Daniel's Reviews

Paul Thomas Anderson’s There Will Be Blood is a film with big ambitions. Its length, cinematography and story are grand in every way possible; creating an epic film that I truly believe is a masterpiece of the 21st century.

The film is centred upon the life of an oil man named Daniel Plainview who following a drilling accident adopts a co-workers son, HW. Daniel uses his son as part of the family business, travelling around American and purchasing land where oil is available.

We see the story of Daniel Plainview’s life across a number of decades as the determined and ambitious man becomes one of the wealthiest in the country. The story is ultimately about greed as Daniel gets what he desires often at the expense of others.

Daniel Day-Lewis’ Oscar winning performance as Daniel Plainview is superb in every aspect; he perfects the role as if we are watching a real person and his performance as angry and explosive person can perhaps be compared to Robert De Niro’s portrayal of Jake La Motta in Raging Bull in terms of quality acting, and Orson Welles as Citizen Kane in terms of the character and his ambitions in life. His accent and the way he talks are particularly great, near the beginning of the film we hear him in conversation introducing his son, he says he is not a great speaker but presents in a way that is chilling and memorable.

That is not to give credit to the film’s other main star, Paul Dano as a young preacher Eli Sunday. He is two-faced, manipulative and at times equally as scary as Daniel Day-Lewis, his role in the film is vital to some of the messages involved, mainly greed and power that he seeks.

The other Oscar that this film managed to win was for its cinematography, the opening scenes themselves are somewhat spectacular despite no dialogue being spoken as we are given an introduction to the oil business and Daniel Plainview with fantastic visual images created by the old Western landscape and gritty work areas.

Before watching this film, my favourite film of the 21st century was No Country for Old Men which was also released in the same year, now I am not so sure. No Country for Old Men went on to pick up more Oscars than this film and I definitely now hold the belief that There Will Be Blood was deserving of much more. Both films are similar in a number of ways, both have fantastic cinematography that make greatly efficient use of Western landscapes and both have perhaps ‘psychopathic villains’, and whilst both villains won Oscars for their performances both were two contrasting type of villains portrayed in completely different ways.

One Oscar that this film probably would have won had it not been for a technicality (reusing a small amount of old work for one scene I believe) would have been for Best Original Score, the music in this film goes fantastically well with the film and really does build up a dark and uncomfortable feeling for a lot of scenes. The way the music is used finds the perfect balance so it can be used in such a way that it is not overpowering but really helps build up tension as some great scenes come to a boil.

I really feel that no complaints can be made towards the film’s pacing and length either, something I was surprised to see some people saw as in issue. Although two and a half hours in length, it has the great quality of keeping the viewer engaged with a fantastic blend of visually stunning and powerful emotional scenes with more quick paced dialogue filled scenes. In this sense it reminded me of Boogie Nights, Anderson’s film that is almost equal in length and it too seems so full of energy, never losing my attention. Comparing the film to No Country for Old Men once again, both films were adapted from novels, and whilst I have no idea what either of them are like when compared with the two films I really do feel that Paul Thomas Anderson’s screenplay is superior to the Coen Brothers despite losing to it in that Oscar category, the dialogue for some of the scenes are masterful, particularly those of Daniel Plainview. The final scene where we see him launch a torrent of insults towards Eli Sunday before screaming the film’s famous ‘Milkshake’ lines is a mini masterpiece in itself, certainly one of the most enjoyable, exhilarating and memorable endings I have can recall.

Following on from my viewing of There Will Be Blood I decided to watch another one of the highest rated films of the 21st century, David Lynch's Mulholland Drive.

This film was actually my first ever viewing of David Lynch, a director who has received a lot of praise for his controversial films that have become famous over the years, garnering great 'cult status'. I had also heard a lot specifically about Mulholland Drive, a film that is constantly referred to whenever someone brings up a discussion surrounding mysterious and confusing films. Unlike There Will Be Blood which gives us a linear story in an epic way, this film is almost the opposite with the narrative structure and rules that come with a film torn apart to create a dreamlike product that although at times is confusing, is fascinating and rewarding.

