There Will Be Blood. - Viewing Thread



Username [Register?]: \| Password [Lost Password?]: Save Password?

Bottom of Page

INTL v5.0 > Site Comments > Archives > Archived Forums > Pretension Palace: i don't like that band because you've heard of them > There Will Be Blood. > Viewing Thread
Also Here: 1 guest.	Moderated by: Amphytrite
Page: [ 1 ]	[ Thread Views: 1119 \| Total Posts: 16 ]
Rate This Thread:	Reply to Thread \| Create New Thread \| Create New Poll \| Convert To Poll \| Subscribe To Thread

Omigodlolzz

Ballkicks: (+2 / -0)
Posts: 4 (0.001)
Reg. Date: Apr 2008
Location: New York, NY
Gender: Female

There will be blood.
Best movie of the year in my opinion. Far better then no country for old me. Daniel Day Lewis' performance alone should have been an automatic win for best picture of the year. And with amazing performances by Paul Dano(the best i've ever seen from him) and Dillon Freasier(this kid was fantastic) it quickly became one of my favorite films.

I loved the father son relationship. How in the begining HW seems to want to be more like his father, how he shares charecteristics with him, movements, the way he talks, but toward the end, even the middle, we see how much HW distances himself and becomes more of his own person while his father continues to be hatefull.

What are some thoughts on this film?

kayte
INTL Premium Member

How long until this becomes my new title let's count the seconds

Ballkicks: (+1019 / -241)
Posts: 4059 (0.641)
Reg. Date: Nov 2003
Location:
Gender: Female

I fucking HATED this movie - in fact I can't even remember the last time I saw a movie that I actively disliked as much as this one. Long, tedious, and to what end? Not to mention the music - stop trying to create drama with swelling, tense minor chords as if it covers for the fact that your screenplay is dull as dirt.

I first checked my watch about 30 minutes into the movie. Never a good sign. That's two and a half hours of my life I'll never get back. PT Anderson is not for me.

The best part by far was getting a milkshake after the show.

Nickolati
Moderator
...moved to Idaho?

the cumstain that is left on the wall 11 years after the party has ended

Ballkicks: (+611 / -61)
Posts: 4927 (0.781)
Reg. Date: Dec 2003
Location: Boise
Gender: Male

I liked it.

Rather than filling it overfull, its better to stop in time.
Sharpen the blade to a point, but the edge won’t last forever.
Gold and jade may fill the house, but no one can retain them for eternity.
Boasting of wealth and virtue, brings trouble on oneself.
Reticence when the job is done, is the Way of heaven.

Air Bud
Internet Superstar

Some plants even masturbate into their own vaginas in order to reproduce.

Ballkicks: (+918 / -56)
Posts: 6785 (0.953)
Reg. Date: Sep 2001
Location: TEH INTARNET!
Gender: Male

Me too. It definitely isn't for everyone, but despite that, it's hard not to credit it as having some top-notch cinematography. The story wasn't half bad either, I was captivated from beginning to end.

A friend of mine posted a blog about this and this was my response to it, since it seems fitting.

Quote:
"The film is presented and structured in such a way where you expect some sort of significant progression in the character. You get it, but it's tacked on in the last 10 minutes"

*SPOILERS*

I got the same impression of Plainview's character progression, but not in the way that you'd typically expect from a movie of this length. I wouldn't say there was a progression of his character at the end, but instead an amplification of character, if that makes any sense. I guess that could be viewed as character progression, but not really significant (such as bad-to-good or good-to-bad, but instead bad-to-worse, which I guess is significant, but not in the classic sense, such as the character progression in Citizen Kane, for example, where there's a slow change in Kane from being anti-Thatcher to becoming essentially Thatcher himself).

From the very beginning of the film, we know that Plainview is a manipulative, showboat of a man whose motivations are not of social betterment (as he says to the public to win accounts), but of his own financial and investment motivations (as he says to his business partners in private). He manages to succeed by a clever use of redirection and manipulation of truth. This gives the blatant impression of an ultimate villainous character from the outset, despite humble beginnings. While there are a few moments where it seems that he has genuinely concern for others (i.e. his initial reaction to the derrick explosion, taking in his brother, church scene repentance, recalling his son from school and subsequent restaurant scene, etc.), but those are then invalidated by the way he ultimately reacts.

