I'm hoping to start a new series in my blog entitled "A Second Look". These are movies in which I was not entirely sure about when I first viewed it, and movies I think are worth a second glance to see if my opinion about them might change. I feel a lot of movies become richer the more times you see them, something may be there you might not have noticed the first time, and sometimes you appreciate something the more you see it. Some of my favorite movies started as films I didn't really appreciate the first time I saw it, but there was always something about them that made me want to revisit them. For my first entry in this series I chose "There Will Be Blood".
I had not seen "There Will Be Blood" since it was first released in theatres, and back then I felt I already came into the film with preconceived notions. As a rule, I try not to read too much about a film before I go see it, but I live in Red Deer, and sometimes when a film like "There Will Be Blood" comes out, it takes awhile for my city to recognize it. It wasn't until the film was nominated for multiple Academy Awards, that Red Deer finally got it. However there was so much written about the film, I couldn't resist reading up on it. One thing that I think made me go in with a skeptical eye was how it was compared very much to "Citizen Kane". The audacity of that comparison had to be unfathomable, how could any film come close to what that classic accomplished?
Upon watching the film, many things bothered me about it, I found it slow moving, with an annoying score that seemed out of place, but most of all a lead character I was ambivalent towards. I felt "There Will Be Blood" tried to impress me too much with its technical wizardry, but had a story I could care less about.
However many things made me want to see it again. Many critics began praising the film even more than before, saying it rewards with multiple viewings. One of my favorite critics Kim Morgan had it in her top ten of that year somewhere in the middle, but after seeing it again, she shot it up past "No Country for Old Men" to take the number one spot.
While this was happening, I was convinced by other friends saying how great it was, when this happened, I felt my ego tarnished, I guess I missed something.
I started thinking about it and figured perhaps I did go into the film with different expectations, I was judging it for what it wasn't, not for what it was. But I suppose the thing that convinced me to see it again was Paul Thomas Anderson. Here is one of the most talented Hollywood filmmakers around, who's "Boogie Nights", "Magnolia" and "Punch Drunk Love" show a very unique though slightly derivative voice. I figured someone like Anderson deserved the benefit of the doubt.
So I have now viewed "There Will Be Blood" for the first time since it was first released, and I must admit my views of it have changed.
The film begins as a silent film with a shot of a mountainous area and an ominous score that I haven't forgotten since the first time I saw it. The shot is very reminiscent of the beginning of the "Dawn of Man" segment in Kubrick's "2001". In fact I would say there are many Kubrick elements throughout the film, most notably in the rather darkly comic finale.
The first 20 minutes of the movie should be shown in film schools on the importance of telling a story through image, as that is what Anderson does. We get the humble beginnings of Daniel Plainview, and his obsessive determination which will dominate his character throughout the film, all done with no dialogue. Anderson always seems to have a very grandiose way of introducing his movies, I find this way less showy and far more impressive.
In my first viewing I was annoyed by the music by Johnny Greewood, I felt it brought too much attention on itself. I had a different feeling towards it now, it is a great score, and I can appreciate how Anderson uses it in the film. The music tells of the dread we have for Daniel Plainview, it's almost as if it's used in foreshadowing, at times it made me feel like I was watching a horror movie.
I suppose your love of the film must some how fall on the shoulders of Daniel Day Lewis and how you view his performance. Much has been said of his chameleon like sensibility when approaching a role, and this particular one gives him much to chew on.
Still the one thing that continues to bother me with "There Will Be Blood" is in the character of Daniel Plainview himself, it's not in the way Day Lewis plays him, but in the way the script refuses to show what made him the man he is.
When we first see Plainview, he has carved out a path for himself, but what makes him choose this path. There are three relationships in Plainview's life that define who is, the first one is his son, who he abandons when he becomes a burdon. The second is a man claiming to be his brother who he learns to bond with, and the third is Eli Sunday, the Preacher/Prophet who is just as ambitious and monstrous as Daniel. The son and the brother hint that there is something more to Daniel than the bloodthirsty oilman, something that he and the film hide too much, they are too interested in Daniel the capitalist monster. Eli is Daniel's reflection, and that is all he has in the end, and when Eli is gone, Daniel truly is finished.
I think "There Will Be Blood" is an interesting movie, but it could've been more interesting if it let its character be more human. Daniel Plainview lacks ambiguity, you know from the very beginning what he wants and what he's after, he's a shadow of a man as the film begins, I wish I knew how he became that shadow.
I'm still hesitant to call "There Will Be Blood" a classic, but watching it I can't deny its uniqueness. It's unlike any American movie made in the past decade, it gets you out of a stupor of mundane movie making. I must say I was more interested in the way Anderson was telling the story than I was the first time, and it held my attention. I appreciate the film more than before, and definitely think it deserves multiple viewings, there were shots that I thought were magnificent and I may just want to go back to the film just to admire that aspect. Perhaps someday I'll feel the need to watch it again, maybe then I'll be convinced of its greatness.
No comments:
Post a Comment