User Score
7.8

Generally favorable reviews- based on 1177 Ratings

User score distribution:
Watch On

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Mar 29, 2011
    10
    Daniel Day-Lewis and Paul Thomas Anderson have created one of the greatest movies of this time and perhaps of all time. There is so much ambition, brilliance, detail, and probably everything that you would put in a great movie. I don't think that anything, and anything could top this level of amazement for me. The film has put me through a cathartic and dogmatic experience by justDaniel Day-Lewis and Paul Thomas Anderson have created one of the greatest movies of this time and perhaps of all time. There is so much ambition, brilliance, detail, and probably everything that you would put in a great movie. I don't think that anything, and anything could top this level of amazement for me. The film has put me through a cathartic and dogmatic experience by just watching. Truly outstanding on every **** level. A masterpiece. Expand
  2. Apr 27, 2013
    10
    By far the best performance by Daniel Day Lewis to-date and Paul Thomas Anderson's best film by far. A film that works on every level; great acting, great storytelling, great cinematography, great score. A must see film for any aspiring film buffs and a essential watch for fans of great films.
  3. tinah.
    Jan 5, 2008
    2
    Totally unlikeable character, never learned anything . Very male film. I didn't like it
  4. JoyM.
    Feb 10, 2008
    0
    What a waste of 3 hours of my time. Acting was all over-the-top, but that seemed what was called for. Movie was pointless and disgusting. Didn't like PTA's other movies and don't like this one. Don't believe the critics. I don't get it.
  5. JamieL.
    Feb 8, 2008
    0
    BORING,BORING BORING!!! the story could have been told in 5 minutes instead of 3 hours. people were walking out when we went and I really wish I had.
  6. JimmyS.
    Mar 5, 2008
    1
    besides some nice pictures, it was really really boring.
  7. WILLIAMGILLINGHAM
    Apr 14, 2008
    0
    MOST WORTHLESS MOVIE I EVER WATCHED, NO PLOT , NO MORAL NO NOTHING I KEPT WATCHING THINKING IT WOULD BE CHANGNG , JUST WHEN YOU THINK THERES A PLOT IT JUST CONTINUES ON TO BEING MORE BORING THEN THE FIRST HOUR, WASTE OF TIME AND MONEY WATCHING THIS MOVIE, THERE WILL BE BLOOD ONLY HAS ONLY ONE PLOT, STEAL YOUR MONEY AS A MOVIE PATRON
  8. AmberC.
    Apr 7, 2008
    2
    I had heard good things about this movie, and I had been so psyched to go and see it...which may be part of why it ended up being such a disappointment. The music in the opening scene put me on the edge of my seat, and I spent the rest of the movie holding my breath for a dramatic and shocking event that would never happen. The movie dragged on and on, and I couldn't shake off the I had heard good things about this movie, and I had been so psyched to go and see it...which may be part of why it ended up being such a disappointment. The music in the opening scene put me on the edge of my seat, and I spent the rest of the movie holding my breath for a dramatic and shocking event that would never happen. The movie dragged on and on, and I couldn't shake off the feeling that nothing substantial or relevant was happening. At first I did think the conflict between Daniel and Eli held a lot of promise, and I guess I kind of expected the movie to focus on this tension and build it up a little more--but here again the movie fell short, and the ending death scene blended in with the rest of the movie about as well as oil blends with water. It felt awkward and out of place. To make things worse, in my eyes at least, there was never anything likeable about DDL's character. I saw him take the orphaned baby from the scene of the mining accident, and when the movie immediately flashes to 9 years later and Daniel happens to be accompanied by a boy who looks about 9 or 10 years old, I put two and two together and suspected it was the same kid. Some have suggested that the son was the only character that Daniel cared about at all, but I question whether he even cared about the boy. Daniel refers to his son as a "sweet face" that helps him get his way in business deals. Then, when someone asks Daniel where his wife is, he gives a shifty look and replies that she "died in childbirth", and presto! The charismatic businessman is transformed into a lying scumbag. I'm guessing that explains why I wasn't at all surprised when Daniel sat H.W. down at his desk years later and finally told him that (gasp!) he's not actually his father. I get the feeling that this was supposed to be a very dramatic, climactic scene, but it left me cold because I'd been practically waiting for it the entire movie. I think the movie was supposed to center around the "transformation" of DDL's character, but I didn't really see much of a transformation, except in the end when he suddenly becomes psychotic, or maybe just reveals that part of his personality. It's hard to tell, because Daniel is very unapproachable as a character; tough to understand or relate to at all, and even tougher to like. The acting itself was still decent, but the character development was iffy at best. All in all, not recommended. Expand
  9. Stephen
    Jan 1, 2008
    2
    Half-baked. I was fairly engrossed through the first 2/3 of the film, then I started to realize the entire film was heading nowhere and saying nothing. A string of disjointed episodes connecting several almost over-the-top scenes of DDR's mad rages without any real groundwork laid to explain or justify them. I have no idea what the critics who rated this so highly were thinking.
  10. schoonschoon
    Nov 25, 2008
    0
    Dull, confusing. I like intelligent/slow movies - Brokeback, Remains of the Day, Apocalypse Now etc, but this had nothing. Love Radiohead but the score was awful too, it seemed Greenwood thought "how irrelevant can I make the score". Hammy acting. Magnolia was crap too. And the first PTA film. Loved Boogie Nights.
  11. AnnK
    Feb 1, 2008
    0
    The entire audience was left dissatisfied. This movie did not live up to the hype! DDL played a fascinating lunatic, but...... so what?
  12. BibliotechaSanchez
    Feb 15, 2008
    2
    Shit movie, only because it bashes Christians, of which Daniel Day Lewis isn't. I'm not saying that the Church portrayed in this movie was a legit church, not my church. Daniel Day Lewis was basically Mocking Christians in general in this movie. If the movie hadn't shown blatant blasphemy, then I would have given it 9 stars. As it is though, There Will Be Blood gets a big fat 2!
  13. WayneW.
    Feb 2, 2008
    2
    Guess what "Professional Critics"...open your eyes..the emperor has no clothes. I spoke with 6 other people after the movie and all agreed the movie sucked..too long..one dimensional..absurd storyline...with a pathetically uncreative ending. There Will Be Bullsh--.
  14. KathleenK.
    Feb 24, 2008
    2
    Another Daniel Day-Lewis vanity piece. Yes he's amazing. But when the curtain comes down -- who cares? What reason is there to care about his character or any of the others? Very little character development, he starts out a shithead and ends up a shithead. Positives: cinematography, highly effective use of sound and music. Just plain shoddy: Paul and his twin brother. Right.