The last 10 minutes just further justifies the fact that over the years, his wealth, success, and subsequently comfortable lifestyle, money, and power have only further rotted him, he's learned nothing, he's only spiraled out of control. The scene with his son supports his almost complete disregard for compassion and love when it comes to his estate and business interests. His character hasn't changed, only gotten stronger, more powerful, and reckless.

I do agree that the movie was slow, but I was not disappointed by the length. Watching it in the theater definitely kept me more captivated than had I watched it in my room. It definitely seems like it is a movie that someone could easily be distracted from in the wrong setting. A few scenes could've been shorter or removed altogether (probably about 30-45 minutes could've been taken out of the film), producing the same result which would've made sense, but I believe shortening the film would likely reduce the impact of the ending.

Definitely a theater movie.

What does it all mean though? I'm not entirely certain. I would hate to boil it all down to something as simplistic and cliche as "money is the root of all evil," but it definitely seems to fit. Perhaps it's more about how wealth can hold a man back from developing empathy and love if all he is concerned with making wealth for himself. Hate to fall back on Citizen Kane again, but "it's no trick to make a lot of money, if what you want to do is make a lot of money." I think that quote fits quite well for Plainview's character.

Nickolati
Moderator
...moved to Idaho?

the cumstain that is left on the wall 11 years after the party has ended

Ballkicks: (+611 / -61)
Posts: 4927 (0.781)
Reg. Date: Dec 2003
Location: Boise
Gender: Male

I loved the church house scenes. Those made the movie for me.

Acheron
INTL Premium Member
If I die in Raleigh, at least I will die free.

is this guy acheron???????? hahaha acheron you big fag

Ballkicks: (+224 / -116)
Posts: 1538 (0.248)
Reg. Date: Mar 2004
Location: Miami
Gender: Male

Quoted from Nickolati:
I loved the church house scenes. Those made the movie for me.

Where is he? Where is he? *BAM* Oh! There he is!

As a preacher's kid and someone who is quite religious, I can say that seeing the harmful aspects of Christianity being criticized with such subtle brilliance was a pleasure.

Other than that I thought the screenplay was brilliant because it didn't explain itself.

I HATE exposition in movies. It exists to cue in the audience and breaks the action for me. If the audience isn't smart enough to get it, that's their problem. Fuck the audience.

This isn't what they did, but they did create a movie that didn't feel the need to explain every damned thing.

"All governments lie, but disaster lies in wait for countries whose officials smoke the same hashish they give out." -IF Stone

kayte
INTL Premium Member

How long until this becomes my new title let's count the seconds

Ballkicks: (+1019 / -241)
Posts: 4059 (0.641)
Reg. Date: Nov 2003
Location:
Gender: Female

I dislike the implication (so often made by pretentious film snobs, about dozens of movies) that if you didn't enjoy the movie it's because you didn't "get" it. La di da. Personally, I understood the movie just fine. It just sucked is all.

Quoted from Sandamnit:

it's hard not to credit it as having some top-notch cinematography

I suppose so, but just because something looks pretty doesn't mean it's good.

Air Bud
Internet Superstar

Some plants even masturbate into their own vaginas in order to reproduce.

Ballkicks: (+918 / -56)
Posts: 6785 (0.953)
Reg. Date: Sep 2001
Location: TEH INTARNET!
Gender: Male

Quoted from kayte:
I dislike the implication (so often made by pretentious film snobs, about dozens of movies) that if you didn't enjoy the movie it's because you didn't "get" it. La di da. Personally, I understood the movie just fine. It just sucked is all.

I'm not entirely sure were this is coming from. Neither Acheron or I made any such accusation or implication. Any such perception is probably your own invented implication, not ours.

However, what I can say is that your tirade screams nothing more than: POT KETTLE BLACK in terms of your stab at "pretentious film snobs." Despite the existence of pretentious film snobs (which I get the impression you're accusing someone of, whether it be me, or Acheron, or that dude who you overheard talking about film in college), there are an equal, if not more, amount of people who act just as pretentious who know little to nothing about film.

Quote:
Quoted from Sandamnit:
it's hard not to credit it as having some top-notch cinematography
I suppose so, but just because something looks pretty doesn't mean it's good.

