There Will Be Blood
Paramount Vantage | Release Date: December 26, 2007
8.1
USER SCORE
Universal acclaim based on 1708 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
1,396
Mixed:
134
Negative:
178
Watch Now
Stream On
Buy on
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Expand
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)

User Reviews

User scoreBy dateMost helpful
3
FrankL.Feb 6, 2008
I expected much from this movie, especially after reading through critics and user-ratings in here and at other sites. To make it short i was mainly heavily disappointed on following points: 1) Music There are movies without music. There are I expected much from this movie, especially after reading through critics and user-ratings in here and at other sites. To make it short i was mainly heavily disappointed on following points: 1) Music There are movies without music. There are movies with music, where the music can transport emotions or atmosphere and suspension. But there are also cases where the film music is so elaborated, so off limits that it simply puts itself way too much in the foreground. 2) i did not read the book, but only after reading to some user comments i understood that major parts of the underlying story were not told. It created on me the impression that i was just looking on some crazy, selfish ppl doing crazy and selfish things. No real message or system critic was really formulated. Frank@germany.… Expand
2 of 3 users found this helpful
10
HalWFeb 5, 2008
My living hell would be to spend time with all the vapid douchebags who gave this movie low scores here. You didn't get the movie -- fine. But clearly, you have missed something big here. So keep your inane pronouncements about the My living hell would be to spend time with all the vapid douchebags who gave this movie low scores here. You didn't get the movie -- fine. But clearly, you have missed something big here. So keep your inane pronouncements about the plot, acting and soundtrack to yourselves, and go away and watch your re-runs of Friends. And remember to crank up the Nickelback.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
ScottM.Feb 5, 2008
I have to disagree with Mike N. I believe this movie deserves comparison with "Citizen Kane", though i believe this film is far more poetic and powerful than "..Kane". I see how some are disappointed, it truly is a one-of-a-kind film, albeit I have to disagree with Mike N. I believe this movie deserves comparison with "Citizen Kane", though i believe this film is far more poetic and powerful than "..Kane". I see how some are disappointed, it truly is a one-of-a-kind film, albeit for better or worse. I personally believe for the better.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
AlanH.Feb 5, 2008
A cinematically well-crafted movie that pays no regards to character truth or consistency or humanity. It's plodding and pretentious. Ditto for DDL's performance.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
BillC.Feb 5, 2008
This film was too long and the soundtrack was god-awful.The constant pounding in the soundtrack and the annoying music only subtracted from the viewing experience. They could just as well cut out the first 30 minutes and the story, what This film was too long and the soundtrack was god-awful.The constant pounding in the soundtrack and the annoying music only subtracted from the viewing experience. They could just as well cut out the first 30 minutes and the story, what little there was, would not have been hurt. This story could have been told in 30 minutes, and with no sound track at all.Problem is , that won't make it a movie will it? Those who fawn over this film sure are forgiving of it's many faults. Bill C.… Expand
2 of 2 users found this helpful
1
DanFeb 5, 2008
The only reason to give this movie a 1 is DDL. The movie is a pretentious, plodding, glacial study of good and evil...actually, of evil and evil. You are bludgeoned with blatant symbolism, annoyed with jarring music (I assume this was The only reason to give this movie a 1 is DDL. The movie is a pretentious, plodding, glacial study of good and evil...actually, of evil and evil. You are bludgeoned with blatant symbolism, annoyed with jarring music (I assume this was intentional?), bored with overly long sequences where nothing substantive happens - filmmaking 101 anybody? - and generally beaten down with the message, which as far as I can tell is: "Bad people are bad. So there." Wait for this one to come out on DVD -- oooh, an extended director's cut. Oh, goody -- and then convince your friend to rent it. Then stay home.… Expand
2 of 2 users found this helpful
9
ChipG.Feb 5, 2008
Great acting by Daniel Day Lewis, beautiful cinematography, fascination editing, mesmerizing soundtrack, solid writing, original directing style all combine to make this a great movie. I must disagree with the criticism that there is not Great acting by Daniel Day Lewis, beautiful cinematography, fascination editing, mesmerizing soundtrack, solid writing, original directing style all combine to make this a great movie. I must disagree with the criticism that there is not sufficient character development. Dramatic movies are interesting only if it is not a foregone conclusion that the characters will conquer there demons in the end; otherwise one is confined to the sub-genre of the story of the epic hero. I will admit feeling some sympathy for the main character, Daniel Plainview (though not of course condoning his violence). In the beginning you see that he is a solitary prospector; a path often pursued by those who know that the baseness of the human condition overly inflames their passions. I hold back on a rating of 10, because I thought the conclusion between Daniel and his son H.W. was somewhat rushed, compared to the pacing of the rest of the movie. If Anderson felt (or was told) the movie was too long, then tough choices should have been made to cut or shorten other scenes to give that relationship the denouement it deserved. This is a DVD I will purchase for my personal collection.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
ShaneM.Feb 4, 2008
This is a masterpiece of artistic and cinematic excellence. By combining realism and cinematic grandiose, P.T. Anderson has created a modern day epic that transcends time. Day-Lewis solidifies his acting supremacy in a role that is both This is a masterpiece of artistic and cinematic excellence. By combining realism and cinematic grandiose, P.T. Anderson has created a modern day epic that transcends time. Day-Lewis solidifies his acting supremacy in a role that is both satanic and also all to familiar. Forget these raters who consider the film pretentious. How can a film be pretentious if it accomplishes what it sets out to do. There Will Be Blood is a provocative, visceral cinematic experience well worth the two and a half hour running time.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
ChadFeb 4, 2008
Long, slow, boring, and often uneventful, but overall Daniel day lewis manages to create a memorable and believable character opposite an interesting preacher played by Paul Dano which collide together in a very unexpected and, in my Long, slow, boring, and often uneventful, but overall Daniel day lewis manages to create a memorable and believable character opposite an interesting preacher played by Paul Dano which collide together in a very unexpected and, in my opinion, good ending. I've definitely seen better, and the critics have praised this a good bit too much, but i still liked there will be blood and it was without a doubt much better than no country and atonement.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
IanS-HFeb 3, 2008
I honestly can't remember the last time I've been so giddy and satisfied after seeing a movie. Music/Cinematography/Acting... all stunning. Stop reading review and go see it. It's pretty obvious by this point (A metacritic I honestly can't remember the last time I've been so giddy and satisfied after seeing a movie. Music/Cinematography/Acting... all stunning. Stop reading review and go see it. It's pretty obvious by this point (A metacritic 92!!) that it's worth seeing.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
KimFeb 3, 2008
This was the most boring movie I have ever seen. Three hours of hell. Would have rather watched paint dry.