  15. Dan
    Feb 5, 2008
    1
    The only reason to give this movie a 1 is DDL. The movie is a pretentious, plodding, glacial study of good and evil...actually, of evil and evil. You are bludgeoned with blatant symbolism, annoyed with jarring music (I assume this was intentional?), bored with overly long sequences where nothing substantive happens - filmmaking 101 anybody? - and generally beaten down with the message, The only reason to give this movie a 1 is DDL. The movie is a pretentious, plodding, glacial study of good and evil...actually, of evil and evil. You are bludgeoned with blatant symbolism, annoyed with jarring music (I assume this was intentional?), bored with overly long sequences where nothing substantive happens - filmmaking 101 anybody? - and generally beaten down with the message, which as far as I can tell is: "Bad people are bad. So there." Wait for this one to come out on DVD -- oooh, an extended director's cut. Oh, goody -- and then convince your friend to rent it. Then stay home. Expand
  16. BillC.
    Feb 5, 2008
    1
    This film was too long and the soundtrack was god-awful.The constant pounding in the soundtrack and the annoying music only subtracted from the viewing experience. They could just as well cut out the first 30 minutes and the story, what little there was, would not have been hurt. This story could have been told in 30 minutes, and with no sound track at all.Problem is , that won't This film was too long and the soundtrack was god-awful.The constant pounding in the soundtrack and the annoying music only subtracted from the viewing experience. They could just as well cut out the first 30 minutes and the story, what little there was, would not have been hurt. This story could have been told in 30 minutes, and with no sound track at all.Problem is , that won't make it a movie will it? Those who fawn over this film sure are forgiving of it's many faults. Bill C. Expand
  17. JanG
    Mar 12, 2008
    0
    I agree with many others that this was one of the worst movies I have seen. If I had been alone I should have walked out in the first 10 minutes, or less. The noise was deafening and SO unsubtle; it seemed as if loud and frightening sounds and music were needed to convince the audience that something was going on. If a movie relies upon this, then it shows me that they did not have full I agree with many others that this was one of the worst movies I have seen. If I had been alone I should have walked out in the first 10 minutes, or less. The noise was deafening and SO unsubtle; it seemed as if loud and frightening sounds and music were needed to convince the audience that something was going on. If a movie relies upon this, then it shows me that they did not have full confidence in their production. If you like loud amplification, excellent scenery, blood, sweat, tears, child abuse, psychotic behaviour and enjoy looking at your watch every ten minutes to see whether the film might soon be ending, then go to see this movie and enjoy! Expand
  18. JosephM.
    Mar 10, 2008
    1
    Possibly the worst movie I've seen in the last decade. The music was annoying. The characters were boring and one dimensional. If it wasn't up for best picture I would have walked out after 10 minutes. By the end, I was really sorry I didn't. You can't wrap a 2 hour movie around the "I drink your milkshake" line!
  19. DD
    Apr 10, 2008
    0
    This has to be one of the worst movies of 2007, along with No Country for Old Men. Plot, what plot? The movie was a waste of film. What was so great about it? It was another worthless film that movie "critics" love because it is pointless and it gives them something to try to make sense of. If you want entertainment, go outside and watch the grass grow. You will have more fun!
  20. JohnL.
    Apr 20, 2008
    1
    This movie was so boring!!!!!! I like good acting as much as the next guy but at the very least I want to be entertained!!!! ddl was good in his role but it was just way too long and after a while you just don't care cause you just want to be put out of your misery.
  21. JohnD.
    Apr 7, 2008
    2
    wow, this movie was so boring. great acting but this movie was painfully dull
  22. TedB.
    May 8, 2008
    0
    If the movie wasn't so tedious and long, I'd waste more time explaining why you should not avoid the hype.
  23. DanH.
    May 9, 2008
    1
    The most insanely boring and pointless movie i have ever seen in my life.
  24. EdM.
    Jun 13, 2008
    1
    This P.O.S. sucks worst than gravity! Over done musical score, over the top and totally hammy acting, DDL during the church scene, please. No plot direction, weak storyline. This movie was just plain bad. What a waste of two and a half hours!
  25. TimR.
    Jun 1, 2008
    0
    I cant believe i am in the minority when it comes to this movie! The worst movie i have seen in the last five years, hand down. I think people have confused total crap with art here. I have never seen a worse movie rated so high for absolutely no reason. I could never be friends with anyone that thought this move was in the least bit entertaining.
  26. RebeccaC.
    Jun 9, 2008
    2
    I tried to keep an open mind.... This movie could have been trimmed down to half it's length. So many bland scenes that left me confused. And the ending..... What??? Maybe I am the type that likes to watch movies that don't make me think. But hey, this is entertainment, not college!
  27. RexS.
    Jan 2, 2009
    1
    This is truely one of the worst movies that I have ever seen. I suffered through every minute expecting something, anything to happen and got nothing. It is predictable from beginning to end. I didn't appreciate the script, the characters, their motives, the cinematography or anything. The film critics, who are so sophisticated may find something to actually appreciate about the This is truely one of the worst movies that I have ever seen. I suffered through every minute expecting something, anything to happen and got nothing. It is predictable from beginning to end. I didn't appreciate the script, the characters, their motives, the cinematography or anything. The film critics, who are so sophisticated may find something to actually appreciate about the film, but then they also find give numberous awards to all those stupid movies that nobody has ever heard of. I encourage everyone to not waste their time on this film. It was truely a let down!!!!!!!! Oh yea-the music suks too!!!! Expand
  28. DWilly
    Dec 30, 2007
    3
    Film should be considered an art and undertaken with high aspiration, but this is like way too many art house type movies that average folk will go see because they are fantastically reviewed and then walk out of saying, and rightly so, that there is something very wrong with this industry. A pretentious film school exercise doth not a legitamit movie make. It might have been a character Film should be considered an art and undertaken with high aspiration, but this is like way too many art house type movies that average folk will go see because they are fantastically reviewed and then walk out of saying, and rightly so, that there is something very wrong with this industry. A pretentious film school exercise doth not a legitamit movie make. It might have been a character study... but no, it's not really; even though Daniel Day Lewis gives a bravura performance, he did this "king thug" guy in "Gangs Of New York" already and it's invulnerable and not by itself affecting. It might have been a clash of ideals story... no, it's not that either (the preacher character disappears for maybe an hour at one point). I guess with a lot of good cinematography on location mixing big theatrical performances with realist ones (using many non-actors), even without a story, film nuts will think its deep. Expand
  29. jessec
    Jan 2, 2008
    0
    I've never even heard of it...and inevitablely it cant be good.
  30. BenD
    Jan 28, 2008
    2
    Honestly, Thirty Days of Night was better than this film. It was about half an hour too long, boring, pretentious, and like one poster said, halfway up it's own backside. Don't know what the critics were on when they saw this one. Spend your hard earned cash elsewhere.
  31. sinclaird.
