There will be blood

jank

Have i missed the boat on this film?
Have been keeping an eye out for ages and i have yet to see it in the cinema?
Was is shown in many places?

xtal191

Not out here until next Friday

Aedh Baclamh

Lewis is superb in this, he really is.

FunkZ

I thought it was out a month ago? I'll check it out soon.

jank

Is it def it wont be out till next week?

johnny_ultimate

jank wrote: »

Is it def it wont be out till next week?

Yeah 29th is the official release date. Could be previews on Wend / Thurs in some of the bigger cinemas, but wouldn't count on it.

jank

Good stuff, will def see this

Basq

Yep, seriously itching to see this!

Laslo

It's absolutely brilliant.

Drag00n79

I just saw it there and Daniel Day Lewis' performance was stunning. A masterpiece.

big_show

Shamrok wrote: »

I just saw it there and Daniel Day Lewis' performance was stunning. A masterpiece.

agreed, great great movie

SavageD

beezer movie, Day-Lewis is fantastic yet again

Snake Plisken

Saw it last night and have to say I wasn't that impressed with it after reading all the hype it was only ok Day-Lewis's performance is good and the film is technically very well made, but I had no emotional envolvement with any of the characters, I dunno I had the same thoughts after watching Magnolia, think its a P.T. Anderson thing, so I'm hoping No Country For Old Men gets the best Picture Oscar tonight as it was a better film imho. I will discuss in further when more boardies get to see it but in a word disapointing!

pickarooney

Saw it tonight. Wasn't overly impressed, TBH. It just ended up nowhere and DDL was just hammy. Not the worst film by any stretch but yet another giant 'meh'. Only Michael Clayton left to see of the 'big ones' and not expecting much.

thedarkknight

Does anyone know when "There will be Blood" is out? I though it was released weeks ago

~Rebel~

thedarkknight wrote: »

Does anyone know when "There will be Blood" is out? I though it was released weeks ago

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Yeah 29th is the official release date. Could be previews on Wend / Thurs in some of the bigger cinemas, but wouldn't count on it.

Jeez guy, there was only 14 posts..

anyway heres some nice official info from IFCO

faceman

Im still trying to work out how Day Lewis got an ifta for this movie and its not out in ireland yet!!!

Not The Real Scarecrow

saw it last night and to be honest even though I loved it, I couldn't exactly tell you why.There is something really magical about this movie.If I was to describe the plot it sounds boring and until now never got the hype around Day Lewis, but when I was watching it, I was hooked and am a new fan of Lewis and Anderson.My only gripe with it was the 2 hrs and 40 mins went too fast.I would have loved to see more, much more.

Wacker

I saw it yesterday as well. Fantastic film. Dan Day Lewis' performance is right up there with Gene Hackman's in The Conversation as the finest acting I have ever seen. Great character too; he makes Michael Corleone look like Ghandi.

No one else has mentioned this, so maybe it is just the IMC, and for early showings, but there was an intermission! I hadn't had one of those since the Green Mile, and it was at least five years before that that I'd last seen one. Did other people have the same experience?

johnny_ultimate

Wacker wrote: »

No one else has mentioned this, so maybe it is just the IMC, and for early showings, but there was an intermission! I hadn't had one of those since the Green Mile, and it was at least five years before that that I'd last seen one. Did other people have the same experience?

IMC Dun Laoghaire too (6.05 showing). Thought it was deliberate myself: based on the typeset on the 'intermission' placard being same as the credits and the placing of it

(basically the turning point of the film as he truly descends into madness)

.

But yeah, it is weird to see. Had one at LotR and Dogville, but they were both over three hours long. There Will Be Blood is only around 2 and a half discounting ads and the like, so tis a bit odd. Gives you a rest after the pretty ****ing intense first half though

Wacker

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

IMC Dun Laoghaire too (6.05 showing).

In the IMC too eh? Read my post again, that's where I saw it! Pay attention boy!

SoupyNorman

Its 24hrs since seeing the film and am considering a second viewing. My thoughts have been constantly drifing back to the movie.

There are so many moments in the movie where at first you may not instantly consider important but using our great friend Hindsight Ive realised there is more there.....much more.

One of my favourite sequences is :

When long lost brother Henry appears, sure I had strong suspicions of how genuine his claims were but its the fact that Daniel 'lets him in' which is pivotal. His line "I'm tired, I cant do this on my own anymore" actually shows a weak chink in Plainview's armor, Plainview feels that he finally has someone to trust, someone to share his burden and more importantly I believe.....to share his hatred. But as we find through Plainview's one to one conversations with his 'brother' that he does not get the answers expected and slowly it becomes clear to him that Henry does not have Plainview blood in his veins. To which comes the bullet in the head!

