There Will Be Blood (Paul Thomas Anderson, 2007)

[John Cope]

Rather than thinking that a character has no motivation just because there is no explicit motive given, perhaps think "What could be the motive?"-- I find it hard to believe anyone who looks for causation truly does come up empty. It's just a lazy attempt at justifying a reviewer's negative reaction to the film.

Yeah, but I think what Walsh was getting at is the idea that perhaps Anderson isn't as interested in "causation" as you are. Personally, if there is a lack of such in a film it certainly wouldn't bother me as it is by no means a requirement, but then consideration shifts to whether what is depicted is revelatory or enlightening enough as an end unto itself. I don't believe Anderson is interested in causality and I don't believe what he is interested in is particularly profound or subtle (at least not when the chips are down). Does this perspective constitute a lazy justification for my response?

[domino harvey]

I don't understand why you're worried about what Anderson is "interested in" or intended to portray-- either it's portrayed or not in your reading, right? Anderson's motivations don't enter into it!

As a tangent I want to return to the notion that the character is insane. This is a pet peeve of mine, because when you declare a character to be insane, you marginalize that character and their actions, robbing them any of the depth and insight they're due.

[denti alligator]

A friend of mine said this was essentially a rip-off of Aguirre and Lessons of Darkness. Not having read the 15 pages of this thread, can anyone confirm or deny this? (Yeah, I'll go see it myself soon, but I just want to get an idea.)

[Cold Bishop]

A friend of mine said this was essentially a rip-off of Aguirre and Lessons of Darkness. Not having read the 15 pages of this thread, can anyone confirm or deny this? (Yeah, I'll go see it myself soon, but I just want to get an idea.)

No

[hot_locket]

A friend of mine said this was essentially a rip-off of Aguirre and Lessons of Darkness. Not having read the 15 pages of this thread, can anyone confirm or deny this? (Yeah, I'll go see it myself soon, but I just want to get an idea.)

Yes, if by "rip-off", he means "shares the most basic of thematic similarities" (madman and oil).

Day-Lewis did remind me of Kinski, though.

[essrog]

I think this film succeeds fantastically in the zone of ambiguity-- presenting the Mystery of Life and Human Motivation-- precisely where No Country For Old Men fails miserably. Sometimes the directors statement is the most distressing answer of all-- "there never will be an answer for certain forces in the world, at least in terms of trying to curb or solve them or sum them up. I'm trying to recreate the mystery of the fullness of this gigantic emptiness."

Schreck, are you saying that this statement is distressing to you as a viewer (as in, "why would a director bother with this?") or as a human being (as in, "Dear lord, this is depressing, but I respect the honesty and force it was presented with")? It seems like you're saying the latter, in which case I think the Coens (channeling McCarthy) presented and executed your aforementioned statement perfectly. I know from this and the NCFOM thread you disagree, but anyway ...

Back on topic, I never had a problem with Plainview's actions (or DDL's acting) over the last 20 minutes of TWBB because of the significant time elapsed (I forget how much -- 15 years?) between this and the last time we saw him. I just sort of assumed that he had spent the intervening years disassociating himself from society in his gigantic house and drinking more and more. Take the Plainview we knew from most of the film and add 15 years and I could see how he'd be capable of almost anything.

[Nothing]

is the argument that it's inconsequential because it's sentimental?

I didn't go into detail as this is the There Will Be Blood thread. Also, it's been a number of years since I was subjected to these films and have no intention of going through such an experience again.

If we take sentimental to mean "coloured by excessive emotion at the expense of reality and reason" then it's possible for this to be applied in art both cynically and with good intention. However, given the extremely close connection between sentimentality and nationalism, the results are almost always the same. Irrational "beliefs" and "feelings" that have been instilled into children by their parents and through the education system find their adult expression in sentimentality.

