There Will Be Blood - NEW FILM (1 Viewer)

[aardball44]

I haven't seen the film yet but I'm looking forward to it.

The brief commercial for the film on TV last night featured DDL delivering one seemingly simple line that sent a chill right through me, and may encapsulate his entire character: "Why don't I own this?"

 

[Bonfire]

i was kind of disappointed, but i had built it up to be an all time great. too much in the expectation department can ruin any film i suppose. i thought the sound track was way too much, several times it was so loud/intense it pulled me away from the movie/story to where i was thinking "i get it! tense music!....dissonance, yes you invented it...." i also had the misfortune of seeing it near someone who thought it ever so cool to let everyone know he agreed with certain lines, or though parts funny, kind of obnoxious. DDL did a great job delivering all his lines. i don't consider this movie epic, and think a lot of that has been created from buzz around it.

 

[The_Hoser]

Saw TWBB a couple weeks ago, and came out of the theater wondering why they bothered casting anyone else in the film. Daniel Day-Lewis is so absolutely overpowering he could do this script as a one-man Broadway show and make it just as effective.

I thought the cinematography was fantastic, but I didn't notice the score much -- and maybe that's a good thing. Perhaps my favourite thing about the film is how every time Plainview does something that could be construed as "nice", it's revealed to be the opposite shortly afterward.

You won't enjoy this ... but see it.

On edit: I agree about the dissonance, Bonfire. There were several instances where the strings were so jacked up I kept expecting Anthony Perkins to come riding up on a horse. I think I forgot them because, really -- can you remember anything about this film besides Daniel Day-Lewis?

 

[Daywalker]

A 5/10 for DDL?That's crazy talk...He was phenomenal in a role that I don't think ANY other actor could have pulled off...

A younger Gene Hackman could have.

 

[Shrek]

Just got back from seeing it.

For my money, there is no one in the business right now who can command the screen the way Daniel Day Lewis does. At least not on a consistent basis. Seriously, if anyone is trying to argue otherwise they are trying to be the trendy voice of disagreement. He is absolutely brilliant.

The movie was very visceral to me. It took me awhile to realize that nearly the first what, 10 minutes? were done without a word of dialogue. The desperation of the land was so palpable it almost makes you thirsty. Did anyone else notice that every time there is liquid in a scene it is the center of attention? Whether it's the oil, blood, mud, H.W.'s glass of water in the restaurant, or the milk/whiskey mixture that Plainview forces H.W. to drink, it's always the focal point. The mise en scene in this film is painstakingly fantastic.

I agree that this movie isn't necessarily an instant all-time classic. But for any film fan, it really is a must see.

 

[fissure man]

Just got back from seeing it.For my money, there is no one in the business right now who can command the screen the way Daniel Day Lewis does. At least not on a consistent basis. Seriously, if anyone is trying to argue otherwise they are trying to be the trendy voice of disagreement. He is absolutely brilliant.The movie was very visceral to me. It took me awhile to realize that nearly the first what, 10 minutes? were done without a word of dialogue. The desperation of the land was so palpable it almost makes you thirsty. Did anyone else notice that every time there is liquid in a scene it is the center of attention? Whether it's the oil, blood, mud, H.W.'s glass of water in the restaurant, or the milk/whiskey mixture that Plainview forces H.W. to drink, it's always the focal point. The mise en scene in this film is painstakingly fantastic.I agree that this movie isn't necessarily an instant all-time classic. But for any film fan, it really is a must see.

well put. but you're nothing but a ******* in a basket!

 

[pecorino]

quick question:

 

[Marc Levin]

quick question:

1) Your guesses are not spoilers.2) No. And doesn't matter - the story works either way. Scene between Eli and his father is pretty telling on that one.

3) DDL's character = WAY too smart to be fooled if it was the same person.