2 of 2 users found this helpful
4
MichaelLFeb 3, 2008
My God, the Emperor has no clothes! What a reductionist, overwrought, overPRAISED and overLONG melodrama. All this to basically say greed is bad, whether it be embodied by capitalism or religion? Are we supposed to take away from this film My God, the Emperor has no clothes! What a reductionist, overwrought, overPRAISED and overLONG melodrama. All this to basically say greed is bad, whether it be embodied by capitalism or religion? Are we supposed to take away from this film the jarring and totally unoriginal message that the sociopaths among us may be the purest by virtue of their unshakable, unstoppable integrity? Whatever! Daniel Day Lewis, doing his best John Huston imitation, has a field day blathering away with an indistinguishable accent (from WHERE is supposed hail? No one in Wisconsin speaks with that hybrid of Queens English and Long Island Lockjaw...) until he descends into Jack Torrence madness, complete with a final line comparable to "Here's Johnny!" And Paul Dano... he evolves (or devolves) from spooky preacher to screaming ninny, and never ages a day, despite the elapse of 30 years. And THIS is the film with buckets of awards? Not nearly as interesting as "Magnolia" nor as brilliant as "Boogie Nights", if you must see this film, tank up on plenty of coffee beforehand...… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
PaulA.Feb 2, 2008
Best film I have seen in years. Daniel Day Lewis has performed the best acting job since David Thewlis in Naked 1993. Its a performance that happens but once a decade. The film itself conjures Kubrick at his best, pure intense genius.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
BiilyMFeb 2, 2008
An unparalleled examination of one man's conflict with his soul: on the one hand Daniel Plainview is a staunch capitalist-man made, profoundly ambitious and unemotional in business; on the other a self-stated aspiring "family man" An unparalleled examination of one man's conflict with his soul: on the one hand Daniel Plainview is a staunch capitalist-man made, profoundly ambitious and unemotional in business; on the other a self-stated aspiring "family man" desperate for authentic contact with trustworthy individuals. The conflict that arises, coupled with an eerily affecting Paul Dano as a staunch opportunist veiled by his holy mania, is classic fodder for epic film-making, and PTA-as usual-succeeds in grand fashion.… Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful
8
DanB.Feb 2, 2008
Citizen Kane w/out the Rosebud moment? Anyway, it's very good.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
WayneW.Feb 2, 2008
Guess what "Professional Critics"...open your eyes..the emperor has no clothes. I spoke with 6 other people after the movie and all agreed the movie sucked..too long..one dimensional..absurd storyline...with a pathetically uncreative ending. Guess what "Professional Critics"...open your eyes..the emperor has no clothes. I spoke with 6 other people after the movie and all agreed the movie sucked..too long..one dimensional..absurd storyline...with a pathetically uncreative ending. There Will Be Bullsh--.… Expand
2 of 2 users found this helpful
10
DavidS.Feb 2, 2008
one of the few films where i did not feel a minute was self-indulgent
1 of 1 users found this helpful
3
BetsyMFeb 2, 2008
This is one where I just don't get the great reviews, hard as I try. The movie was long and boring and had no real redeeming social qualities. I was hoping that the performance by Daniel Day-Lewis was as great as everyone says, but it This is one where I just don't get the great reviews, hard as I try. The movie was long and boring and had no real redeeming social qualities. I was hoping that the performance by Daniel Day-Lewis was as great as everyone says, but it wasn't. He just limped around and brooded. Very disappointed.… Expand
2 of 3 users found this helpful
10
MichaelR.Feb 2, 2008
There were so many aspects of that movie that scared the s**t out of me. It had the most realistic and wrathful acting that would rock many film watchers to their core. It was a fantastic movie, that I'm going wait to see again.
1 of 1 users found this helpful
6
ChaseW.Feb 2, 2008
I have to completely agree with Matty J. on this one. This movie earns a six rating virtually on the sole acting performance of Daniel Day-Lewis. Despite some overacting in the latter parts of the movie, he carries this movie through its I have to completely agree with Matty J. on this one. This movie earns a six rating virtually on the sole acting performance of Daniel Day-Lewis. Despite some overacting in the latter parts of the movie, he carries this movie through its majority. Paul Dano has some brilliant scenes as well, but when PTA doesn't direct him in key scenes where he's allowed to go way over the top ending any suspension of disbelief. Quite simply this movie bored me. The only reason I didn't fall asleep was because the music was so jarring. Not in recent memory have I seen a movie that had music that so made me want to run out of the theater. It was like some failed attempt to appear classical or majestic but instead it was just obnoxious and as with much of this movie way over the top. The plot had little coherence and plodded along. To the point of Matty it also failed to convey the complexity of Sinclair's book. There was very little inspiration for the character's apparent drive to insanity or even the animosity that appears almost out of nowhere toward various characters. While I appreciate that Sinclair's book is long and you want to skim through some of its detail, that detail is what gives you a truer appreciation for the various characters motives. This was seriously lacking in the movie. If you're making a choice right now, defintely, definitely go see No Country for Old Man which clearly outpaces this movie for Best Picture of the year.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
AnnKFeb 1, 2008
The entire audience was left dissatisfied. This movie did not live up to the hype! DDL played a fascinating lunatic, but...... so what?
2 of 2 users found this helpful
8
LarryHFeb 1, 2008
Great gritty movie about greed and self-righteousness. Anderson, Lewis and the film are all worthy of the Oscar. As with all of Anderson's movies, this is definitely not a film for everyone.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
MikeN.Feb 1, 2008
PTA has made a "Citizen Kane" with the same ego but half the talent. (And DDL is brilliant,but overacted in the 1927 sequences).