For Americans, this most often takes form in the heartfelt feeling that the majority of Americans are, in their essence, 'good' human beings (the best? the most free?) wishing to connect with each other and the outside world and wanting everyone in the world to have a better life, even if they are sometimes thwarted in their good intentions by the workings of evil/fate. This is, of course, a self-serving and nationalistic avoidance of reality. You'll find it in everything from Saving Private Ryan to Ally McBeal. In PTA's case, the scene I would particularly mark out for its unconscionable sentimentality is the group song in Magnolia.

Yes, the new film does rip off the imagery of Lessons of Darkness and, to a lesser extent, Aguirre.

[portnoy]

Oil on fire - Herzog had it first!

And there's nothing of Aguirre's imagery in this film.

[Cold Bishop]

Everybody knows Herzog just ripped-off Red Adair

[MichaelB]

Everybody knows Herzog just ripped-off Red Adair

Which raises the question of whether Anderson's mise-en-scene specifically ripped off Herzog, or whether he was merely inspired by the real-life Iraqi burning oil wells. Is there anything that suggests the former?

[Awesome Welles]

The burning oil reminded me of a similar scene in Il Caso Mattei in which basically the exact same thing happens.

[kinjitsu]

Fellas, it's a known fact that oil wells caught fire in California during the early part of the 20th Century.

[Marcel Gioberti]

Fellas, it's a known fact that oil wells caught fire in California during the early part of the 20th Century.

I was wondering if somebody would point that out.

Of all the criticisms of this film, and I have plenty, that would be the least of them.

[domino harvey]

Coming to DVD April 8th:

The DVD will be released on April 8th, 2008 on a 2-disc collector’s edition. The cover is very classy; personally, I was hoping they’d use the original one-sheet “bible” poster, but this isn’t too bad either — it’s an image of Daniel Plainview looking down into the oil well, taken from a frame near the beginning of the movie. DDL is credited at the top; in the center lies the title “There Will Be Blood” and directly underneath “written for the screen and directed by Paul Thomas Anderson” and at the very bottom “2-Disc Collector’s Edition”.

[Belmondo]

Coming to DVD April 8th

And, click on "there will be blood" at the bottom of that page where we learn that there will be no commentary track from PTA now or ever again, and that his next movie may well be a horror film.

[domino harvey]

I wish he'd try again at making a musical

[Barmy]

Just caught this flick. Haven't read this thread, but I'm wondering why Daniel was so pissy.

[Oedipax]

And, click on "there will be blood" at the bottom of that page where we learn that there will be no commentary track from PTA now or ever again, and that his next movie may well be a horror film.

The horror thing was just a short-lived rumor - PTA said something like "I thought I just got done making a horror film" and said in general he's tapped out at the moment, not working on anything new yet.

[Morbii]

There was a rather funny statement on that blog:

there is no commentary track, nor will there ever probably be one again. paul mentioned to me how alot of the buzz has been taken from doing them because people quote them back verbatim to him in interviews and fun/flippant comments are regarded as gospel. (not a quote, but the gist of what was said)

[domino harvey]

What better way to celebrate Valentine's Day?

[portnoy]

Just caught this flick. Haven't read this thread, but I'm wondering why Daniel was so pissy.

Tell us about any noises the audience made.

[Barmy]

There were a lot of slurping noises.

[pemmican]

Note: what follows below is a condensed and altered version of several posts I made, over a couple of days. Some of what I'm replying to has been moved off into a "Mumblecore" thread, as has some of my writing. If the following seems odd, it's because it's a bit of a Frankenpost, and I'm not the guy responsible for having stuck it together.

John Cope - thanks for posting Godfrey Cheshire's article, in particular; it helped make some sense of the spectacular, fall-on-your-back-and-spread-your-legs reception this film has gotten. I agreed abundantly with much of what he said - was pleased to see him describe Anderson's characters as "cartoonlike."

Orphic L. - I feel less lonely for your being outspoken about your views; thanks. Good points about Dano's performance.

