturbing and shameful...it really solidifies the movie for me. Now where I guess you could make the argument that it felt more like Malick was in the way that Anderson frames things. He's not distant from his subject and he's not as, detail obsessed as Kubrick was with keeping things perfectly symmetrical. But even there I would say his eye bears less resemblence to Malick than someone like Truffaut. And yes, Moriarty hit the nail on the head with the Jesse James Malick comparison. That is more Malick than this and, imo, just as worthwhile a movie as There Will Be Blood. Both are fantastic films. Pretty damn good year for film...
-
Movie opening wide?? I can't find a release date anywhere.
-
... January 18th, it'll be everywhere.
-
ignoring your "response"...
as a huge fan of both PTA and Deadwood it is safe to say that, unless your understanding of Al Swearengen is very very limited, there is little that he has in common with daniel plainview that should leap out during a preview.
-
Dec 30, 2007 10:47:17 PM CST
"your understanding of Al Swearengen is very, very limited"
by al swearengen
Ain't that the fuckin' truth.
-
Thanks for the great review, Moriarty!
-
from Simone Weil: "Imaginary evil is romantic and varied; real evil is gloomy, monotonous, barren, boring. Imaginary good is boring; real good is always new, marvellous, intoxicating."
-
Dec 31, 2007 7:26:50 AM CST
Great review Mori, but the film definitely does foreshadow...
by rickey henderson
I'm not saying that the movie is a clear cut parable about our current dependence on the Middle East for oil, but come on now Mori, you have to admit that there is some serious foreshadowing going on here. I haven't seen the flick yet (but am dying to) and it seems pretty clear that we're talking about the prototypical oil baron who forsakes human decency for profit. How is that not an ominous foreshadowing of where we are today? Even the dark & brooding title, "There Will Be Blood," hints at it. Sorry, but there's definitely a modern subtext to be gathered from this flick. And, yes, I can legitimiately say that without having seen the movie.
-
Cause I am nonetheless.
-
of Planview's interaction with his son at the end of the film is very interesting. Was he, in fact, actually proud of his son? Did he push him away with his cruelty to give him, as Mori says, "the precise ammunition he will need to be a success and compete against his father without holding back out of loyalty or affection". That way seems to be more in line with his character in the film. God, how about that part when he is being baptized and has to admit that he abandoned his son? Amazing.
-
but many.
-
Since the movie is over two-and-a-half hours, someone should pay attention to the narrative flow and figure out when a good time to run to the bathroom would be, in case you finish your large soda before the previews are over. I was pretty engrossed throughout, so I'd have to see it again to make a determination.
-
yea, i think this is a good film to make sure you pee twice in the hour before, and consume only minute sips of water when thirsty throughout. It is not recommended to miss even a scene.
-
You do know Funny Games is Haneke remaking himself, right? He's from Austria, not Hollywood.
-
I drank a 40 oz of coke, have a small bladder and didn't take a pee break until I got home, 30 minutes after the movie.
-
Dec 31, 2007 2:02:40 PM CST
As for Mori's interpretaion of the final scene between HW and Da
by chaplinatemyshoe
I don't buy it at all. I think people want to read into that because it makes Daniel more likeable and therefore the empathy for Daniel one has as an audience member more acceptable. I think you miss the point of the last scene of the film if you interpret it that way...just my two cents.
-
I can see it both ways. I personally got the impression that Plainview did in fact love his son, even after SPOILER he became deaf. What happened with their relationship during the missing years is unclear to me.
-
really? what than has been good recently? I am legend? AVP-R?? Please indulge us...
-
I have no doubt that he loved his son. But I have no doubt that revealing his son's origin was an act of hate not love. Think about what he did to Henry when he found out he wasn't a blood relative. It's the same instinct.
-
That was my first impression. That Planview revealed this information because his son was going to be a business competitor. I'll have to watch it again to see if Mori's interpretation holds up.
-
TWBB is beautiful, elegant, DDL rocks hard, Paul Dano is quite good, the opening dialogue-free scenes were great, and the film's got the kind of ending Europeans cum in their pants over. And yeah, PTA is strong on technique.
That being said, at the end of the day the total was less than the sum of the parts. The score seemed to have been dropped in from God-knows-where. It was grating in places I longed for something lyrical, and I kept hoping at some point that something in the score would evoke - even vaguely or obliquely - the music of the period.
That Paul Thomas Anderson so assiduously connected almost every dot reflects more a Hollywood than an Indie sensibility. Frankly, I didn't need all those dots connected.
TWBB resonates for me, but more for the frustrations I have with what PTA's doing and how he's doing it than for the brilliance of PTA's technique. If anything, his technical excellence at individual scenes and sequences, his facility with his actors, makes the shortchanging I feel walking out of the theater all the more annoying.
So I leave this brief missive with a question: Is PTA still, this many films in, struggling to connect what he wants to say to his art? Or does he really not know what he wants to say, or have anything to say??? -
I think Plainview simply treated his son the same way he treated everyone else in his life. He didn't have the "tools" necessary to relate to his son normally. And he felt bad about that (as related in his breakdown on the staircase). There was some recognition on Plainview's part that he was sad about that.