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
AriK.Jan 31, 2008
Powerful and meaningful, this is a film that can be discussed for hours. The levels of malice, egoism, paranoia, and greed are brought to such high levels, that it is easy to think of this as an absurdest tale - but in fact when viewed in Powerful and meaningful, this is a film that can be discussed for hours. The levels of malice, egoism, paranoia, and greed are brought to such high levels, that it is easy to think of this as an absurdest tale - but in fact when viewed in light of actual events taking place all around us, it suddenly seems more like a stark reminder of the fact that we're not too far past this vision of a wild west dominated by paranoid, selfish oilmen and pious clergymen. The first thing I noticed watching this film was the score. Without it, the film is nowhere near as disturbing as it might otherwise be (except of course for the end). In fact, I found the music so disturbing, that I almost had an anxiety attack in the theater. That is, however, par for the course when engaging a PT Anderson flick.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
MattyJJan 31, 2008
Haven't looked forward to a movie so much in years. Very disappointed...I thought Anderson was going to add more life to a great but painfully long story by Upton Sinclair. Instead the director takes only the first few chapters into Haven't looked forward to a movie so much in years. Very disappointed...I thought Anderson was going to add more life to a great but painfully long story by Upton Sinclair. Instead the director takes only the first few chapters into account and somehow manages to make isaid story even longer by eliminating the socially important aspects of OIL!. Gone is the relevant stuff--Sinclair's complex look at a moral businessman's son deeply troubled by his relationship with both labor and a corrupt industry, instead turning it into a simple story of a crazy man getting crazier. DDL was perfect and is probably the only reason folks dig this the way they do. Paul Dano was amazing in Little Miss Sunshine, but that was because he didn't speak in it...in this movie he becomes a shrieking, Peter Brady squealing banshee who's representation of the parallels of revival culture in the early 20th century to that of industry is put too much on the backburner when it could've been Anderson's contribution to a storyline understated by Sinclair. And why did Anderson make Eli and Paul twins? It leaves anyone who hasn't read the book wondering if they're the same guy until the end, for no real reason. It is painfully boring for those who like movies to take them places...even harder on those who like to think about the movies they see (yay No Country!!!) And anyone who is revved up about it must just like eccentric characters who don't change (which is understandable, but useless in the grand scheme of things). I would say if you're thinking about seeing it you should YouTube Howard Dean's historic on-camera breakdown and then imagine watching that for three hours an how painful that would be..then go see diving bell and the butterfly or no country for old men...or follow the advice of the guy who put 30 Days of Night above this. Vampire flicks rule!!!… Expand
2 of 3 users found this helpful
10
StevenMJan 30, 2008
A masterpiece, but a sure-fire audience splitter similar to the (near equally) "No Country for Old Men." On one side you have people who love to go to the cinema and be challenged, surprised, perplexed, even dare say, confused. We want to A masterpiece, but a sure-fire audience splitter similar to the (near equally) "No Country for Old Men." On one side you have people who love to go to the cinema and be challenged, surprised, perplexed, even dare say, confused. We want to debate the film, what it means, what motivated the characters. To, you know, think. We are the people voting 9 and 10 here. The other side are folks who want to go to the movies. To be spoon fed sugary treats, patted on the head, given a good night kiss and sent off to bed without a thought ringing in their heads. These are the folks slamming this film, and who probably just loved "National Treasure 2" and "Alvin and the Chipmunks". It's not wrong. Some people spend their hard earned cash on something and want exactly what they want -- to be entertained but without the hassles. Seriously, does anyone who's seen "National Treasure 2" remember if the next week, the next day, the next ... hour. No. "There Will be Blood" settles inside you like oil, and I know I'll be wrestling with it for weeks and months to come, until I see it again. You've read the plot posts already, Daniel Day-Lewis -- never more brilliant -- is an oil tycoon with oil for blood. He loves nothing but his ambition. He is the corruption of capitalism, which was meant to help all people but has been hijacked by the greed of a few. Paul Dano, who by God looks exactly like my brother who's now in Iraq, represents the corruption of America's other greatest gift, religion. He is an evangelist for himself, not God above. Both men destroy and push away every thing close to themselves until they have nothing but each other -- then they start tearing down again. One stands at the end, or rather slumps. This is a brilliant, methodical film that is as one poster here said, a brilliant disaster film. The disaster of the soul. Again like in "No Country," there is an innocent -- the adopted son of Daniel Planview (the Day-Lewis character). In a brilliant twist, the boy has his ear drums blown out by an oil rig accident and he goes deaf. It's heart-breaking to think a son will never hear his father say, "I love you." The irony is that Planview, when he tells his son exactly that, doesn't mean it. Alas, it's not worth hearing. Yes, it's long, yes, it's challenging, and hard to get a grip of, yes, there's deep, deep thought in every scene. Cinema, lovers: enjoy. All others, do pass. One final note: The score, by Johnny Greenwood of Radiohead, is the best this decade.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
BlakeJJan 30, 2008
The new American epic. Daniel Plainview will resonate forever as a man trying to accomplish the American Dream. Day-Lewis' performance is mesmerizing. In every frame he IS Plainview. From the first scene you know you're dealing The new American epic. Daniel Plainview will resonate forever as a man trying to accomplish the American Dream. Day-Lewis' performance is mesmerizing. In every frame he IS Plainview. From the first scene you know you're dealing with a Goliath. Paul Dano will surely move from this movie and become one of the next big stars, I predict an Oscar in his future. Paul Thomas Anderson crafts the perfect story...everything circling his main character...The whole time I was trying to figure out who the antagonist was...but then I realized Plainview is his own protagonist and antagonist...he is ultimately the one at fault for his downfall, a downfall not dissimilar to that of Scarface.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
OshiA.Jan 30, 2008
May be slightly better than No Country for Old Men, but only due to its relevance in current culture.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
AnonymousMCJan 30, 2008
There Will Be Blood is easily the greatest disaster film ever made. Plainview is less a man than he is a volcano, that we watch percolate for nearly 2.5 hours before it explodes in the appropriate climax the film had been working towards theThere Will Be Blood is easily the greatest disaster film ever made. Plainview is less a man than he is a volcano, that we watch percolate for nearly 2.5 hours before it explodes in the appropriate climax the film had been working towards the entire time. Unlike, your typical piece of crap disaster film there is no Brosnan running around to save the women and children...the disaster wins! Plainview destroys all in his path, sucking them dry of their humanity (both lit and figuratively) as he did the earth of its oil. No one is spared Plainview's wrath that was brought to life be an excellent performance from Daniel Day Lewis.
The film's score is one of the best in recent memory as it manages to be both Kubrickian and Hitchockian. The landscaping shots and set-pieces like the oil well catching fire, were simply perfect. Perhaps people just "want to be different" or do not like Kubrick either, but There Will Be Blood is not only the best film of 2007, but also the best of the decade thus far.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
AlexGJan 29, 2008
Fantastic movie. One person mentioned no sense of humor was present in this film. I honestly thought this movie was hilarious at moments... The overall drama masked everything else. I believe Daniel Day Lewis deserves an Oscar for this Fantastic movie. One person mentioned no sense of humor was present in this film. I honestly thought this movie was hilarious at moments... The overall drama masked everything else. I believe Daniel Day Lewis deserves an Oscar for this one... Amazing performance.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
DNJan 29, 2008
Awesome!!!
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
DanGJan 29, 2008
Unappealing and long. "Pixote" meets "Citizen Kane". Great performance by Day-Lewis, but on what dispiriting material!
2 of 3 users found this helpful
3
mmiddleJan 29, 2008
What Michelle said. The photography is gorgeous, the actor playing the son is fine, but the storytelling is flat and careless, and Day-Lewis just extends his silly performance in "Gangs."
2 of 3 users found this helpful
10
SteveFJan 29, 2008
One of the most brilliant screen performances that I have ever seen! Daniel Day and Paul Thomas have together made the ultimate masterpiece!!