    Jan 5, 2008
    2
    This was a terrible film = poor storytelling, slow, and pretentious. why did all these critics say it was so outstanding. We were passive. The director wanted the images to move, but he didn't find the key to make them work,
  32. JohnR
    Feb 14, 2008
    1
    If you think this acting performance is great performance, go to a theater and watch students work. Than you know how overacting will look like, and you will find interesting parallels to what will get here an Oscar. Besides this i understood the message and emotions the music wants to create, but its still uncomfortable too loud and annoying. Story make sense only 2/3 of the movie. At If you think this acting performance is great performance, go to a theater and watch students work. Than you know how overacting will look like, and you will find interesting parallels to what will get here an Oscar. Besides this i understood the message and emotions the music wants to create, but its still uncomfortable too loud and annoying. Story make sense only 2/3 of the movie. At the end i guess the writers went on striking. Expand
  33. GrantW
    Feb 14, 2008
    2
    This movie was a waste of my life. Yes it's intended message of Greed and money twisting everyone is a good one, but that point has been made many a time. We don't need another two and a half hour movie where the weak dialoges play second fiddle to the soundtrack to beat that dead horse. "I'm finished" Roll Credits.
  34. CameronC.
    Feb 18, 2008
    0
    I just don't understand how anyone could enjoy this movie. Sure, the acting was top quality, but there is only so much a talented actor can bring when the plot is bad. In fact, the plot isn't bad, it is simply non-existent. The fact that great actors are forced to act out this long, boring mindless drivel is an incredible shame. For this reason, I consider this one of the worst I just don't understand how anyone could enjoy this movie. Sure, the acting was top quality, but there is only so much a talented actor can bring when the plot is bad. In fact, the plot isn't bad, it is simply non-existent. The fact that great actors are forced to act out this long, boring mindless drivel is an incredible shame. For this reason, I consider this one of the worst movies I have seen since The Thin Red Line (another critically acclaimed pile of rubbish). Expand
  35. MistyD.
    Feb 21, 2008
    2
    The fact that this movie is getting so much Oscar hype and critical acclaim completely bewilders me. The film is so littered with tremendous gaffes in plot development that it becomes a melodramatic train to nowhere. Sure the acting is intense, but rings completely false, as characters do complete about faces from scene to scene. Yes, it is a "pretty" film and educational about the early The fact that this movie is getting so much Oscar hype and critical acclaim completely bewilders me. The film is so littered with tremendous gaffes in plot development that it becomes a melodramatic train to nowhere. Sure the acting is intense, but rings completely false, as characters do complete about faces from scene to scene. Yes, it is a "pretty" film and educational about the early days of the oil business in the U.S., but outside of that worthless. I would have rather watched a documentary on PBS. Ultimately, I didn't care about the fate of any of the characters by the movies' end. A true sign that the film was a colossal failure. Expand
  36. LuluS.
    Feb 22, 2008
    2
    I have heard a lot of people cite the acting in this movie as a reason for a hands-down 10. I, however, look at a film as a whole. I judge art according to its contribution to society as a whole... Art, after all, is derived from life and not the other way around; I don't see a chicken-or-the-egg conundrum. So I can't accept a film that seems like cinematic and theatrical I have heard a lot of people cite the acting in this movie as a reason for a hands-down 10. I, however, look at a film as a whole. I judge art according to its contribution to society as a whole... Art, after all, is derived from life and not the other way around; I don't see a chicken-or-the-egg conundrum. So I can't accept a film that seems like cinematic and theatrical masturbation. Yes, the actors in it did excellent jobs. Yes, the elements of cinematography, lighting, and music were original and innovative. But did it affect me? Did it even affect anyone in the entire theatre? The work *as a whole* was ineffectual, anticlimactic, uncompelling, and unrelatable. I'm not even interested in the characterization of Daniel Plainview. The glimpses of the shards of his humanity were too few and too distant for me to care about him; and a person that monstrous provokes me only to marvel briefly and incomprehendingly at his monstrosity. I want to be as far away from Daniel as possible, and I want to forget the movie. I'm not against "weird" movies or movies that require a long attention span, but I perceived a vagueness in the characters and story that seems to come from a lack of specificity in purpose... and if there was a specific subtext in the minds of the actors and and a specific intent in the mind of the director--sorry, it was not conveyed. This objectivity wouldn't be so bad except that at times the movie leads the viewer to believe they should be understanding some kind of message. There Will Be Blood: you fail at communicating. Expand
  37. ChrisB
    Feb 25, 2008
    1
    there are some mildly compelling portions of this movie. That's the only thing positive that i can say. This movie is so overrated it hurts. It was boring beyond belief. there isn't a story. The characters are annoying and not that interesting. The acting have been blown way out of proportion. It isn't that great. I hate this movie and I could not be happier that it there are some mildly compelling portions of this movie. That's the only thing positive that i can say. This movie is so overrated it hurts. It was boring beyond belief. there isn't a story. The characters are annoying and not that interesting. The acting have been blown way out of proportion. It isn't that great. I hate this movie and I could not be happier that it didn't win the Oscar for Best Picture. This movie is not good. Don't spend your time watching it. It will be forgotten in 5 years. This is a prime example of the overly inflated Hollywood hype machine causing people to show interest in a movie for some reason not based on merit. Watch something else. Expand
  38. Kim
    Feb 3, 2008
    0
    This was the most boring movie I have ever seen. Three hours of hell. Would have rather watched paint dry.
  39. AmandaL.
    Feb 8, 2008
    0
    Boring! music hurt my ears and did not fit the movie. Terrible storyline.
  40. Carlos
    Mar 11, 2008
    1
    Nice guy at the beginning turned twisted and alcoholic at the end not mention a criminal too .. done 100 plus times in different movies . Nothing has a common sense. However good topic is was done more realistic like say "a truth history".
  41. FredK.
    Mar 1, 2008
    0
    Simply put, one of the top 5 worst movies I have ever seen. I kept looking at my watch to see when it would be over.
  42. Phil
    Mar 1, 2008
    2
    Some theatrical merit, but to be honest, I couldn't even make it through the whole film. Nice perspectives on bleak American history though..
  43. JamesB.
    Mar 13, 2008
    2
    Besides Daniel Day Lewis (who totally deserved his oscar) this is a boring, drawn out, mess of a film and completely unentertaining.
  44. GloriaW.
    Mar 28, 2008
    0
    Absolutely the most boring moving I have ever seen. Totally disappointed that I wasted my money to purchase a ticket to see such a crummy movie.
