'There Will Be Blood' Excitement Thread! (1 Viewer)

[Yurn!]

Well that's what I meant. Please don't take it as a personal insult

oh i don't, i barely register what you have to say about anything Mitchum.

 

[Corey]

Hahahahah. I'm a little embarrased for you with that one.
C'mon play the ball not the man.

Without resorting to ludicrously childish insults why do *you* think Daniel Plainview is such a complex character?

It's Game and Player.

See? I'm just as smart as you.

 

[Yurn!]

not that i am making any comparisons or competitions, but i really wanna see NCFOM again. it was fucking great.

 

[Moods For Mallards]

It wasn't me who said he was complex - but whatever - you want me to say why I think Plainview is more complex than a novelty act like Chigur with his funy hair and his coin toss schtick - OK I can do that.

It's easy to focus on Plainviews drive and aquisitiveness to the exclusion of all else. He has a self awareness that Chigur is completely lacking. Contrast the conversations between Chigur, Carson and Carla Jean and the one between Plainview and his Brother. Chigur has absolutely no understanding of what Carson and Carla Jean are saying to him. On the other hand Plainview is aware of how different he is and how that may be a flaw in his make up.

All that bollox about Chigur having a code - that all comes from Carson - Chigur himself is just a metronomic psycho. Unsettling perhaps, scary - but complex, bollox.

Remember for Plainviews fury at Ely during the baptism scene he still brought HW back from the boarding school immediately after. Also in the final scene there is the paternal pride he has in Paul Sunday's success - we are given the impression that he had been closely following Paul's progress. So there is definately more going on with him than just plian greed.

In fact his hatred of Ely has nothing to do with greed - it is far more elemental - it has more to do with seing Ely as a fraud than anything to do with money. If greed was the motive he would have paid Ely what he promised - he had no problem paying more to Paul anyway - for good relations and a quiet life.

Very good post. Beats the hell out of most of the alternately snide and vague rubbish of the last few pages.
I do think that the complexity of NCFOM comes not from the character of Chigurgh himself though, but from how he is used in the imagination of Jones. In that sense, it could be said that NCFOM is about the ability/inability of ordinary people to influence the world they live in.

 

[Moods For Mallards]

Oh I don't know.

 

[Mitchum]

It wasn't me who said he was complex - but whatever - you want me to say why I think Plainview is more complex than a novelty act like Chigur with his funy hair and his coin toss schtick - OK I can do that.

It's easy to focus on Plainviews drive and aquisitiveness to the exclusion of all else. He has a self awareness that Chigur is completely lacking. Contrast the conversations between Chigur, Carson and Carla Jean and the one between Plainview and his Brother. Chigur has absolutely no understanding of what Carson and Carla Jean are saying to him. On the other hand Plainview is aware of how different he is and how that may be a flaw in his make up.

All that bollox about Chigur having a code - that all comes from Carson - Chigur himself is just a metronomic psycho. Unsettling perhaps, scary - but complex, bollox.

Remember for Plainviews fury at Ely during the baptism scene he still brought HW back from the boarding school immediately after. Also in the final scene there is the paternal pride he has in Paul Sunday's success - we are given the impression that he had been closely following Paul's progress. So there is definately more going on with him than just plian greed.

In fact his hatred of Ely has nothing to do with greed - it is far more elemental - it has more to do with seing Ely as a fraud than anything to do with money. If greed was the motive he would have paid Ely what he promised - he had no problem paying more to Paul anyway - for good relations and a quiet life.

I think you're missing the point about the Chiguhr character. He may be a metronomic psycho (he doesn't kill the receptionist in the motel or two kids at the end though) but he is also a symbol of morality. He sets out to retrieve the suitcase and he does, regardless of consequence.
It's not only Carson's reference to his moral fortitude but Sherrif Bell's speech at the end of the movie.

Going on the examples you cite if being a responsible father and an obsessive capitalist are the complex facets of Plainview's character well...*shrug*

Plus I don't think he's proud of Paul Sunday-he's aware of a fellow competitor.

 

[Mormon Nailer]

Han on a second - Chigur's search for the suitcase has nothing to do with morality or doggedly doing what you set out to.

He killed the people who contracted him to retreive the suitcase - he wants the thing for himself.

And of course Daniel is proud of Paul - all that spiel about the Ely bing the afterbirth and the pride in his voice when he says Paul has 2 wells producing.

 

[Mitchum]

Han on a second - Chigur's search for the suitcase has nothing to do with morality or doggedly doing what you set out to.

He killed the people who contracted him to retreive the suitcase - he wants the thing for himself.

And of course Daniel is proud of Paul - all that spiel about the Ely bing the afterbirth and the pride in his voice when he says Paul has 2 wells producing.