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
BenDJan 28, 2008
Honestly, Thirty Days of Night was better than this film. It was about half an hour too long, boring, pretentious, and like one poster said, halfway up it's own backside. Don't know what the critics were on when they saw this one. Honestly, Thirty Days of Night was better than this film. It was about half an hour too long, boring, pretentious, and like one poster said, halfway up it's own backside. Don't know what the critics were on when they saw this one. Spend your hard earned cash elsewhere.… Expand
2 of 2 users found this helpful
6
LindaL.Jan 28, 2008
Daniel Day-Lewis is mesmerizing in this movie -- although I got a jolt when it's revealed that his character hails from Wisconsin, since he sounds just like his character in "Gangs of New York." We haven't seen a story set in the Daniel Day-Lewis is mesmerizing in this movie -- although I got a jolt when it's revealed that his character hails from Wisconsin, since he sounds just like his character in "Gangs of New York." We haven't seen a story set in the oil boom for a long time, and this is a gritty, engrossing one with dark, complex characters. None of them very likable, which is a drawback for some of us. With so much calamity and grief, I missed having someone like Tommy Lee Jones (in "Old Men") as the anchor and "heart" of the story. And thought the score, with its plinky percussion and busy strings, was awful, actually a distraction.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
EnriqueJan 28, 2008
Nothing less than a masterpiece. One of the most important American films in years.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
Jonny99Jan 28, 2008
Like being served a grand, sumptuous, banquet only to find out desert is tepid, rainbow-flavored, Jello. I have to go back to 1997's "Contact" to find dissapointment with an ending on this scale. The real tragedy is how unnecessary this Like being served a grand, sumptuous, banquet only to find out desert is tepid, rainbow-flavored, Jello. I have to go back to 1997's "Contact" to find dissapointment with an ending on this scale. The real tragedy is how unnecessary this derailment was; if the director were to cut out everything that happens in 1927, a fully realized, great movie would be left. Having said all this, I would still encourage you to see the film for no other reason than Daniel Day-Lewis is the best living actor.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
MchelleJan 28, 2008
This movie does not reflect the critics comments. It's 2.5 hours of Daniel Day-Lewis reprising his role in "The Gangs of New York". His acting seems affected and the plot goes no where. Waste of an evening. Avoid this film.
2 of 2 users found this helpful
10
MikeW.Jan 28, 2008
I'm sorry if your attention span is that of a chimp, because this is one of the most well written and cleverly crafted movies I've seen in a long time. The acting alone could make this movie great, but its the character development I'm sorry if your attention span is that of a chimp, because this is one of the most well written and cleverly crafted movies I've seen in a long time. The acting alone could make this movie great, but its the character development and the dramatic turning points in the story that make this movie great.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
DustB.Jan 28, 2008
From Day-Lewis, who has been garnering universal acclaim for this movie for a reason; to Paul Dano, who also impresses beyond all expectations; to the direction, which feels almost Kubrickian it, along with the film's style, is that From Day-Lewis, who has been garnering universal acclaim for this movie for a reason; to Paul Dano, who also impresses beyond all expectations; to the direction, which feels almost Kubrickian it, along with the film's style, is that good; to the music, which is pulse-pounding and amazing; There Will Be Blood is an endeavor in superior filmmaking and storytelling, the likes of which no one should miss. I see a comment by a "joe k." who thinks the critics praising this film have severely lost touch with the movie-going public. And yet his review is nothing but quoting them and somehow trying to disprove (and commenting on someone's lack of punctuation. Yes, we get it, commas make you intellectually superior) their praise. Ah yes, and then he made a wonderful comparison to the human body regarding this film in an attempt to be clever. And yet here I am, an average movie-goer, and I rate this movie a 10/10. Perhaps some people just don't have an appreciation of cinema anymore. Real shame. Go see this movie.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
JeffJohnsonJan 27, 2008
This impressive film is an intelligent treatment of a time when hard physical work, relentless business acumen and pure greed were what got the oil industry off the ground in its early days. The movie is a bit confusing with regard to someThis impressive film is an intelligent treatment of a time when hard physical work, relentless business acumen and pure greed were what got the oil industry off the ground in its early days. The movie is a bit confusing with regard to some characters (Paul and Eli) and the passage of time. Day-Lewis is, as usual, amazing; all of the actors are very good. The movie is beautiful to watch. The story, however, moves a unevenly and takes an abrupt turn at the last 20 minutes when it jumps ahead many years and leaves the viewer guessing about a number of things. Overall, it's a fine, entertaining and thoughtful movie, but not clearly the best movie of the year, in my opinion.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
StaciaM.Jan 26, 2008
One of the most amazing films in a long time.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
TerryAndrewsJan 26, 2008
Grandiose, pretentious, irritating, and repetitive, this may be the most grossly overrated movie of the year. Day-Lewis is mannered and showy, and comes across as a caricature of virtuoso acting rather than as a believable human being. TheGrandiose, pretentious, irritating, and repetitive, this may be the most grossly overrated movie of the year. Day-Lewis is mannered and showy, and comes across as a caricature of virtuoso acting rather than as a believable human being. The music is intrusive, jarring, and distracting, and most of the characters are cardboard background figures. To see how truly derivative and shallow Anderson's "masterpiece" is, have another look at "Citizen Kane."… Expand
3 of 4 users found this helpful
10
MarkKJan 26, 2008
Daniel Day Lewis is amazing his best performance. A dark gritty film that is both sad and angry at the same time.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
DaveBJan 26, 2008
Boring! Did anyone else not notice how DDL walked with a limp after a horrific accident, then had no limp for a time, then had the limp return?
2 of 3 users found this helpful
8
JesseDJan 25, 2008
I'm sitting at my computer not 20 minutes removed from one of the most thought provoking films I've ever seen. There were moments honestly, where I couldn't hold back a belly laugh. A few times I braced myself for a dreadingly I'm sitting at my computer not 20 minutes removed from one of the most thought provoking films I've ever seen. There were moments honestly, where I couldn't hold back a belly laugh. A few times I braced myself for a dreadingly dark sequence. By the end I took all the things from the movie that the Director was wanting to place in my mind as...something more. The reason for the 'average' score, is that it was pretty long with what felt like less of a real "eureka" moment than I'd of hoped. Daniel-Day Lewis is everything advertised and more. If he does not win best actor it will be a crime. Paul Dano is eerily violent and a superb actor in his own right. Solid film you should watch this as soon as possible while it's on the big screen.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
AlexHJan 25, 2008
there isn't much character development because people don't change. there isn't a traditional story arc because life's stories are too f***ed up to arc. this is a masterpiece in the same way cormac mccarthy's "the there isn't much character development because people don't change. there isn't a traditional story arc because life's stories are too f***ed up to arc. this is a masterpiece in the same way cormac mccarthy's "the road" is a masterpiece. flawless acting, a merciless score, breathtaking cinematography, and one of the very few perfect endings to a film. picture of the decade.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
TomJan 24, 2008
The single greatest acting performance of my lifetime. For the life of me, I can't see how you'd rate this movie any less than a 9. I suppose if your attention span is more "Fast and the Furious 2" than "There Will Be Blood" you The single greatest acting performance of my lifetime. For the life of me, I can't see how you'd rate this movie any less than a 9. I suppose if your attention span is more "Fast and the Furious 2" than "There Will Be Blood" you might find this a bit dull. But if you ever enjoyed a serious work of fiction, see this post-haste. It rewards thoughtfulness, understanding of character, and a sober assessment of what simultaneously makes our country great, and yet corrupts it.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
CussR.Jan 24, 2008
Does savage ambition inevitably breed insanity? Is true success earned only upon complete deprivation of human emotion? These are among the uncertainties haunting Paul Thomas Anderson
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
DaveS.Jan 24, 2008
Daniel Day-Lewis awesome as usual. Most annoying sound track I have ever heard. Scenes dragged out too long.