The great thing about a film like this is that it is almost impossible to give someone an idea of what the film is about without really spoiling it, and even then you’re not spoiling the films dreamlike style leaves any type of interpretation completely up to the individual viewer.

The film focuses on the lives of two young women named Betty and Rita, following a car crash in which Rita loses her memory and forgets her own identity, the two forge a bond as the pair attempt to get to the bottom of an incredibly strange mystery involving a blue box and key, a mysterious cowboy, a film director and a night club called Silencio.

So if the meaning of the film require such great thought and discussion after watching the film, how can I rate such a viewing so high considering it is my first ever viewing from the director? The film works on a number of levels that work together to give such an enjoyable experience. The film works as a suspenseful thriller, because of the surreal dreamlike world we never know what is around the corner, with characters like the monster behind Twinkie’s and a cowboy that appears out of nowhere it is difficult not be at least slightly spooked out by the eerie and unpredictable atmosphere created. Lynch’s attention to detail makes the mystery even more enthralling, constantly engaging the viewer and forcing you to keep your eyes attached to the screen in the fear of missing something that might be of significance to solving the mystery.

Sometimes when watching a film you can tell by your initial reaction and immediate thoughts that follow the viewing that you have seen a great film, which is exactly how I felt. Although I was confused and wanted answers I was mesmerised by what I had seen and really could not stop thinking about it.

I won’t discuss my personal interpretation of the film in my review; I’d rather discuss that elsewhere without spoiling the viewer who will benefit from watching without any ideas heading into it. However I will say that my interpretation I think follows the general theory behind what actually happens during Mulholland Drive, however like many critics have said I think it is important not to focus to much on analysing the meaning, although you will no doubt want to gather some type of meaning for what you have seen, Lynch has deliberately left the film ambiguous with no official or confirmed meaning, you should appreciate the film for what it is and I believe that is quite possibly a masterpiece in filmmaking.

(1986, David Lynch)

I have always been fascinated by film-noir yet I have seen very little of them, so when MGM decided to show one each day in a 'film-noir week' I looked forward to finally increase my noir viewings, the first film for this was the great Stanley Kubrick's The Killing.

Because this was one of Kubrick's first ever films I was all the more excited to finally watch this as a big fan of his more well known works such as 2001: A Space Odyssey and Dr. Strangelove. The thing I love about Kubrick is the fact the his films are almost indistinguishable in terms of plot and had I seen this 50s' crime thriller without knowing the director I would of been surprised to find out that it was Kubrick.

The film follows the plan of Johnny Clay who comes up with a seemingly flawless set of actions that would allow him and his friends to pull off a major heist at a racetrack. Quentin Tarantino has cited this film as an inspiration for Reservoir Dogs which is similar in the fact is is centred around a heist and shares a similar ending, you can also see the influence on his most famous film Pulp Fiction in terms of the intelligent and fluid narrative structure.

In terms of the film's style it has everything you could want from a crime thriller and its structure allows it to run smoothly and keep your interest as the plan carefully unfolds, the camera techniques used are great as well as the dark shadows and colours that we now associate with dark and mysterious crime films.

What keeps the crime aspect most interesting though is the characters who each have their own individual roles in the plan. Sterling Hayden as Johnny Clay, the man behind the heist gives a great performance in his role and would later become the memorable star of Kubrick's Dr. Strangelove. The film has a number of interesting characters though that keep the film constantly interesting, one of my favourite performances was Elisha Cook Jr. as George Peatty, a man who is being cheated on by his wife and is looked down by others as an idiot.

When the heist actually takes place Kubrick does a great job of turning up the intensity of the film and ensuring that each shot is done correctly to match the seemingly immaculate plan of Johnny. Without spoiling too much of the ending, I enjoyed Kubrick's choice to end on an ironic note. Given what has gone before with the heist being planned with such extreme precision up to the point that there is even a plan for what to do if any of the members died it is ironic how things eventually turn out.

Kubrick combines memorable characters, great visuals, a structure that sees the film paced greatly at a rather short length of 85 minutes, humour and a little bit of violence to give us a thoroughly enjoyable noir, a fantastic effort for a man only 28 years old, it is not surprising to see that such a director would go on to be remembered as one of the greatest of all time. Next up for me is Kubrick's Killer's Kiss.