Early Reviews Hungry for ‘Blood’
Fasten your seat belts. Though it’s not getting a limited release until December 26th and the proper release won’t happen until January, I plan on flogging There Will Be Blood every chance I get. At the risk of over-hyping Paul Thomas Anderson’s new film, I’m going to make good and goddamn sure everyone I know is aware of it. Let’s just say I have a competition in me. If it stiffs like The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford, well it won’t be my fault.
I will refrain from spoilers, but I can’t guarantee what conversations might get stirred up in the comments section.
I’ve already given a brief first impression and I’ll have my own review up sooner or later, but if you’re one of those people who can’t resist reading lots of reviews before you see a movie, here are a couple of raves from David Ansen of Newsweek and David Denby of The New Yorker [caution: potential spoilers].
Incidentally, I don’t condone watching a trailer before you see a movie, but if you must, Blood gives an uncommonly good one.
Filed under: Miscellaneous
Related Posts: - ‘Blood’ Finally Goes High-Definition
- More Critical Bloodlust
- There Will Be Blood…I Promise
- Christmas Forecast
- Return of the Son of Rambow
P.T. Anderson and Daniel Day Lewis are scheduled to be on Charlie Rose for the hour Tuesday night.
Anderson’s been on the show before for every film except “Hard Eight” and usually fills the time with lots of good conversation.
Alas, since I haven’t seen the movie yet and am trying to avoid seeing or reading EVERYTHING, I won’t be watching. But I will be DVR-ing and should finally get to check it out in, oh, 30, 40 days or so. Goddamn limited release….
Anyway, just a heads up.
Here’s his very amusing appearance from the “Boogie Nights” era….
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YUB7XTbZSjc
PTA shows up about 29:30.
Alas, I just realized the audio is way out of synch. Good to listen to, though.
Wow, thanks for the heads up Harvey, although I’m in the same boat as you. Reserve a spot on my DVR. All the old Charlie Rose shows are now online and it’s amazing how far you can go back…there’s some real gem interviews in his archives with great directors and actors.
http://www.charlierose.com/search/
Thanks for the heads up Harvey.
This is especially good because DDL isn’t a guy who does nany interviews.
If I could see only one more film in 2007, then it would be There Will Be Blood. Can’t wait. That’s a terrific Denby review. Lane is the better writer but he would have probably dismissed it in two sentences at the bottom of a review of a revival of a film thirty years old.
According to the web site, the interview has been delayed. I bet it’ll be on closer to the limited release date.
Have any of you cracked and watched the trailer? I’m not saying you should, I’m just asking.
I have. I’m a spoiler maven. I shouldn’t be but I am. I’ve also read the script because I’m a naughty little boy who can’t wait til Christmas.
The script was unholy good. But I think I’ve said that here before.
I’m guessing if you liked the script, you will probably love the movie right away. Count me among those who were taken aback…in a good way…but I had to see it again to fully grasp the depth of it. I was a little stunned afterwards the first time.
You already know what to expect so your response will be more instant. Plus I’m slow as we’ve already established numerous times.
Have not seen the trailer yet…which is frustrating because my local Regal-for-indies is running it alot so I have to go to great lengths to avoid it, all the while feeling like a freak for being so damn particular.
I feel your pain Joel and I’m sorry to further tempt you.
In the interest of advocating for the film however, I feel obligated to shout it from the rooftops to anyone who will listen. Bear with me for a few weeks.
I can’t wait for others here to join Craig, frankbooth, and I as having seen the film. The resulting discussions will be fascinating and rich. Scott Foundas went further with hyperbole than I would ever feel confident to do, but in my heart I believe he’s right ->
“There are great films (like No Country For Old Men) and then there are films that send shock waves through the very landscape of cinema, that instantly stake a claim on a place in the canon. Often, such vanguard works fail to be fully understood or appreciated at the moment they first appear, as some of the initial reviews that greeted Psycho, 2001 and Bonnie and Clyde attest. There Will Be Blood belongs in their company, and I consider myself fortunate to belong to a group [LAFC] with the foresight to recognize it in its own moment.”
craig…proof that i’m insane i think i’ve seen two trailer for the blood thing….
and the first trailer seemed to ’scary’ for me. yes i’m a wimp.
you read correctly to ’scary’ (maybe it was the music that was killing me…ha ha)
Foundas is right, though I’m not so anxious to quicky canonize a film. It’s something better left to history.
Gilmmer, I believe there have been a couple of trailers, but I don’t know what became of the original teaser.