As a consequence, we find a man burned by his own rare mistake, a mistake that will never be made again

Pure Class.

BLITZ_Molloy

Went to see this tonight and I found it quite depressing, in a good way. De Lewis probably gets a bit too over the top and 'stagey' at points in the latter third but he had me pretty sucked into the character at that stage so I didn't find it too distracting.

The one thing I didn't like was

I found the whole Paul/Eli thing quite distracting. I'm reading on imdb that they are separate twin brothers, which was certainly suggested. But there are lots of clues to suggest he just had a split personality (notice he pours three drinks). This is all fine and well but I think it kind of muddied the impact of the ending. I'd rather it was more explicit.

The music while good felt a bit inappropriate at times as well. It was almost like a horror movie for alot of it.

kevmy

I saw it last night and I don't really know what to think.

Usually I get carried along with a film and don't really make a judgement until I come out of the cinema. But I've rarely been as confused over whether I liked a film or not as this one.

Daniel Day Lewis is really good in this. All other characters and actors pale in insignificance when they were up against him. I loved the opening sequence and some of the scenes where really good especially those with him and Henry.

But I'm still thinking about it. His relationship with HW is utterly confusing.

At the end of the film I still don't know whether he a)loves him but can't deal with it,
b) has no feelings for him and never did and actually did just see him as a way to buy land,
c) hates him like he hates everyone,
d) can't bear to be around his son because he caused HW to go deaf and Plainveiw hates himself for that
e) if he's just mad and doesn't really know what he's doing
f) sees HW as another Henry - no Plainview blood in him - out to get his money

Maybe it's a combination of some or all of these. I didn't like how even though it was 2.30hr+ it dragged in places and went to fast in others. In fact I think the pacing of the film is one of main criticisms.

lostexpectation

kevmy wrote: »

But I'm still thinking about it. His relationship with HW is utterly confusing.

At the end of the film I still don't know whether he a)loves him but can't deal with it,
b) has no feelings for him and never did and actually did just see him as a way to buy land,
c) hates him like he hates everyone,
d) can't bear to be around his son because he caused HW to go deaf and Plainveiw hates himself for that
e) if he's just mad and doesn't really know what he's doing
f) sees HW as another Henry - no Plainview blood in him - out to get his money

I agree i didn't get it either

really enjoyed this film, particularly liked seeing how technology progressed through the film, Danial day lewis thoroughly deserves the oscar but then it just sorta went nowhere and jumped forward and ended

i don't know he felt bad about his son and about killing the man, things like that don't usually stop movie characters. we don't actually really see plainview go mad ott like the talk of the movie describes, all we see is flash forward of him hiding in his big house.

does he hide himself away becuase he can't allow competition from anyone and doesn't want to havea go at his son, indeed sending his oby away to school was part of that, he didn't want distraction from oil nad he ahted himself for that.


i was toatlly confused about the eli and paul, i didn't really realise the significance of it until I read some the reviews on here, I thought itt was his preacher name or something.

there just seemed to be gaps in the story. they'd written them but forgot to put them in the film.

Petey2006

Saw it in the IMC with the intermission too. That was a little annoying. I hate breaking up a film, and the intermission went on a little too long. Only seemed to be there so they could sell more popcorn. Not impressed, to be honest. Anyway, my review just went up on the site listed below.

Kur4mA

I thought this film completely deserved all the hype. Day Lewis is of course completely stunning and it's very hard to take your eyes off any scene. Watching him go further and further down the hole he has created and him getting more evil as he goes is just amazing. The awards he's getting are all well deserved.

pickarooney

For me DDL has gone the way of Al Pacino. His acting now seems to consist of "funny-accent, shouty-shouty, screwed-up-eyes, amn't-I-scary" and I'm suspicious as to why everyone seems to feel the need to rush in and agree that he's sensational in this film.

Am I the only one looking through the Emperor's New Clothes?

Nordwind

Probably. He's phenomenal in this and anyone that says different is just plain wrong.

lostexpectation

he didn't shout as much as I expected him to, i mean in his biggest shouting scene he was just pretending to placate the landowner.

Mr. Presentable

pickarooney wrote: »

For me DDL has gone the way of Al Pacino. His acting now seems to consist of "funny-accent, shouty-shouty, screwed-up-eyes, amn't-I-scary" and I'm suspicious as to why everyone seems to feel the need to rush in and agree that he's sensational in this film.

