Directed by:
Paul Thomas AndersonScreenplay:
Paul Thomas AndersonCinematography:
Robert ElswitComposer:
Jonny GreenwoodCast:
Daniel Day-Lewis, Paul Dano, Kevin J. O'Connor, Ciarán Hinds, Dillon Freasier, Barry Del Sherman, Paul F. Tompkins, Kevin Breznahan, Jim Meskimen (more)VOD (2)
Plots(1)
Daniel Plainview (Daniel Day-Lewis) is an independent oil man, who with his son H.W. (Dillon Freasier), is looking for prospects in California at the turn of the 20th Century. They are challenged by a young preacher, Eli Sunday (Paul Dano), whose own ambition is matched by Plainviews. Their battle forms the centre of a scary, darkly-comic historical journey into an abyss of madness. There Will be Blood is Paul Thomas Anderson's American nightmare belching fire and brimstone and damnation to hell. (Roadshow Entertainment)
(more)Videos (2)
Reviews (14)
Paul Thomas Anderson and cinematographer Robert Elswit are film alchemists. Daniel Day-Lewis is a genius actor and There Will Be Blood might become this century’s Citizen Kane. This cynical, original and epic portrait of capitalist America is a masterpiece.
()
Masterful craftsmanship without artistic compromise. A perfect study of an ambitious, egocentric soul, in whose bearer – the oilman Plainview – the film world has one of the juiciest characters in its history. The gripping first half, when the plot revolves more around the building of an oil empire, is almost visually hypnotic (the scene of the oil rig fire accompanied by rhythmic percussive music has a kind of horror-apocalyptic feel). The second half is more intimate, with the narrative focusing more on the oilman's troubled relationship with his son and the sycophantic religious fanatic Ali (Plainview's "confession" at the baptism gave me chills). It seems as if no one played Plainview, that this slightly stooped man with a distinctive moustache was brought in by Anderson in a time machine from a hundred years ago and filmed with a hidden camera, letting him live out his story… No, really. Daniel Day Lewis… There are no words to describe my fascination with his performance; the facial expressions, the complete change of voice (which doesn't seem mannerist at all), the slightly hunched posture, the imposing appearance. That's no longer acting, that's reincarnation, which perhaps only Day-Lewis is capable of using his famous 'Stanislavsky method'. Daniel and Paul, you have my applause. When Day-Lewis accepted his second Oscar this year with his aristocratic appearance and massive earrings, he looked like a being from another world. And so does this film.
()
An epic fresco, in which Anderson's purposeful filmmaking is matched by the riveting acting of Daniel Day-Lewis, who once again gets to the heart of his character and doesn't act, but simply is that character. The two-and-a-half-hour portrait of a tough egotist who managed to fulfill the American dream without faith and family may not be to the liking of many American churches, but at least it creates a functional subversion of the established rules. This is the essence of perfect filmmaking!
()
Maybe I was too excited by the five-star compliments from my favorite users and their enthusiastic comments full of superlatives, just like the Oscar nominations, because when I finally managed to watch it thoroughly, I was slightly disappointed. It is definitely a case of professional filmmaking with quality camera work, a strong storyline, and quality actors. However, fitting 30 years of the main character's life and work into a single feature film is still a challenge, and the screenplay could not avoid a few significant jumps in time, cutting out certain motifs, and overall flattening. Sometimes the character Daniel Plainview is compared to the main protagonist of The Social Network due to his self-centeredness, but with that film, it only took one year spent alongside Mark Zuckerberg for me to get into his mindset and understand his motivation, whereas, in the case of the oil prospector, his motivation and character slip through my fingers somehow. It could have been a great film about the oil industry, which, along with the automobile industry, shaped the economic history and prosperity of the United States in the first half of the 20th century, but the screenplay fails to capture the grandiose growth of innovation and wealth or simply everything that moved the lives of the residents of the mining areas. Nevertheless, there are a few scenes that leave no doubt in my mind that the film deserves its 4-star rating, such as the final confrontation between Plainview and his ideological opponent, the leader of the religious community. Overall impression: 75%.
()
"That was one goddamn helluva show." Yup, it sure was... In other reviews you frequently come across strong claims such as movie of the year and the like. I might even increase the aforementioned unit of time to cover a longer period. Why? Because it’s already a good few hours since the movie ended, but I’m still quivering with absolute delight. And something tells me that I will continue to quiver for a long time yet. I feel as if Anderson made this for me alone. This grand work may be described using but four words: cynicism (with respect to mankind), cynicism (with respect to religious fanaticism and religion in general), cynicism (with respect to the American Dream), and cynicism (with respect to everything else). Simply cynical egoism to the core and a good feeling from knowing that Anderson watch The Treasure of the Sierra Madre very attentively. Additional note: Second time round it’s maybe even better. On my second visit to the movie theater, Anderson again drowned me in black gold. And I had a great time all the while he was drowning me. It’s high time to take a good bath.
()
Ads