There Will Be Blood
(2007)
review by Dr. Loomis

There Will Be Blood is the kind of movie where you wish the lights would slowly rise as the credits began to roll, and the director would suddenly appear next to you, asking politely "So... What did you think?"

With Paul Thomas Anderson's latest, I wouldn't know where to be begin in answering that question.

On a cinematic scale the movie is huge. It recalls the golden age of film with its sweeping scenery and grandiose set pieces. It's ambitious, relentless, and long winded. It channels David Lean in some ways, David Lynch in others, but arguably boils down to Stanley Kubrick as its biggest influence. Those who assume it channels Orsen Welles first and foremost, with Citizen Kane front and center, are incorrect I think.

Kubrick is Anderson's Altman this time.

What is certain to stir the most debate among Blood's audience is all the religious undertones and blatant symbology. When i look back on the film I cannot help but think of how blatant so much of it is. Even some of its characters' names seem so obvious that it's almost pointless to dig deeper than what is in plain sight. This same statement goes for much of the film in fact, or at least in my eyes it does.

Part of me thinks that this film is a purposeful departure for Anderson, as he leaves behind quirkiness and, in some ways, romanticism in favor of a film that erases all he has done and reinvents himself as a filmmaker that has the ability to make a film so massive and challenging, like Kubrick did so many times. There Will Be Blood is so Kubrick that one would almost have to take it more seriously than perhaps it should be taken, reading into it on such an intricate scale as if it were The Bible itself... but then again The Bible is essentially just storytelling at its core.

The story Anderson sets out to tell involves the rise and fall of Daniel Plainview (Daniel Day-Lewis,) an "oil man" whose financial success and escalating greed drift him apart from emotion and affection. But he's aware that he has a mean streak in him and almost revels in his need for more and his ambition to shatter any form of competition. He despises people and acknowledges this fully. Lewis' audience will likely celebrate his theatrically entertaining performance as Plainview, but to draw any sympathy from the character is unlikely (and presumably intentionally avoided.)

Like Charles Foster Kane of Welles' masterpiece Citizen Kane, Plainview builds an empire of sorts (of course it's oil money here while Kane grew wealthy in the newspaper business.) Spanning several decades around the turn of the 20th century, Plainview schemes his way into buying land that is sure to contain oil beneath the surface, and turns profits once he and his workers set up shop. Once again, the plot is very simple here.

What complicates things are a young preacher (Paul Dano, definitely miscast and rather ineffective in a crucial role) who tries to draw Plainview into the local church. The two clash and embark on a rivalry that seems miniscule when putting the film in perspective, but is emphasized by Anderson's screenplay (adapted from Upton Sinclair's "Oil!") Another important element to the story is Plainview's "adopted" son H.W. (a marvelous turn by young Dillon Freasier,) who is basically Plainview's business partner.

The less you know about the plot and its characters the better, for this two and a half hour-plus film uses much of its time developing the characters and placing them in elaborately presented sequences rich in technique and style. Technically speaking the film is flawless, and Anderson elevates himself to a level of directing that officially makes him the best filmmaker of the past 15 years. As flawed as There Will Be Blood comes across, with its tiring pacing and oddly constructed inner-narrative, there is no way to deny Anderson's genius.

As I stated before it seems like he is simply straying from what is expected from him and running with it. He takes the film so far and so large that you can sense that even the offbeat score (by Jonny Greenwood) is just part of the experimenting Anderson has going on here. With Daniel Day-Lewis in Bill "The Butcher" mode, it's as if the Plainview character is meant to just stand out as much as possible so that Day-Lewis can act as grand in scale as the picture around him is. Anderson undoubtably encouraged this, and it seems to show.

What is so interesting about the movie is that the presentation seems so enormous, and yet everything beneath the surface is so simple, like the way oil so obviously represents greed. We knew that going in and our assumptions are proven correct time and time again, but we leave wanting to ask Anderson himself if there was more to it, or if what we saw was pretty much cut and dry.