2 of 3 users found this helpful
10
NickA.Jan 23, 2008
P.T. Anderson has had one dynamite career thus far
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
EricH.Jan 23, 2008
It is very rare that I will give a movie a ten out of ten. This film deserves it, hands down. Some say it's too slow, too boring, or too pointless. The opposite is the case. Sure; it does ride heavily on the back of Day-Lewis, but there It is very rare that I will give a movie a ten out of ten. This film deserves it, hands down. Some say it's too slow, too boring, or too pointless. The opposite is the case. Sure; it does ride heavily on the back of Day-Lewis, but there are plenty of other fantastic actors to keep the movie afloat. What really needs to be taken into account here is character and theme. Put quite simply, the character development is spectacular and the numerous themes have you leaving the theater shaken and, quite frankly, changed. Sit this movie out and you will be rewarded.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
JoanC.Jan 22, 2008
3 out of 4 of us who saw the film were disappointed. The movie lacks character development, seems irrelevant, and I didn't really care about the characters, although DDL did a fabulous acting job.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
TaylorM.Jan 21, 2008
Absolutely jarring and relentless cinema that treats its characters and subject matter with the utmost of care and gumption. The men who did (and do) the "legwork" that made modern American capitalism possible were ruthless in their malice Absolutely jarring and relentless cinema that treats its characters and subject matter with the utmost of care and gumption. The men who did (and do) the "legwork" that made modern American capitalism possible were ruthless in their malice toward those whom them fleeced. Henry Plainview is the finest embodiment of capitalist violence ever committed to film. Bravo to Paul Thomas Andersen, and the fine cast that brings his story to life.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
D.Jan 21, 2008
Great acting by DDL, but the story is boring. No arc, no lesson that hasn't already been told before and too long. From the very beginning you know where this is going. It's like watching the Patriots football season. PTA is really Great acting by DDL, but the story is boring. No arc, no lesson that hasn't already been told before and too long. From the very beginning you know where this is going. It's like watching the Patriots football season. PTA is really overrated.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
ChrisJan 21, 2008
This film has a lot going for; a high quality writer/director, a great cast, and an excellent score. Sadly, it does not amount to much. The movie moves slowly and is never very captivating. Day-Lewis gives a great performance at the This film has a lot going for; a high quality writer/director, a great cast, and an excellent score. Sadly, it does not amount to much. The movie moves slowly and is never very captivating. Day-Lewis gives a great performance at the beginning and end of the film, however, he loses focus during the middle. Paul Dano is fantastic should garner some Academy consideration. I wish this film had been more interesting, but it just a dull period piece. The film does have some interesting themes such as religion and greed, but leaves many questions unanswered. Sadly, this is a 2 hour 40 minute hike that leaves you unfulfilled.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
RL.Jan 21, 2008
This film was just as good as I hoped it might be. It can rightfully be compared to "Citizen Kane" intersected with "McCabe and Mrs Miller", with a hint of "Treasure of the Sierra Madre." But don't worry about comparisons when you see This film was just as good as I hoped it might be. It can rightfully be compared to "Citizen Kane" intersected with "McCabe and Mrs Miller", with a hint of "Treasure of the Sierra Madre." But don't worry about comparisons when you see it. It presents a whole world of its own. Clear your mind, sink back in your chair, and soak it in. Highly recommended.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
SeanP.Jan 21, 2008
It stunned me. 2007 had its share of great movies. I didn't think stuff like No Country For Old Men and The Diving Bell And The Butterfly could be beat, but this movie knocked me out like no other film from the last few years. Maybe It stunned me. 2007 had its share of great movies. I didn't think stuff like No Country For Old Men and The Diving Bell And The Butterfly could be beat, but this movie knocked me out like no other film from the last few years. Maybe even longer. The ending was over-the-top and bizarre, but it was also 10 minutes of some of the best one-person acting I've ever seen. Day-Lewis is spectacular throughout the whole film, but he just went all out at the end. A crazy masterpiece.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
PaulLJan 21, 2008
Oscar nomination caliber cinematography and acting by Daniel Day Lewis. Good direction by PTA and Paul Dano surprised on the upside at times. The movie is a bit long and is not "Godfather" great but serious movie viewers may want to see it Oscar nomination caliber cinematography and acting by Daniel Day Lewis. Good direction by PTA and Paul Dano surprised on the upside at times. The movie is a bit long and is not "Godfather" great but serious movie viewers may want to see it on the big screen.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
DylanP.Jan 20, 2008
I'm no movie critic (thank god ;) ), but the moview was thought provoking. Maybe it was more enjoyable because I watched it under the influence of some controlled substances (haha), but it did raise some interesting questions. Also, it I'm no movie critic (thank god ;) ), but the moview was thought provoking. Maybe it was more enjoyable because I watched it under the influence of some controlled substances (haha), but it did raise some interesting questions. Also, it does seem a little slow, but if you're willing to ride it out it has a good flow to it in a completely chaotic and impossible-to-follow kind of way. I liked it (as simple as I can get).… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
GregTJan 20, 2008
Wow... Simply brilliant
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
JohnGJan 19, 2008
Oh boy. My expectations were so high for this. I was extremely disappointed. The film was long, unfocused and relied to much on DDL vs, an actual story. The director relied way too much on DDL to save a film that by the end of the film it Oh boy. My expectations were so high for this. I was extremely disappointed. The film was long, unfocused and relied to much on DDL vs, an actual story. The director relied way too much on DDL to save a film that by the end of the film it was like he was parodying his own performance. Also, his cadence was similar to Hug Weaving in The Matrix to such an extent that it was distracting. The actor who played Eli was not very good. I thought the score was awesome and the cinematography was brilliant. I almost feel like the critics were afraid to give this a bad review. I also thought the same about Diving Bell and Butterfly -- reviewers were so impressed by prinicpals that all flaws were overlooked. Anyone who compares this to the Godfather is silly and emotional.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
JayKJan 19, 2008
One of the best films I've ever seen. Daniel Day Lewis is incredible.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
BillyS.Jan 19, 2008
There Will Be Oscar.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
GaryB.Jan 19, 2008
There Will Be Blood is one of the greatest films made in many years. It has grabbed me and will not let go. It was a pleasure reading the critics insightful reviews. I have seen it twice in three days and will be seeing it again very soon There Will Be Blood is one of the greatest films made in many years. It has grabbed me and will not let go. It was a pleasure reading the critics insightful reviews. I have seen it twice in three days and will be seeing it again very soon and again and again.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
SteveT.Jan 19, 2008
Of course, Day-Lewis is fantastic. Loved Paul Dano, too, but the plot moves along fairly slowly and is oftentimes predictable. The music (if you call it that...it is frequently "sound") is pretty cool as the movie's backdrop. Overall, Of course, Day-Lewis is fantastic. Loved Paul Dano, too, but the plot moves along fairly slowly and is oftentimes predictable. The music (if you call it that...it is frequently "sound") is pretty cool as the movie's backdrop. Overall, worth seeing but not the best movie of the year.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
DonnaS.Jan 19, 2008
Disappointed with the plot, but DDL was worth watching.