 

[Shrek]

quick question:

 

[Englishteacher]

The movie was def worth seeing and very powerful. However, it was incredibly long, maybe not so much minutes wise as how the story took quite a while to unfold. Lewis' performance of Plainview leaves you with one of the most memorable character portrayals you'll ever see. Others' comments on how he more or less "dwarfs" the other actors around him are right on. Perhaps if there were other noteworthy performances around him the film would have been stronger but honestly the film focused on Plainview/DDW and didn't allow for much character development otherwise. Lewis creates one of the darkest characters you'll ever see in film. Not much to like about the guy.

Overall, the film was very powerful but a bit unbalanced. You walked out saying, "Wow" and "What a *******!". Your ### was also sore from sitting so long (note: ET saw this movie in a very old, indy movie theatre that has terrible seats anyways). It's a bit taxing but worth seeing. Def worth seeing on the big screen.

 

[One]

TWBB was an excellent movie, but far from a classic.

 

[whoknew]

i was kind of disappointed, but i had built it up to be an all time great. too much in the expectation department can ruin any film i suppose. i thought the sound track was way too much, several times it was so loud/intense it pulled me away from the movie/story to where i was thinking "i get it! tense music!....dissonance, yes you invented it...." i also had the misfortune of seeing it near someone who thought it ever so cool to let everyone know he agreed with certain lines, or though parts funny, kind of obnoxious. DDL did a great job delivering all his lines. i don't consider this movie epic, and think a lot of that has been created from buzz around it.

Just got back. It's going to take a bit to digest it but my initial impression is obviously the acting was great -- terrific. The story was ... it was really interesting. The more I think about it the more I really liked it. A lot. The one big thing I agree with you -- I didn't like the music at all. I thought it was very distracting.I think No Country was a better overall movie but the acting in this was on par with anything you'll see. Great year for movies -- No Country, There Will be Blood and Juno.

 

[Gadfly]

Am I the only one who liked and related to Daniel Plainview?

 

[Kumerica]

Am I the only one who liked and related to Daniel Plainview?

I didn't relate to him at all, but I wanted him to win.

 

[whoknew]

Am I the only one who liked and related to Daniel Plainview?

I didn't relate to him at all, but I wanted him to win.

I'll tell you -- hopefully this won't be a spolier for anyone -- but I think the ending could have been better. I think it was out of character for Plainview.

 

[Gadfly]

I don't see why you would think it out of character. He already attacked Eli earlier in the film. Plus his declarations of going to that guy's house and slitting his throat seemed more a promise than a threat.

 

[wildbill]

I'm going to assume anyone in this thread has already seen the film.

Why is "There Will Be Blood" the title? I can see the blood being one of a few different things. It can represent the family that Plainview is searching for (adopting HW, taking his brother under his wing). Except in the end, he ends up with no one. It can represent the blood of Christ, since his baptism plays a key part in the plot. Except that he didn't mean it. It can represent the brutal, murderous side of his personality. Except that he only kills a couple of people, and as far as we know he never follows through on his threat against the Standard Oil representative.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Just got back. Really disappointed. Yes, Lewis is a fantastic actor. I get that. His character was interesting / pathetic / repulsive / scary etc. Fine. Score was brutally bad. Almost comically bad. Pictures were cool but nothing spectacular. Basic western stuff.

Really don't get the love. Can someone help?

J

 

[Marc Levin]

It can represent the brutal, murderous side of his personality. Except that he only kills a couple of people

We have become really numb as a movie-going society to say there were not "enough deaths" to justify the title of the movie.His search for oil and murderous personality caused at least 2 deaths in the oil rigs, caused his boy to become deaf, caused him to kill his brother's friend, and ultimately caused him to kill the preacher.This movie was sufficiently titled if the only death was the one at the end. Isn't that one instance of blood enough to justify the title?

 

[Marc Levin]

Really don't get the love. Can someone help?JYes, Lewis is a fantastic actor. His character was interesting / pathetic / repulsive / scary etc.

