There Will Be Blood 2007 (2007) Other movies recommended for you
There Will Be Blood 2007(in Hollywood Movies) There Will Be Blood 2007 (2007) - Download Movie for mobile in best quality 3gp and mp4 format. Also stream There Will Be Blood 2007 on your mobile, tablets and ipads
Plot: A story of family, religion, hatred, oil and madness, focusing on a turn-of-the-century prospector in the early days of the business. Runtime: 158 mins Release Date: 26 Dec 2007
A film that will leave film-goers pondering for a long time (by toolfan-hess)
PT Anderson delivers perhaps his best work with "There Will Be Blood". Unlike "Magnolia", the film's daunting runtime is not very daunting whilst watching it. All acting in the film was solid, even the work of the child actors. Daniel Day-Lewis in particular delivered a truly phenomenal performance, capturing the power of greed, fear, insanity, and comedy simultaneously, at many points throughout the film. At no point does the time period distract from the power of the film. Sometimes period pieces cannot be appreciated because they delve too deep into historical <more>
details -- turning the experience into more of a documentary than a narrative set in the past. This is not the case for "There Will Be Blood", as human interactions are the focus of the film. Johnny Greenwood's chilling score is very strong, benefiting from the elegant minimalism that he show's in the band Radiohead. The cinematography is also spectacular. Robert Elswit beautifully captures the essence of the environment and the tension amongst the characters. All in all, this is truly a perfectly crafted film.
Revitalizing, masterful, and utterly terrifying. (by blake-91)
What is evil? What is hate? How low can an individual go with one's actions and still be considered human....? These, quite possibly, are the biggest questions raised in There Will Be Blood.Paul Thomas Anderson and Daniel Day-Lewis, the tycoons at the helm of this dig for moral oil, tell a story that takes the archetypal anti-heroes of 'Citizen Kane' and Travis Bickle of 'Taxi Driver' to a whole new, 21st-century level. The film, using Lewis's character Daniel Plainview, walks through incredibly dangerous cinematic territory that questions religion, plays with the <more>
nature of greed and hate and evil, and with it all, draws terrifying parallels to the world we live in today. The film and its main character claw so deep through the limits of humanity and the landscape of hell, that you'll be thanking the Good Lord for the silver screen that divides you from this horrible world Paul Thomas Anderson has portrayed. But despite how safe you may seem in your cushy seat, you will undoubtedly walk out of the theater with all kinds of new demons and ghosts buzzing in your head and ripping away at your subconscious. In this way, Anderson has abandoned his primary previous influence of Robert Altman to take more of a Stanley Kubrick direction, creating moral allegories that creep into your psyche and don't ever leave. You should be scared. Very Scared.
This film raises the game for everyone out there. I have loved all of Paul Thomas Anderson's work, including his greatly underrated Punch-Drunk Love, but this is a huge leap from any of the previous movies into a realm, as others have said, inhabited by classics such as Treasure of the Sierra Madre - and then some. Every element of this film is astonishing, from the opening twenty minutes, which feature virtually no dialog, to Jonny Greenwood's score, which I have heard criticized as too imposing but which seems just about perfect to me and brings to mind the non-Blue Danube elements <more>
of 2001 at its most experimental . Daniel Day-Lewis' performance is in a league of its own: his voice, his mannerisms, his physical movement, his stunted emotions, are flesh and blood, and hauntingly so, in a way that even Tommy Lee Jones in In The Valley of Elah which I thought was a pretty staggering performance can't quite attain. I will watch this film again and again simply to see something so raw and so moving and so gut-wrenching. This is why I love movies; this is what made me want to make movies when I was fourteen years old.
Remember Those Hollywood Studio Epics? Me Either. But We're Covered. (by DSampson612)
The year I was born was the same year Predator and Robocop came out. When I was finally old enough to appreciate films, Little Nicky was in theaters. I know, believe me, I know; rocky start. And often I would watch older films, or specials on older films, and be dazzled. You know the ones. Remember when they made Spartacus? Remember sitting in the movies and watching Gregory Peck play Atticus Finch in To Kill A Mockingbird? Remember the first time you heard "I could've been a contender" through theater speakers? Well I sure as hell don't. But I'll tell you what, now I <more>
feel somewhat caught up. Let's begin with the obvious. Daniel Day Lewis. No one's arguing about this. The man is a veritable God among ants on the screen. He takes his role by the reigns and I don't doubt him for a second. In fact, at times, I was downright afraid of the man. Lewis gives what is easily, EASILY the best performance of the past five years. But let's get serious about it. Lewis' Daniel Plainview is the most convincing, awe-inspiring, and downright mortifying character to take the big screen that I can remember. Here, perfectly in his element and at his best, Lewis could go toe to toe with Brando and Kinski, playing a part that oozes enough skill and pathos to earn him a place among Hollywood's, and perhaps the world's, greatest performances of all time. He gives those of us who missed out on the craft, depth of character, and technique of classic cinema a chance to admire a tour de force portrayal of a memorable, identifiable, and completely despicable character, and it's so damned refreshing that I can't stop singing the man's praises. Paul Dano has been taking a lot of fire for this whole thing. People continue to spout their disapproval of the film's casting, saying that Dano has no business rivaling the seasoned Lewis on the screen. Listen, lay down your swords a minute and consider the obvious. The guy was cast opposite the performance of the decade, he's not going to outshine Lewis and you'd be crazy to expect him to. In fact, I think that he and Lewis' back-and-forths are the films highlights, as we see the juxtaposition not only in the characters themselves, but also in their acting techniques. And the cinematography? Welcome to the old days of film. The glory days of Hollywood. Anderson gives us one of the most beautifully shot and directed films in recent memory, truly at the top of his craft on this one. Every moment feels more epic than the last, until the film becomes such a towering cinematic spectacle that the end leaves the viewer exhausted. It's truly an experience not to be missed. Yeah, we missed out on A Street Car Named Desire. And Casablanca isn't gonna be in theaters again any time soon. But in the meantime, There Will Be Blood is just about as good, and will likely haunt our generation as much as the Hollywood studio epics of the past...
