There Will Be Blood

The year I was born was the same year Predator and Robocop came out. When I was finally old enough to appreciate films, Little Nicky was in theaters. I know, believe me, I know; rocky start. And often I would watch older films, or specials on older films, and be dazzled. You know the ones. Remember when they made Spartacus? Remember sitting in the movies and watching Gregory Peck play Atticus Finch in To Kill A Mockingbird? Remember the first time you heard "I could've been a contender" through theater speakers? Well I sure as hell don't. But I'll tell you what, now I feel somewhat caught up. Let's begin with the obvious. Daniel Day Lewis. No one's arguing about this. The man is a veritable God among ants on the screen. He takes his role by the reigns and I don't doubt him for a second. In fact, at times, I was downright afraid of the man. Lewis gives what is easily, EASILY the best performance of the past five years. But let's get serious about it. Lewis' Daniel Plainview is the most convincing, awe-inspiring, and downright mortifying character to take the big screen that I can remember. Here, perfectly in his element and at his best, Lewis could go toe to toe with Brando and Kinski, playing a part that oozes enough skill and pathos to earn him a place among Hollywood's, and perhaps the world's, greatest performances of all time. He gives those of us who missed out on the craft, depth of character, and technique of classic cinema a chance to admire a tour de force portrayal of a memorable, identifiable, and completely despicable character, and it's so damned refreshing that I can't stop singing the man's praises. Paul Dano has been taking a lot of fire for this whole thing. People continue to spout their disapproval of the film's casting, saying that Dano has no business rivaling the seasoned Lewis on the screen. Listen, lay down your swords a minute and consider the obvious. The guy was cast opposite the performance of the decade, he's not going to outshine Lewis and you'd be crazy to expect him to. In fact, I think that he and Lewis' back-and-forths are the films highlights, as we see the juxtaposition not only in the characters themselves, but also in their acting techniques. And the cinematography? Welcome to the old days of film. The glory days of Hollywood. Anderson gives us one of the most beautifully shot and directed films in recent memory, truly at the top of his craft on this one. Every moment feels more epic than the last, until the film becomes such a towering cinematic spectacle that the end leaves the viewer exhausted. It's truly an experience not to be missed. Yeah, we missed out on A Street Car Named Desire. And Casablanca isn't gonna be in theaters again any time soon. But in the meantime, There Will Be Blood is just about as good, and will likely haunt our generation as much as the Hollywood studio epics of the past...

It's about expansion, it's about capitalism, and whatever that caused the demise of the Wild West myth. "There Will be Blood" looks, smell, feels like a Western but this is an Anti-Western more than anything …

There's so much to say about this movie but it left me speechless at the end, Daniel Day-Lewis was hypnotic, giving a performance that reminded me of Orson Welles in "Citizen Kane", and Humphrey Bogart in "The Treasure of the Sierra Madre" ... He's definitely one of the greatest actors of his generation, especially in this performance that probably best defines the alienating effect of materialism. The 40's had Charles Foster Kane, the 80's had Gordon Gekko and the 2000's have Daniel Planview.

Indeed, "There Will be Blood" is not your typical 'soul corrupted by money and/or power' drama, as I said, it's all about materialism, ending with a pocket filled by gold and a heart made of the same stone you've been working on all your life, it's trusting anything that has a specific color, a specific smell, working on a land to find a greasy black liquid gushing from its womb, and never, never trusting or giving any credit to "nothingness" or "abstraction".

Daniel Plainview considers these abstractions with the most profound disdain. Nothing is free, nothing comes from nothing, nothing is unsubstantial. If one claims to be your brother, he has to prove it, if one should make a deal with you, he should talk business and not about education ... not because it's personal, not because it has nothing to do with business, BUT because it is NOTHING and nothingness irritates Plainview as if the only thing he could believe on had to be material. The rest is nothing, feelings are nothing, believing is nothing, these so strong and noble words for us, well, Plainview doesn't give a damn about them...

And more than anything, above all these abstractions, there is religion, God is Daniel Plainview's archenemy … this is the ultimate masquerade for him, the cancer that gangrenes the progress, an evil that transforms people into sheep, almost like animals, the biggest hypocrisy of all … Plainview, the capitalist, almost shares the same opinion than Marx who thought religion was people's opium. And because Plainview despises this hypocrisy, he tries to exorcise his hatred by using religion to achieve his plans, exploiting it, like he exploited his adopted son. No feelings, no sentiments, everything should serve a palpable purpose. The end justifies the means.

And ultimately, he gets rich at the end, he's a respected and feared tycoon, as the purest and most implacable illustration of the American dream. But is he happy? no! because power, prosperity, those are still empty words ... he believes in material, in things, in stuff he drinks like the iconic 'milk-shake' metaphor that still resonates in my mind as one of the most memorable hymns to greed and pragmatism. Plainview is greedy, but not evil, evil is still too abstract a word; because it implies the use of one own conscience while Plainview's conscience was dedicated to one goal: getting bigger, possession, expansion, territoriality.

And are we to blame him? Let's not forget the bleak cinematography at the beginning of the film where we could feel, the stink of the oil, the hardness of the rocks and the land as an incontrollable enemy ... let's not forget that Plainview spent half of his life stuck alone into dark holes made of land, stone, metal, oil, and raw matter, so close he could almost feel them, so close it became a part of him ...

"There Will Be Blood" is the quintessential film about materialism and its alienating power, when all that matters is matter!

This film raises the game for everyone out there. I have loved all of Paul Thomas Anderson's work, including his greatly underrated Punch-Drunk Love, but this is a huge leap from any of the previous movies into a realm, as others have said, inhabited by classics such as Treasure of the Sierra Madre - and then some. Every element of this film is astonishing, from the opening twenty minutes, which feature virtually no dialog, to Jonny Greenwood's score, which I have heard criticized as too imposing but which seems just about perfect to me (and brings to mind the non-Blue Danube elements of 2001 at its most experimental). Daniel Day-Lewis' performance is in a league of its own: his voice, his mannerisms, his physical movement, his stunted emotions, are flesh and blood, and hauntingly so, in a way that even Tommy Lee Jones in In The Valley of Elah (which I thought was a pretty staggering performance) can't quite attain. I will watch this film again and again simply to see something so raw and so moving and so gut-wrenching. This is why I love movies; this is what made me want to make movies when I was fourteen years old.

There's a prospector by the name of Daniel Plainview, a weathered type of soul, after all the things he's been through, now he's come across some oil, underneath Californian soil, and he's planning to extract, withdraw, accrue. He has a son that he acquired after a blow, now where he goes, young H. B. will also go, as he supports his father's hand, acquiring most of the scrub land, with the knowledge of the flow that sits below. But a preacher seeks to meddle, interfere, and Daniel Plainview's disinclined to be so dear, H. B's deafened by a boom, a long lost brother finds a tomb, there's no salvation, when your life's so insincere.

Two of the finest cinematic characters you'll encounter.

This is a compelling family drama charting one man's rise and fall as he ruthless exploits oil in the American west. It has everything you could want from a great Hollywood movie: subtlety, excellent acting, a thoughtful and intelligent script and quite wonderful cinematography.

It's a film in which the oil is a supporting character in itself, and the series of unfortunate deaths and accidents that beleaguer our leading man reminded me of Emile Zola's excellent novel, Germinal. Daniel Day-Lewis gives another assured performance here, living and breathing rather than merely acting his role, and watching his growing feud with the slimy preacher is the stuff of great cinema. All in all a wonderful, epic film, old fashioned in the best possible sense.