I pared it down for you and re-organized

 

[Joe Bryant]

Really don't get the love. Can someone help?

J

Yes, Lewis is a fantastic actor. His character was interesting / pathetic / repulsive / scary etc.

I pared it down for you and re-organized

I don't get the love for the movie. I get that Lewis did a nice job with his character.J

 

[Marc Levin]

I got what you were asking, Joe.

I was trying to be cute with the way I was telling you that you nailed why it is considered a great movie. And the character itself was very well written. I loved the dialogue.

But, to play devil's advocate, the cinematography was amazing - big big shots that looked great on the big screen. For a character study, the scenery shots were placed in an interesting juxtaposition to the development of DDL's character.

The score wasn't for you - I understand that. But I loved the score. I thought the score overlapped with the tension in the movie very well.

Regardless, the movie begins and ends as a good movie based on DDL's performance.

 

[Peyton Marino]

I'm going to assume anyone in this thread has already seen the film.Why is "There Will Be Blood" the title? I can see the blood being one of a few different things. It can represent the family that Plainview is searching for (adopting HW, taking his brother under his wing). Except in the end, he ends up with no one. It can represent the blood of Christ, since his baptism plays a key part in the plot. Except that he didn't mean it. It can represent the brutal, murderous side of his personality. Except that he only kills a couple of people, and as far as we know he never follows through on his threat against the Standard Oil representative.

the basic premise of the movie, to me, was that greed causes people to do awful things, including killing. thus, where there will be greed, there will be blood. the greed caused him to kill a few people. a few is enough to make the point of the story (as levin pointed out).

 

[whoknew]

I gotta agree with JB on the score. I thought it was really distracting. It was so overbearing.

 

[Joe Bryant]

I got what you were asking, Joe.I was trying to be cute with the way I was telling you that you nailed why it is considered a great movie. And the character itself was very well written. I loved the dialogue.But, to play devil's advocate, the cinematography was amazing - big big shots that looked great on the big screen. For a character study, the scenery shots were placed in an interesting juxtaposition to the development of DDL's character.The score wasn't for you - I understand that. But I loved the score. I thought the score overlapped with the tension in the movie very well.Regardless, the movie begins and ends as a good movie based on DDL's performance.

spoilers belowI keep hearing the cinematography / big screen comment. It was pretty meh. I mean it was nice with "big" shots of rough country from far away. Anyone can do that. Nothing particularly skillful or interesting. Maybe the ocean stuff. 3:10 to Yuma was easily much better in that regard. Brad Pitt's Jesse James easily better too.And the character was just a little much. How hard is it to be the pyscho making your kid drink liquor and then holding him close like you love him. Then make fun of him for being deaf? And then be a drunk that sleeps face down on the hard floor? He's a handsome guy doing the cowboy / Tom Selleck thing I guess. And clearly a highly skilled actor. But I really didn't see the love for the movie. The more I think about, the worse it seems. Walked out of the theater thinking Definitely should have waited for DVD.J

 

[Peyton Marino]

I got what you were asking, Joe.I was trying to be cute with the way I was telling you that you nailed why it is considered a great movie. And the character itself was very well written. I loved the dialogue.But, to play devil's advocate, the cinematography was amazing - big big shots that looked great on the big screen. For a character study, the scenery shots were placed in an interesting juxtaposition to the development of DDL's character.The score wasn't for you - I understand that. But I loved the score. I thought the score overlapped with the tension in the movie very well.Regardless, the movie begins and ends as a good movie based on DDL's performance.

spoilers belowI keep hearing the cinematography / big screen comment. It was pretty meh. I mean it was nice with "big" shots of rough country from far away. Anyone can do that. Nothing particularly skillful or interesting. Maybe the ocean stuff. 3:10 to Yuma was easily much better in that regard. Brad Pitt's Jesse James easily better too.And the character was just a little much. How hard is it to be the pyscho making your kid drink liquor and then holding him close like you love him. Then make fun of him for being deaf? And then be a drunk that sleeps face down on the hard floor? He's a handsome guy doing the cowboy / Tom Selleck thing I guess. And clearly a highly skilled actor. But I really didn't see the love for the movie. The more I think about, the worse it seems. Walked out of the theater thinking Definitely should have waited for DVD.J

i finish reading your review thinking it's not for everybody i guess.