2 of 3 users found this helpful
8
BrianJan 19, 2008
I'm still trying to figure out what the film was actually about. None of you self-aggrandizing 'critics' are helping.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
StefaniaSJan 18, 2008
to Joe K.: you're an idiot. if you're rating reviews, go elsewhere. wow no comma. some one pull out a gun and shoot that person. this movie is clearly above and beyond the quality and perceptual genius of most films out there to to Joe K.: you're an idiot. if you're rating reviews, go elsewhere. wow no comma. some one pull out a gun and shoot that person. this movie is clearly above and beyond the quality and perceptual genius of most films out there to date. get a life. stop reading other's reviews and critiquing them, just relax. the script, the actors, the cinematography...fine if you didn't enjoy the movie. but you're an absolute fool if you cannot appreciate its mastery of the medium.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
ChadS.Jan 18, 2008
In order to get financing for "Plan 9 from Outer Space", filmmaker Ed Wood agreed to be baptized by a Baptist church. It happened in a swimming pool as depicted in Tim Burton's 1994 biopic about a man who believed in cinema more than In order to get financing for "Plan 9 from Outer Space", filmmaker Ed Wood agreed to be baptized by a Baptist church. It happened in a swimming pool as depicted in Tim Burton's 1994 biopic about a man who believed in cinema more than God. Daniel Plainview(Daniel Day-Lewis) is all about the almighty dollar, about building a pipeline to the ocean, so he gets baptized, gets slapped around by Paul Sunday(Paul Dano) because spiritual enlightenment for this oil man comes from a crack in the dirt. Interestingly enough, the original title for "Plan 9..." was "Grave Diggers from Outer Space". Daniel is a sort of grave digger from inner space. When the oil man buries a man he just murdered, he throws dirt not only on the evidence, but on his secret desires as well. "There Will Be Blood" asks the viewer to determine whose higher calling is more righteous.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
stevegJan 18, 2008
It's wasn't that bad a movie but it sure wasn't a 92. D.D.L. did a great acting job but the circumstance just wasn't interesting. A "maverick", "independent" oil mans rise to wealth, yay. I started to dislike the mainIt's wasn't that bad a movie but it sure wasn't a 92. D.D.L. did a great acting job but the circumstance just wasn't interesting. A "maverick", "independent" oil mans rise to wealth, yay. I started to dislike the main character once I figured out that there were no revelations or shifts in personality forthcoming and it made it even harder to watch. I had high hopes based on the ratings critics have given it and was very disappointed. The best part of the movie? "I'm done now."… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
RVJan 18, 2008
After reading the review of the reviews of this movie I was immediately amazed! Never have I been moved by such poignant criticism of criticism. Seeming to take the term "Metacritic" in an unexpectedly creative direction, Joel K turns theAfter reading the review of the reviews of this movie I was immediately amazed! Never have I been moved by such poignant criticism of criticism. Seeming to take the term "Metacritic" in an unexpectedly creative direction, Joel K turns the lens of the popular website's comment section back in on itself, describing the reviews as "patheitc." Also stating, "Was ready to see this film," Joel K poses as an individual none to familiar with proofreading or personal pronouns in a successful effort to skewer those without such acute senses of critical irony. He gets a ten!… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
CherylD.Jan 17, 2008
Okay people!!! What's the matter here? I can't believe that people are dissing this film because they can't find any CONTENT in it. A fundamental idea in this film is the following: PEOPLE ARE IGNORING THEIR OWN CHILDREN inOkay people!!! What's the matter here? I can't believe that people are dissing this film because they can't find any CONTENT in it. A fundamental idea in this film is the following: PEOPLE ARE IGNORING THEIR OWN CHILDREN in some vain pursuit for money, prestige and status. THEIR OWN CHILDREN people! It happens ALL the time. Divorce rates are higher than ever, the average person is less happy than they would like to be (just take the time to ask around), but our society is more materialistic than it ever has been and that is due primarily (and no one can argue against this -) to BIG OIL. This film is a sincere attempt, and the only attempt I've yet to witness, to bring the big oil narrative to as many people as possible in the most uncompromising way. People who aren't 'getting' this film have their heads way up their behinds, and choose to ignore our present predicament as a corrupted, ignorant species that is primed for disaster. People should wake up, turn off the mind-numbing television and ride a bicycle to the film. See how good it feels. Then talk about this film or take a film course and start changing things from the inside out. STAND people!… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
ScottBarneyJan 17, 2008
I truly enjoyed it, and thought the 2.5 hours flew by. My husband found it interesting from an engineering standpoint (learning about how oil rigs were built and laid at the turn of the 20th century) but found the film long-winded and a bitI truly enjoyed it, and thought the 2.5 hours flew by. My husband found it interesting from an engineering standpoint (learning about how oil rigs were built and laid at the turn of the 20th century) but found the film long-winded and a bit too much dialog. So some of you will like it, others won't;if you don't like films that are slow-action, you probably won't like this one.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
ChristopherC.Jan 16, 2008
After seeing this film, I felt refreshed. I needed a movie like this to remind me why I love film. I needed a film like this to give me faith that there are still film makers that use the medium as more than just a profit center, but toAfter seeing this film, I felt refreshed. I needed a movie like this to remind me why I love film. I needed a film like this to give me faith that there are still film makers that use the medium as more than just a profit center, but to express ideas and situations artistically. I needed a film like this to reaffirm my faith that not all actors are self-indulgent talking heads. I needed a film like this to proof that proves that films are not just formulas but a means to creative independence. I love this film, and hope that some out there will feel the same way I've felt.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
HaleL.Jan 16, 2008
I hate to sound extreme and toss my coin in with perfect ten crowd, but this is a goddamn great film. A pretty sprawling, Kubrick-esque American fable. The visuals are stunning, camera work subtle and sharp. Performances are, above all,I hate to sound extreme and toss my coin in with perfect ten crowd, but this is a goddamn great film. A pretty sprawling, Kubrick-esque American fable. The visuals are stunning, camera work subtle and sharp. Performances are, above all, memorable. Whether you dug it or not is your thing, but why else are we sitting around shitting about how AWESOME or TERRIBLE this thing is. It's a stark work of art. And usually with one of those, there is mass division. So, don't feel bad or pretentious for digging it, and don't feel self-righteous and scornful if you didn't.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
XTrapnelJan 16, 2008
The ending is not wholly satisfactory, but the middle section of the picture features some of the most bravura sequences -- scored to perfection -- you could ever hope to see. However, Joe K is right about some of the awful, purple prose theThe ending is not wholly satisfactory, but the middle section of the picture features some of the most bravura sequences -- scored to perfection -- you could ever hope to see. However, Joe K is right about some of the awful, purple prose the film has inspired. Mind you, have a look at this: "These people are so desperate to prove how "above" they are of the common movie goer." That hardly counts as English, either.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
MattAJan 15, 2008
I hate to sound like all of the others, praising Daniel Day-Lewis for his performance, but the lead actor is deserving of it. His character was a believable figure enthralled by greed and power. His relationship with his son H.W. and hisI hate to sound like all of the others, praising Daniel Day-Lewis for his performance, but the lead actor is deserving of it. His character was a believable figure enthralled by greed and power. His relationship with his son H.W. and his hate for those around him create a complex character which strikes almost fear in the common man. The story was very interesting. There were also a few spectacular scenes of dialogue. I can see how some may not like it, especially if the topic doesn't interest one. However, look deep into the development of Daniel plainfield as a man throughout thirty years, and you'll see a creature worth watching.… Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful
10
jimrJan 14, 2008
The terse dialog and stark visuals really highlight and outstanding storyline. This is the only time I've seen huge numbers of an audience burst into spontaneous nervous laughter because the tension in a scene is so palpable. This isThe terse dialog and stark visuals really highlight and outstanding storyline. This is the only time I've seen huge numbers of an audience burst into spontaneous nervous laughter because the tension in a scene is so palpable. This is great film not for its art house merit but for the punch its story packs.