I didn't interpret it as Plainview trying to teach his son any life lessons through some sort of reverse-psychology voodoo or anything. -
It sounds more like you're struggling to connect with his work more than he's having a hard time making a point. Each one of his movies have been rich in subtext, theme and character development (I used the word development lightly as he prefers to reveal his characters rather than change them). I've never felt like he lost his way in any of his movies or muddled the story he was trying to tell. But then, I like his work. Objectively, I can agree with you that he's a great and talented filmmaker. Anybody who knows anything about film can agree on that. But subjectively, we can disagree on whether or not his stories work for us individually because that's a matter of personal taste. I, for one, cannot stand the work of Todd Solandz on a subjective level, but I know plenty of cinephiles who can make great cases for his filmography.
Conversation with fellow viewers and repeat viewings. For me, that's the only way to confirm or change your opinion of someone's work. -
Good to know there are people here that are actually willing to discuss film in a grown-up manner, without resorting to namecalling and four-letter insults. Hats off to you, sir. That said, Mark Steven Johnson is a cunt hack.
-
just havnt had the chance but look forward
-
(1) Someone will make a power about the wind and solar barons of the early twenty-first century; and (2) some people will still be saying, "Well, it's not The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford" about every new, hyped flick. I haven't seen any of these movies, so I guess I have nothing to add. Therefore, I won't post this.
-
funny typo? as in make a film? "lol"
-
Not a "power." Then again, since I didn't post that last one, I won't bother posting this one, either.
-
I haven't seen the trailer for Funny Games. Not going anywhere near that one. The original was frustrating enough. But then the trailer might make me act against my better judgment...
-
...... Did Harry have a New Years party and get the entire fucking staff drunk, sick and hungover on high-fat eggnog spiked with grain alcohol and barrels full of homemade Chex Party Mix? Right now they're all gathered around the only toilet in Harry's flat doing a "circle hurl."
And yeah... I am posting this to every Talkback... Statrt the new year right by being a dick, yeah? -
I was quite pleased with the films of 2007. Here's to another great year of film!
-
I believe Plainview related to his brother. But, after the truth was revealed, came to believe everything he had felt for him was an illusion. The pain that followed from that experience, in my opinion, is what sent him over the edge.
-
I agree. It's a pivotal event for him. He makes this awkward, suspicious, halting human connection, but it's genuine. The idea of having a brother he could trust obviously excited him on some level, enough that he let it affect how he did business. And to figure out that he'd been suckered... when that's exactly what he'd been suspicious of before... it was too much for him to take.
-
All of this is of course devastating to watch. The images from that section haunt me: Plainview backstroking through the Pacific, his brother drunkenly soliciting money from him in that bar, and the deep deep pain in Planview's face after reading his brother's diary. PTA's artistry in this sequence is exceptional, in part because he handles their relationship so delicately. I remember leaning forward in my seat during this section as if I was having a conversation with someone who was whispering.
-
I enjoyed it - almost enough to sit and write a big review of it but - I'm doing a cliff notes version instead - I think moriarity hit it in his review about the film grabbing me from the geekdom of days long past - the score was very kubrick inspired - the begining of the movie was brilliantly shot and very cinematic - something in itself seems to have been forgotten these days with movies in general - I think the studio formula slips into the editing room on most but there wasn't a bad cut for me with this show - really well put together on all levels including story - it was big and thick like that prime rib they only serve on the weekends - I took my first bite and savored every nibble til the last chew - well done pta - daniel day lewis was as usual brilliant and compelling to watch in this bold role - i can't imagine too many actors being able to pull this off - maybe john hurt or gary oldman - I'm sure it will stand out as a career highlight for DDL - the rest of the cast fall short besides daniel's brother henry - nice work by henry j o'connor. as far as recommending the film be careful - it's long and ass hurting seats in the theater drama - not everyone will dig this flick - not a popcorn movie - this is the prime rib weekend look forward to for the geeks out there who have been waiting for a flick to come along and get behind - I am more sold on this film than No Country for Old Men - I think both films endings miss but are done in a way that make them necessary to talk about after all said and done - worth the price of admission for me and anyone who is a frequent visitor to this site - on th eother hand I think that there were some very memorable scenes in NCFOM - I agree that the cashier scene was priceless - ok, I will eat frozen pizza now - my 2¢
-
this is complex faire, some of it works, a lot of it doesnt. too much of it doesn't. it'd be great if someone put together a list of films (kill bill etc) that everyone here SCREAMED would be a classic that just sort of dissapeared. This would be one of them. Not significant, thought incredibly well crafted. PTA needs to worry a little more about what he says rather than how he says it.
-
-- for film geeks
-
and steamy au jus - this aint no ham sandwich BAM!