You’ll be having nightmare’s about DDL’s Big Bad Wolf, glim.
i doubt i saw the orignal teaser because the first trailer i saw when i saw ‘no country’..
the orignal teaser was scarier than the trailer shown in cinemas ?? *gasp*
hmm yes sartre…i…need a brain eraser. *shudders*
I can’t wait to see this movie. And I’m looking forward to reading your full review, Craig.
Glad you stopped by again Alison!
I was putting this one off because the release date is so far away, I’m getting anxious to get this one written.
We touched on TWBB in the NCFOM thread, and now I’m gonna do the opposite. (I did see the trailer for the former in front of the latter, so there’s my excuse. Got me excited to see it all over again. I also thought it was kinda funny that moments were chosen to make the film appear to be — at least in part — some sort of touching father/son story.)
(SPOILERS, obviously.)
Remember when I said Chigurh was a reptile? I should have been more specific and said “snake”, because I finally got to see the movie a second time and noticed a subtle, but constant, aural reinforcement of this idea. Mostly in the hissing of the cattle gun’s air tank, but also near the end when he walks out onto Carla Jean’s porch. The two kids are riding by on their bikes, and one of them has a card in his spokes. It sounds just like a rattlesnake, and it’s cued to Chigurh’s emergence from the house. Brilliant sound design.
There are probably more examples if you look for them — hell, even his name is a sort of hiss.
Wow, that’s great Frank. I’d tought about the hissing and the kids bikes as a tension building device, but I hadn’t really connected them to Chigurh.
I’m overdue to see NCfOM again. Conversations from people I just can’t fathom keep cropping up about ‘the horrible ending’. I’m tired of debating it. I just want to climb into a hole with my copy of the movie, pull a blanket over my head and watch it over and over and over.
You are so lucky to have a copy of the movie, Craig.
I want one. :-(
You mean TWBB? Alas, I’m not priviledged to have a screener (yet!), but I’ve somehow been lucky enough to catch a few screenings of it.
I worry that the hype will be too much and you’ll see it and go ‘meh…overrated’. I have yet to hear you say you don’t like a movie, but there’s a first time for everything :)
Am very excited about TWBB.
Finally saw NCFOM this weekend at the Alamo Drafthouse in Austin. The perfect venue I might add.
SPOILERS
The film was as good as the script altho Bell’s dream story occurs over a desolate landscape, a more effective visual coda. I’m going to join those in the ether between liking the ending to thinking it far too literary.
In other words, I didn’t think it a powerful monologue and to not give it any cinematic juice is a litle unfair. To go all subtle is a bit of a cheat considering that we get to see needles plunged into torn bloody flesh. It still works for me, but my mind drifted while TLJ was speechifyin’ even when I read the script and I’ve heard that from my friends who love love love the film.
The film is not so existential as some complain. If Chigurh is the ghost of Bell’s fears, as he must be, then even that mythos has been dealt a fatal blow by Josh’s wife denying Chirgurh his cynical deadly game.
CJ is spot on in that she actually unsettles him and hurts him more in kind.
Oh, and HUGE logic flaw: When Woody Harrellson says he’ll get money from his ATM to buy Chirguh off — well, there weren’t no ATM’s in the late 70’s. Right? I also thought Woody was great trying to save his life; he looks genuinely scared.
And where did this Josh Brolin cat come from?
Anyway, it’s great to see a film that launches discussion on its meanings. NCFOM is easily my favorite Coen Bros film since RAISING ARIZONA.
Glad you’re finally on board Christian. And what a great place to catch it.
And I’m glad you liked it even if you have issues with it.
I’ve always considered the Coens to be the most literary of filmmakers working today. If this was the 19th century, they’d be right at home writing novels.
I guess my point is that the literary contrivance of the ending is uplifting to me rather than a let down. It might not technically be good cinema, but it’s good art and that’s enough.
All I can say about the ATM is that it was in the book, but yeah it felt like an anachronism to me too.
Actually, Craig, I meant a screener of No Country. I need to watch it eight more times so I can pick up on all of these snake symbolism and what-not.
Oh, and I didn’t like American Gangster too much, Craig. It was okay, but nothing special.
You’ve gotta keep seeing it in a theater Alison! Get that box office up.
I was a little cool on AmGang too which is probably why I never reviewed it. It was fine and it might improve on seeing it again but…
Getting back to TWBB, check out Stephen Holt’s comment on the Nobody Knows Anything article on AwardsDaily. He rants about how much he hated it and how sneaky it was that they showed it to the critics before they showed it to the public. I have a feeling there will be a lot of this type of reaction.