Chigurgh is an idea of morality. Chigurgh is not meant to be a character in the *conventional* sense. He's an object of drama, a symbol. He doesn't change. Again, I reckon this is symbolic. In a fillum which can seem to be deliberately ambiguous, it's still clear that Chigurgh has a sort of moral code and that of all the characters in the film, his code is the most unflappable. Philosophically speaking, Chigurgh is the most perfect example of a moral code. He does at the end what he promises to do at the beginning. In certain terms, he is the most honest individual in the film.
What's hard to stomach here is that the honesty comes with so much darkness. In essence, if this is morality with honesty, then pure morality is too dark for normal people.


It's spelt 'Chigurgh', right?

 

[Mormon Nailer]

Chigurgh is an idea of morality. Chigurgh is not meant to be a character in the *conventional* sense. He's an object of drama, a symbol. He doesn't change. Again, I reckon this is symbolic. In a fillum which can seem to be deliberately ambiguous, it's still clear that Chigurgh has a sort of moral code and that of all the characters in the film, his code is the most unflappable. Philosophically speaking, Chigurgh is the most perfect example of a moral code. He does at the end what he promises to do at the beginning. In certain terms, he is the most honest individual in the film.
What's hard to stomach here is that the honesty comes with so much darkness. In essence, if this is morality with honesty, then pure morality is too dark for normal people.

Are you on glue?
I mean really. Theres no other excuse for it.

 

[Corey]

Chigurgh is an idea of morality. Chigurgh is not meant to be a character in the *conventional* sense. He's an object of drama, a symbol. He doesn't change. Again, I reckon this is symbolic. In a fillum which can seem to be deliberately ambiguous, it's still clear that Chigurgh has a sort of moral code and that of all the characters in the film, his code is the most unflappable. Philosophically speaking, Chigurgh is the most perfect example of a moral code. He does at the end what he promises to do at the beginning. In certain terms, he is the most honest individual in the film.
What's hard to stomach here is that the honesty comes with so much darkness. In essence, if this is morality with honesty, then pure morality is too dark for normal people.


It's spelt 'Chigurgh', right?

I think you are crazy. I really do.

 

[snakybus]

haha you film geeks crack me up, fighting on the internet over which is better, NCFOM or TWBB.

I loved There Will Be Blood. First film I've seen on the big screen in about a year. From the opening title it had me hooked. For some reason it reminded me of that film Don't Look Now, not sure why.

I win.

 

[Buzzo]

I thought this film was mutli-snoozey.
Reding about everyone's appreciation for all the scenery, Danny Day and tension being created by camera shots and awesome scenery and shit... it doesn't make up for the fact that it was generally quite boring and nothing happened that I particularly cared about.

I thought the priest dude was fucking cool but that was about it.

 

[Mitchum]

I loved There Will Be Blood. First film I've seen on the big screen in about a year.

There's the rub.

 

[snakybus]

There's the rub.

Rubbing yersel' again, Mitchy?

 

[JohnnyRaz]

. For some reason it reminded me of that film Don't Look Now, not sure why.
.

Facial hair

 

[potlatch]

I've been thinking about this movie constantly since I saw it a couple of weeks ago. I haven't read 'Oil' or anything (which I know was published in 1927), but does anyone think there's something in the idea that the story works on some level as an allegory of the rise and fall of the American empire?

If it's been said before, I humbly apologise and kindly ask someone to link me to some windy article about it.

 

[snakybus]

I've been thinking about this movie constantly since I saw it a couple of weeks ago. I haven't read 'Oil' or anything (which I know was published in 1927), but does anyone think there's something in the idea that the story works on some level as an allegory of the rise and fall of the American empire?

If it's been said before, I humbly apologise and kindly ask someone to link me to some windy article about it.

I think that's the idea, yeah. Big story, big imagery.

I liked the scene at the start when they were emptying the oil into the pool in buckets, and it looked like the evil sludge thing that ate Tasha Yar in Star Trek (if you'll permit a quick slide from the sublime to the ridiculous). IU know obvious symbolism like this can sometimes be a bit leading-a-horse-to-water, but I thought this was pretty good. In fact, that whole opening sequence with no dialog was great

 

[Wilbert]

I think that's the idea, yeah. Big story, big imagery.

I liked the scene at the start when they were emptying the oil into the pool in buckets, and it looked like the evil sludge thing that ate Tasha Yar in Star Trek

 

[snakybus]

haha check out that trekkie nerd!

 

[7 - No tomorrow]

I've been thinking about this movie constantly since I saw it a couple of weeks ago. I haven't read 'Oil' or anything (which I know was published in 1927), but does anyone think there's something in the idea that the story works on some level as an allegory of the rise and fall of the American empire?

If it's been said before, I humbly apologise and kindly ask someone to link me to some windy article about it.

I would say that's exactly it.
Plainview representing greed/avarice/capitalism and Sunday as faith/religion.