There Will Be Blood

A great film in every way, which confuses me the most with its clash between visual grandeur and moody unwatchability. Several scenes seem to have come straight out of the greatest classics of golden age Hollywood, with the landscape stretching from horizon to horizon – and yet such an environment is perhaps too generous for the pervasive malevolence of the story. Both extremes cancel each other out and thus I can never connect with the (perhaps intended) oppressive gloominess, nor do I ever experience sincere joy as a viewer. For some, Plainview is an immortal figure because of his journey on a cynical path, but for the same reason, I never really understand him completely. I don't root for him, I don't wish him well, I just shake my head wondering why he willingly makes mistakes and creates such a disproportionately large enemy in Eli due to his own self-centeredness. However, I too was left breathless by Daniel Day-Lewis, who captivates, crushes, and in the last half hour, blatantly destroys everything that remained inside me until then. 70% for a unique film of its kind. I regret that I missed it at the time of its release because I would have liked to have discussed with someone the reasons this piece is supposed to be considered one of the best ever produced, with Paul Thomas Anderson alongside giants like Sergio Leone or Francis Ford Coppola. Even Once Upon a Time in America or The Godfather are films that do not overly embellish the olden days and occasionally hit you in the face with their period power. However, they never want to leave the viewer emotionally unaffected. (27/09/2021)

If is it was less protracted, it would be great. I have to admit that in terms of filmmaking, There Will Be Blood is close to perfection, but I prefer films that are a bit more human (not so dry). Oscar here, Oscar there, but I just got bored and it be couldn’t avoided, even with Daniel Day-Lewis’s performance – anywhere else, I’d probably be unable to take my eyes off him. 3* for me, but it’s certainly worth watching. (03/10/2008)

A delicacy. Daniel Day-Lewis steals the whole picture. He is the type of heavenly actor who would be capable of ripping down and retracing in all of David Plainview’s character contours. A struggle for money and faith, where money always wins. A demolition of the American dream, a dream that doesn’t just sit and wait for you, but you have to wade through mud, oil and blood to get to achieve it. Paul Thomas Anderson knows this. A masterpiece. (25/02/2013)

An epic fresco, in which Anderson's purposeful filmmaking is matched by the riveting acting of Daniel Day-Lewis, who once again gets to the heart of his character and doesn't act, but simply is that character. The two-and-a-half-hour portrait of a tough egotist who managed to fulfill the American dream without faith and family may not be to the liking of many American churches, but at least it creates a functional subversion of the established rules. This is the essence of perfect filmmaking! (15/03/2008)

Here we go again. A good film in every respect, but I have one major problem with it: Its main character is an anti-hero. On the one hand, of course, I bow down to Daniel Day-Lewis, who made the initially somewhat sympathetic Plainview convincingly and utterly disgusting to me with his brilliant performance, but on the other hand, I take no pleasure in watching a man who deliberately hurts, abuses and despises his fellow human beings. I know that such people exist (and that there are lots and lots of them), I just don't have to watch them in realistic dramas. So from about an hour ago, I wished Plainview the worst possible ending... And that's probably why I didn't enjoy There Will Be Blood as much. Otherwise, of course, I praise the unusually but sympathetically slow direction, the strange but impressive music, and the beautiful cinematography. (07/01/2012)