You're assuming that I am attributing the quality of the movie based entirely upon it's cinematography with this statement. I never made such claim, since this isn't the case. Conceding to an individual quality of a movie doesn't invalidate your case that it "sucks" any more than me saying I didn't like a certain quality of a movie invalidates my case of saying it was "good". It's this kind of black-and-white analysis that destroys the essence of open dialog and discussion of art, by which I leave wide open the course of responding, "art? lol!"

I enjoyed the movie. I loved the cinematography. I enjoyed the dialog. I enjoyed the performances of all the actors. In fact, I thought Daniel Day-Lewis's performance was one of the best performances I have seen in at least the last twenty years. I enjoyed the story. I thought it was overly long, I thought it could've been about 30-45 minutes shorter. The music was interesting, but very typical and (yes) overdramatic, oddly enough done by a member of Radiohead, Johnny Greenwood, who composed the score before the movie was even filmed. It dragged at moments, but managed to reinvigorated itself whenever it fell into such a lull through plot development, interesting dialog, and beautiful cinematography. I enjoyed the ending, it had impact and had meaning in the context of the story. All around, I thoroughly enjoyed the movie, despite its flaws.

You, on the other hand, have offered nothing constructive whatsoever. Instead you come across as equally pretentious as those you describe, overly condemning and critical, having not said anything that isn't full of venom and offensive attacks. I imagine you've even used the term "WORST MOVIE EVER" to describe it. It's this kind of reaction that completely renders your opinion worthless, regardless of how my or anyone's reactions are to this movie or any movie or anything ever. Hell, I could probably agree with you and come to the same conclusion.

kayte
INTL Premium Member

How long until this becomes my new title let's count the seconds

Ballkicks: (+1019 / -241)
Posts: 4059 (0.641)
Reg. Date: Nov 2003
Location:
Gender: Female

Geez. I am so sick of getting essays from the sensitive souls on this website.

What I said was in direct relation to the comment Acheron made:

Quote:
Other than that I thought the screenplay was brilliant because it didn't explain itself.

I HATE exposition in movies. It exists to cue in the audience and breaks the action for me. If the audience isn't smart enough to get it, that's their problem. Fuck the audience.

If you read it differently... good for you. I don't care. Meanwhile, to call my post a "tirade" is a hilarious overstatement, likely more applicable to your own post.

Now, I'm sorry if I didn't post an essay about why I didn't like the movie, but I like brevity on the internet and I pretty much felt that "long, tedious, [needlessly and falsely dramatic]" pretty much covered it.

I'm not really sure how to express my dislike of something without being critical of it, but since this appears to have hurt your feelings, I'm sorry for that, too. Good grief.

Air Bud
Internet Superstar

Some plants even masturbate into their own vaginas in order to reproduce.

Ballkicks: (+918 / -56)
Posts: 6785 (0.953)
Reg. Date: Sep 2001
Location: TEH INTARNET!
Gender: Male

Plenty of dumb people "get" movies but don't like them. I still don't see how your comments make you any less pretentious, my POT KETTLE BLACK comment still stands.

Perhaps you could share your opinions of other movies that you thought did a better job at what this movie was trying to achieve. Have you seen the movie's actors in other movies that you thought were better? What movie's score is your favorite? Is this genre not your flavor? If not, what other genre do you enjoy more? How could it have been improved? What, if anything, did you enjoy about it? What aspects of your favorite movies make them your favorite movies and how do the absence of those aspects make this movie bad to you?

Those are all good questions to answer when you're being critical of anything, anywhere, ever. That's what I'm talking about in terms of being constructive. You don't have to say a damn thing positive about the movie, as long as you advance discussion. All you've done is come in here and troll, making claims without offering anything else worth a damn. Then when I call you out on it, you continue trolling and then throwing in some ad hominem and sarcasm for good measure.

Bottom line: making claims with no backing whatsoever is FUCKING WORTHLESS. It's fucking annoying.

Nickolati
Moderator
...moved to Idaho?

the cumstain that is left on the wall 11 years after the party has ended

Ballkicks: (+611 / -61)
Posts: 4927 (0.781)
Reg. Date: Dec 2003
Location: Boise
Gender: Male

Quoted from Sandamnit:
Plenty of dumb people "get" movies but don't like them. I still don't see how your comments make you any less pretentious, my POT KETTLE BLACK comment still stands.

Perhaps you could share your opinions of other movies that you thought did a better job at what this movie was trying to achieve. Have you seen the movie's actors in other movies that you thought were better? What movie's score is your favorite? Is this genre not your flavor? If not, what other genre do you enjoy more? How could it have been improved? What, if anything, did you enjoy about it? What aspects of your favorite movies make them your favorite movies and how do the absence of those aspects make this movie bad to you?