  45. HarvB
    Mar 6, 2008
    2
    This could have been a great movie! But how ironic that a movie about deafness, both literal and metaphoric was beaten into the ground by a pointless over blown music score. Has this director never thought about understatement or the notion that less in more. If you want to see a great movie go and see No Country for Old Men. The Coen brothers know what they are doing and their movie has This could have been a great movie! But how ironic that a movie about deafness, both literal and metaphoric was beaten into the ground by a pointless over blown music score. Has this director never thought about understatement or the notion that less in more. If you want to see a great movie go and see No Country for Old Men. The Coen brothers know what they are doing and their movie has no music track at all! Expand
  46. John
    Apr 12, 2008
    2
    Terrible plot and very slow movie.
  47. LoganW.
    Apr 14, 2008
    0
    Horrendous. The post-credits opening music reminded me of TV's Lost, except that Lost is enjoyable. It was all downhill from there. The (long, really long) story of a selfish man's complete moral collapse. Fine, except who could care one whit about the character (or any of the others, for that matter)? The fact that this drivel was nominated for eight Academy Awards is a either Horrendous. The post-credits opening music reminded me of TV's Lost, except that Lost is enjoyable. It was all downhill from there. The (long, really long) story of a selfish man's complete moral collapse. Fine, except who could care one whit about the character (or any of the others, for that matter)? The fact that this drivel was nominated for eight Academy Awards is a either testament to the exquisite sense of humor of the critics involved, or a testament to years of hard drug use among that same august group. A genuine waste of time. Don't bother. Expand
  48. BarbaraM.
    Apr 26, 2008
    1
    Balderdash!! Slow, dull, melodramatic, poorly characterized. The story line was absurd and totally unbelievable. Daniel Day-Lewis was marvelous, but he could read the phone book and be enthralling. Worse than No Country for Old Men, and it gets my vote for most annoying soundtrack in history. Actually, the sound track was suitable for such a train wreck of a drama. All sound and fury Balderdash!! Slow, dull, melodramatic, poorly characterized. The story line was absurd and totally unbelievable. Daniel Day-Lewis was marvelous, but he could read the phone book and be enthralling. Worse than No Country for Old Men, and it gets my vote for most annoying soundtrack in history. Actually, the sound track was suitable for such a train wreck of a drama. All sound and fury signifying darn little. Expand
  49. KashRA
    Apr 3, 2008
    2
    The greatness of the cinematography of this film is only matched by the weakness of the plot line. The reviewer's accolades are just further evidence that Paul Thomas Anderson is always viewed as a film deity in spite of the overwhelming evidence that he is a mere mortal.
  50. Zatty
    May 11, 2008
    0
    About an hour of plot in a 2 1/2 hour movie, without the soul or talent to earn its considerable length. In essence this is a long love letter to the absence of love, as Daniel Day-Lewis' expertly-wrought character writhes and destroys what he loves (even if he does most of the destroying off screen, saving his screentime for business). It doesn't do Upton Sinclair's Oil About an hour of plot in a 2 1/2 hour movie, without the soul or talent to earn its considerable length. In essence this is a long love letter to the absence of love, as Daniel Day-Lewis' expertly-wrought character writhes and destroys what he loves (even if he does most of the destroying off screen, saving his screentime for business). It doesn't do Upton Sinclair's Oil any justice, highjacking the socialist meaning for a message of heartlessness and hopelessness. Two and a half hours of Our Lies Vs. Their Lies, intentionally turning the camera away from anyone who might escape it. Expand
  51. CliffM.
    May 31, 2008
    0
    Most boring movie I ever saw. I can't believe the critic's ratings on this.
  52. Rob
    Jul 11, 2008
    0
    This is one of the most pointless movies ever made. All you guys awarding 10/10 are deluded, or maybe it's just the old thing of you must never say that you don't understand for fear of looking stupid. They sure pulled the wool over your eyes on this one.
  53. JoshuaB.
    Aug 25, 2008
    0
    I honestly believe this was one of the worst movies i have ever seen! Thought it was a joke when I saw it actually on the list.
  54. RS.
    Jan 2, 2009
    0
    From the very first minute, this film grabs you by the throat and makes you want to puke. It may be a bold and strange parable in the Huston and Welles traditions about what's right and wrong with America, but who wants to watch such a boring movie that portrays exactly what everyone already knows! This film is a total waste of time. On a craft and technical level, the film is low From the very first minute, this film grabs you by the throat and makes you want to puke. It may be a bold and strange parable in the Huston and Welles traditions about what's right and wrong with America, but who wants to watch such a boring movie that portrays exactly what everyone already knows! This film is a total waste of time. On a craft and technical level, the film is low quality. The camera moves are similar to what you would expect of your own vacation video shoots. There is nothing complex or impressive. The visuals are matched by Jonny Greenwood's musical score which sweeps, surges and sux just about as bad as the scenes. It matches the film's dull mood and meaningsless drama perfectly! Definately a must not see!!!!!!! Expand
  55. Audrey
    Dec 27, 2007
    2
    Long and boring with no interesting turns to the story. Acting is fine but I really don't see what the big deal is. Did all these critics see it together? Was there something in the punch?
  56. Mchelle
    Jan 28, 2008
    3
    This movie does not reflect the critics comments. It's 2.5 hours of Daniel Day-Lewis reprising his role in "The Gangs of New York". His acting seems affected and the plot goes no where. Waste of an evening. Avoid this film.
  57. Sep 13, 2010
    8
    Oil that is, Black Gold, Texas Tea.
    Daniel Day Lewis is "into" oil & makes his fortune, sometimes at the misfortune of others.
    Weighs in at just over two & a half hours but I didn't think it dragged too much & the authenticity of the film is superb.
    As to be expected, Lewis is brilliant but so is Paul Dano as Eli.
    Not to everyone's taste but I really enjoyed it.
    I'm finished!
  58. Aug 27, 2010
    10
    One of the first great achievements in narrative and character study in the 21st century. There is no doubt in my mind that this movie will become one of the great classics of our generation.
  59. Mar 19, 2011
    10
    UNPARALLELED!!! DANIEL DAY-LEWIS KILLS IT!!! THIS DESERVES TO BE CALLED A CLASSIC IN EVERY WAY... AMAZING ACTING, DIRECTING, MUSIC (JOHNNY GREENWOOD), ENDING... EVERYTHING.