 

[Moe Green]

I gotta agree with JB on the score. I thought it was really distracting. It was so overbearing.

I love PTA movies, but the constant music in Magnolia and TWBB were distracting. Still, a great film.

 

[Marc Levin]

Why was Tootsie nominated for best pic, best director, best cinematography . . .

Sometimes good crisp dialogue and an incredible performance makes for a good movie

To each their own - there is noone here who can tell you why they liked something you thought was "meh" and convince you to change your mind.

 

[Gadfly]

I see the movie as being about hypocrisy. Daniel Plainview is looked down upon for being a cunning capitalist. Eli uses the pretense of being a man of God, but he's just as hungry for power as Plainview. It's an interesting juxtaposition of the cutthroat worlds of business and religion, one that rings true throughout human history.

 

[Finless]

A Modern Classic

Mark it down

 

[wildbill]

It can represent the brutal, murderous side of his personality. Except that he only kills a couple of people

We have become really numb as a movie-going society to say there were not "enough deaths" to justify the title of the movie.His search for oil and murderous personality caused at least 2 deaths in the oil rigs, caused his boy to become deaf, caused him to kill his brother's friend, and ultimately caused him to kill the preacher.This movie was sufficiently titled if the only death was the one at the end. Isn't that one instance of blood enough to justify the title?

You may be right about our senses becoming numbed to violence. But the title made me expect Kill Bill Vol. 3, so two murders spread over a couple of decades wasn't what I expected.

 

[Shrek]

It can represent the brutal, murderous side of his personality. Except that he only kills a couple of people

We have become really numb as a movie-going society to say there were not "enough deaths" to justify the title of the movie.His search for oil and murderous personality caused at least 2 deaths in the oil rigs, caused his boy to become deaf, caused him to kill his brother's friend, and ultimately caused him to kill the preacher.

This movie was sufficiently titled if the only death was the one at the end. Isn't that one instance of blood enough to justify the title?

You may be right about our senses becoming numbed to violence. But the title made me expect Kill Bill Vol. 3, so two murders spread over a couple of decades wasn't what I expected.

What about the movie ****? Was it what you expected after seeing the title?

 

[Joe Bryant]

This one nails it pretty well for me. And I realize full well that there is never a right and wrong on these. I was mainly just surprised to find I had such a different opinion of it than the masses who fawned over it. I do think it might be the mustache....

J

There has been plenty of critical pants-wetting about Paul Thomas Anderson's latest film, and I am an Anderson admirer to be sure, but beyond an acting nomination for Daniel Day Lewis, I just can't get on that train. We are presented with some fascinating information on the trials and tribulations of a prospector in the late 19th and early 20th century, the dangers and triumphs, the frustratingly backwards technology. We have an interesting cinematic experiment with the first 14 minutes of the film having no dialogue. As Lewis' character Daniel Plainview draws the blood of the earth up from his wells, Paul Dano's character Eli Sunday tries to wash Plainview in the blood of Christ. Their antagonism seems to have no foundation. Well, let me put that differently. Plainview has no reason to be antagonistic to Sunday beyond pure orneriness, and Sunday has no reason to seek Plainview's salvation beyond pure, sinful spite.