reviewers who launch into a diatribe of other reviews and then conclude with an argument such as "...was like being a proctologist for two hours- go see it if you like staring at a$$h()les." are the ones who deserve to be mocked.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
MikeSurenessJan 14, 2008
Scene after scene of men walking. See that tree one hundred yards in the distance. You are going to watch the actors walk to it and back in real time. Never once during this movie did I ever wonder what was going to happen next or have aScene after scene of men walking. See that tree one hundred yards in the distance. You are going to watch the actors walk to it and back in real time. Never once during this movie did I ever wonder what was going to happen next or have a reason to care.… Expand
3 of 4 users found this helpful
7
MarkDuffyJan 14, 2008
This is quite likely the most overrated film of the year. Overall, this film is very strongly character driven. Daniel Day-Lewis and Paul Bano create intriguing characters that save an otherwise lifeless plot. The soundtrack is great andThis is quite likely the most overrated film of the year. Overall, this film is very strongly character driven. Daniel Day-Lewis and Paul Bano create intriguing characters that save an otherwise lifeless plot. The soundtrack is great and the characters intriguing but I simply found myself wanting more. There is nothing to "get" in this movie. The film is rather heavy handed on its critiques of society, greed, etc. Succinctly, this film drags you through the rise and fall of an intriguing character at a slow pace with a hollow ending.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
AlexS.CarterJan 13, 2008
i need to be honest right from the start - i listed 'there will be blood' as my favourite film of 2007 before i had even seen it. luckily, i couldn't have been more right. last night, i sat in a sold-out theatre at the varsity,i need to be honest right from the start - i listed 'there will be blood' as my favourite film of 2007 before i had even seen it. luckily, i couldn't have been more right. last night, i sat in a sold-out theatre at the varsity, the only one in canada and one of only a handful across north america currently screening the film. the show was to begin at 8.45pm but by 8pm, all the tickets had been sold and there was a lineup outside the theatre unlike anything i've seen for any film other than blockbusters like star wars, harry potter or lotr. as the previous show emptied, i watched the faces of the patrons as they came out of the darkness, some in excited conversation as if they had just gotten off an amusement park ride, others in quiet contemplation as if having just visited the grave of someone dear to them. one young man exclaimed to those of us in line as he walked by 'you're in for a treat!' while others simple nodded their heads to acknowledge us before we embarked on the journey from which they were just returning. i have been to many films on opening night and there is quite often a lot of excitement, but i must reiterate that i have never experienced this kind of anticipation for an art film.

and then the film began. i'm not someone who gives a synopsis of a film in my reviews since i feel it can infringe on the viewer's experience. i prefer to explore the various creative elements of the piece and my experience/reaction to those elements. i had no doubt going into 'there will be blood' that daniel-day lewis would be incredible as a nihilistic oil magnate driven by ambition and greed. i was also not worried about the direction since i really enjoyed paul thomas anderson's previous three films ('boogie nights', 'magnolia' and 'punch-drunk love'). i had no way of knowing that this film would not only be both anderson's and lewis' best film to date, but also a master work in music (radiohead's jonny greenwood), cinematography (robert elswit - 'good night, and good luck', 'syriana'), editing, art direction, sound editing, costumes and makeup. no other film in recent memory has impressed me on every level as this film has.

i also want to specially recognise paul dano who plays a young preacher and is lewis' only real adversary in the film. dano orginally had only a small role and another actor was initially cast in the role of the preacher [http://www.calendarlive.com/movies/cl-en-dano2jan02,0,924101.story?coll=cl-movies]. dano stepped in at the last minute due partially to his previous work with lewis and i am grateful that he was up for the task. since winning best debut performance at the independent spirit awards back in 2001 for playing howie blitzer in l.i.e., dano has had memorable roles in 'the girl next door', 'the king', 'fast food nation' and of course 2006's 'little miss sunshine'. this is one young actor that deserves to be watched and i hope he at least gets a nomination for his incredible work in 'there will be blood'.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
JoseRJan 13, 2008
This movie was slightly more than 2.5 hours long, but felt like a seven hour film. D.D. Lewis' performance is the only thing that kept me in my seat. Paul Dano's performance was also excellent. The movie dragged on for what seamedThis movie was slightly more than 2.5 hours long, but felt like a seven hour film. D.D. Lewis' performance is the only thing that kept me in my seat. Paul Dano's performance was also excellent. The movie dragged on for what seamed like days. I found myself looking at my watch wondering how long the movie had been playing and when, if ever, it would finally end.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
joek.Jan 13, 2008
The funniest thing about this film is its ability to inspire some of the most patheitc armchair critic user reviews ever written. These people are so desperate to prove how "above" they are of the common movie goer, they don't even The funniest thing about this film is its ability to inspire some of the most patheitc armchair critic user reviews ever written. These people are so desperate to prove how "above" they are of the common movie goer, they don't even realize how stupid they sound. Look at these gems: "It is more exciting for its very real clashing of strong characters set to an EQUALLY RELEVANT (!?) background." "Rarely does a movie so EXCEED THE CONVENTIONS (!?) of todays film making as this one does." "Immediately after seeing it I was amazed. Not only was it by far the best movie of the year. But it might be one of the best movies I have ever seen." (ever heard of a comma?) "but the writing too really is something". Was ready to love this film, but watching this movie was like being a proctologist for two hours- go see it if you like staring at a$$h()les.… Expand
2 of 3 users found this helpful
4
RadCompanyJan 13, 2008
Another reviewer below wrote, "Anyone who doesn't rate this film highly is not terribly bright." Most people that believe There Will Be Blood is a good film are doing so to state their "Hollywood Vs. Art" status. Trust me, I don't Another reviewer below wrote, "Anyone who doesn't rate this film highly is not terribly bright." Most people that believe There Will Be Blood is a good film are doing so to state their "Hollywood Vs. Art" status. Trust me, I don't "not get it". I get it, but it's just one big empty gesture after another, just like the ubiquitous "How many in your family?" question the characters in the movie pose before every scene. The opening music is a nod to "2001" that tries to set a tone that something mysterious is happening, but there is nothing deep here, just a cliche morality with no likable characters to identify with. Haven't felt this empty after leaving the theatre in a while.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
MarioB.Jan 13, 2008
An excellent film that hits you like a fever. Absolutely visceral and and hard to stomach, this movie focuses on characters that you will seldom find as the focus of a character study. Unsympathetic but charismatic, Daniel Plainview is An excellent film that hits you like a fever. Absolutely visceral and and hard to stomach, this movie focuses on characters that you will seldom find as the focus of a character study. Unsympathetic but charismatic, Daniel Plainview is portrayed to perfection by Daniel Day-Lewis.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
JohnBarkerJan 12, 2008
There Will Be Blood is simply the best American movie all year, perhaps ever. While No Country For Old Men was fantastic as well, Anderson puts his own original daring ideas into the mix to create something completely unique. It is better There Will Be Blood is simply the best American movie all year, perhaps ever. While No Country For Old Men was fantastic as well, Anderson puts his own original daring ideas into the mix to create something completely unique. It is better because it is imperfect. It is funner for its awkward scenes and twisted sense of direction. It is more exciting for its very real clashing of strong characters set to an equally relevant background.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
BarbaraL.Jan 12, 2008
Amazing, haunting, thought provoking, and worth every minute of an film goer's time!