  60. Jan 25, 2014
    9
    Just fantastic. This was my first film that I've seen directed by Paul Thomas Anderson and it did not disappoint in the least. The film is slow, but the acting from Daniel Day-Lewis, Paul Dano and cast, is just so engrossing that you cannot look away. The sets were brilliant and looked extremely realistic and fit in perfectly with the times they were depicting. Those who claim there is noJust fantastic. This was my first film that I've seen directed by Paul Thomas Anderson and it did not disappoint in the least. The film is slow, but the acting from Daniel Day-Lewis, Paul Dano and cast, is just so engrossing that you cannot look away. The sets were brilliant and looked extremely realistic and fit in perfectly with the times they were depicting. Those who claim there is no story are missing the bigger picture. Sure, there is no direct story, but what we are seeing is so much bigger than that. The interaction of every character and the constant "peeling back of the onion" that is Daniel Plainview and how evil he truly is make up for any story people may be searching for. In fact, I dare say that is the story; the revealing of how far a man will go to make money and how cutthroat you had to be to make it in the the time period depicted. Fantastic film. Expand
  61. Sep 17, 2012
    10
    There Will Be Blood is a captivating film, detailing the extents of a man's ambition and, in turn, his eventual turn to madness. Paul Thomas Anderson has created a sprawling masterpiece, an epic of the most extraordinary genre, and one rich in emotion despite the fact that the lead character (acted superbly by veteran, Daniel Day-Lewis) lacks a shred of compassion. The ending is brutal,There Will Be Blood is a captivating film, detailing the extents of a man's ambition and, in turn, his eventual turn to madness. Paul Thomas Anderson has created a sprawling masterpiece, an epic of the most extraordinary genre, and one rich in emotion despite the fact that the lead character (acted superbly by veteran, Daniel Day-Lewis) lacks a shred of compassion. The ending is brutal, confronting and gut-wrenching in scope; it leaves the viewer lost in thought (and possibly weeping) as to how capitalism managed to have such an effect on Daniel Plainview. We are left in detest of the oil-man, but undoubtedly in awe of Paul Thomas Anderson's direction, for masterpieces are rare in any age. Expand
  62. Mar 1, 2014
    10
    The best part about There Will Be Blood is the fact that Day-Lewis can give his character depth in the first ten minutes without saying a word. This shows what an actor he is. The rest of the movie falls in place from there, and is one hell of an experience.
  63. May 1, 2014
    10
    Now to my mind, it's an abomination to consider that any man, woman or child in this magnificent country of ours should have to look upon (this particular) loaf of bread as (anything but) a luxury

    I have drank this milkshake and I approve.
  64. DavidS.
    Feb 2, 2008
    10
    one of the few films where i did not feel a minute was self-indulgent
  65. BiilyM
    Feb 2, 2008
    10
    An unparalleled examination of one man's conflict with his soul: on the one hand Daniel Plainview is a staunch capitalist-man made, profoundly ambitious and unemotional in business; on the other a self-stated aspiring "family man" desperate for authentic contact with trustworthy individuals. The conflict that arises, coupled with an eerily affecting Paul Dano as a staunch opportunist An unparalleled examination of one man's conflict with his soul: on the one hand Daniel Plainview is a staunch capitalist-man made, profoundly ambitious and unemotional in business; on the other a self-stated aspiring "family man" desperate for authentic contact with trustworthy individuals. The conflict that arises, coupled with an eerily affecting Paul Dano as a staunch opportunist veiled by his holy mania, is classic fodder for epic film-making, and PTA-as usual-succeeds in grand fashion. Expand
  66. MichaelR.
    Feb 2, 2008
    10
    There were so many aspects of that movie that scared the s**t out of me. It had the most realistic and wrathful acting that would rock many film watchers to their core. It was a fantastic movie, that I'm going wait to see again.
  67. DavidF.
    Mar 6, 2008
    1
    "There Could Have Been Worse" It could have been poorly shot. I don't care if it had a great film score, the volume of the music was really high. Does that make it better-- NO. If turning the voltage up to 11 in every facet of a movie makes it great in your mind, then this is your film. The film score opens with a musical crescendo that shouldn't have been used because it was "There Could Have Been Worse" It could have been poorly shot. I don't care if it had a great film score, the volume of the music was really high. Does that make it better-- NO. If turning the voltage up to 11 in every facet of a movie makes it great in your mind, then this is your film. The film score opens with a musical crescendo that shouldn't have been used because it was lifted hook line and sinker from Kubrick's 2001, and yet was intended to bring to mind a different emotion and theme. Pointless violence, characters who you don't believe in, a supposedly angry character who unburdens himself once to a virtual stranger claiming he hates everyone, and then shows unexpected sensitivity to his employees after a workplace death? Yah right! I'm a Yankee who knows nothing about the oil business, but I was scratching my head as to what kind of Rube Goldberg devices were running in the background most of the movie, so its not just the Texans who saw stupid lazy research. A supposedly greedy man who keeps a secret from his son for twenty years longer than the greed requires? Who are we kidding here? This movie is just Dumb with the volume cranked up so high you can't think straight! Expand
  68. SteveT
    Apr 30, 2008
    10
    This is one of the best movies ever made, IMO. An instant classic with Daniel Day Lewis giving the best performance so far in his acting career. He is brilliant. Why 'No Country For Old Men' won the Oscar for best picture over this movie is an enigma and proof that the academy is out to lunch. I'm a Cohen brothers fan and 'No County For Old Men' is not even This is one of the best movies ever made, IMO. An instant classic with Daniel Day Lewis giving the best performance so far in his acting career. He is brilliant. Why 'No Country For Old Men' won the Oscar for best picture over this movie is an enigma and proof that the academy is out to lunch. I'm a Cohen brothers fan and 'No County For Old Men' is not even anywhere near their best quality of film making. Expand
  69. AnthonyS.
    May 12, 2008
    10
    The movie was extraordinary. After three watches I can see how it is truley a character examination of Plainview and his realistic, darkly comic, and brutal interaction with the world around him. Anyone bashing the soundtrack obviously has little appreciation for real music, and while Johnny Greenwood may not have done the best job, his minimalist and serialist influences can still be The movie was extraordinary. After three watches I can see how it is truley a character examination of Plainview and his realistic, darkly comic, and brutal interaction with the world around him. Anyone bashing the soundtrack obviously has little appreciation for real music, and while Johnny Greenwood may not have done the best job, his minimalist and serialist influences can still be heard and appreciated. True work of art, none of the dumbed down bullshit so popular today. Expand
  70. JoshS.
    Feb 12, 2008
    0
    Horrible. Watching this film was a waste of time. None of the characters are likable, the music was terrible, and some lines were repeated over and over and over and over again until you become sick to death of them. Why that was put in the script, I will never understand. There really isn't a lot going on here, just people having unengaging conversations. There are also some LAME Horrible. Watching this film was a waste of time. None of the characters are likable, the music was terrible, and some lines were repeated over and over and over and over again until you become sick to death of them. Why that was put in the script, I will never understand. There really isn't a lot going on here, just people having unengaging conversations. There are also some LAME attempts at comic relief. I will never see another movie with Daniel-Day Lewis again! If you want to see a movie that's actually good, see "No Country For Old Men". Expand
  71. MikeM.
    Feb 15, 2008
    1
    Daniel Day was a phenomenal actor, and there was an interesting sound track.... but that was it. The movie drags on and is horribly pointless. Avoid it unless you style yourself a movie connoisseur.