Plainview is an unpleasant man, an awful man, and surely a juice role to tackle. He is a difficult hero to follow, however. I don't need my protagonists to all be likable, but I do need some reason to care about what they are doing. Perhaps the novel upon which this is based, Upton Sinclair's Oil, would be of some assistance in seeing inside the man who Lewis portrays with such prickliness. Lewis has a tremendous accent and (as he always does) embodies the rangy sinew of his character with a disturbing naturalness. He does a terrific job but even his elegant speech patterns couldn't keep me from being vaguely repelled. As one of my companions said about his volcanic temper, "He should start counting to 10." Dano (Little Miss Sunshine) has the fire of evangelism burning bright in his young, narrow chest, as well as a legitimate beef with Plainview.



I blame the music a bit. Scored by Radiohead's Johnny Greenwood, the score by itself plays as rich and interesting. I had occasion to listen to it before seeing the film, and thought it sounded moody and portentous. However, when placed on top of the movie, it felt misaligned with the action or the emotion of a scene, and was loud and distracting. Despite the sensual loss of visual and aural details, such as the creaking monster of an active well or the desolate hillsides of desperate prairie towns, I'd rather just listen to the score while I read the book than see it so misapplied as here.



It is frustrating in general to see such exquisite elements thrown together into such an off-putting stew. In films past, writer/director Paul Thomas Anderson has created sublime beauty from weirdness and off-kilter anti-heroes. I don't know if this film misfires for me because the original story belongs to someone else or if the scope of a period film filled with antique emotions and happenstances were too remote for such modern directorial vision, but something happened in the final mix that left me cold. I think it is worthy of seeing but I hope you save your extra pennies for something more cohesive.

 

[Bob Lee Swagger]

A Modern Classic

Mark it down

 

[Gadfly]

I think there's an obvious foundation for Plainview's hate of Eli. Plainview immediately recognizes Eli as a fellow BS artist who uses the theory of a god to look down on him. While Plainview does give back to the community (to keep the people happy and out of his way, as a matter of good business), Eli is a complete parasite who tries to come off as an altruistic saint. It is this phoniness that offends Plainview, the one person who sees Eli as he really is -- a weak, power-hungry leech.

 

[Peyton Marino]

I think you can justify Plainview's hate for pretty much everybody in the movie. Plainview flat out says, "I don't much care for people. People are my competition.. I'd much rather throw off all people and live alone."

That's kind of the whole point of the movie. Plainview's excessive greed and love for competition causes him to hate all people. Greed breeds hate.

The whole movie, and the book, is a shot at Capitalism-- which I don't much agree with, but the movie does an extremely good job on conveying it's point and I can forgive the message because of the film's overall awesomeness.

 

[JZilla]

I agree that the "music" really took away from this film. If that's what you call a steady monotone buzz. It was just obnoxious IMO.

Other than that it was well done, well acted of course, but a bit of a downer. Just a tad. The final scene still gets a thumb up from me, enthralling and just brutal.

 

[Finless]

I thought the music was perfect.

 

[cacksman]

There's a funny subplot in Arrested Development where Maeby (Alia Shawkat) becomes a 15 year old Hollywood movie producer by mistake. She can't figure out an ending to a film that is virtually plotless and decides to tack on a open ended ending that is confusing and out of place and is sure of herself that critics and audiences will see it, and rather than admit their own confusion, will decide the film was brilliant. That's how I feel about TWBB

Interesting. I agree.

 

[Shrek]

Here's something no one wants to talk about. Lewis is popular with the Jewish community through his links to Rebecca Miller and her late father, Arthur Miller. Although no one wants to admit it, I think this plays a huge role in his ability to be an Oscar contender for nearly every role he's had. Yes, he's a good actor, but that influence cannot be underestimated in that town.

This is a crock. Daniel Day Lewis is one of the best actors of his generation, easily in the top 5 of his contemporaries IMO. To suggest that being Jewish somehow makes him seem better than he really is is very short sighted. I'm not calling you a racist either. I'm saying that he could be French, Samoan, or Australian aboriginie- it doesn't matter. He is a commanding artist who doesn't deserve to have anything taken away from his performances because of his relationship with a few Jewish people.

