There Will Be Blood: Review By thedude-abides

Feb 18th, 2011 by thedude-abides
When ambition meets faith...There Will Be Blood.
  • OVERALL
    4.0
    GREAT
  • Story
  • Acting
  • Directing
  • Visuals
Based on the novel Oil by Upton Sinclair, and written for the screen and directed by P.T. Anderson (Boogie Nights, Magnolia), There Will Be Blood tells the story of Daniel Plainview (Daniel Day-Lewis), self-made oil tycoon on his way to an ever-increasing fortune. The film itself includes iconic performances given by Daniel Day-Lewis and Paul Dano, flawless writing and directing by P.T. Anderson, a story as epic as the film itself, and a pacing, texture and musical score that perfectly exude the time period.

The story ensues as Plainview, a mining prospector, discovers oil underground during an expedition. Plainview quickly assembles the equipment and the help needed in order to drill. His partner dies during drilling, however, after a heavy piece of equipment crashes down on him, leaving his infantile son without a father. Daniel collects on his fortune after drilling is complete, and takes his partner's son with him as his own.

CUT TO: about 10 years later. Daniel, a now established entrepreneur of oil, is seeked out by a young man named Paul Sunday (Paul Dano). He offers to disclose information to Daniel regarding an abundance of oil in a secret location for a given price. Daniel agrees, and Paul (funny how both character names are their actual names) reveals the location to be his hometown of Little Boston, CA.

Daniel and his "son", H.W., set out for Little Boston after Paul's visit in an attempt to purchase the Sunday Ranch. Paul's twin brother Eli (also played by Dano), however, is wise to Daniel's act, and holds out to the tune of 5,000 dollars in hopes of building his church, The Church of the Third Revelation.

Daniel agrees, and with the success of his drilling in Little Boston comes with it the success of The Church of the Third Revelation, along with Eli's expanding sphere of influence and manipulation over his congregation and the town itself. Eli and Daniel quickly become the two most prominent figures in Little Boston, but that isn't enough for Eli. He is insistent upon making Daniel a prominent member of his congregation, using everything he can against him in order to make Daniel submit to his will.

They are truly two sides of the same coin are Plainview and Eli, both of whom are willing to stop at nothing in order to increase their worldly fortunes. Because they know their own desires, each man is able to see through the other's act almost at a glance. While one places his stock in wealth, the other places his stock in influence, each one using his own method of power and control over the other all the way up until the film's conclusion.

P.T. Anderson was nominated for Oscars for his achievement in writing and directing, while Day-Lewis took home the award for Best Actor in what is arguably - and in my opinion, easily - the single greatest performance in film history.

Nominated for 8 Academy Awards including Best Picture, There Will Be Blood is by far the best film of the decade and it isn't even close. It's the classic tale of the blind-faith preacher vs. the blinded-by-ambition business man, each one equally as corrupt as the other. Needless to say, when these two opposing forces of nature collide...there will be blood.

"I'M FINISHED!"

Do you like this review?

Comments (21)

  1. XxNickTheFilmCriticXx

    @thedude-abides -- Lol, really? I wish that were the case for me..

    4 months agoby @XxNickTheFilmCriticXxFlag

  2. thedude-abides

    @XxNickTheFilmCriticXx Yeah, I agree. I knew you were going to mention the rabbit, lol. That's about all I remember from this one.

    4 months agoby @thedude-abidesFlag

  3. XxNickTheFilmCriticXx

    @thedude-abides -- No problem, man.

    It was cool at first, but I felt that it kind of contained over-the-top weird material, as if they were purposely trying to over do it. First of all, there's a crude, odd, sexually-charged discussion concerning the Smurfs. It was kind of funny, but boy, was it awkward. Hell, the acting was even over-the-top at times. The dialogue contained a few horrendous lines, and the ending screamed rushed/chaotic when two(if I remember correctly) characters get shot and ultimately die towards the end. It just...didn't fit with everything that we witnessed beforehand. And it kind of felt like they threw in something like that because they give us nothing to munch on throughout the entire movie. The only two notable scenes throughout the movie - besides the ending - were those weird scenes between our lead and that giant rabbit. It's incredible that so many people find this movie to be great, amazing, and so on.

    That's just me, though.

    4 months agoby @XxNickTheFilmCriticXxFlag

  4. thedude-abides

    @XxNickTheFilmCriticXx Thanks, man. I try and go through and re-evaluate every so often.

    It was cool. I like weird movies, but it didn't really do anything special for me. Slightly above average at best, like you said.

    4 months agoby @thedude-abidesFlag

  5. XxNickTheFilmCriticXx

    @thedude-abides -- I've been going through your ratings and it's awesome to see how accurate they are. I really hated "Donnie Darko", but I can't that it was actually a terrible movie or anything - just very average, if not a little above.

    How did you feel about it?

    4 months agoby @XxNickTheFilmCriticXxFlag

  6. thedude-abides

    @XxNickTheFilmCriticXx Haha. No worries, man. Fight Club's a great movie.

    4 months agoby @thedude-abidesFlag

  7. XxNickTheFilmCriticXx

    @thedude-abides -- I agree. I absolutely loved "American History X" the first time I saw it, but it was very average after the second viewing. It went from 9/10 to probably a 6/10. I think if I rated it on everything 8/10 would be most fitting.

    I actually like "Fight Club" more, personally. Albeit, that's probably because it hit home for me, and I gotta admit it's a hell lot more appealing. I'm not saying that it's a better film, but "Fight Club" is the ultimate "guy movie", if you ask me. I'll refrain from going into detail, because I'll go all elaborate on you and before you know it, I've basically written a short review for it. Lol.

