Listen now | Today’s movie is There Will Be Blood directed by Paul Thomas Anderson. This movie is another classic case where Anna likes it and Casey doesn’t. Anna gets totally lost in the experience of watching this movie. Casey agrees that the filmmaking is fantastic, and can’t really say anything is objectively bad about the movie (except maybe Paul Dano’s performance, which he doesn’t like), but ultimately it’s just not for him.
I do agree with Anna that Daniel's relationship with his son was the only real relationship he ever had. I think a part of Daniel's character, especially towards the end, is him being in some amount of internal conflict because his love for his son, even if very small, is in conflict with the image of himself he had build up.
The main satire/commentary angle I saw was on religion vs money being used to control people, with money being the stronger motivator in the end. I agree that the movie doesn't really leave you thinking about anything that is not Daniel's character, but the filmmaking totally worked for me, especially the cinematography, score, and production design.
Casey's description of how he felt about this movie is quite possibly the definition of what it means to not like a given Paul Thomas Anderson movie. I had a very similar feeling towards "The Master", funnily enough, where I just didn't quite connect with anything enough to fully care about where things were going.
In terms of this movie, I find myself somewhere in between Casey and Anna: there are a lot of experiential elements to the film I like, such as the music. The weird dissonant score definitely really stood out the first time I saw the film, and it was a huge departure from the norm. I liked *some* of the character-development aspects of Plainview, such as his creeping alcoholism. I liked his sociopathic competitiveness, and disdain for the preacher, who is just plain annoying and weird.
I found Plainview's relationship with his son super confusing, and had a hard time understanding it, even though it is ostensibly a key part of the story -- I can appreciate the goal of making a character who has something of a psycopath's love-hate relationship with the son, but I don't think that it was portrayed well in the film. To wit, I was super confused when he sent his son off on the train, and likewise confused when his son returned and he had the restaurant meal with him. Thus, the ending confrontation between Plainview and the son didn't have anywhere near the impact I think it could have in a more conventional "drama".
I do agree with Anna that Daniel's relationship with his son was the only real relationship he ever had. I think a part of Daniel's character, especially towards the end, is him being in some amount of internal conflict because his love for his son, even if very small, is in conflict with the image of himself he had build up.
The main satire/commentary angle I saw was on religion vs money being used to control people, with money being the stronger motivator in the end. I agree that the movie doesn't really leave you thinking about anything that is not Daniel's character, but the filmmaking totally worked for me, especially the cinematography, score, and production design.
Just dropping by to say that I absolutely love this month's theme! Probably says something about the dark side of myself :P
Casey's description of how he felt about this movie is quite possibly the definition of what it means to not like a given Paul Thomas Anderson movie. I had a very similar feeling towards "The Master", funnily enough, where I just didn't quite connect with anything enough to fully care about where things were going.
In terms of this movie, I find myself somewhere in between Casey and Anna: there are a lot of experiential elements to the film I like, such as the music. The weird dissonant score definitely really stood out the first time I saw the film, and it was a huge departure from the norm. I liked *some* of the character-development aspects of Plainview, such as his creeping alcoholism. I liked his sociopathic competitiveness, and disdain for the preacher, who is just plain annoying and weird.
I found Plainview's relationship with his son super confusing, and had a hard time understanding it, even though it is ostensibly a key part of the story -- I can appreciate the goal of making a character who has something of a psycopath's love-hate relationship with the son, but I don't think that it was portrayed well in the film. To wit, I was super confused when he sent his son off on the train, and likewise confused when his son returned and he had the restaurant meal with him. Thus, the ending confrontation between Plainview and the son didn't have anywhere near the impact I think it could have in a more conventional "drama".