Skip to main content

There Will Be Blood



So after months of failed attempts to see this movie, I finally got around to it. I'd seen No Country for Old Men and it amazed me beyond words. Hearing some of the same sort of talk about There Will Be Blood, I figured it'd be worth seeing. It's an... Interesting movie. Let's put it that way.

One sentence review: "Did you know that this was based on an Upton Sinclair novel? We'll remind you! Again! And Again! (oh, and we've got the totally kick-ass Daniel Day-Lewis in here too, btw)"

For anyone who hasn't been forced to read an Upton Sinclair novel in high school, I'll sum up his style in short: "Did you know that there are horrible things going on in otherwise innocuous areas? How horrible you ask? Let me tell you! In graphic detail, at length! If you don't feel the urge to vomit by the first chapter, then I've failed as a writer! (oh yeah, and that phrase about 'beating a dead horse'? They were thinking of me when they coined it)"

The fact that it's based on an Upton Sinclair novel is brought up first because the entire existence of the movie is oriented around his style of writing - a graphic and brutal exploration of an area previously viewed by the common folk as fairly hum-drum. The meat packing industry is just food right? Wrong! *People* get ground up at meat packing plants and put into your food! And I'm not talking about that fictional Charlton Heston flick either!

The plot more or less goes like this: "Daniel Plainview is a complete and utter asshole and misanthrope. He's also a talented oil man. If Ayn Rand had a personal hero, he would be it. He goes to Texas.. er, California to find oil, bilk the locals, gets rich doing so, becomes the poster boy for 'creative child neglect', 'shooting your brother from another mother' and finds that once he has it all, he isn't any happier than he was before. Which was 'very much not at all'. Oh yeah, and there's crazy fundamentalists around these here parts. Did we mention that Daniel Plainview absolutely hates religion? This will be funny! Oh wait, Upton Sinclair novel, right. No, it won't be funny in the least."

If I haven't scared you away yet, it's actually a darn good movie. Not for the squeamish, the easily bored or people that think that Shakespeare is crap, to be certain, but a darn good movie all the same. A friend mentioned that it wasn't quite as good as "No Country for Old Men". That movie, at the end, was *more* than just the sum of its parts. This movie? It's somewhat less than the sum of its parts.

Still, 'not *quite* as good as the best movie in the last five years' is impressive. It's worth seeing to be sure.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Max Payne: The Movie - A Review

It all started innocently enough back in '01. Some company named 'Rockstar' put out a video game. It was like playing a cross between the best cliches of pulp detective novels and a combat system right out of the Matrix films. Some crazy fool turned it into a movie, and after seeing it tonight, I came to a few conclusions. One, the first video game was better than this movie. Two, this movie was still better than the second video game in the Max Payne series. Three, a few punches can put Max Payne in a hospital bed, but he can laugh off a shotgun blast to the chest from three feet away. If you're reading this, all you care about is 'should I bother seeing it or not?'. The short answer is, if you like stuff being shot up reaaaal good, go see it! If you're interested only in seeing Oscar-worthy movies, you'll probably want to skip this one. And for those of you sticking around for my humorous take on the movie... Max Payne is a man with a past. We know thi...

Green Lantern: Made of Fail

If someone gave you $300 million dollars and said " Make me an awesome movie about the Green Lantern ", you might think to yourself 'Ah, twice as much money as Thor and X-Men: First Class had - easy as pie!'. If you're director Martin Campbell and you've impressed everyone with movies like Edge of Darkness and Casino Royale, but secretly hate super hero movies and Hollywood producers with an insane cunning, and really want to make an expensive pile of fail, you'd have made " Green Lantern ". The short review - don't waste your money on this unless you *literally* have nothing better to do than watch paint dry. If you like comic books, or even just action movies, AVOID AT ALL COSTS. Where to begin... I heard bad things about the movie, but I thought 'How bad could it be?'. First things first. Ryan Reynolds. Generally known for playing slightly air-headed characters with a sense of humor and formulaic Hollywood looks. Star of fifty-two ...

The Hunger Games: A movie review

If I was to describe the hunger games in a single word, yes I know this is becoming a habit with me, it would be this:  Stark.  Having read the entire hunger games trilogy, I feel that this is appropriate, but does not necessarily make for the best movie.  Let me clarify though:  the very austere and even severe impression that I get from the movie isn't bad, it just isn't fun.  Interesting, compelling, provocative yes, but fun, no. A brief word to those that are fans of the series:  the movie is fine.  Structurally there isn't anything wrong with it and all the most critical details are left intact, as they had damn well better be if these people hope to make a trilogy out of this.  Being a fan of the series myself and having read all the books, I notice the glaring differences where small or large details have been left out and while I'm not thrilled, it didn't prove to be a deal breaker either.  On the whole, I would say...