There Will Be Blood

There Will Be Blood (2007)
Directed by Paul Thomas Anderson
****

Deliberate
P. T. Anderson's newest film is bound to produce love-it or hate-it reactions. It's long (2 1/2 hours). It's set in the oil fields but has only one blowout. Best (or worst) of all, it's deliberate.

This is the story of Daniel Plainview and the well he drilled in Little Boston, California. It's also the story of Eli Sunday, a local boy and fervid pastor of the Third Church of the Revelation. They're both men who are driven to succeed and who teeter on the edge of madness. Before it's all over, there will be blood.

Atmospheric
Plainview's tale develops slowly. In fact, it's slow enough that some viewers have complained and more than one critic has titled a review 'There Will Be Boredom'. PT is obviously cultivating this atmosphere, though. He's developing a tangible feel to the passage of time, a sense of space for these two men to swagger about in. It might be foolish to call this a failure.

Plainview has already been successful at drilling wells when he's approached by one Paul Sunday. Paul offers to sell him exclusive information about the untapped oil fields of his hometown, Little Boston. Soon Plainview is there, unannounced, buying up land with his son HW by his side, the 'only family he's got left' after his wife died in childbirth.

Operatic
He's an obvious mercenary, but we don't know quite what Daniel's got up his sleeve, or whether he's going to tip over one day into the madness he so freely courts. In the meanwhile, his well blows out and HW is injured. Eli Sunday, the charismatic member of his stolid family, decides to win Daniel into the town's good graces by force, luring him into a public conversion and a considerable donation. He's impassioned and respected, but we sense that Eli may be no more honest than Daniel — only more whitewashed in his criminality.

Daniel Plainview takes it all in stride, painting his dialogue in all shades of irony and sarcasm. Eli takes off, purportedly on a mission. Out of nowhere, a man appears, claiming to be Daniel's half brother. But we need a third act.  We need some closure, some confrontation, the inevitable showdown between these conflicted men.

 Showdown is exactly what we get, in a finale that feels like Kubrick without the artificiality. I won't go into the details because this film gets you used to the idea that you don't know what's going to happen next. Even the characters don't seem too sure about it.

Stark
In the end, though, it's obvious that this film has won for itself a distinctive memorability. It's character-driven, yes, and features two performances which are so loaded that it's difficult to tell whether they're over the top or merely faithful portraits of pathological men. Robert Elswit deservingly won for cinematography so convincing in its stylishness that you forget you aren't actually there, part of the frame. Jonny Greenwood contributes a score that is, at turns, gratingly jarring and wonderfully meditative — some of the latter music on the level of Górecki.

It's difficult for me to decide whether I like this film or not. It is so self-assured, so successful at what it is trying to do (whether it's my cup of tea at all times or not), that I feel criticizing it would be like insulting one of America's great novels. The worst I can say is that it's a brilliant failure, not at all an insult in my book. I can't promise it will be your favorite film of the year, but I can say there's a lot going on here. I've been thinking about it for days, and have the feeling it's going to stick with me for a while to come. What more could an artist wish for his work?

Comments

[RC of strangeculture]

I had a feeling you would certainly enjoy this film.

I agree, this film is very memorable, and I too was very fond of Greenwood's score.

Glad to read your thoughts.