-
I saw it the other night and was blown away. Mor hits the nail on the head. So nice to read him rather than Harry, who's too busy describing his snacks and the sticky floor. This film is a massive achievement. Definitely the best American piece of cinema in a very long time. Maybe since Pulp Fiction?
-
I'm sitting here trying to think of another equal American cinematic achievement in the past 13 yrs, and I cant. Hmmm...
-
Really, it's just extraordinary. And I never thought Day-Lewis could top his Christy Brown, but he has here. This is the greatest performance of the post-Brando era.
-
Harry's review for this movie was pretty spot on.
-
I see you talkbackers love your ham with the way you are praising Day Lewis for his "performance" in this film. Nothing extraordinary about this performance at all! DDL does this kind of ham shit in his sleep.
-
Sooo why complain about a spoiler by putting the very spoiler in your heading? Ruining key plot points for future viewers isnt that cool, or maybe im missing something... And Animal Structure, thats part of the appeal i think, that he is so fucking good, that he can pull such a performance out of his ass.
-
First, blow me.
Second, the "twist" you refer to is dealt with by about 25 minutes into the movie, and is handled as a very casual and simple reveal. It's not a twist. It's not the point of the film. It's simply a dual role. Feel free to complain that I mentioned that Plainview has a son or that there's oil in the film. Those are also giant film-ruining spoilers. -
The casual and simple reveal is anything but. I have to think you knew of it in advance from reading about the film. But if someone is watching it cold, the reveal reveals nothing! He's no more a twin than some slick con man or some schizo religious freak. It is unnecessarily confusing. PTA was lazy not to recast the part once he fired the guy he first cast for it. He just went with Dano and made the whole thing very ambiguous for no reason. It distracts from what is ultimately a very uninteresting story involving uninteresting characters, all except for little HW. Old HW was a terrible actor.
wilsonfisk89 - Day Lewis in Mohicans, or in Age of Innocence, that's good acting. His ridiculous accent in both TWBB and Gangs of NY are so hammy and over the top. OOPS! Terrible. He's entertaining, but throughout TWBB I kept thinking how much Day Lewis should play John Stossel in the movie of Stossel's life. If you enjoy it, cool, I just don't think it is award worthy. -
Paul mentions he has a brother named Eli. They're twins. I didn't see what was so confusing.
-
... just like in real life when there are twin brothers. I find it both shocking and confusing, and I feel the need to harangue people about it. Damn youse, Paul Dano!
-
... you can cry about it all you want, but it was never meant to be a twist. There's not one character in the movie who is misled by the Eli/Paul situation, and there's no scenes in the film about the confusion between the two.
But by all means... continue to act outraged that I "ruined" a plot point from the first half-hour of the film. -
See, you say it was handled 25 minutes into the film very calmly and whatnot, and I presume you mean when Eli meets them on their "quail hunt," right? See, my friend and I who saw that film, we both took it to mean that it was the same character, *pretending* to meet Daniel for the first time, for the sake of the family who might be looking on. And Daniel shook his hand after a pause, realizing to play along. I thought Paul Dano was playing a game there, not wanting his family to know he approached Plainview, and feigned ignorance. And then when he, mud-encrusted, attacked his father, I thought he was just going crazy and speaking in the third person, or speaking "as the holy spirit." My friend and I were both very confused, so I can be sympathetic as to how others could be too, and see it as a "twist." It's not very clear, I don't think.
-
It's not a twist Mori, but it is confusing to those who have no foreknowledge going into the film. Will you admit that you knew about the behind the scenes stuff with the film? Will you admit that you knew Dano was playinng a dual role before seeing the film. Because I think you're full of shit if you say you didn't know these things previous, and that if you did indeed go in not knowing this stuff, that it was not confusing at all. PTA was lazy not to recast the part. And to use the argument that there are twins in real life? So what? This is a film, and in film, things mean something. You don't just create a dual role, dual roles have significance in film, and they mean something. You're really being quite disingenuous to say it is not confusing for someone seeing the movie cold. And why would there be scenes in the film about the confusion of the two? PTA RECAST THE PART WITHOUT REWRITING ANY OF THE SCRIPT! You're using his laziness as justification for why it is not confusing. And would Plainview really not mention this fact at all in his dealings with Eli? Especially at the end when he is chastising him about Paul being a success? And the word twin is never mentioned in the film, not once ever. What do you think would happen if you called PTA lazy for not recasting once he realized he cast the wrong guy for Paul? Or for not putting in a throwaway line? To say that his and Daniel's first meeting is not confusing at all is such utter bullshit. Don't insult people's intelligence. Just admit you knew Dano was a twin before seeing the film. Admit it.
-
Dano was brought in to replace the other guy altogether because he was apparently uncomfortable working with DDL in character all the time. The other guy was never only Paul. He was always Paul and Eli. Thus, Dano's replacement of him never required rewrites.
-
Stop complaining. Apparently, all he did was basically save a few over active viewers from making up twists in their head by making up twists that weren't there. Even if you thought Eli and Paul were the same person, Eli's reaction to the blessing of the oil well at home should've cleared up any confusion you would've had. Unless you then looked for a dual personality twist...