Those are all good questions to answer when you're being critical of anything, anywhere, ever. That's what I'm talking about in terms of being constructive. You don't have to say a damn thing positive about the movie, as long as you advance discussion. All you've done is come in here and troll, making claims without offering anything else worth a damn. Then when I call you out on it, you continue trolling and then throwing in some ad hominem and sarcasm for good measure.

Bottom line: making claims with no backing whatsoever is FUCKING WORTHLESS. It's fucking annoying.

Word.

kayte
INTL Premium Member

How long until this becomes my new title let's count the seconds

Ballkicks: (+1019 / -241)
Posts: 4059 (0.641)
Reg. Date: Nov 2003
Location:
Gender: Female

Quoted from Sandamnit:

Bottom line: making claims with no backing whatsoever is FUCKING WORTHLESS. It's fucking annoying.

I don't expect Sandy to point out the hypocrisy here, so good post, Nick. I suppose as long as you're complimenting the things that Sandamnit likes, it doesn't really matter that your posts about the movie didn't contain any backing details, either.

Quoted from Nickolati:
I liked it.

Quoted from Nickolati:
I loved the church house scenes. Those made the movie for me.

Quoted from Nickolati:
Word.

LOL. *applause* Thank you for "advancing the discussion." You've really shown me how it's done, and I will turn to your masterful example for posting lessons in the future.

Quoted from Sandamnit:
Perhaps you could share your opinions of other movies that you thought did a better job at what this movie was trying to achieve. Have you seen the movie's actors in other movies that you thought were better? What movie's score is your favorite? Is this genre not your flavor? If not, what other genre do you enjoy more? How could it have been improved? What, if anything, did you enjoy about it? What aspects of your favorite movies make them your favorite movies and how do the absence of those aspects make this movie bad to you?

I thought this thread was about There Will Be Blood, not other movies or genres that I like or my favourite movies. My bad. Be honest, you're just cranky because I don't like your new favourite movie. Even though you basically agreed with all the things I said I didn't like about it. Amusing.

emtilt

the cow of horses

Ballkicks: (+486 / -41)
Posts: 5238 (0.757)
Reg. Date: Mar 2002
Location: Last Week
Gender: Male

Ok, chill with the bickering, all three of you.

this is my music i hope you like it
this is music i listen to these are movies i like these are books i like

Air Bud
Internet Superstar

Some plants even masturbate into their own vaginas in order to reproduce.

Ballkicks: (+918 / -56)
Posts: 6785 (0.953)
Reg. Date: Sep 2001
Location: TEH INTARNET!
Gender: Male

There is a rather significant difference between unsubstantiated statements of agreement and unsubstantiated statements of disagreement.

Quote:
Be honest, you're just cranky because I don't like your new favourite movie.

Since you want me to be honest, I'll go ahead and do so.

Had I come into this thread, being an avid hater of this movie, I probably would have challenged Nickolati's statement, asking him why he liked it and completely overlooked your comments, despite probably still disagreeing with your manner of approaching it. I would have left it alone, there's no big secret or revelation there.

When people are in agreement about something without reasoning be explicit, there is an assumption that they agree on the same grounds. When an actual discussion takes place, they may end up drawing the same conclusions based on entirely different ideas and conceptions, which neither may agree on, but conclude the same thing. As a result, there's really no need for me to challenge Nickolati's comments on liking the movie (or your comments on hating the movie, had I hated this movie), unless the reasons were explicitly stated along with the claim.

Had Nickolati said "I liked this, movie because I like potato chips and I had plenty of potato chips when I watched this movie," I would've commented on that, since that line of reasoning is dumb as fuck. On the same token, had he said, "I liked this movie, because I thought it was one of the most exciting, thrilling, heart-pounding action film ever in the history of cinema!" I would've commented on that, because I certainly disagree with the reasoning, but not the claim. Must I go on?

You, on the other hand, commented on it saying essentially, "I hated it, it was boring, tedious, dull, had no purpose, and the score sucked and was overdramatic." That's offering some backing to your claim of "hating the movie," but what does it really say? Absolutely nothing. It's full of vague opinion, which mean nothing to anyone but yourself and anyone who just so happens to agree with you for reasons of their own. It offers nothing, it's combatative, venomous, and borderline trolling, and since I disagree with the statements and get absolutely nothing of value out of them, it's... worthless. Much like Nick's original comment, all I get out of it is the claim, nothing more. I'm left to draw my own conclusions.