  72. YevgeniS.
    Feb 15, 2008
    1
    Rarely can I see a film with such incredibly good performances yet hate the result. It tales 10 full minutes of tedium to get a single line of dialogue and that seemed to be the fastest pace the film could attain. Dull. Dreadfully dull. I thought it would NEVER end. I contemplated walking out, but felt it would HAVE to get better with all the great reviews. It doesn't. It begins bad, Rarely can I see a film with such incredibly good performances yet hate the result. It tales 10 full minutes of tedium to get a single line of dialogue and that seemed to be the fastest pace the film could attain. Dull. Dreadfully dull. I thought it would NEVER end. I contemplated walking out, but felt it would HAVE to get better with all the great reviews. It doesn't. It begins bad, moves slowly and has no discernible plot other than "greed corrupts." If you need to spend time in a theatre to see this, you are in need of medication for insomnia. Expand
  73. KR
    Feb 22, 2008
    9
    A near masterpiece. Daniel Day Lewis's performance is riveting and unnerving and disturbing to watch - but well worth watching!
  74. RonC.
    Apr 15, 2008
    0
    I am a 67 year old man. I have seen a lot of movies .This is simply the worst movie that I have had the misfortune to see.
  75. SammyP.
    May 25, 2008
    0
    The man was horrible and what a waste of time watching this stinker!
  76. JeffB
    Jun 17, 2008
    0
    This perfectly shows how stupid and manipulable today's society has become. Make a film that basically has no point other than having no point, mix it with the most annoying music - it's actually not worth calling it music - that humanity has ever had the displeasure to hear and last but not least unnecessarily protract the whole act AND voilà, critics will call you a This perfectly shows how stupid and manipulable today's society has become. Make a film that basically has no point other than having no point, mix it with the most annoying music - it's actually not worth calling it music - that humanity has ever had the displeasure to hear and last but not least unnecessarily protract the whole act AND voilà, critics will call you a genius! The audience will follow the critics because it is afraid of being called dumb if they dislike the film and so we have one giant ludicrous farce. Expand
  77. Rich
    Jul 17, 2008
    2
    No am0ount of stellar acting can hide from the audience that this movie, indeed, has no point. Daniel Day-Lewis is absolutely perfect for this role, if only he had some meaningful dialog. This movie reminded me very much of 2001: A Space Odyssey in that it is very long, has some good music, and is boring to the point of nausea.
  78. TSD
    Aug 11, 2008
    0
    I spent hours waiting for it to get good, and then the credits rolled. No redeeming features whatsoever.
  79. juggawugga
    Aug 24, 2008
    0
    god jesus buttfucking christ this is a piece of shit, ass-licking movie. absolutely nothing new or insightful presented. yep, some doucebag oil man sends off his "son" after he goes deaf at his own cause and is of no more use to him. and then he kills a few more people along the way, blah blah blah, guys with mustaches are bad because they have bowling alleys in their houses.god jesus buttfucking christ this is a piece of shit, ass-licking movie. absolutely nothing new or insightful presented. yep, some doucebag oil man sends off his "son" after he goes deaf at his own cause and is of no more use to him. and then he kills a few more people along the way, blah blah blah, guys with mustaches are bad because they have bowling alleys in their houses. that's it, fudgepackers. the same people who rated this movie highly also like shakespeare and opera. if that's not you, don't listen to them or you'll be just as pissed as i am right now. Expand
  80. HaroldM.
    Dec 23, 2007
    0
    there Will Be Blood is mouth aching, in a bad way, as the audience is having a tough time enjoying this, all it does is annoy, frustrate, bore, and ware out on ideas, and makes you instantly want to return home, where life truly is.
  81. CeliaC.
    Dec 23, 2007
    0
    My least favourite movie since Epic movie this year, Epic movie is much worse, but this is still pathetic, it feals like a low-budget, snoozing, lazy, and dull atmosphere. i cannot belive how much these critics are enjoying this!Because this REALLy SUCKS!!!!!
  82. SunshinefanChristenson
    Dec 23, 2007
    0
    Very weak at heart, and cosmetically stupid and dumb. The storyline is awkward and really really really dull, how is it possible to make a good movie out of this kind of idea?
  83. EricS.
    Dec 29, 2007
    3
    Way too long - a good 1930s director would have done a better, stronger job with the story in 90 minutes, or less. The music was awful - intrusive and used far too much. At times it was almost laughable. Daniel Day Lewis was good, sort of, but frankly, a nasty drunk isn't all that tough a role. There was far too much reliance on tight closeups of people's faces to try and wring Way too long - a good 1930s director would have done a better, stronger job with the story in 90 minutes, or less. The music was awful - intrusive and used far too much. At times it was almost laughable. Daniel Day Lewis was good, sort of, but frankly, a nasty drunk isn't all that tough a role. There was far too much reliance on tight closeups of people's faces to try and wring emotion out of the audience - a cheap trick that was overused to the point of not working. Boring! Expand
  84. Aug 14, 2010
    10
    Paul Thomas Anderson is the best minimalistic director out, in my opinion. Most of his movies have been very simple but they have deeper messages in them. Definitely in my top 10. Amazing movie.
  85. Aug 16, 2010
    10
    A modern masterpiece. This is Anderson's best film. Day-Lewis and Dano are both stunning. Greenwood's soundtrack is hypnotizing and phenomenal. The visuals are dazzling if not completely hallucinating. The black humor is outrageously funny and brilliantly placed so that only the most astute viewer and can notice it. One of the best films of the 2000's.
  86. Mar 12, 2011
    9
    The films of Paul Thomas Anderson seem to polarise folks - I'm one who loves his films but plenty of people don't. That said this film is quite a departure from his previous work - no large ensemble cast, no contemporary / modern setting, very little humour, relatively sparse dialogue. This has the same feeling of unease as 'Punch Drunk Love' largely due to Johnny Greenwood's (of RadioheadThe films of Paul Thomas Anderson seem to polarise folks - I'm one who loves his films but plenty of people don't. That said this film is quite a departure from his previous work - no large ensemble cast, no contemporary / modern setting, very little humour, relatively sparse dialogue. This has the same feeling of unease as 'Punch Drunk Love' largely due to Johnny Greenwood's (of Radiohead fame) brilliant / unconventional score (incidental music might be more accurate). Daniel Day-Lewis plays the protagonist Daniel Plainview very adeptly - a great psychological study into the unique individuals that prosper in times of explosive industrial growth.

    A great and unique movie that will surely be recognized as a classic in years to come
    Expand
  87. Sep 19, 2010
    10
    Amazing. Two days in a row, and two days of incredible movies that portray humans at their most raw. Still afflicted with Oscar fever, I followed up my viewing of The Reader with There Will Be Blood, which won Daniel Day-Lewis an Oscar for Best Actor last year.

