Monday, December 31, 2007

There Will Be Blood - A

The fact that Paul Thomas Anderson dropped out of New York Film School after only 2 days proves that genius cannot be taught or learned. And with enough persistence and luck, that genius can be shared with others. Anderson’s first feature Hard Eight aka Sydney (A-) starred John C. Reilly as a luckless drifter who is befriended by the successful and established Philip Baker Hall. Hall’s mentorship leads to compromises and revelations and the film perfectly exemplifies the independent film movement of the 1990s. Anderson would expand his canvas in his following 2 films by borrowing liberally from admitted influences. In Boogie Nights (A+), Martin Scorsese seems to be his primary inspiration with its episodic narrative and virtuoso camera moves. Magnolia (A) is structurally identical to Robert Altman’s Short Cuts. With his fourth feature Punch-Drunk Love (A-), PT began to form his own style and voice. Jon Brion’s music was a cacophonic mess of a soundtrack accentuating Adam Sandler’s inner turbulence. Anderson use camera flares and bold colors seemed be the start of a new visual style as well. (Continue by clicking below)


In There Will Be Blood, Jonny Greenwood’s score is revolutionary with its mix of dissonant sounds and abstract rhythms. Only occasionally will a melody form. Like PDL, the music is stressing its main character’s inner turmoil. The protagonist (or is it just agonist?) here is one for the ages, Daniel Plainview, an ambitious, deceitful, aggressive oilman. Taking place from 1898-1927, the film tracks Plainview’s rise from a poor struggling prospector to a Howard Hughes-like recluse. Daniel Day-Lewis completely inhabits the character of Daniel Plainview, giving a blustery, powerful performance. He goes farther and with more depth than anyone since Robert De Niro in Raging Bull. He’s funny and frightening, fiery and furious. He’s in every scene in the movie – including the 20-25 minute wordless (but hardly silent) opening sequence, possibly homage to the opening “Dawn of Man” sequence in Stanley Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey. As a bookend, the ending line and choice of closing credits music is downright Kubrickian as well.
In between is the most searing condemnation of capitalism and greed since The Treasure of the Sierra Madre (including Kubrick’s The Killing). But PT Anderson has much more on his mind than merely avarice. He’s also after the manipulative nature of man. Plainview cons numerous people out of their land. His main nemesis Eli Sunday sees him for what he is and vice versa. Sunday (played by the admirable but outmatched Paul Dano) has his own church and congregation and claims to be a healer and a vessel of the Holy Spirit. Plainview seeks to expose Sunday as a fraud. Some will view the final scene as anti-God but it’s just another example of how some people will discard everything, including family, friends, and faith for monetary gain. The man who made Magnolia, with all its religious references and acts of providence, could hardly be considered anti-God. In There Will Be Blood, the churchfolk are presented as honest hardworking believers trying to help and save Plainview. They may be gullible to both Plainview and Sunday’s wiles and tactics but they are basically good. Also, the “Blood” in the title may only refer to the violence inflicted on man by man and nature. But can’t it also be alluding to the redemptive blood of Christ?
In addition to showing increasing thematic maturity, Anderson shows restraint with equally complex, but less showy directorial flourishes. He seems to be after image composition and is clearly more secure in his storytelling ability, keeping dialogue sparse at times and his camera still for the most part. The sequence of the year begins when Plainview’s young son H.W. is injured on an oil derrick when it begins to spew oil. After Daniel saves him, the oil is then set ablaze. It’s unlike anything ever captured on film and the turning point in the movie. The only thing Daniel loves (his son) is now chronically injured and he increasingly lashes out at man and God alike. It’s a landmark performance and like the film itself, it will split audiences (and Oscar voters). Indeed, it’s tough to know how to react to such a dense film on a single viewing. There will be more. There must be. A

2 comments:

Priest said...

nice review, doc. i waited until after writing my own review to read yours. while i wasn't crazy about the movie when we saw it, it has really stuck with me. i've replayed many of the scenes back in my mind repeatedly. very, very powerful. i was struck by how similarly we saw this one. your back-knowledge and technical knowledge of film is very helpfull

Doctor said...

It seems like I dropped alot of names during the review. Not sure if my technical knowledge is correct, but I know what I like. It's interesting we stressed many of the same scenes.