-
... I didn't know they were twins ahead of time, Animal. Thanks for pretending you have access to my head. I didn't read THERE WILL BE BLOOD. I still don't know who the first actor cast before Paul Dano was. I'm sorry... despite what I do for a living, I don't automatically know every piece of info about every film, and in the case of this one, I knew about what anyone else did before I walked into the screening room.
Not only do I not think the casting of Dano is confusing as written, but I will go so far as to say I didn't even think there was potential to be confused until Rod Holt started yapping at me like an angry lapdog and then you jumped into it.
I'm sorry you're so upset. I still don't think it's a twist. I still don't think it's a spoiler. And you can call me "disingenuous" all day if you'd like... don't make it true. -
I got a bit confused earlier, what I meant to say was Dano was always cast as Paul, but there was a different actor for Eli. After two weeks of shooting they decided to fire the guy they got for Eli, and reshoot all his footage with Dano instead. Role was never meant to be dual, nor were they ever meant to be twins, as they're not twins in the book.
As far as Mori goes, I call bullshit. Sorry. -
... you're free to disagree with me, but if you call me a liar after I clearly stated that I did not read the script or know what was up with the Sundays before walking into the theater, I'll show you the fucking door, Animal.
For the last time... just because you don't agree with someone, you don't have to reduce things to accusing them of lying. Stop it. If not, I'm sure talkback will survive without you. -
with a group of PTA fans. after 2hrs and 38 minutes, the theatre released less fans than entered. the character is flawed. that's fine. the film is flawed, and that's not. large portions of this film could be lost and would help the flow greatly. there is no energy in this film. it does not meet you halfway. it requires you to do ALL of the work. daniel day was great as usual, but a tacked-on cartoonish ending leaves you feeling that he shot it months and years after he shot the rest. it's as if he'd forgotten how he was playing the role. as for Paul and Eli: they were twins?
-
that i thought the "Paul" character was the greedy side of Eli. which would have been good. instead, it was apparently an "Evil Twin" (tm) subplot.
-
Saw it again last night, and the twins thing was still confusing as hell, as proven by the handful of people I spoke to afterward who, like me and like my friend with whom I saw the film the first time, completely missed the lines about brothers. If Paul had just said, "I live there with my sisters and my TWIN brother," all would have been clear from then on, but that earlier line comes off as throw-away exposition so that many miss it entirely.
And I say again, the initial meeting between Eli and Daniel can reeeeally be viewed as "Oh, hi, Mr. Person I've Clearly Never Met Before, wink-wink play along." "Huh? OH! Yes, a pleasure "Eli," wink-wink," in that Paul gave them a fake name initially, or was playing them. And when Eli attacks his father and says, "Your son is stupid," I thought it was just the "Holy Spirit," speaking through Eli (by which I mean, he was crazy and self-loathing).
I'm sure I sound like an idiot plebeian here, but I'M FAR FROM THE ONLY ONE WHO READ THESE SCENES THIS WAY.
I'm sorry, Mori, but it seems many, many people are being confused by that, and that confusion is interfering with their enjoyment and understanding of the film as a whole (I had to see it a whole second time to really appreciate it, and I'm far from a slow idiot WILD HOGS-watching escapist film goer). It took me two viewings to finally be "knocked flat" by this otherwise-excellent film, but mark my words, the Paul and Eli stuff will confound and mislead many a film goer, distracting them from an excellent movie. -
It's kind of par for the course at this site. Still, the only thing he said that was offensive was "blow me". Don't take it personally Rodholt
-
... you wanna disagree with me? Fine. You want to interpret it differently? Fine. My only real objection is being called a liar. I was not confused by it, and I didn't read the script to help myself understand it ahead of time, either.
I still don't think it's a spoiler... at all. If you feel differently, sorry.
But if Animal Structure wants to call me a liar, that's unrelated, and I will happily show him the door. If that makes me a big bad grouch, then I guess I don't care. -
... you were the one who set the tone of the conversation, Rod, by starting your post to me with "Fucker." Don't act like a baby now because I didn't perk right up and do exactly what you say when that's how you began things.
-
That's true. He attacked your integrity. You have a right to defend yourself. And you're definitely in the right. But you could have been the bigger person and avoided the whole "blow me" thing. Just because someone starts an immature tone to a conversation doesn't mean you have to join in. In my opinion.
-
Roger Ebert writes: "There is another son, named Eli, who is also played by Paul Dano, and either Eli and Paul are identical twins or the story is up to something shifty, since we never see them both at once." I saw the film with 5 other very film-literate fans, and the issue of the twins stirred up quite a debate. Some of us (myself included) were certain that Paul and Eli were indeed twin brothers, while a few of us felt that they were possibly meant to be one schizophrenic character. I don't know how Anderson meant for this to be interpreted, but it is definitely not a clear situation. While some people seemed to be pissed about spoilers in Moriarty's review and the Talkback, I am stoked! This is exactly why I come to AICN-- to enjoy discussion about films with real fans like myself. Keep it up everyone!