    Gritty, cold and, at times, cruel, this period piece set in the late 1800s through the Great Depression, There Will Be Blood is,
    Amazing. Two days in a row, and two days of incredible movies that portray humans at their most raw. Still afflicted with Oscar fever, I followed up my viewing of The Reader with There Will Be Blood, which won Daniel Day-Lewis an Oscar for Best Actor last year.

    Gritty, cold and, at times, cruel, this period piece set in the late 1800s through the Great Depression, There Will Be Blood is, at its core, about the business of...well, business, versus the business of salvation. Neither are proven to be better, or worse, as the case may be, than the other except for maybe, in the end, Daniel Day-Lewis' character is shown to be more exact in his evil, while his moral counterpart, Eli, is shown to be naive in his selfishness.

    Paul Thomas Anderson continues his track record of unique and heavily character-driven films, in the vein of Boogie Nights, Magnolia and Punch-Drunk Love. As usual, his characters are immensely flawed and capable of the most atrocious of actions. He's quickly becoming a master of creating characters who actually do what only our darkest moments think of doing, if then.

    As usual, Daniel Day-Lewis is outstanding in his role, commanding immense strength on the screen. The Oscar was well-deserved.

    My only real criticism of the film is that the portrayal of Eli's religious con-man being made into the weak, whiny hypocrite that he becomes, comes across more as a personal indictment of Anderson's rather than an necessary element of the movie, specifically Eli's senseless murder in the end. Unlike the seemingly objectivity of The Reader, There Will Be Blood shamelessly overexaggerates the stupidity of the congregation (and, believe me, I cannot believe I'm saying that since I generally believe Christianity to be silly). If Eli is proven to be a great fool, what then of the congregation who put such faith in him? It rubbed me the wrong way, but didn't make me enjoy the film less. Perhaps portraying Daniel as an empty, soul-less man is meant to counter the naivete of his enemy.
    Expand
  88. Nov 3, 2010
    10
    Very politically minded, intelligent, brutal and unapologetic. Daniel Day Lewis owns this film and deservedly won the Oscar for it. Great music, beautiful settings but it is always the story that triumphs with a finale that feels right. Much more satisfying than No Country For Old Men.
  89. Nov 22, 2011
    9
    Another example of why Daniel Day Lewis is the best actor alive today. He delivers a powerful performance in this film and he is perfect from start to finish. The entire film is rather interesting but it can be a bit dull in some parts and make it a little bit of a suffer to get through. However great performances by the cast and overall interest in the plot will keep you satisfied till the end.
  90. Jul 7, 2014
    10
    Paul Thomas Anderson created a masterpiece when he wrote and directed "There Will Be Blood" but, unfortunately for him, another masterpiece (ever-so-slightly closer to perfection) edged the Academy Award for Best Picture in 2007. However, in terms of character study this film is up there with Taxi Driver and Citizen Kane and, when this is combined with the indomitable performance of DanielPaul Thomas Anderson created a masterpiece when he wrote and directed "There Will Be Blood" but, unfortunately for him, another masterpiece (ever-so-slightly closer to perfection) edged the Academy Award for Best Picture in 2007. However, in terms of character study this film is up there with Taxi Driver and Citizen Kane and, when this is combined with the indomitable performance of Daniel Day-Lewis, "There Will Be Blood" is in a league of its own. Some may find this film long, slow, or even boring but there is no doubt that the fascinating message that PT Anderson conveys so successfully will still stay with you - memorable, horrifying and enlightening. Expand
  91. Sep 12, 2011
    10
    There Will Be Blood has to be the best movie of the decade, and an all-time favorite, and the man who helps the movie be as brilliant is Daniel Day-Lewis. He's that kind of actor that makes any film worth seeing. He played a staggering role in Scorsese's "Gangs of New York", and then makes an even better attempt in this. Paul Dano plays the supporting character as a young preacher, and boyThere Will Be Blood has to be the best movie of the decade, and an all-time favorite, and the man who helps the movie be as brilliant is Daniel Day-Lewis. He's that kind of actor that makes any film worth seeing. He played a staggering role in Scorsese's "Gangs of New York", and then makes an even better attempt in this. Paul Dano plays the supporting character as a young preacher, and boy was he perfect for that role. He should of won "best supporting actor", but at least Day-Lewis won. There Will Be Blood is a story about an oil man named Daniel Plainview and his adopted son, H.W, who make their way across California, trying to dig out every last bit of oil they can find. Having met by a young man, saying that there was loads of oil on their land. Having to travel miles to their small home, they lied and said that they were hunting for quail. After a while of the hunting, H.W found the oil. Then, when having dinner with the family, Plainview brings up the oil found on their land and asks if he could buy the land for three thousand dollars, and the family immediately says yes. But one of the family's sons, named Eliot, who's a young preacher for the towns church, disagrees and asks for ten thousand. This starts a rival between the oil man and the preacher, which will create loads of problems for both, that will also cause murder.

    This film may be my favorite movie of all time. This also had some parts that gives the movie resemblance to Kubrik's classic, "2001: A Space Odyssey", but like a western version, with the long stretch of the violin, and everything else quiet. I don't really find this slow at all, the whole time it was exciting and really interesting to watch. I bought the DVD without ever watching it before (though I knew it was going to be good), and now I can easily say that I made a great decision. Please watch this movie! I guarantee that if you have a passion for film or a huge fan of Day-Lewis, you'll love it!
    Expand
  92. Sep 10, 2011
    10
    an amazing film, some stunning acting from all inviolved and some of the best lines ever in a movie (milkshake!), people complaing that it lacks action or nothign happens needs to get a clue and perhaps grow up a little.....this movie doesnt hold you by the hand , it requires a little effort but gives you maximum reward.
  93. Jun 11, 2013
    10
    Clearly this film isn't for everyone. For me, it's Anderson's best, and one of the best films of recent years, because it combines realism (which some people mistake for lack of plot) with intensity, action with meditation, and amazing performances and settings. Jonny Greenwood contributes a haunting but earthy score, whose rawness often plays off the characteristic intensity of Day-Lewis'Clearly this film isn't for everyone. For me, it's Anderson's best, and one of the best films of recent years, because it combines realism (which some people mistake for lack of plot) with intensity, action with meditation, and amazing performances and settings. Jonny Greenwood contributes a haunting but earthy score, whose rawness often plays off the characteristic intensity of Day-Lewis' antiheroic protagonist. All this plays out in terms of a revealing meditation on the origins of the clash between capitalism and religion in modern-day America. Truly a film that ticks all the boxes see for yourself why it was the most mentioned film on critics' 'best of the decade' lists for the noughties. Expand
  94. Nov 12, 2012
    10
    There Will Be Blood is one of the greatest movies on my list because thanks to Paul Thomas Anderson, the movie is violent, brutal, and I think if Lincoln could get Oscar buzz, then call in Daniel-Day-Lewis. He's a gifted acclaimed actor and I think he delivers a calm, attitudinal, no-nonsense character in real life. Great film, should be in the AFI lists for the best movies of all time.
