My wife and I just finished watching There Will Be Blood. This powerful movie had a virtuoso performance by Daniel Day-Lewis, another strong performance by Paul Dano, incredible cinematography, fine direction... yet, ultimately, left us both a bit unsatisfied.
Too much is left unexplained. Why did HW set fire to the cabin? Why didn't Daniel and HW use written notes to communicate after HW's accident? Why did Daniel act drunk at times when he didn't appear to have been drinking? Why didn't Daniel ever pay Eli (or, rather Abel) the $5000 he owed him -- especially when the initial conversation ended with them 'drawing up contracts'? Why didn't Daniel, after hearing about one hold-out and saying he would go see him, never do it (I'm assuming this one has to do with the "drainage" speech, but that is still a tenuous connection)?
I don't think that all aspects of a film need be explained. However, such critical and crucial parts to the story should be. Or, at least, reference enough to them should be made to allow the audience to draw its own conclusion. My wife and I discussed many of these aspects and were always left with a "yes, but" statement that included something that nullified the explanation we came up with.
Daniel Day-Lewis is almost unrecognizable as Daniel Plainview. He is a mean, solitary man who doesn't see any good in people-- any of them. People are a means to an end. Early in his career he is better able to hide this, but in the end he has become a hermit who stays away from everyone. He is a violent, crude, uncaring, self-serving man and he relishes in it. My wife said, "Daniel Day-Lewis was unrecognizable in that role. Heath Ledger was almost as unrecognizable (in The Dark Knight)." I agree (and that puts it in some context for those who may have seen the more widely viewed Dark Knight).
Paul Dano's acting is pretty damn good as well. Without his quieter, lighter, but equally as obsessed preacher to work as a foil for Daniel Day-Lewis, I'm not sure you get the same quality acting job overall. Sometimes it takes quality to make quality.
All in all, I'm glad I watched the film. However, I would not recommend it to just anyone (like, for example, my mom or certain friends) as they would be bored, would not want to put the (concerted) effort in to pay attention and follow the plot, and would not like how it ends.
-
You were bored and searching for something to read when serendipity brought you to my blog. Many blog responses and emails later, things see...
-
Originally, I used Yahoo! as my home page. However, I never liked how everything sort of got clumped together with ads and other things that...
-
Well, I got "the script" from Renee today. I knew something was up at work with the number of mid-level managers who were present ...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
OUCH: I would not put in the effort? Have I become that shallow, that easily bored, that unwilling to complete what I begin? Or is it that I'm not one who enjoys horribly violent films, although when an outstanding film comes along, I not only to see it, but I stay to the end (3:10 to Yuma comes to mind).
ReplyDeleteYou have never accepted that I walked out on that incredibly slow-paced, boring film about Hollywood, The Players. Yeah, I to this day do NOT know how it ends, nor do I care. But come on, that is ONE FILM ...