Who is Paul Thomas Anderson? There is something about him that does't belong to this earth. That could be a compliment or not, it's all up to us. That's what make his cinema so damn unique. At the end of the day it's all up to us. But the abrasive way in which he visits universes and throws his views to us is so powerful, so arrogant, so enthralling, so infuriating that the experience leaves you baffled and suspicious. but also enchanted, transformed. Here, Daniel's saga could very well be the saga of a Hollywood maverick. So little time for sentimentality. Daniel Day <more>
Lewis seems to understand it all and he adds his unmistakable humanity to another monster, after his butcher in Gangs Of New York. His performance goes beyond anything we've seen recently anywhere. From Upton Sinclair to Paul Thomas Anderson via Daniel Day Lewis an unmissable work of art.
There Will Be Blood is a masterful adaptation of Upton Sinclair's 1926 novel, Oil!.The film was directed by Paul Thomas Anderson, of Magnolia and Boogie Nights. Through actor Daniel Day-Lewis's spot-on representation of the ambitious oil tycoon created by Sinclair, one grows a respect for Daniel Plainview's enterprise, but the corruptive power of oil deteriorates the man's nobility, and along with it one's admiration for him.Witnessing blow by blow the destruction of Plainview's good intentions is contrasted by an off-kilter score composed by Radiohead guitarist Johnny <more>
Greenwood. From the opening scene, harsh, droning violins seem to foreshadow the troubles to come. As an unfortunate result of every business success, Daniel's personal problems multiply.When Daniel and his son, H.W., move to the barren town of Little Boston to exploit a sea of oil beneath it, he becomes acquainted with Eli Sunday Paul Dano , a religious zealot who runs a popular church in town. Eli's presence is continually problematic for Daniel, as they are both overly ambitious in their own pursuits.As business continues to grow, Daniel becomes increasingly angry and withdrawn from the few close to him. In an emotionally climactic final scene, There Will Be Blood encapsulates the humanity of greed, and the corruption of power.In a land where the success of a movie is judged by how many times Adam Sandler can bring down the house by talking like a developmentally disabled 4-year-old, and accidentally sleeping with his grandmother, pet, boss, or self, There Will Be Blood will score no points. This is because There Will Be Blood is actually a phenomenally entertaining and intelligent film, showcasing two of the year's best acting performances. Day-Lewis and Dano If one thing is certain, it is that There Will Be Blood will be well noticed by people who actually appreciate good movies. So, when the Oscar goes to Daniel Day-Lewis for Best Actor, four people will know what movie host Jon Stewart is referring to. The rest of the award shows viewers will be left scratching their heads, asking themselves, There Will Be Blood? Is that the movie about the vampires in Alaska?
I am going with Paul Thomas Anderson's latest, more mature work as the best American film showing this year, certainly guided and downright anchored by Mr. Daniel Day-Lewis in another legendary performance of screen-shattering proportions. I will hear of many accusing this master character actor of overdoing it at times, serenading the camera with eyes viewers needn't peer too closely into lest our own humanity become compromised. The truth is, for every over-the-top scene which almost always remains justifiable in Day-Lewis's astonishing hands, observant viewers will be equally <more>
if not largely rewarded by the boiling subtleties which ripple throughout, just beneath this menacing surface of a man.As engaging a character study the movie feels and this it firmly remains right up until an overworked finale , There Will Be Blood shines equally as bright as a brave new step for period westerns. Not in some time has fictionalized American history been so bold with creative and thematic assertion, yet accessible enough to render this harrowing study into greed without generation, and one for the books.