-
I honestly don't understand the outcry in this talkback. This was a very minor plot detail and plays absolutely no role in the development of the film, other than to get DDL to the town where most of the movie takes place. The one twin is only in a single scene in the entire movie, for pete's sake. Eli refers to his brother in his argument with his father and DDL refers to the brother at the end of the movie. So, even Plainview himself believed that they were two people. Occam's razor, people. Let it go.
-
I am told that both PTA and Dano are on record as saying that Paul/Eli were twins - and that's good enough for me. But if I accept that as a fact, then PTA has to accept the fact that he did a poor job setting that up in the film. It should have been and could have been much less ambiguous, but it was not.
Good film, though. -
When Eli referred to his brother in the argument, many people who were already confused took this to mean that Eli was just going crazy, or perhaps the "holy spirit" was speaking through him. Obviously, this didn't turn out to be the case, but that only furthered the confusion of many. And it was a more major plot detail than you seem to think; the other brother's involvement is, I think, instrumental in Daniel's final crushing of Eli at the end.
-
So I thought I might be able to clear some things up here. First of all, Dano showed up on set thinking he was there for a three day shoot of the character Paul. When he got there, he found out that the actor playing Eli (Kel O'Neil) had been fired and PTA offered him the role. He got there on a Thursday and had until Monday to prepare character, which in my opinion is fucking insane on PTA's part. Lastly, on the twist...PTA said that he intentionally left the relationship between the two boys nebulous for a time but thought the dinner scene where Eli confronts his father was the reveal. There...that's straight from the two guys who made the movie. Everthing else is moot. Oh yeah, this movie was fucking spectacular.
-
Spoilers, for you crybabies out there: They shot the first Plainview beatdown of Eli and the "baptism" on back to back days because PTA thought it unfair to let Lewis bitch slap Dano and not let him immediately return the favor. In the baptism scene, only Lewis and Dano know what Plainview said to Eli after the ceremony...it wasn't scripted, but Dano said it put him back in his place. Another great thing was that when they shot that scene, they were supposed to cut right before Eli slaps Daniel for the first time, but Dano didn't stop, so they went with it. After they cut, he apologized to Lewis, who replied, in character, "That's the way you do it son!" Awesome...I can't tell you how cool this Q&A was.
-
At a screening over a month ago he seemed confused when someone asked him about the twin issue, as if he had never even thought of it in terms of being confusing for the audience. He offered no such explanation about intentionally leaving it nebulous. PTA is rationalizing his fuck up ex post facto. Man what an underwhelming film. I predict this film will not be thought of as great in 3 years time. You're all fools for the hype, there's nothing there.
-
In that "nothing there" comment, are you including Daniel Day-Lewis' performance? Because if so, you just became the frontrunner for dumbest poster of 2008. As for the twin issue, what is the fuck up? He didn't set it up clearly for a reason and then completely explained it in the fight scene between Eli and his father. If people were looking for something else in that scene, such as split personality, etc., that's their own problem. I don't really understand why everybody's so worked up about this.
-
It's ultimately irrelevant.
-
I wouldn't say it's critical to Plainview's takedown at the end, but it certainly is one of his weapons (I doubt Plainview had anything to do with the brother after paying him his $500, and Eli already knew that that occurred). That just proves my real point, though - the movie makes clear that there are twin Sunday brothers, by the final scene if not sooner.
-
I went to a SAG screening of this Sunday night. PTA and Paul Dano were there afterwards. PTA was asked about the twins. Originally Paul Dano was only cast in the role of Paul Sunday, but the Eli actor dropped out, and they decided to cast Paul Dano as both characters. They then had more discussion about whether it would be confusing for the audience. PTA thought any explanation like "oh, they're twins" would be stupid, dull and absurd. So in the end they made the conscious decision to go the more ambiguous, confusing, "obtuse" (the word he used) route. But if you pay attention, it should be clear. In Paul's first scene he mentions his brother Eli. Then when Eli introduces himself to Plainview and H.W. in the field, you can see a look of recognition on Plainview's face, and then Plainview and H.W. share a conspiritorial look. Then when Eli attacks Abel, he says that he knows it was his brother Paul who sent Plainview to Little Boston. And then of course at the end Plainview talks to Eli about how Paul was the chosen one. Having read the book, I knew there were two brothers, so I was never confused. But I think it's interesting that PTA chose to obfuscate rather than clarify.
-
If you pay attention and listen to one character being called Paul and another being called Eli, you won't be confused.
