There Will Be Blood (Paul Thomas Anderson, 2007)

Discuss specific films and franchises
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
miless
Joined: Sun Apr 02, 2006 1:45 am

#376 Post by miless »

Faux Hulot wrote:
Jeff wrote:Saturday Night Live did a TWBB parody last night.
Drink it here
Like pretty much every skit in the history of SNL, it has one punch-line repeated ad-nauseum for 5 minutes. It could have easily been 30 seconds, then (maybe) it would have been funny.
User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 6:42 pm

#377 Post by domino harvey »

I really liked the part in that skit where -- I can't finish this sentence
User avatar
Belmondo
Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2007 1:19 pm
Location: Cape Cod

#378 Post by Belmondo »

Raoul Duke wrote:
Stagger Lee wrote:I was struck by Daniel's apparent lack of any sexuality. It seemed that the moment at which he knew with certainty that the man was not his brother was when Daniel watched him with the hookers--as if he was aware of his own lack of interest in sex and considered it a hereditary quality of true Plainviews.
Actually I think the moment Daniel realizes that that was not his brother is when he refers to taking girls to the dance and getting drunk and the guy doesn't respond.
Spoiler
Is this the scene at the seashore? Because, to my mind, it all happens there ... hope I remember this right ... Plainview and his "brother" Henry, survey the pipeline route to the ocean and this is where Plainview says "I have a competition in me" followed by something warm and caring about his brother. The next morning after a swim (cleansing?), he mentions something about home and quickly realizes his brother is a fraud and that from this point on, no one - no "brother", no "son", no other human being, is worth anything to him, and he now proceeds on the belief that "there will be blood".
noelbotevera
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2007 6:57 am

#379 Post by noelbotevera »

Faux Hulot wrote:PTA should've sat him self down with a copy of Once Upon A Time In The West before shooting, and made himself watch it at least twice.
Basically, West is the same thing, with Fonda as Evil, Bronson as Good, Robards as Cynicism and Cardinale as The Whore with the Heart of Gold. But West also had outsized style, and poetry.
User avatar
miless
Joined: Sun Apr 02, 2006 1:45 am

#380 Post by miless »

noelbotevera wrote:and Cardinale as The Whore with the Heart of Gold.
who was the whore with the heart of gold in TWBB?
User avatar
Mr Sausage
Has Risen from the Grave
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 1:02 am
Location: Canada

#381 Post by Mr Sausage »

noelbotevera wrote:
Faux Hulot wrote:PTA should've sat him self down with a copy of Once Upon A Time In The West before shooting, and made himself watch it at least twice.
Basically, West is the same thing, with Fonda as Evil, Bronson as Good, Robards as Cynicism and Cardinale as The Whore with the Heart of Gold. But West also had outsized style, and poetry.
I suppose all you've really hit on is a common use of archetype. Except West is really about the dissolution of Good and Evil and Cynicisim as mythic, archetypal catagories. You're also way off on Robards (not half as smartassed and cynical as Bronson) and Cardinale (she marries for money, gives herself sexually to the villain to save herself, is caught up in the fight reluctantly and through circumstance rather than because it's her role in the myth, and ends up being a decent rather than "golden hearted" character: casually giving water to the thirsty rather than sacrificing life and money to get it for herself; she's really the antithesis of Morton: modernity as positive rather than negative progress).
User avatar
Antoine Doinel
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 5:22 pm
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Contact:

#382 Post by Antoine Doinel »

miless wrote:
Faux Hulot wrote:
Jeff wrote:Saturday Night Live did a TWBB parody last night.
Drink it here
Like pretty much every skit in the history of SNL, it has one punch-line repeated ad-nauseum for 5 minutes. It could have easily been 30 seconds, then (maybe) it would have been funny.
I was pretty impressed with how spot on Bill Hader's voice was.
User avatar
miless
Joined: Sun Apr 02, 2006 1:45 am

#383 Post by miless »

Antoine Doinel wrote:I was pretty impressed with how spot on Bill Hader's voice was.
but that doesn't make it good sketch comedy.
Grand Illusion
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2007 11:56 am

#384 Post by Grand Illusion »

Despite all the talk about the politics of the film, listening to Day-Lewis's acceptance speech, it was clear that DDL saw this as a story about fathers and sons.
User avatar
malcolm1980
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2007 8:37 am
Location: Manila, Philippines
Contact:

#385 Post by malcolm1980 »

I'm a bit delayed. I saw this a couple of weeks ago.