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
TerryA.Jan 12, 2008
A "10" does not do this film justice. Rarely does a movie so exceed the conventions of todays film making as this one does. A true masterpiece.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
KeithD.Jan 12, 2008
Long and Boring, 1 good actor, nothing more, I really didn't even think there was that much for DDL to do anything with. You just keep waiting and waiting for something to develop and nothing does.
2 of 3 users found this helpful
10
michaelcJan 12, 2008
Immediately after seeing it I was amazed. Not only was it by far the best movie of the year. But it might be one of the best movies I have ever seen. Paul Thomas Anderson's directing is masterful, and Daniel Day Lewis' performance Immediately after seeing it I was amazed. Not only was it by far the best movie of the year. But it might be one of the best movies I have ever seen. Paul Thomas Anderson's directing is masterful, and Daniel Day Lewis' performance is unbelievable. Its just magnificent.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
DeeS.Jan 12, 2008
I'm rating this babdly because I know bad votes get more attention...but I will admit that this is an incredible film. I was worried about Day-Lewis and his theatrical antics, but he showed remarkable restraint in his perfirmance, and I'm rating this babdly because I know bad votes get more attention...but I will admit that this is an incredible film. I was worried about Day-Lewis and his theatrical antics, but he showed remarkable restraint in his perfirmance, and was perfectly cast in the part. Anyone who doesn't rate this film highly is not terribly bright. I hate almost all of Hollywood's generic output, but this stands out without a doubt. And I will also add that I disliked Magnolia, and was hesitant about seeing this film. This film has a lot of ideas strewn throughout its shifting narrative, and what I particularly liked is how the film made BIG OIL a personal issue. Most documentaries that deal with oil (and there are so few of them) leave no room for personal politics; P.T. Anderson's film relies on a close study of how mankind's raping of the earth reveals troubles that evolve exponentially, culminating in our present state of affairs (the effects of which we are facing now more than ever). But placing the film less than 100 years in our not too distant past should be a wake-up call to anyone with even a semblance of a brain. In an artfully convincing way, this film is a desperate call to action. If people could only take their bicycles or public transportation to the screening. And that's the irony with modernity, isn't it?… Expand
2 of 3 users found this helpful
6
rammJan 12, 2008
They should have named this " There will be Asshole" Sure, I get the message. But what's with the music? It seems that they were trying to make the story something it was not with all the abstract horror strings. Every scene was built They should have named this " There will be Asshole" Sure, I get the message. But what's with the music? It seems that they were trying to make the story something it was not with all the abstract horror strings. Every scene was built up with this omenous music that never led to anything. It had you thinking that diaster was eminent yet nothing ever happened. What was the story on Eli and Paul? They never resolved that to any satisfaction. DD Lewis was brilliant. But was it neccesary to portray him as the world largest colnic apature? I don't get it. Great cinematography. Great acting. But where's the beef?… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
IanT.Jan 12, 2008
I think 20, 30, 40 years from now, people will look back at There Will Be Blood as an epic work of American filmmaking, following in the tradition of movies like The Godfather.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
JackH.Jan 12, 2008
It's nice to see a prestige picture that breaks from the traditional "heartbreaking-story-of-humanity" mold every once in a while, without becoming too politicized. This is one of the reasons "There Will Be Blood" is so incredible: it It's nice to see a prestige picture that breaks from the traditional "heartbreaking-story-of-humanity" mold every once in a while, without becoming too politicized. This is one of the reasons "There Will Be Blood" is so incredible: it delicately treads the line between humanistic and intimate, and commentative, political. Day-Lewis's portrayal of Plainview is, without a doubt, the film's highlight, to be sure. Coming out of the theater, I was shaking and crying--not due to the sadness of the film, but rather due to Day-Lewis's performance (if he doesn't win Best Actor for that role, then there really will be blood.) This isn't to play down the rest of the film, though: it does an unusually good job of making all of its characters, not just the protagonist, complex and believable, and by the end, it'll be difficult to decide who's the de facto "good guy"--or if there even is one. Many comparisons have been drawn between this film and "Citizen Kane." To be sure, the capitan-of-industry aspect is there, along with the power-corrupts adage worked in. But somewhere between Johnny Greenwood's haunting soundtrack and Daniel Plainview's monologue about his hatred of humanity, you realize this film is nothing like "Citizen Kane"--it's a rags-to-riches story with all the hope and triumph drained from it,like so much oil in the ground, and it feels strangely relevant to the current world. Easily the best movie of the year.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
DarrylF.Jan 11, 2008
Day-Lewis gives the best acting performance that I have ever seen !!!! it was pure joy watching this man act.... and it had some of the funniest scenes that had me laughing harder than some of what they call comedy today.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
BillD.Jan 11, 2008
This is a very big movie, an experience, an event. Exhilarating. The movie ended 2 hours ago, and I can't calm down. I'm speechless. If you like movies, you have got to see this.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
LeonardP.Jan 11, 2008
This has to be the biggest joke critics have played on the film going public.it's like watching Bergman on Valium.SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO Boreing. Paul Thomas Anderson is the most pretentious director working today.
2 of 3 users found this helpful
10
MattH.Jan 10, 2008
One of the greatest movies that I have ever seen. Daniel Day-Lewis gives his best performance to date. PT Anderson's directiopn is flawles. Paul Dano shows great promise in a pivotal role in the film. Great Location, great supporting One of the greatest movies that I have ever seen. Daniel Day-Lewis gives his best performance to date. PT Anderson's directiopn is flawles. Paul Dano shows great promise in a pivotal role in the film. Great Location, great supporting cast, and for a long movie it does keep you captivated and wanting more the whole time. I can't wait until it's released wide, so I can see it again. PS Thank you to Allied ad company for the pass to the screening.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
Page:
More From This Movie

93 Critic Reviews

8.1 User Reviews

Details & Credits|Trailers

Current Movie Releases
By MetascoreBy User Score
1 77 Project Hail Mary
2 75 Send Help
3 73 Hoppers
4 72 The Sheep Detectives
5 68 Crime 101
SEE ALL
Essential Links
New on Amazon Prime Video
New on Netflix
Coming Soon to DVD/Blu-ray
SEE ALL