-
Daniel Day Lewis is a big ham, period. This is not a bravura performance by any means, it is a pantomime. Age of Innocence he was good, My Left Foot, now he just goes OOPSY! in that awful American accent he overacts in. The movie was really good for the first 20 minutes, pretty good from then up until the fire, then total shit afterward. Come on, so many years have passed, and this guy is supposedly a raving drunk....he'd look A LOT worse than he does. They give him some fucking gray stubble and tell him to bend over when he walks, wow, what acting, what convincing portrayals. Dano doesn't age, Day Lewis doesn't age, little HW ages a lot, and then looks nothing like he used to, at all. The third act is preposterous. The best film of the year is Assassanation of Jesse James. TWBB comes nowhere close to being a great film.
-
Did you see "the Ballad of Jack and Rose"? Didn't really overact in that one. The Boxer? In the Name of the Father? The Crucible? His last two films he has been playing men who are larger than life. And he has played them convincingly and 100 percent truthfully. Like he always does.
-
for attention. Now you seem to be complaining about the makeup artist.
-
I just won't even respond to someone who doesn't understand the level that Daniel Day-Lewis works at...it's really something special. By the way, we were at the same screening at the Egyptian. I wondered if anyone else would pop up in the tb.
-
You mention that H.W. is Plainview's adopted son, which isn't revealed until a very climactic moment ("BASTARD FROM A BASKET!"), so you might want to amend that. Otherwise, this was an excellent review.
-
....know I am right. The rest of you are children. You would not know good acting if it bit you on the ass. Daniel Day Lewis has no subtlety, he's lost it. And when exactly is he playing people larger than life? What does such a ridiculous term even mean? I guarantee, like with most shitty movies this site and you childish talkbackers hype up to no end, no one will care for this movie in a few years time. It's simply not a good film. It's episodic, slap dash, with a terrible score, bad overacting for everyone except the kid who plays little HW. And I like the way none of you fans can defend the way Plainview looks at the end considering he's been a drunk for nigh on 15 years by the third act. Little clue, drinking heavily for 15 years does not just give you some gray stubble. If you guys weren't children you'd realize that. The critical bar has been so lowered by "fans" such as yourself that shit like TWBB gets praised to high heaven before it even comes out, so once it does come out sheep like yourselves are forced to proclaim its greatness without really analysing the film as a film and not some hype bullshit. Pathetic.
-
Jan 08, 2008 8:14:35 AM CST
rather amusing that you refer to others as "children"
by just pillow talk
Since they don't agree with you, they are children? How old are you?
-
Not children for disagreeing with me, children because they can't even put up one argument in defense of their new favorite movie except saying Daniel Day Lewis is larger than life. The movie is average at best, but made worse by all the undue praise being heaped upon it by the good old AICN hype machine. Can one person mount a defense of why Plainview, after 15 years of hard drinking, looks almost exactly the same at the end of the film as at the beginning?
-
Are you serious? Who did you think was caring for the infant until he was struck by mining equipment at the beginning of the film?
-
kdanger- it is obvious that the baby is adopted by daniel very early on. No spoiler at all. Animal- I think u keep this going for shits and giggles so its gotta make me laugh. However,i gotta disagree w.mostly everything, especcially the 'people who know film defense.' I know film. Im sure there are millions who know it much better than me, and thousands that are on this site right now. However, i have spent the past few years making film my life, and id like to think im getting a pretty good grasp of what makes a great film. This is such a film. It is great. I think the bar, perhaps bc of universal critical praise is so high that people want to find faults. Consider if there wasnt such fanfare, consider the film as it stands and it is simply fantastic. It is wholly original, despite his numerous influences(giant, siera madre, kane, etc) pta crafted a wonderful film. DDL is legendary in it. his characterization is completely NUANCED. while he goes overboard, he also retains a certain quite, personal fire that we search his eyes and body language to understand. Im on a shitty school computer and its a pain to type, so im done.
-
Have you considered the fact that no one is arguing with you because you're such a flat out idiot? There's a retarded boy across the street who always wants to argue about how Gilbert Arenas is better than Kobe. I just stand with an amused expression on my face and watch him drool on his chest.
-
So Bastard, what does it say about you that you can't even refute an idiot with some facts? If you guys think it is good filmmaking to have DDL look exactly the same throughout the film even though he is a hardcore drunk, fine. Just don't expect people to think you know jack shit about film. You know I am right regarding the drinking and the physical appearance, because if I wasn't you'd be able to refute me in one sentence. The fact you haven't speaks volumes. And I'm used to people calling me an idiot when they know I am right. I take no offense. It's human nature.