 

[jdoggydogg]

Here's something no one wants to talk about. Lewis is popular with the Jewish community through his links to Rebecca Miller and her late father, Arthur Miller. Although no one wants to admit it, I think this plays a huge role in his ability to be an Oscar contender for nearly every role he's had. Yes, he's a good actor, but that influence cannot be underestimated in that town.

This is a crock. Daniel Day Lewis is one of the best actors of his generation, easily in the top 5 of his contemporaries IMO. To suggest that being Jewish somehow makes him seem better than he really is is very short sighted. I'm not calling you a racist either. I'm saying that he could be French, Samoan, or Australian aboriginie- it doesn't matter. He is a commanding artist who doesn't deserve to have anything taken away from his performances because of his relationship with a few Jewish people.

IT'S ALL A SECRET ZIONIST CONSPIRACY!!!

 

[KarmaPolice]

Saw this yesterday. I've been saying it for a while, Daniel Day Lewis is one of the best actors of our generation and did nothing but bolster his resume with There Will Be Blood. Perfect combination of mania and ruthlesness. The scene at the end with Eli in the bowling alley was lights out, one of the most powerful I can remember."I drink your milkshake! I drink it up!"

I would say the opposite. By the time they got to that famous line, I was starting to laugh. It seemed like a good idea on paper that they couldn't get right on the screen. Dano couldn't seem to pull off the scene to me and when they started to run around it looked cartoony. I thought the bowling alley scene was bad, and would say that the scene right before it with his son was much better and did a lot better job of showing Plainview's insanity and his ability push everybody away.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Saw this yesterday. I've been saying it for a while, Daniel Day Lewis is one of the best actors of our generation and did nothing but bolster his resume with There Will Be Blood. Perfect combination of mania and ruthlesness. The scene at the end with Eli in the bowling alley was lights out, one of the most powerful I can remember."I drink your milkshake! I drink it up!"

I would say the opposite. By the time they got to that famous line, I was starting to laugh. It seemed like a good idea on paper that they couldn't get right on the screen. Dano couldn't seem to pull off the scene to me and when they started to run around it looked cartoony. I thought the bowling alley scene was bad, and would say that the scene right before it with his son was much better and did a lot better job of showing Plainview's insanity and his ability push everybody away.

I'd agree. The bowling alley scene was just sort of comical to think a decrepit old Plainview could kill the guy rolling a bowling ball down the alley. A child could have gotten away there.J

 

[jpeace121]

Saw this yesterday. I've been saying it for a while, Daniel Day Lewis is one of the best actors of our generation and did nothing but bolster his resume with There Will Be Blood. Perfect combination of mania and ruthlesness. The scene at the end with Eli in the bowling alley was lights out, one of the most powerful I can remember."I drink your milkshake! I drink it up!"

I would say the opposite. By the time they got to that famous line, I was starting to laugh. It seemed like a good idea on paper that they couldn't get right on the screen. Dano couldn't seem to pull off the scene to me and when they started to run around it looked cartoony. I thought the bowling alley scene was bad, and would say that the scene right before it with his son was much better and did a lot better job of showing Plainview's insanity and his ability push everybody away.

I'd agree. The bowling alley scene was just sort of comical to think a decrepit old Plainview could kill the guy rolling a bowling ball down the alley. A child could have gotten away there.J

I think that, to an extent, this was intentional. PTA may have been trying to show how much of a mockery both of their lives have become. Out on DVD today for those who want to pick it up.

 

[Big_Russel]

I loved this movie, thought it was perfect. I even liked the score. Maybe because I watched it on DVD and not in the theater?

Seems to me that almost everyone who watched it on DVD loved it, and everyone (I know) who watched it in the theater had issues with it (most commonly the score).

