On the surface, one may depict this movie as a proxy for the US involvement in Iraq. It is about a ruthless, cheating, win-at-any-cost oilman’s relentless drive to acquire and control oil. That this analysis will be extremely popular with a lot of moviegoers is a given. In the long run however; There Will Be Blood is likely to be remembered for a fascinating character portrayal and a powerful performance by the lead actor Daniel Day-Lewis. He is the favorite to win the Oscar for Best Actor in 2007. This picture is also nominated for several other awards including best picture and best director(Paul Thomas Anderson).
Story Synopsis
After discovering oil in the late 1890’s, Daniel Plainview(Daniel Day-Lewis) becomes a serious prospector. He forms a small company, gathers crew and equipment, and begins drilling for oil in earnest. An accident claims the life of one of his men, and Daniel adopts his baby son. Using the son(named H.W.) to burnish his family credentials, Daniel cajoles rural people into letting him prospect for oil on their lands. One day a young man, Paul Sunday(Paul Dano), walks into his office and offers to sell him the address of a place "floating on a pool of oil". Daniel makes the deal and gets the address(it is Paul’s family’s property), and arrives with the 10-12 year old H.W. He does discover oil and without mentioning this attempts to buy the property from Paul’s father. Paul’s twin brother Eli drives a hard bargain(he knows about the oil) and they agree upon$10K, paid half in advance and the other half to be paid later as a donation to Eli’s church. Daniel’s ruthlessness is displayed on many occasions; buying surrounding properties to ensure a monopoly and not donating the other$5k to Eli’s church. Another chilling example is when H.W. looses his hearing in a drilling accident, and he packs him off to a boarding school. A lone property holdout makes Daniel join Eli’s church as a condition for sale, and a probable atheist Daniel endures a humiliating initiation. All this so he can build a pipeline to the coast to transport oil, and not be at the mercy of a
big company competitor. The rest of the movie documents his relentless exploits, culminating in a truly volcanic ending of epic proportions.
Iraq War Proxy
This analogy brings out all the "bad" stereotypes - greedy capitalist stop-at-nothing oil-men, and equally power-hungry evangelists(Eli). Both attempt to cheat and swindle innocent people for their own profit, and the capitalist also uses force when necessary. Daniel Plainview symbolizes a corrupt tyrannical America lusting after oil present on other people’s lands. It is easy enough to make this analysis and call it a day, and for the most part probably justified as well. Other supporting evidence includes Daniel’s(and America’s) sometimes isolationist and sometimes do-it-alone behavior.
What Makes A Person Tick
As Hercule Poirot likes to say(Murder on the Orient Express); there is a simple explanation(Iraq War Proxy) and there is a complex explanation. Outwardly, Daniel is driven to acquire and control oil; but he does not seem to relish its material gains. He sleeps on wooden floors and eats simple food while at the drilling site, and seems to do so even after striking it rich and purchasing a large mansion. It could be argued that he is impotent, he is never shown consorting with women. Being an atheist/agnostic, he certainly does not act in the name of God; indeed his major redeeming feature is a virulent hatred of religious con-men. My analysis is that he is driven by an intense desire to succeed, and is only afraid of disappointing one person - himself(since he does not care for God and is a loner). After watching this movie a friend of mine compared Daniel’s character to Howard Hughes. I tend to agree with him slightly, but will also add Richard M. Nixon to the mix. Suffice to say that this character portrayal has enough volcanic fuel to ignite and sustain several debates.
Performance Comparison
Daniel Day-Lewis’s performance as Daniel Plainview is certainly one of the best performances by a lead male actor that I have ever seen. Indeed, a separate review could be written just to compare with other great performances. The obvious ones that spring to mind are Marlon Brando(Godfather), Robert De Niro(Godfather II), Gregory Peck(To Kill A Mockingbird), George C. Scott(Patton), Jack Nicholson(One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest), Dustin Hoffman(Rain Man), Tom Hanks(Forrest Gump) and Russell Crowe(A Beautiful Mind). This friend of mine also had another intriguing question - Can this movie be made by Bollywood and if yes, who would play the lead? My answer(and I know I need body armor after this, let those NU’s come forth) - NO & NONE(Well if you put me in a dungeon without food unless I had an answer; maybe Dilip Kumar or KamalHaasan). I would go so far as to say that it is unlikely that anyone but Hollywood can make this kind of a movie and extract this performance(Double coating of armor needed now.)
*Why is it Uplifting
*Despite all the negative implications, There Will Be Blood is an uplifting quintessential Hollywood classic. This movie grows upon you and makes you think hard about your convictions. It courageously portrays all the inconsistencies and lacunae deeply rooted within a person’s(and a country’s) character; does not make any apologies for it, nor does it present any corrective solutions. Paul Thomas Anderson’s direction is top class(I really would like Ipsi to comment on direction and other technical aspects of the movie, she is so much better at this than I am.). The sets are realistic and the general handling is well suited to bring out the movie’s inherent complexity.
In summation; in almost all encounters of life that require passion and drive - "There Will Be Blood".
For more reviews and information -
1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/There_Will_Be_Blood
2) https://imdb.com/title/tt0469494/(Currently ranked #20)
Mouthshut has this movie in Hollywood Movies->NonCurrent->T
It should obviously be in Hollywood Movies->Current.