Wilson, I beg to differ. I found nothing original about the film. PTA himself is nothing but a walking rip off artist. He has no style, no personality, cause everything is just aping someone else. And I wasn't hyped to see it. I wasn't looking for faults. I was looking for a good film that entertained me, instead I got a boring film with subpar acting and a ridiculous third act that parted ways with the reality of the first two. Oh wait, I get it now, Plainview got rich just as he wished, was able to divorce himself from people just as he wished, yet he was still unhappy! Wow, what a life lesson! Gimme a fucking break. As originally written the ending was somewhat better, as they intercut the wedding of HW with the scene of Eli and Daniel, with HW asking Ciaran Hinds to go in with him on his business venture in Mexico, forming a new father/son relationship. Again, this original ending was only marginally better. This is a subpar film, period. -
Perfect review and it aptly sums up all my thoughts on the film, too! I saw this last night, and 2 hours and 38 minutes just flew by because I was so thoroughly engrossed and enraptured by the acting, characters and story. It packs a major wallop, that's for sure! Interesting point about the final confrontation between father and son, as I thought there was more to it than what was presented on the surface, as well. Maybe Daniel was just incapable of admitting that he loved his son and reacted the only way he knew how: by destroying him emotionally and financially. Cutting the ties that bind, literally and figuratively, in one fell swoop. BTW, I'd be hard-pressed to choose between this and The Assassination of Jesse James BTCRF as best picture of the year. Also, DDL and Casey Affleck as best actors for the same films. The line that 9strangely) haunts me from TWBB: "And NOW I'm drinking YOUR milkshake, Eli!" Classic!
-
Im curious, whered u find this ending, as it does sound interesting? its not in the script i have, nor in "Oil!"
-
You're wrong.
-
Seriously, if you're going to belittle and insult one another, use the relevant source material and do it in style.
-
I aint readin all that
-
I get that you are a PTA fan, but there is very little in your review regarding the performances, especially that of DDL.
Also, there seems to be a huge amount of connection between Daniel Plainview and Bill the butcher, do you not think this may be slightly unfair to Day Lewis and maybe undemime the originality and dept of the character he has created. -
Good to know that 15 years of isolation and hard drinking has no effect on one's physical appearance. Learn something new every day, don't ya you douchebag?
-
I have no idea if the full wedding was actually filmed, but that's how it was written at least in the draft I saw. Can't really say how I got my hands on it without getting people in trouble.
-
At the very end when Daniel is berating Eli about "drinking his milkshake", he says: "I paid Paul $10,000 for his information and he's got three wells now, and they make $5,000 per week for him." (or something to that effect) Interestingly, this dialogue doesn't appear in the script that's online right now; maybe it was created on-set? Anyway, seeing the same actor in both roles was a minor confusion at first, but ultimately not a major problem for me...
-
http://www.salon.com/ent/mov ies/review/2007/12/26/blood/index.html
-
because it wasn't obvious to me H.W. was adopted. Maybe mentioning it isn't a spoiler, but not knowing for sure the Daniel/H.W. relationship did make their reunion near the end more powerful, in my opinion.
-
...early in the film, working next to Daniel in the "oil-pit", is H.W.'s Dad. We saw him caring for, and cradling H.W. in an earlier scene. -
I'm glad that you found one of three negative reviews of the movie. Nevermind that you had to go to Salon.com to do so. If you want to get off on people bashing this film, you can also check out media giants themovieboy.com and the NY Press for their spectacular reviews. For everyone else, rottentomatoes.com has links to 28 reviews that fall in line with Moriarty's.
-
See Daniel Plainview. This movie was pure genius top to bottom.
-
An appeal to authority is never a good line of argumentation. "Everyone loves it, so if you don't obviously something is wrong with you."
-
Everyone's entitled to their opinion. Just pointing out that attempting to back it up with a review from a shitty online site that is in the vast minority doesn't really help your argument.
-
What does it matter where the review comes from. You choose to belittle the website without actually engaging any of the arguments contained in the review. I don't care if the review was printed on toilet paper, it's a great review. I don't care where it comes from. And the fact that I and the reviewer are in the minority actually BOLSTERS my case against the film being great. No great art EVER has a consensus upon it's release that is great. The masses are asses, and if the public loves some work of art, it is most probably shit. And I really don't need anything to help my argument anyway because I am right. The film is simple. It is not layered, or complex, in any way. This is a fact.
-
I loved the film, a lot of us did. Animal Structure didn't and presented his numerous reasons why. Some have tried to persuade him that it is in fact a great film, yet he sticks by his opinion. There we go. Lets all move on?
-
Jan 10, 2008 3:49:53 PM CST
Wow this is getting repetitive. Lets move on AnimalStructure
by lovecraftfan
A lot of people loved the film. You didn't. Thats fine. Its been clear for a while now so lets move on shall we.
-
Because after Josh Brolin got in that firefight with Chugher, his hair looked too good! It wasn't mussed enough! Someone explain that to me. You CAN'T, can you?! What a stupid, worthless movie - utterly without merit.
-
It's funny how you think you know something. It's okay though, if I was 16 I'd probably also think the movie was great and use a stupid phrase from it as my handle. Douchebag.
-
It starts on 1-18. While all the morons are watching Cloverfield I will be enjoying There will be blood.
-
DDL is an amazing actor!!
-
I loved this movie. Top to botton loved it. Perhaps I should have stayed off the internet because I knew that Dano played twins from reading reviews. When Eli meets Plainview and H.W. during the "quail hunt" and introduces himself, I got the feeling that the look that passed between Plainview and H.W. was "Oh shit...I almost called this guy Paul and let the cat out of the bag! I guess they're twins!" So for me, this was no controversy. As far as the revealing to H.W. that he was adopted, the film clearly showed Plainview's partner taking care of the baby H.W. Plainview simply took over after his death.
