The over the top ending is what lessened the movie for me. That and the Dano thing. The Dano thing is just bad film-making, there's no question about it. Seems like a rookie mistake.

The ending was a choice, I would have prefered something less over the top.


No one is arguing about the acting being amazing, the cinematography being great, the writing being good, the music being good.

It was very good, personally, I'd give it around an 8.5, or so.

The ending was fantastic, and the closing line will be one of the most discussed lines in film history.

I saw it with a primarily college-age crowd and everyone, myself included, were laughing at like every part where DDL was being being a dick, especially when he's beating up Dano and the restaurant scene.

The point about the movie being different from how people expected it to be is really valid, imo. The score, the setting, and how it's shot give it this epic and "deep" feel but then a lot of the scenes just kind of boil down to Plainview taking a dump on everyone and showing how badass DDL is.

The thing about the brother being the same guy is annoying, if only because after seeing it people kept trying to say he was actually the same guy or some sort of imaginary figure or some other bs.

Mixed feelings about the score. Interesting music and gave transition scenes a lot of tension and movement but it also felt like it overshadowed the scenes sometimes.

I liked it a lot but thought it dragged a bit in a few spots. No Country was a bit better n my opinion.

This movie was awesome. PT is the really the man. I can see why a lot of people wouldn't like this movie though.

Completely agree. An amazing line. It's simplicity/complexity is a pretty damn good reflection of the movie as a whole.

cosign.

Amazing movie. Not without its flaws, but just awesome in scope both visually and thematically.

Oh yeah, DDL >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> everyone else at acting.

I stand with you. Scary.

I doubt the ambiguity is an oversight.

Considering that the actor switch was done late and that Anderson clearly says in an interview that there are 2 brothers, I'm not so sure.

Having Dano play both Paul and Eli sets up one of the better lines of the film:


Granted, that line could have been changed after the casting changed. But I didn't find the presence of the twin brother confusing at all.

I saw this in LA when it was in extremely limited release about a month ago, and another time since it opened wider. Phenomenal film. Muscular narrative pacing. Never drags. Amazing performances by both DDL and Dano. At once a throwback to classic moviemaking, but at the same time manages to be wholly modern in many ways. Modern in that it's a highly focused character study where the protagonist is extremely wicked/unlikeable, and doesn't undergo any transformation (other than from pretty bad to worse). And also in particular elements of the style of the film, PTA's unconventional use of score for example. Gorgeous cinematography by Elswit. A lot of great, extremely memorable scenes etc.

Movies that smash your skull in with their awesomeness are so rare these days I really rejoice when one comes out. This is one of those rare cases.

This really represents a leap in Anderson's career. Not only superficially (abandoning the sprawling, urban, ensemble-cast formula), but also in terms of his confidence as a storyteller. Boogie Nights is a great film, and Anderson, being a cinephile, isn't embarassed about his influences. But, not so much in particular shots (though there is the I Am Cuba shot, and the opening shot), but the whole structure feels very derivative of Goodfellas. It's inventive and inspired enough in it's own right to not be labeled a 'rip-off' imo, but at the same time it's not 100% Anderson's own creative voice. Similarly Magnolia, while being one of the best films of the 90s, and despite being extremely genius in what he's able to bring to the concept, still is structurally a big riff on Short Cuts. With this film you can FEEL a lot of his influences (Citizen Kane, Treasure of the Sierra Madre, Kubrick), but they inform it in a way that doesn't feel derivative, and he certainly isn't basing the entire structure of the film around any influence (consciously or subconciously).

You saved me some typing. Pointless movie therefor worthless.

Interesting. Can you give me a few movies you really enjoy so I can gain perspective on what this movie was lacking for you?

OK, I'll play:

First, TWBB is nice to look at and the acting is good but ultimately there is no reason for what has happened. The main character is in the oil business and it shows him doing oil business stuff. There is supposed to be some tension between him and the preacher but it hardly affects anything and
I found that I had zero emotional connection w/ any of the characters and didn't care what happened, didn't anticipate a certain ending and when it finished I thought 'Big deal'.