    Actually, I didn't know that! That's a neat, history lesson, man. Thanks for the information. ;)

    4 months agoby @XxNickTheFilmCriticXxFlag

  8. thedude-abides

    @XxNickTheFilmCriticXx I do. I like American History X, but I think it lacks some of the more intrinsic filmmaking qualities that make TWBB so amaizng. I rank it as a really cool, really good movie, but not a great one. That's just my opinion.

    As far as Fight Club is concerned, I actually think that's a great movie, just not as great as TWBB or Pulp. I would give Fight Club somewhere around a 91% (my current grade for the film), whereas I would give the other two 100%. Again, that's just me, but I just think Pulp and TWBB are the magnum opuses of two brilliant filmmakers at the height of their game.

    A quick history lesson on Pulp Fiction before you see it (and I hope I'm not undermining your intelligence by saying this, but I just realized it recently and it made the movie even cooler) :

    In the 1920s throughout the 50s, the greatest crime literature around was known as "pulp fiction." It got its name from the paper it was printed on, made from pulpwood, which gave the paper a kind of coarse feel to it. The word 'pulp' also pays meaning to the lurid subject matter within the writing itself. All the classic film noirs from the time period were inspired by the work of some of the greatest pulp writers of that era.

    That's why, if you were to go to a bookstore back in the day, you would find a section of literature under the category of "pulp fiction." It's no different from going to a bookstore and seeing the science fiction section today. Tarantino just lifted the name from the entire genre and used it to encompass the world of pulp-noir he created. The story of the boxer, and the gangster falling for the boss's wife were staples of the genre, which Tarantino also used to base his story around.

    Sorry if I was telling you stuff you already knew. Like I said, I just discovered all of that within the past year, and it made me appreciate the movie even more.

    4 months agoby @thedude-abidesFlag

  9. XxNickTheFilmCriticXx

    @thedude-abides --No problem. Oh, I figured that would most likely be the case.

    I'm hearing a lot of amazing stuff about "Pulp Fiction", so I'll try to see it as soon as possible. So, you think "There Will Be Blood" is better than "Fight Club" and "American History X"?

    4 months agoby @XxNickTheFilmCriticXxFlag

  10. thedude-abides

    @XxNickTheFilmCriticXx Thanks, man. I actually got that opening quote from one of the original movie posters.

    Anyway, I agree with everything you said. I actually think it's the best of the decade as well, and the best movie since Pulp Fiction in '94.

    4 months agoby @thedude-abidesFlag

  11. XxNickTheFilmCriticXx

    @thedude-abides -- Concerning the title and closing statement, two words: bad ass! Bad-ass start and finish that perfectly complement your excellent review, that is.

    I've seen this film twice. The first time I saw this, I thought it was extremely slow-paced, but a very worthy film due to the ending alone.

    I recently watched this - may I say - *masterpiece* a couple of months ago, and I was completely blown away! The acting is out(f*cking)standing, the cinematography wonderful and fitting, the score is mind-numbingly effective, the plot is nothing short of brilliant, and the directing is marvelous.

    I found this film thoroughly entertaining, gripping, and compelling the second-time around, and I thought that it was arguably the best film of the decade, along with "No Country For Old Men".

    4 months agoby @XxNickTheFilmCriticXxFlag

  12. slysnide

    @ejk1: I just couldn't resist dropping in a snide remark to keep with the spirit of my username. :P

    @thedude-abides: Makes sense. I considered the same thing when I posted my first review 3yrs ago this Saturday, then thought the 5 star system allowed more mathematical reasoning, and was more flexible. To each his own.

    1 year agoby @slysnideFlag

  13. thedude-abides

    @slysnide Well, there is really no great explanation. The only justifiable reason of why I prefer the 4 star system is because that's how the overwhelming majority of star ratings critiques are based. I myself have never come upon a 5-star system before joining movieweb.

    To try and sum it all up without sounding completely insane, lol, if I were to give a movie a rating based on the 5-star system, I would have nothing to judge my own critique of the film by. I would inevitably have to compare it to a 4-star system to get a feel for my own rating. So if figure I'd just rate on a scale of 4 and save myself the confusion.

    In any case, I've been thinking about dropping my little crusade as of late. Perhaps in the near future I will concede to the fact and start rating on a scale of 5. And if I do, I can promise you this movie will definitely be a 5, lol.

    1 year agoby @thedude-abidesFlag

  14. ejk1

    @slysnide Oh. Well, okay then :P

    1 year agoby @ejk1Flag

  15. slysnide

    @ejk1: Obviously. That's why I asked him. :P

    1 year agoby @slysnideFlag

  16. ejk1

    @slysnide babyH only rates movies up to four for his own reasons.

    1 year agoby @ejk1Flag

  17. slysnide

    @thedude-abides: Now why do you rate on a scale of just 4? Your praise makes it sound like a 5.

    1 year agoby @slysnideFlag

  18. Bane. Ferguson

    i didn't like this film one bit, i could stay with it, my attention was going above the TV not at it.

    1 year agoby @Zak-FFlag

  19. thedude-abides

    Thx, @corey.

    1 year agoby @thedude-abidesFlag

  20. Corey

    Great review, sir.

    1 year agoby @coreyFlag

  21. thedude-abides

    Remember, I grade on a scale of 4.

    1 year agoby @thedude-abidesFlag