Kind of interesting: on Sunday, the priest at the church down the street from me is going to give his sermon on the Oscars and THERE WILL BE BLOOD and NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN (which I also didn't like much). The church is advertising it as a hook to get people in, and I must admit, it's working on me. I'm not a churchgoer - I don't even know what denomination said church is, tho' it's one block away from where I've lived these last few years - but I'm most curious what a man o' the cloth would have to say about these films and their enthusiastic reception.

My votes for the two best/ most important American films of 2007, by the way, are for Aaron Katz's QUIET CITY and Robinson Devor's ZOO. *These* are vital, important, breathing films, worthy of careful attention and thought... I don't think there's even a thread for QUIET CITY, is there?

Actually, I learned vastly more about human emotion and expression from the performances of either of the leads in Quiet City, and felt far more personally engaged by them, than I did by Day Lewis' admittedly impressive, but grandiose, larger-than-life, and at times scenery-menacing turn in TWBB. Rather than steak-and-dry-toast, can we stick with the musical analogy of Bishop? I feel very little for opera, cannot attach myself to it emotionally at all -- there's too much history/tradition, too much artifice, too much foreign baggage for me to really get through to the emotions it wants to convey, and my awareness that this vast spectacle has been assembled at great care and cost and is supposed to have momentous import and impact grates against the fact that it doesn't actually move me much at all (which is how I felt about TWBB). On the other hand, one young kid with his or her heart on his sleeve, singing about things deeply felt and intensely perceived, usually will move me, even if his or her voice breaks. Sometimes especially if. (I have the feeling that this analogy may turn around and bite me in the ass at some point, but fuggit).

That said, tho' - actually, I think the kids in Quiet City do a great job of conveying a whole range of human emotion rarely captured on screen. There's an aching fragility to their connection ("how tenderly they must attend these friendships/or all is lost," to quote, completely disregarding context, a poem by Robert Duncan); the horrible awkwardness of which you speak seems to be something put there very much by design, almost half the point of the film, and is hardly a sign that they're doing a bad job... I should imagine that however much the actors actually DID rehearse, as with Cassavetes - who is the real reference point here, not Carney - anything that FELT rehearsed or staged in delivery would have been rejected, in favour of readings that seemed more spontaneous and emotive. Watch Cassavetes pushing Jenny Runacre in the Making of Husbands film, if you can find it, trying to get her to laugh like she's laughing, not like she's acting... I would assume that's where Katz is coming from, and that he works towards that goal with considerable care.

Oh, and by the way, I'm not trying to "rescue" a small film by praising Quiet City; it's a film of lasting importance, one of a very small handful of recent American films that I've seen that actually has value as art (other examples - Old Joy, Police Beat... I don't really know how I feel about Mutual Appreciation at the moment, but it seems far less serious/ important than Quiet City or Dance Party USA -- which is an even more significant work). These films don't need me to condescend to them with "rescue" attempts; they have my respect and win my delight as a viewer, and I'll happily watch them again and again, admiring their beauty and craft. I would feel that way even if millions of people were going to watch them. The sad fact is that American audiences are more impressed by shallow, tricked-up Oscar fodder like TWBB, No Country for Old Men, Paranoid Park, etc. -- films consciously crafted to impress critics, to be "arthouse blockbusters," while disguising the fact that they have precious little to say.

P.

[Jeff]

The sad fact is that American audiences are more impressed by shallow, tricked-up Oscar fodder like TWBB, No Country for Old Men, Paranoid Park, etc. -- films consciously crafted to impress critics, to be "arthouse blockbusters," while disguising the fact that they have precious little to say.

Those stupid Americans. When will they ever learn?

You realize, of course, that Paranoid Park has not even opened in the U.S. yet, and maybe only 500 Americans have even seen it at festival screenings. When it is finally released, maybe 1% - 2% of the total population will see it. It's not exactly the kind of film that's going to sweep the nation (or get Oscar noms or be an "arthouse blockbuster") for that matter.

