There Will Be Blood

Rating: 10/10 (23 July 2011)

There Will Be Blood – 9.8/10
Director: Paul Thomas Anderson
Writer: Paul Thomas Anderson
Ground-breaking, disturbing, distraught,frightening, unnerving, intimidating, and in every sense of the word –'a masterpiece'. There Will Be Blood is a character sketch so strong,so complex, that it might take an individual a lifetime of trials and tribulations to comprehend the forces of human nature at work.
The film is dark and desolate, like much of Upton Sinclair's works, on whose book 'Oil' the film is loosely based on. Paul Thomas Anderson's (Magnolia) vision to convert this nature study of capitalism into a stunning film, revolving around an oil baron and a pastor has yielded starkly contrasting reactions. While audiences at large have not taken to the film particularly well, most critics unanimously agreed it was Anderson's best. Daniel Day-Lewis (Daniel Plainview), who plays the role of the oil prospector, has etched a new character in the history of world cinema and Paul Dano (Paul Sunday/Eli Sunday) who became a part of the film after the shooting started has played Day-Lewis' antagonist with perfection.
Anderson researched this film with all sincerity and it shows. Day-Lewis spend days understanding the character he was playing, to an extent that the actor who Paul Dano replaced alleged he was intimidated by Daniel's character, off-screen as well! The cinematography of the film is simple brilliance, and rightly earned Robert Elswit, Anderson's companion from Magnolia, an Oscar for best cinematography. While the music of the film did not earn much appreciation, I thought it perfectly complemented the film. In several instances, the music lays bare Day-Lewis' emotions, especially in the instance post the accident, when he has a conversation with his son HW, played by Dillion Freasier.
The film had a very strong script. This is almost true of all films made from successful and well written novels. But Day-Lewis has gone a step forward and owned the character. He commands every iota of attention in the film and for the first twenty minutes, where there is no dialogue, Lewis proceeds to build and delineate a character which will ultimately define what the film will be. I am not sure if I have seen a better character sketch in a film, a character so powerful, that it leaves one disturbed when the credits role in. What has amazed me is the magnitude with which the audience and critics alike have misunderstood the character narrative of the film.
Lewis' character has largely been interpreted as a heartless, cruel, capitalist for who even his adopted son is just a tool to achieve power and success. I believe this widespread misinterpretation is due to a shallow approach that capitalists are greedy and will stop at nothing to achieve their goals. The character of the film is so complex, that I am not sure if there is enough space and time, and ability to explain the nuances and explore the depths. But I will make a brief attempt to do so.
Lewis' character is shown to be highly competitive. A man who trusts no one and loves nothing; he is lonely and believes there is no need to understand people as it would be a futile pursuit beyond that what is obvious. But he is not a man driven by pure greed, nor is he blinded by wealth and affluence as many viewers have believed. His relation with his son, and his inability to chart the course of his son's life, reveal his softer side while throwing light on his own superiority, godlessness and a form of megalomania. His character is extremely rational, but his hatred for everything that competes with him ultimately leads to his destruction. Not only is he aware of this (the last dialogue of the film tells us this), we see several moments where his loneliness breaks him; but the fundamental purpose of a human being shedding tears is undermined if there is no one to wipe them. He rises spiteful, harsher and harder after each trial, like a rock hardened by the incessant heat of a volcano. He seeks some solace, something to hold on to. Any trace of familial blood (There WILL Be BLOOD) which he can create by the virtue of his will or by the hand of destiny, he shall accept. The complexities of his character are so profound, that they only reveal themselves in small and quick passing dialogues and one has to live the character to truly see through him.
I dread to say there are common traits Daniel Plainview shares with all and everybody. We have either failed to realize it, even though our actions would speak, or we have managed to subvert, repress and bury them deep enough for acceptance in an unforgiving, conditional society. The film is like a streak of artistic lightening in a bleak sky. Whether this film speaks of perfection or not, we will never know, but one thing is certain, we will debate its mastery for years to come.