Quote:
I thought this thread was about There Will Be Blood, not other movies or genres that I like or my favourite movies. My bad.

I don't even know where to start with this. You've been around long enough to know better than to make a statement like this and expect anyone to take it seriously. You're making it out to seem that every single discussion is a microcosm, entirely dependent upon itself for discussion with absolutely no room for outside discussion or reference. As if it's inconceivable to ever bring up any other topic for comparing or contrasting the current topic.

The only way this comment has any validity is if someone came in here and said, "There Will Be Blood? Never heard of it, but I just watched Austin Powers and holy shit, that movie is hilarious. Oh man! hahahahaha"

wheezy
The Reel RS Krew
Lord Handsome

The next time you wanna call a coon a nigger, call that spearchucker a jungle bunny instead. I know, I know... nigger rolls off the tongue so easy, but there is a world of rarely used racial slurs that we need to start utilizing. White power!

Ballkicks: (+527 / -190)
Posts: 4335 (0.618)
Reg. Date: Dec 2001
Location:
Gender: Male

I finally saw this movie, and thought for about 2 hours that I was going to say "Man that was a huge fucking letdown." It seemed really slow, and increeedibly long (Though I think I must admit that my back was hurting and I was physically uncomfortable while watching the movie in my chair, so that can certainly attribute to my perception of how long it was). The score just seemed to really annoy me. To me, it seemed like they were trying to be really creative and edgey and do their own unique thing, but it just didn't really work for me. I loved Daniel Day Lewis's performance and thought his interactions with HW were great, but that's not really enough for me. I'm not the kind of film-goer who can really enjoy a movie just because pacing (whatever the fuck that's all about) and acting were brilliant. I need the shit on the screen, the actions happening, to be worthwhile...and in There Will Be Blood, that simply wasn't the case.

Until the end.

I loved the ending and thought it was amazing. It definitely saved the entire movie. If the ending had been on par with the rest of the movie, then I would've definitely strongly disliked this movie, except for Daniel Day Lewis. But with this ending, I can say that the movie was pretty good and worth seeing. I wouldn't say it was one of my favorites, and I probably won't really ever want to see it again, but I'm certainly glad that I saw it.

PS - Why was everyone always talking about milkshakes? I know the reference in the film, but that's only like 3 lines.

U CANT TRICK THE TRICKSTER

Moderator of the Proud Inside Discussions Forum.
www.uselessstatic.com

fallingleaf
I've never masturbated, I know I'm a weirdo.

Ballkicks: (+14 / -3)
Posts: 50 (0.008)
Reg. Date: Oct 2004
Location: on the ground
Gender: Female

Quoted from kayte:
Not to mention the music - stop trying to create drama with swelling, tense minor chords as if it covers for the fact that your screenplay is dull as dirt.

.

The music made me almost walk out of the theater. It was very...umm....odd...or lack of better words. Did not really fit with the the movie at all.

Ballsack 5.0

i'd like to see a pic of ice's duck

Ballkicks: (+91 / -77)
Posts: 1301 (0.21)
Reg. Date: Mar 2004
Location: Dinner with Amphy and Kayte
Gender: Unspecified

Quote:
The only way this comment has any validity is if someone came in here and said, "There Will Be Blood? Never heard of it, but I just watched Austin Powers and holy shit, that movie is hilarious. Oh man! hahahahaha"

In all fairness, I did see Austin Powers, and it was pretty funny.

Real life Kayte sightings:
1) July 10th, 6:32 PM at a coffee shop: saw a girl reading the CBC at a coffee shop

Real life amphy sighting:
1) June 3rd, 11:07 am: Saw a girl having sex with a horse in a field.

Quick Reply

Page: [ 1 ]	Reply to Thread \| Create New Thread \| Create New Poll \| Convert To Poll \| Subscribe To Thread
[ Thread Views: 1119 \| Total Posts: 16 ]

Server Time: 03-08-21 04:56:46 AM
Load Time: 0.257 seconds.
- PHP: 0.182 seconds.
- SQL: 0.075 seconds.
- Queries: 28

Top of Page