Blood and No Country have, for the most part, impressed the critical community worldwide, which is why they have done moderately well at the box office. I'm not sure that it's fair to say that "American audiences" have even been impressed by them. While the two films are well-liked by critics and film nerds (myself included), ask the average moviegoer what they thought about either one (especially No Country), and they will explain to you how the films were "boring," "didn't make any sense," and the endings were "stupid."

Once again, instead of simply just saying "these films did not work for me and here's why," we must paint the audience that did enjoy them as pathetic rubes who have been duped into appreciating something that's clearly inappreciable.

I have no issue with your dislike of any of these films, pemmican, only your choice to be condescending when expressing it.

[pemmican]

Aaaaaaaaaargh! I laboured SO LONG and SO HARD on my reply that the forum logged me out and the whole damn thing was lost. Fug! I'll try again:

Re:

P is clearly "rescuing" smaller films and presenting an obvious, obnoxious bias against anything resembling a conventional film-- the worst kind of snobbery.

a) Sorry, but there are all sorts of commercial/conventional films I've admired: Michael Clayton, I'm Not There, to name a couple of recent examples. Can't wait to see Romero's new dead film, either. I am not attempting to say that all conventional cinema, or all critically praised films, are therefore bad and unworthy of attention. Not my point at all.

b) The point was that relative to what it accomplishes, TWBB seems vastly overhyped, overpraised, over-fussed over, and that if one WANTS to praise great art cinema being produced in America, there are better places to look - Katz, Devor and Mudede, Kelly Reichardt, James Benning, John Gianvito. Yes, these are all "smaller" films than TWBB, but that has little to do with anything, unless you're praising TWBB for the scope of its ambitions and budget. The point isn't that conventional, big movies (all bad) versus unconventional little movies (all good); the point is vastly overpraised arthouse successes, versus what I see as the real, vital American cinema, the stuff that people SHOULD be fussing over. And yeah, I agree with a lot of what Ray has to say on that front, what can I say? I have no business dealings with Criterion, so it shouldn't oughta be a problem...

c) If you want to accuse me of snobbery, then accuse me of it for this: I can't but assume that the fawning over TWBB has received has a lot to do with things extraneous to its slight merits as I perceive them. I mean, forgodsake: the film seriously posits as its central dilemma a conflict between relatively undisguised capitalism and ambition, and capitalism and ambition as hidden behind a cloak of religious respectability (I'm borrowing this formula from the VIFF's Jack Vermee, by the way, who liked the film). But this is hardly that deep -- it's a false dilemma, crafted for the purposes of the film, which sheds very little light on any real human emotions; you might as well ask if I would rather lose my left foot or my right. There ARE good moments to the film - when Day Lewis confesses himself, say - but there is far more caricature (Dano) and drama that amounts to nothing, because the characters and themes are so underdeveloped (anything involving the son, Standard Oil, the Sunday family, etc). And the climax is abrupt and unsatisfying, delivering far less than the film seems to promise.

d) By contrast, Old Joy says a LOT about the failed promises of 60's idealism; the humiliations that the Will Oldham character endures, and his ultimate generosity of spirit in the face of them, are quite touching and say a great deal about lost possibilities in our Darwinistic current climate. That the film goes about articulating these themes subtly, and requires more than one viewing, should not be held against it.

e) And finally, Jeff: when Paranoid Park played here - a complete nonentity of a film, I thought - various local critics and Vancouver filmpeople were singing its praises, calling it a masterpiece; I heard that word more than once. I realize it hasn't gotten wide release yet, but I assume that it will do very well on the arthouse circuit, and will receive, like Elephant and Last Days, a reasonable amount of support, given that it's Gus van Sant. If not, I stand corrected, but based on how it already seems to be being overrated, on so slight a release... I think it's fair to include on the list.

P.