I think this is P.T. Anderson's first truly great movie. He has made very good movies with great moments but no truly GREAT one. This is a great one.
noelbotevera
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2007 6:57 am

#386 Post by noelbotevera »

miless wrote:
noelbotevera wrote:and Cardinale as The Whore with the Heart of Gold.
who was the whore with the heart of gold in TWBB?
Eli. Except he was the gold with the heart of a whore.
User avatar
MichaelB
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 10:20 pm
Location: Worthing
Contact:

#387 Post by MichaelB »

MichaelB wrote:Incidentally, Penderecki wrote an original score for Andrzej Wajda's Katyn - I'm not 100% certain that it's featured in the trailer, but the music there certainly has a Pendereckian tang.
Just to update my earlier post in this thread, I've now seen Katyn, and the Penderecki score turns out not to be an original one - it's a patchwork of things like the Polish Requiem, the second Cello Concerto, 'The Awakening of Jacob' and others. It's very effective in context, though the use of 'Jacob' is slightly hampered by prior association with The Shining.
Macintosh
Joined: Sat Sep 09, 2006 3:38 pm
Location: New York City

#388 Post by Macintosh »

User avatar
Marcel Gioberti
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2007 1:55 am
Location: Torino, Italy

#389 Post by Marcel Gioberti »

At least until Paramount finds out...
User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 6:42 pm

#390 Post by domino harvey »

In glorious heat-transfer quality printing :roll:
Grand Illusion
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2007 11:56 am

#392 Post by Grand Illusion »

Who would you say is the antagonist in this movie? If you see any.
I think Eli is a pretty classical antagonist, defined as the force in the story that tries to keep Daniel from his goals. He provides obstacles to acquiring both his father's land and the land belonging to the other old guy (the member of his church).

He also competes with Daniel for the mindshare of the community. Ultimately, Eli hopes to be the most influential, just as Daniel does.

HW and the deterioration of family can be seen as the consequence of Daniel's escalating competition with Eli. I don't see this as an unconventional narrative at all.
User avatar
exte
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 8:27 pm
Location: NJ

#393 Post by exte »

Sorry fellas, but I find this movie very close to Raging Bull, with the biggest anatagonist being Daniel himself. He's superb in the second half, utterly destroying everything just as Jake did. Classic rise and fall, no?
User avatar
Belmondo
Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2007 1:19 pm
Location: Cape Cod

#394 Post by Belmondo »

exte wrote:Sorry fellas, but I find this movie very close to Raging Bull, with the biggest anatagonist being Daniel himself. He's superb in the second half, utterly destroying everything just as Jake did. Classic rise and fall, no?
Well, we got ourselves three choices here:
man versus man
man versus nature
man versus himself

And the correct answer is -
holy shit! it's all three.
User avatar
Anhedionisiac
the Displeasure Principle
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2008 6:25 pm

#395 Post by Anhedionisiac »

Raoul Duke wrote:Actually I think the moment Daniel realizes that that was not his brother is when he refers to taking girls to the dance and getting drunk and the guy doesn't respond.
Totally agree. I swear, after Henry doesn't respond to the suggestion of going to the ball at Fond du Lac, when Daniel gives him the stink-eye and starts silently muttering to himself something along the lines of "NO... (can't be)...":

I wondered if this meant Henry was gay and Dan a homophobe. Which would have been kind of awesome but by the time that great shot of Daniel feeling the roll of the tidal wave came along, it was obvious it was not meant to be (Although I still entertained the thought when Henry asked some money, for a, erm, whore: I was half-expecting a man to be revealed being outside the frame, the source of Daniel's thinly-veiled disgust). I also fleetingly wondered if Daniel realized Henry didn't share his taste for younger women (assuming the girls who go to a ball or dance are young) and was, I dunno, confirmation that the creepiness with which he fondly looks after Mary was foreshadowing of something that was to come...

Basically, I had to quickly discard at least two or three theories before I realized Henry wasn't his brother. Which either makes me terribly thick or underscores just how shocking the revelation is. I vote thick.
User avatar
Cold Bishop
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 1:45 am
Location: Portland, OR

#396 Post by Cold Bishop »

Belmondo wrote:Well, we got ourselves three choices here:
man versus man
man versus nature
man versus himself

And the correct answer is -
holy shit! it's all three.
Not to mention milkshake versus milkshake.
User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 6:42 pm

#397 Post by domino harvey »

Man versus DRAAAAAAAAAINAGE
Grand Illusion
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2007 11:56 am

#398 Post by Grand Illusion »

If you have a man, and I have a man, and my straw reaches aaaaaalll the way...

wait... am I doing this right? #-o
User avatar
kinjitsu
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:39 pm
Location: Uffa!

#399 Post by kinjitsu »

I sense a milkshake thread is in the cards.

Okay, basta already!
User avatar
flyonthewall2983
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 7:31 pm
Location: Indiana
Contact:

#400 Post by flyonthewall2983 »

Just saw this, and I have a question for everyone who saw it and consider themselves familiar with Paul's work. If you had seen this with no clue of who directed it, how quickly would PTA come to mind?
Post Reply