  95. Apr 11, 2013
    10
    The film answers the question of how far greed can drive a man to succeed, and how far the money and in this case, oil, truly dictates human behaviour. There Will Be Blood tells the ultimate disaster of one man's mission to be the best at what he does, and discard anything that gets in his way.
    Daniel Day-Lewis puts in one of the greatest and most memorable performances of any actor or
    The film answers the question of how far greed can drive a man to succeed, and how far the money and in this case, oil, truly dictates human behaviour. There Will Be Blood tells the ultimate disaster of one man's mission to be the best at what he does, and discard anything that gets in his way.
    Daniel Day-Lewis puts in one of the greatest and most memorable performances of any actor or actress in the last few decades, his wispy and dominating voice truly capture the ruthless and maniacal means boiling beneath the surface, he is the 'oilman' Daniel Plainview, and he gets what he wants.
    The film opens with very little dialogue, we watch Plainview, alone and down a well, digging for oil, his perseverance and can-do attitude are apparent as he breaks his leg in a fall, but manages to get out of the well and start over again.
    Plainview and his son, HW, coax towns into letting them dig up their land in the search for oil, and when he is approached into a town with the potential of riches beyond measure, he is met with the bizarre and erratic Eli Sunday (Paul Dano), a preacher who ends up being at egotistical loggerheads with Plainview about his faith and his intentions with the town.
    After a tragic accident, Plainviews behaviour drastically changes and ulterior motive soon come to light, wanting to have so much money that he would no longer have to know people. The addition of his half-brother perhaps shows a more humanly side to him, but he seems determined and forthright to get what he wants, eventually falling into obsessive and alcohol-fuelled madness.
    An epic tale which is never without its drama, There Will Be Blood never fails to impress in its acting, writing and visual landscapes of beauty, filming in the same place as No Country for Old Men, the similarities in film style.
    But of course it is the thrilling characters that truly make this film what it is, Plainview has flashes of Citizen Kane in his determination for everything, but ultimately loneliness at what he has become.
    The film has styles of long scenes and plenty of dialogue, but what truly needs to be seen is the characters who bring these scenes to life, the ambition of Paul Thomas Anderson could indeed have been a hit or miss but what he has created is something unique.
    The often debated ending has been the subject of many talks, particularly peoples distaste for it, but as the film goes on its difficult to imagine another finish, other than the madness within.
    A truly remarkable film that never ceases to amaze in its character development, expert writing and ambitious reach that could very well be the best film in the last fifteen years. Taking it from its remarkable perch could indeed be a difficult thing.
    Expand
  96. Oct 19, 2012
    9
    after watching this movie, i became a fan of daniel day lewis... very dark and riveting movie. This should have been d oscar winning movie for me in that year..
  97. Jun 1, 2012
    10
    There isn't much more I can say to add to the heap of praise that this move received, so let me just say that everyone who has called this one of the best movies ever made is telling the truth. Also, I want to just mention the amazing Score by Johnny Greenwood. It's hauntingly beautiful and it sets the mood perfectly. It's a shame it was ruled ineligible for an Academy Award.
  98. Jun 6, 2012
    9
    I am probably applauding this film more than it deserves, but this is my type of movie. Paul T. Anderson's direction of the film is well done which should not be a surprise considering he has been called "one of American film's modern masters". The style of atmosphere Robert Elswit creates is perfect for the films setting. The script is very good. And the acting is more or so average.I am probably applauding this film more than it deserves, but this is my type of movie. Paul T. Anderson's direction of the film is well done which should not be a surprise considering he has been called "one of American film's modern masters". The style of atmosphere Robert Elswit creates is perfect for the films setting. The script is very good. And the acting is more or so average. Daniel D. Lewis does however, a job of portraying mineral prospector Daniel Plainview, still a bigger expectation from him is held after watching Gangs of New York. Watching Daniel's relationship with his boy, especially towards the end, really makes the film's audience care for the characters. Expand
  99. Feb 11, 2013
    9
    Where to start, on the first viewing There Will Be Blood has comfortably become one of my favourite films of all time. From the dialogue-free 15 minute opening of Plainview mining alone, to the intense and violent conclusion, There Will Be Blood is unrelenting. You cannot take your eyes off Daniel Day-Lewis. He is quite simply fantastic as the fiery, vengeful and driven oilman and deservedWhere to start, on the first viewing There Will Be Blood has comfortably become one of my favourite films of all time. From the dialogue-free 15 minute opening of Plainview mining alone, to the intense and violent conclusion, There Will Be Blood is unrelenting. You cannot take your eyes off Daniel Day-Lewis. He is quite simply fantastic as the fiery, vengeful and driven oilman and deserved his Plainview becomes so dislikeable he is likeable, and I found myself routing for him, after all he is the film. The scenes between pastor Eli and Daniel, in particular the two where each humiliates the other, are worth the price of admission alone.

    Maybe I'm biased, maybe Daniel Day-Lewis is one of my favourite actors, maybe because I work in the oil industry the film's subject appeals to me more, maybe great shots of drilling derricks and flaming oil gushers set against the American West just do it for me. Or maybe not, maybe Paul Thomas Anderson has just created a truly great film, full of memorable images and lines. Although central to the film, the themes of religion and capitalism are allowed to exist without heavy handed interference from Anderson. Ultimately, neither come out of the other side smelling of roses.

    The reason this film only scores 9/10 is due to the score. Radiohead's Jonny Greenwood is responsible for the score which Tarantino complimented as "one of the great modern original soundtracks of the last decade" but it just didn't agree with me.
    Expand
  100. Sep 18, 2013
    10
    A morality tale where evil is self aware from the opening credits to the bloody, seething finish. This is beyond a tone poem, something of an Old Testament caliber parable, where there's no hope, no light, just the severe presence and weight of a thick, ethically drained darkness. To call it one of the most important motion pictures ever made would be no understatement.
Metascore
92

Universal acclaim - based on 39 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 36 out of 39
  2. Negative: 0 out of 39
  1. Reviewed by: David Ansen
    100
    There Will Be Blood is ferocious, and it will be championed and attacked with an equal ferocity. When the dust settles, we may look back on it as some kind of obsessed classic.
  2. Reviewed by: Glenn Kenny
    100
    There Will Be Blood is, in fact, not a historical saga; rather, it's an absurdist, blackly comic horror film with a very idiosyncratic satanic figure at its core.
  3. Reviewed by: John DeFore
    100
    Daniel Day-Lewis stuns in Paul Thomas Anderson's saga of a soul-dead oil man.