Am I the only one looking through the Emperor's New Clothes?

Nope. Retelling of Citizen Kane, almost. Nothing new here. Day Lewis being Day Lewis. Entertaining but not special.

wotisthere

What was all the fuss about ? Oscar ! ok yes .A fine perfomance by DDL as per usual . The movie ,mmnn a bit long ,but got there in the end.I intend to go to see it again as I feel I missed something .

Driver 8

Nope. Retelling of Citizen Kane, almost. Nothing new here. Day Lewis being Day Lewis. Entertaining but not special.

Nice of you to sum up the 165 minutes so concisely. Honestly, films can't win-tell a story within normal genre parameters and you're doing nothing new, try something vaguely new (Cloverfield, not a huge leap forward, but still) and you get savaged too.

Not every film can reinvent the wheel. I thought this was an interesting story, pretty well told, what more do you want?

Mr. Presentable

Driver 8 wrote: »

Nice of you to sum up the 165 minutes so concisely.

You're welcome:D

Driver 8 wrote: »

I though this was an interesting story, pretty well told,

And that's pretty much what I said.

pickarooney

nipplenuts wrote: »

Nope. Retelling of Citizen Kane, almost. Nothing new here. Day Lewis being Day Lewis. Entertaining but not special.

There was something new - Day Lewis being Larry David instead of Day Lewis being Robert De Niro.

lostexpectation

what was new in the film?

johnny_ultimate

lostexpectation wrote: »

what was new in the film?

Erm... the way it was told? In terms of atmosphere I don't think I've ever seen anything like this. It was such an intense, visceral experience (for the first half anyway). The humour was dark and original (see the superbly exaggerated and melodramatic church sequences), and the soundtrack was an eerie and unique innovation.

Sure, it may just be the Howard Hughes / Citizen Kane story retold again, but it was done in an extraordinarily fresh and exciting way.

The Denouncer

Loved this film. Sucked me in completely. Day Lewis was amazing I thought, christ what an emotionally retarded driven basketcase of a hateful nutbag, yet he still managed to provoke empathy. Unbelievable performance.

Gunther_Gloop

There's a kind-of spoiler (though mistaken in my view) in this quote. Don't bother reading the rest if you don't want it spoilt (this is more a correction than a point of argument IMO, so needs to be in the review section)...

Driver 8 wrote: »

The plot, such as it is, is relatively simple. We see the progress, and moral decay (though what was there to begin with, we do not know) of Daniel Plainview, across the beginnings of the twentieth century, through the prism of the oil industry in California. Plainview is a man willing to sink to any depths (pardon the pun) to achieve his ends, enlisiting his adopted son to give himself a family man image, and appearing at all times to be well spoken while his hatred and bile bubbles just beneath the surface. His conflict with local preacher Eli Sunday (Paul Dano) forms the backbone of the film, with both men loathing one another, and attempting to gain the upper hand.
9/10

I don't think it's very sensible to mention an "adoptive son" in the 2nd paragraph, then only put a spoiler notice on the last paragraph.
More than the last scene, I would consider that a greater spoiler.

...Although I don't believe it to be necessarily true. And not even needed to be mentioned in that synopsis.


Truth is we don't know if he was adopted or not. Indeed, given the way he embellished the truth in the last scene, I would argue there's a very good chance he was also lying when shouting at his son -which probably makes the man even more horrible when you think of it.


But anyway, I was captivated while watching the film, but I can't say I liked it very much. I don't consider the main character worthy of almost 3 hours of my attention and there really wasn't a whole lot else besides him (despite the nods at symbolism/ allegoricalism).
It works as a character study, if you really want to sit and watch psychotic disintegration for 3 hours.

For me, it's a movie that traps its audience like bunnies in a headlamp, then simply outs the light.
Whoopee do.

peeps78

it mightent have the most original story/theme and not much might happen in this film but it kept me damn mesmerized the whole way through. and i kept thinking about it for days after, which for me is a test of how good a film is.
i thought Daniel Day Lewis did a fantastic job as did Paul Dano (Eli/Paul).
People here seem to be dismissing the job Lewis did because hes done such strong performances before. should he be dismissed for being consistent?

Basq

Saw this today.. really enjoyed it although no real idea why.

Both Day Lewis and Paul Dano were magnificent in it.. and how Daniel Day Lewis's character changed throughout the course of the film was astonishing. The music did really annoy the arse off me though especially the scene with Daniel carrying HW from the well.. it just sounded like random drums, and "tings" and "bings" thrown in for good measure.