Of course, no other films this year were shown to the critics first. :-p
Here’s the link:
http://www.awardsdaily.com/2007/12/nobody-knows-anything.html
“…It’s also strikingly like “Sweeney Todd” with the gore factor…”
He goes on to mention Fangoria (though I’m not quite sure what he’s getting at, since that particular sentence didn’t make sense). Did he see the movie, or fall asleep halfway through? Because the truth is, there is not much blood in There Will Be Blood.
But isn’t DDL’s voice positively hypnotic in the trailer for TWBB?
since that particular sentence didn’t make sense
One thing I like about Stephen Holt’s posts is that he is obviously very enthusiastic and passionate about movies, which is wonderful. On the other hand, his comments are written in such stream-of-consciousness form that sometimes I’m not sure I follow everything he’s trying to say either.
He really bashed TWBB though; Sasha’s negative assessment of the movie was so much more balanced even though she clearly didn’t like it and was biased. And he prognosticated to his heart’s content (this on an article about no one knowing anything) . He bashed DDL (which irked me because I admire and respect his work, and he put a lot of effort into the character of Plainview). I think Depp is Stephen’s favorite to win, so he wants to knock DDL down a peg or two. ;-)
As for the Adrien Brody example, people have been talking about that comparison for about two months. Where has he been? The comparison is Depp and DDL to Nicholson and DDL in 2002. If there is an Adrien Brody this year, it will be someone else (in my humble opinion). If there is a dark horse my hopes are for Frank Langella or Viggo.
OK, I can’t bring myself to read Mr. Holt’s comments. They will just make me cranky and I’m in a good mood. The movie is f’ing brilliant and that’s all there is to it.
I also admire Stephen’s enthusiasm, but he’s out of his f’ing tree. There is very very little blood in this movie. The violence is mainly psychological.
Hate the movie all you want, but don’t lie about it. And they haven’t just saved it for the critics, they’ve been showing the thing all over town and it’s not supposed to come out for another couple of weeks.
Christian, if you’re hypnotized by the trailer, you’re going to be entranced by the movie. I keep saying this, but you can’t take your eyes off of Daniel Day-Lewis wheneverf he’s on screen…and he’s on screen most of the time.
This is a movie that pushes 3 hours and it’s never boring.
Stephen is a crazy person. It’s fair to hate this movie, many people will. Great movies have a funny way of dividing people, but only a liar or a madman would say anything bad about DDL’s performance.
Heh heh…sorry. Getting a little fired up.
No problem. I was actually getting fired up too, which is why I waited to answer him and made no reference to TWBB. It was a general comment. :-)
I really do want to try to stay level-headed in situations like these.
And I’ve decided that Stephen is just a Sweeney/musical queen, so he wants the way cleared for Sweeney Todd. :-p
I couldn’t resist. I didn’t read his whole post, but I let him have it in the nicest way I could.
You were stern, but polite. Nicely done.
Thanks. :-)
I saw the comment you posted. Indignant but not at all out of control. You said what you had to.
And sartre really gave it to him.
Actually on the same post, some self-righteous guy attacked me and I ended up reacting very hastily unfortunately.
I always regret it when I do that.
I enjoyed your three versions of the same message Alison :-) You had no cause for self reproachment in what you said.
It’s easy to be hasty when you’re personally attacked by random strangers Alison. Don’t sweat it. You made a perfectly innocent and common complaint and this fellow got all uppity.
Consider him smacked down in triplicate.
Thanks, sartre and Craig. :-)
Argh, Stephen Holt did it again. Does he want to piss off all the people who like DDL?
http://www.awardsdaily.com/2007/12/karger-on-globe-surprises.html
I’d have more respect for him if he actually wanted to piss people off, but he’s just being clueless. Just like how he could never get over how violent American Gangsters was…when in fact it wasn’t really at all.
I hate to leave you dangling Alison, but I can’t bring myself to argue with him. I’ve said what I have to say in other threads and he didn’t even read it.
I don’t feel like you’re leaving me dangling at all, Craig.
I just felt the need to vent here, among people who understand.
Yeah, well I stewed about it for 20 minutes then couldn’t resist getting my own little jab in.
Sometimes you just have to take a stand even if it’s going to be blithely ignored!
True. And I do think that Stephen reads the comments. He has answered me once in awhile.
I think he’s just afraid to answer you. ;-)