-
then I saw this movie and sat through the credits frozen in amazement. Then I saw it again and thought it was a fucking masterpiece and bought the score.
-
I saw the movie on Thursday....and it's still growing on me.
For the record, only a monkey would be confused about Eli and Paul being brothers! I think my biggest problem with the movie though was Paul Dano. I just didn't like his portrayal in the movie and felt he was miscast. Not to mention that Eli didn't age a day in the 10-15 years he was in the movie (that kind of thing always takes me out of the movie). -
Sorry to trudge this up again, but I just saw the movie and thought a more even-headed side of the twin-confusion argument might help. Like others here, I was also under the impression Paul Dano was playing one character for most of the movie. My 2 friends who saw the movie with me (who were also underwhelmed by it) were not confused. I wouldn't think of accusing the people claiming they knew all along that they were twins of lying, but I do think that a substantial portion of the audience is not going to catch that, and it does impair one's initial viewing. Here's where I'm coming from personally: I'm bad with names. If I'm introduced to more than 2 people at a time, I'm not going to remember any of their names unless they are somewhat unusual. So when we meet Eli, I didn't think "Hmm, Eli, the other one was Paul. Must be twins." I thought "Oh, here's Paul Dano again". And like others have mentioned, I took the whole introduction as being for the benefit of the onlooking family. While I fully cop to the fact that this is a shortcoming of myself and not the film, I have to wonder how hard it would have been to make this a little less ambiguous when it seems to be such a common problem people are having. Would it have been a little clunky to have Paul or Eli refer to the other as his "twin brother"? Sure, but I'm under the impression that Anderson is a good writer, and keeping those little clarifications from sticking out is what good writers should be able to do.
-
It's my general understanding that the general movie-going public doesn't pick up on names in films too well either. Think about how often people refer to a character by the name of the actor who played them. Yet you don't see this happen when it's a name they're not likely to forget (Jesse James, Juno, Peter Parker, etc.), which suggests this isn't an intentional decision to think of characters in those terms. Not saying this is a huge flaw (actually one of my more minor issues with the film), but like I said, it does hurt your initial viewing if you didn't catch on, and it couldn't have been that hard to make a little more clear.
-
Maybe he was going for something like that. "Laziness" is b.s.
-
Not to get that HW was the dead mans son, or Eli and Paul were twins, or complaining about how DDL should be looking older from drinking, you shouldn't be commenting on this film.
We should have an IQ test before people can post here. -
But I finally saw it today and regardless of my thoughts I have one question. This may have been covered in talkback but I quit about halfway down. The twin thing confused me for a while, and I still thought it was going to be a "reveal" at the end. It wasn't, and I'm fine with that. But why did Eli pour 3 shots at the end? That seemed to be the catalyst of the "no twin" reveal for me. Eli ended up drinking two of the shots, but what was the choice there? To show he was a sinful man and also enjoyed alcohol? That seemed like a choice to maintain suspense. PTA says the twin thing wasn't am issue, but the shot choice seems to point otherwise. BTW, I really liked the film, but think a second viewing will blow me away. No Country is may 07 fav though. Tommy Lee Jone's performance is the BEST of the year.
-
Much like Day-Lewis won "Best Actor," you've won the coveted "Dumb-Ass AICN Talkbacker" award. The award is a bronze statuette depicting Daniel Plainview bashing Animal Structures' dumb-ass little head in. Care to make a speech, dumb-ass?
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- Whitney Houston 1963 - 2012 -- 273 total posts 271 posts
- New JUDGE DREDD post production footage pops up -- 92 total posts 92 posts
- AVENGERS enemy revealed as pink boardgame pieces... You might suffer some form of elation... SPOILERS!!! -- 160 total posts 69 posts
- There's a STAR TREK video game that is going to lead into JJ's STAR TREK 2 apparently... -- 151 total posts 63 posts
- Does ‘SNL’ Rhyme With ‘Deschanel’?? Learn Which SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE Vet Hosts After Sexy Zooey!! -- 67 total posts 59 posts
- HANNA's Saoirse Ronan to boss around seven little people -- 60 total posts 57 posts
- To Commemorate The 3D Release Of STAR WARS EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE, George Lucas Wants You To Know...Greedo Shoots First!! -- 484 total posts 49 posts
- Here's The Red Band Trailer For Drafthouse Films' THE FP! -- 69 total posts 42 posts
- Friday Brings SWEEPS DAY NINE!! Gab Here About Tonight’s FRINGE!! Plus Einstein on TIM, Wiig On PORTLANDIA, MAHER, CLONE, GIFTED, GRIMM, SPARTACUS, SUPERNATURAL, GOLD RUSH And More!! -- 120 total posts 32 posts
- SPACE 2099!! -- 183 total posts 24 posts