Also, to the guy who said DDL gets Oscar love because he is Jewish/has Jewish connections, that's ridiculous! Don't be silly. Maybe that holds true in some instances, but Day-Lewis is a terrific actor.

 

[Tony Danza]

Here's something no one wants to talk about. Lewis is popular with the Jewish community through his links to Rebecca Miller and her late father, Arthur Miller. Although no one wants to admit it, I think this plays a huge role in his ability to be an Oscar contender for nearly every role he's had. Yes, he's a good actor, but that influence cannot be underestimated in that town.

This is a crock. Daniel Day Lewis is one of the best actors of his generation, easily in the top 5 of his contemporaries IMO. To suggest that being Jewish somehow makes him seem better than he really is is very short sighted. I'm not calling you a racist either. I'm saying that he could be French, Samoan, or Australian aboriginie- it doesn't matter. He is a commanding artist who doesn't deserve to have anything taken away from his performances because of his relationship with a few Jewish people.

Daniel Day Lewis is one of a handful of actors that I would pay admission to a movie they were in without knowing anything about the film. Just having him in the movie generates entertainment as far as I'm concerned. Gary Oldman is in that group as well.

 

[KarmaPolice]

I loved this movie, thought it was perfect. I even liked the score. Maybe because I watched it on DVD and not in the theater?

Seems to me that almost everyone who watched it on DVD loved it, and everyone (I know) who watched it in the theater had issues with it (most commonly the score).

Also, to the guy who said DDL gets Oscar love because he is Jewish/has Jewish connections, that's ridiculous! Don't be silly. Maybe that holds true in some instances, but Day-Lewis is a terrific actor.

I just watched it on DVD and didn't love it. I didn't list it in either post about the movie, but I did find the score annoying at times, and I usually never notice things like that.

 

[DanFouts]

I loved this movie, thought it was perfect. I even liked the score. Maybe because I watched it on DVD and not in the theater?

Seems to me that almost everyone who watched it on DVD loved it, and everyone (I know) who watched it in the theater had issues with it (most commonly the score).

Also, to the guy who said DDL gets Oscar love because he is Jewish/has Jewish connections, that's ridiculous! Don't be silly. Maybe that holds true in some instances, but Day-Lewis is a terrific actor.

I just watched it on DVD and didn't love it. I didn't list it in either post about the movie, but I did find the score annoying at times, and I usually never notice things like that.

Concur. Just watched it on DVD and was kind of meh...I had huge huge expectations.DDL is great....cinematography great.

But overall I thought the character was too crazy, and one sided. Basically following his descent into madness fueled by greed. I get it, but overdone.

 

[SmoovySmoov]

Just to pile on:

1) DDL is awesome, as he always is, and that is one of those few things in movies that you can always take to the bank.

2) I like PT Anderson and his movies, but I'm a fan of David Lynch and Wes Anderson, so I'm probably more open to "movies that aren't quite the norm" than most people.

3) I liked the movie. I liked the cinematography. And I liked the score. But, having said that, I don't feel it is a "classic". And to all the people who have said that it was better than "No Country for Old Men", well, you are wrong, and there's probably not a whole lot we would agree on movie-wise. A solid 4 out of 5, but NCFOM definitely deserved it's Best Picture Oscar.

 

[southeastjerome]

I agree that the "music" really took away from this film. If that's what you call a steady monotone buzz. It was just obnoxious IMO.Other than that it was well done, well acted of course, but a bit of a downer. Just a tad. The final scene still gets a thumb up from me, enthralling and just brutal.

I actually thought the opposite. I thought the score added to the film. In fact, I can't imagine the film without it. Knowing PTA, I kind of expected his type of movie, so the score was not distracting, I thought it added a lot. Specifically when there is that incident and his son loses his hearing, the build up to that with the score was just awesome. I enjoyed the movie overall, but I cannot envision many casual movie watchers enjoying it. I do not think it is an all time classic, but definately one of the better movies I've seen this year. I wish PTA did more movies.