"I'm an oil man!" Asserts Daniel Plainview Daniel Day-Lewis to a colony of naïve citizens of which he is astutely slipping into his trouser pocket one by one. However in this case the man speaks no lie for his veins do indeed run rich with plutonium oil. A crude, black substance embedded deep in the merciless heart of director Paul Thomas Anderson's gargantuan North American epic- There Will Be Blood. A perpetually steady, emotionally-draining and dark character study of an oil guzzling tycoon that vigorously chews on the themes of gluttony and deception, faith and <more>
ambition, death and revulsion. Do not be mislead by its title, though. This is not some balls-to-the-wall slasher-flick as the "chavs" sat behind me seemed to think at the outset . It is a gruelling, drawn-out dissection of a loathsome yet sinisterly-comical individual consumed and maddened by his own persona. And it's absolutely formidable- visual and melodramatic arrestment at its bona fide best that exudes cinematic precision and awe with satire to spare. But it's also a long-winded affair. So thrill seeking, gore-craving moviegoers walk away, now. I'm afraid there will be no blood for you. Sorry. Add to that list- chic-flick, rom-com and sci-fi enthusiasts. You guys may be better off buying another ticket. Taking another ride. Those left, steady yourself for, perhaps, this year's most thought-provoking feature driven by a leading character performance fit to rival the very best.Ushering in a near dialogue-free opening 15 minutes with a distinct fade-in, Anderson wastes no time in introducing us to the protagonist. Daniel Day-Lewis plays no scratch that Daniel Day-Lewis is Daniel Plainview. An ambitious, moustached miner who, while thrashing away at the crust of his motherland- at the turn of the twentieth century- strikes oil. A profitable discovery that fortuitously leads him to H.W Dillon Freasier , a new-born infant of whom he slots forcefully under his oil sodden wing only to drag about the entire continent in search of large segments of land in which crude oil is stirring directly beneath. Soon enough, Plainview forges a blossoming "family" oil drilling corporation that soon establishes itself as a force in the industry and prospects appear even brighter when, in 1911, Plainview receives a generously eerie, yet pricey tip-off as to where there may be a sturdy supply of his beloved oil. A tip-off in which he pursues like a unwavering moth to an oil fuelled flame as he meanders ominously into Little Boston, California where the true colours of the indomitable oil baron edge disturbingly into light.Daniel Plainview is an angry, vengeful man whose promises and loyalties to those around him are as false and as futile as his love and respect for God. He "guarantees" the people of the Little Boston ranch; food, water, schools and, to the town's radically odd preacher Eli Sunday an inspired Paul Dano , a newly renovated church of the Third Revelation. But he cares little for the reserving of his pledges and spends little time guilt-tripping over his numerous acts of iniquity. "I look at people," he says "and I see nothing worth liking." "I have a competition in me," he continues "and I want no one else to succeed". Self-centred sociopath? Yep, for Plainview is as putrid and as predatory as any character to ever grace the big screen. He putrefies slowly, though. The end product appearing more entity than man. Better yet: an egocentric emblem of evil that governs the screen in an implausible manner in which only an actor of Day-Lewis' calibre can. The sheer potency of his flawless portrayal actually carries the relatively toothless narrative in areas which could be further criticised for chugging along at a near crawling pace at times.Visually and acoustically, though, TWBB is outstanding- every nuance of every aural and cinematic component work so well with one another to help give the film such power and impact. It's just a shame that no real direction or purpose bled into the screenplay for which Anderson adapted from Upton Sinclair's 1927 novel- Oil. As far as storytelling goes, Anderson has underperformed here. His narrative lacks any legitimate path or hooks and, to be honest, the lack of defining moments- bar the infamous confession and milkshake scenes- within 158 minute running length is a little disappointing. But the manner in which Day-Lewis dictates the audiences' attention more or less vanquishes any negative thoughts regarding the muscle of the plot. Which is why it comes as no surprise that everybody and their brother have duly commended the London-born method actor's impeccable, Oscar winning performance: the epitome of everything grand about Anderson's fifth but not quite finest feature yet; profound, provoking, intense, immense.In spite of its flaws, TWBB is still an exceptionally powerful piece of cinema that'll remain etched in the minds of those who take to it for quite some time. Even if it's quality is not there for all to see, in plain view.
I really enjoyed this movie, which I thought was virtually flawless for the first two thirds: realistic, authentic, original. Starting with the scene in which the son tells his father he wants to leave to start his own drilling company, though, I found the acting became stylized, as opposed to naturalistic, a real shift in tone. I hate to say it, but it reminded me of Nicholson in "The Shining." Even the last line, after the murder, seems like a joke, perhaps the only funny line in the entire very somber film. Why the shift? What was the director trying to accomplish by changing <more>
from realism which works well for this film of Naturalistic themes to stylization. Any ideas?Folks have commented on the "Citizen Kane" quotes, which I think are done in really interesting ways. For example, if Kane is famous for deep focus, here we see Kane-like scenes in incredibly shallow focus. The music's fantastic, drawing attention to itself in ways that break the rules of traditional film-making, really adding dimension to the narrative and characterizations.