Movies I watch whenever they are on:

Groundhog Day
Brazil
The Red Violin

And the 'worst' movie of all time: Edit: I had that wrong. It's Billy the Kid versus Dracula. Forget 'Plan 9 from Outer Space'. Only seen it twice but it's great.

I just saw it last night and thought it was great. DDL is unreal phenomenal. No amount of hype will spoil the experience of watching his performance. It was like watching DeNiro in his prime, except that DeNiro never had DDL’s ear for voices. What a monster.

I liked the soundtrack but can understand why others wouldn’t. There were times when it was clearly the focus of the moment, overwhelming the action on screen. This would bother me if it weren’t clearly intentional. Not being a film historian, I’m not sure if PTA is the first director to use music in the way that he does in Punch Drunk Love and in TWBB, but he’s the first that I’m aware of at least. It’s new and it’s challenging to the audience, the same way that atonality was to audiences when they first heard it in classical music. But I think it will eventually be just another accepted tool in a director's arsenal. IMHO it’s awesome that music won't have to be relegated to a supporting role and can be in active counterpoint with the visuals and dialog. The music over the opening shot in TWBB was great at resetting our expectations for the role the music would play in the rest of the movie, and in general I loved the pent up tension the music brought to the story. That being said, the two moments that did bother me were:

1) The first time we see Plainview and HW riding in their car and passing behind 2 empty buildings. Each time the car passes behind a building the music dims, and each time the car comes back into sight the music flares back up again. It’s almost comical, and I’m not sure it was meant to be.

2) The use of the Brahms Violin Concerto over the big oil gush scene. I’m still scratching my head over why they had to use this piece. It’s not like in Clockwork Orange where the main character has an obsession with Beethoven’s 9th so that it’s justified by the plot. Full disclosure: I was a violinist for 17 years and was kind of annoyed that this masterpiece could be pressed into service for a movie. I didn’t mind it so much over the closing credits.

One spoilerish question:

Loved the first half, the second half was typical over the top Paul Thomas Anderson. In both Magnolia and There Will Be Blood, it seems he's wanted to emulate his famous huge penis shot from Boogie Nights by destroying any kind of mystery, subtlety, or wonder about his characters.

This could've been an all-time great film - and before someone criticizes its heartlessness, I think it borrows a lot Citizen Kane thematically, and people seem to like that one. Everything about it was great - but

Frankly I am flabbergasted at any critic who could possibly put this as their best film of the year. If this is the future of cinema, where audiences get bludgeoned over the head with the point already conveyed through symbolism and foreshadowing, I don't want to be a part of it. PTA has a ton of talent, but there's something he lacks so far - hopefully he finds it, because he will have a long career as a director.

Oh, and Magnolia sucked. Hard.

burningyen:

Have you seen Barry Lyndon by Stanley Kubrick? He uses music in a very similar way in that film. I think this film borrows a lot from Barry Lyndon too - although its final scene was incredible, whereas this one... not so much.

I loved the music, too. Very late 20th century in a film that wasn't - what that says, I'll leave up for someone more boring to try to explain.

Triumph, I understand where you are coming from with the general "over-the-top"-ness of the final few scenes, but I think you go too far to say that it "sound and fury signifying nothing." I also don't agree that it is the best picture of the year but I can't fault a movie critic who does think that.

Oh, and the baptism scene is absolutely unbelievable. Chill-inducing.

Triumph,

By last half of the movie, are you actually just talking about the final 15 minutes or so? Seemed to me that was where the break took place.

Strangely, while you thought we were bludgeoned over the head with the point of the film, others on 2+2 complained that they didn't get the point.

Daniel Day Lewis =best actor alive

It felt like way longer than 15 minutes, but yeah. Anything that took place

I'm a huge Kubrick fan but haven't seen Barry Lyndon. It's in my Netflix queue.

just got back from it, while DDL was fantastic, i agree 100% with FFK and Howard. anybody who seriously thinks TWBB was a cinematic masterpiece that will be cherished for generations is a friggin lemming.