Oh, and my plan tomorrow is to use the milkshake analogy at least once!

Running Bing

I think what is jarring for many people is that this is a film completely about a single character yet we are left to make our own conclusions about that character.


Every event in the film, every other character in the film is geared towards revealing more about Day Lewis' character. At the same time we're not shown what his motivations are, how he built up his business, what he really thinks of his son or what he eats for breakfast. It is up to us to fill in the blanks and I think for some reason that annoys audiences. They expect to have everything spelt out in big bright neon letters.



Personally I thought this film was amazing. From the first second I was gripped and completely enthralled with the character. The direction is on another level to 99.9% of the stuff produced today, the performances from Paul Dano, DDL and Dillon Freasier as H.W. Plainview are perfect, the sound track adds perfectly to the sense of prevailing doom, Daniel Plainview is an incredibly deep and interesting character, the cinematography was stunning and I absolutely loved the sly black humour and felt it just sat perfectly with the whole tone of the film. Fantastic way to end the film as well.


Its the full package and in 50 years time I will be telling my grandson about how I remember seeing it in the cinema because I certainly wont forget it and it will certainly go down as one of the greatest films ever made for me.

Naos

Gunther_Gloop wrote: »

Truth is we don't know if he was adopted or not. Indeed, given the way he embellished the truth in the last scene, I would argue there's a very good chance he was also lying when shouting at his son -which probably makes the man even more horrible when you think of it.

I thought the son belonged to the man who was killed in the first well (He can be seen holding the baby)

Just seen this tonight and too tired to write up my thoughts right now so will come back to this tomorrow.

lostexpectation

Babybing wrote: »

I think what is jarring for many people is that this is a film completely about a single character yet we are left to make our own conclusions about that character.


Every event in the film, every other character in the film is geared towards revealing more about Day Lewis' character. At the same time we're not shown what his motivations are, how he built up his business, what he really thinks of his son or what he eats for breakfast. It is up to us to fill in the blanks and I think for some reason that annoys audiences. They expect to have everything spelt out in big bright neon letters.

why not show us the first scene and the last scene and we can sit in the dark thinking up the story by ourselves for an hour huh?

or maybe thats not what cinema is about.

kevmy

Naos wrote: »

I thought the son belonged to the man who was killed in the first well (He can be seen holding the baby)

Just seen this tonight and too tired to write up my thoughts right now so will come back to this tomorrow.

Thats what I assumed and I would have thought 99.9% of the viewing audience would have thought that as well

Gunther_Gloop

kevmy wrote: »

Thats what I assumed and I would have thought 99.9% of the viewing audience would have thought that as well

Whatever you thought is your opinion (or 99.9% of the viewing audience's opinion -you speak for a lot of people). Since it's not said in the film it is just that -an opinion. Mentioning it at all is a spoiler. But a spoiler for the wrong reasons I agree.
The word should be removed, but despite the commitment it hasn't been yet.

Running Bing

lostexpectation wrote: »

why not show us the first scene and the last scene and we can sit in the dark thinking up the story by ourselves for an hour huh?

or maybe thats not what cinema is about.

To you.


To me cinema is about emotion, characters and imagination. There will be blood got all three perfect imo.


If you want everything spelt out for you, dont want to have to think about the movie at all and see films as purely a form of entertainment (which is 100% fine) then dont bother with films like there will be blood.

Driver 8

http://www.empireonline.com/reviews/reviewcomplete.asp?FID=133232

Ok, Europe's biggest film magazine clearly doesn't consider it a spoiler. I'll go with them...

Ardent

The Denouncer wrote: »

Loved this film. Sucked me in completely. Day Lewis was amazing I thought, christ what an emotionally retarded driven basketcase of a hateful nutbag, yet he still managed to provoke empathy. Unbelievable performance.

You should see Raging Bull if you thought this was good.

I thought the film was ok. DDL and the pastor's acting were the two best things about the film - I just felt the film lacked a genuine story, was expecting more after all the hype.

lostexpectation

Babybing wrote: »

To you.


To me cinema is about emotion, characters and imagination. There will be blood got all three perfect imo.


If you want everything spelt out for you, dont want to have to think about the movie at all and see films as purely a form of entertainment (which is 100% fine) then dont bother with films like there will be blood.

you taking the snob line, as I said we can sit at home and think up the film ourselves if thats the criteria you think film literate people should seek, why not show us all of _their_ story.

ntlbell

pile of steaming horse poo is being too kind IMO.