User Score
7.8

Generally favorable reviews- based on 1166 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. Jul 25, 2014
    0
    I will resume this movie in three words: **** ING ****
    Daniel Day Lewis is not better actor than Adam Sandler or Paul Dano, and the oscar goes for him?
    This society is simply awful.
  2. Apr 1, 2013
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This films started off well, but once we've seen how Plainview (Day-Lewis) set up the business and his early difficulties in buying land to drill for oil that the film starts to take a nose dive. First of all, there is little to no character development we learn nothing about Plainview's work force, his son (who turns out not to be his son) is only developed very slightly towards the end. There are also a few things that don't make any sense i.e when Plainview abandons the boy on the train. He is returned back to Plainview later in the film, but where had he been? Where did they find him? How long had he been gone for? None of this is explained. I also felt the ending was over the top. I gave it 4 mainly because it started out well and Day-Lewis put in a good performance (not Oscar worthy though). I also thought the guy who played Eli put on a good performance too. Expand
  3. Nov 11, 2012
    3
    The acting is superb and Daniel-Day Lewis is captivating as always. But I had to drag myself through this one. It has it's moments, but overall There Will Be Blood is a like a never ending desert highway riddled with pot holes and tumbleweeds. Long winded, dry and not an inkling of refuge in sight. If only they would have whittled it down to a neat and simple package, this could have beenThe acting is superb and Daniel-Day Lewis is captivating as always. But I had to drag myself through this one. It has it's moments, but overall There Will Be Blood is a like a never ending desert highway riddled with pot holes and tumbleweeds. Long winded, dry and not an inkling of refuge in sight. If only they would have whittled it down to a neat and simple package, this could have been great. But as it stands, snooze fest. Expand
  4. Mar 31, 2012
    2
    The only reason this movie gets a 2 is because of its acting other than that zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz. I almost cried because i was so bored. I rather watch grass grow in my backyard. What a disgrace this movie is and it doesn't deserve to be up for best picture.
  5. Mar 31, 2012
    3
    No matter how superb that acting was and the overall quality of the film.....it is wayyyyyyyyyy too long and pointless. It was the farthest thing from a gripping movie. There were some very good scenes and music, but come on....so boring.
  6. Mar 13, 2012
    1
    I still am baffled at how anyone thinks this is a good movie. I have watched it twice now and both times I was so bored and confused as to what the meaning of this turd was, I had to fight to stay awake. I get the plot, but the whole moral dilemma thing just escapes me. I mean, in real life who the hell acts like these people do? The only positive things I got from this movie were theI still am baffled at how anyone thinks this is a good movie. I have watched it twice now and both times I was so bored and confused as to what the meaning of this turd was, I had to fight to stay awake. I get the plot, but the whole moral dilemma thing just escapes me. I mean, in real life who the hell acts like these people do? The only positive things I got from this movie were the visuals and the acting of Daniel Day-Lewis. Other than that, avoid this movie unless you want to be bored to tears and pissed off at the ending. Expand
  7. Jun 22, 2011
    0
    Absolutely awful movie! I saw this movie because there was nothing else on and to say I didn't like it is an understatement. Truthfully the entire movie is uninteresting, boring and supremely stupid.
  8. May 16, 2011
    0
    Never before have I seen such a well made film that was so TERRIBLE.

    I still have no idea why this film gets good ratings. I cannot even discern a plot, other than a story of how corrupt people can become, be they the Businessmen as depicted or the Churchmen as depicted. So, people can be bad and corrupt? We needed over 2.5 HOURS of wasted film for this? The performances were
    Never before have I seen such a well made film that was so TERRIBLE.

    I still have no idea why this film gets good ratings. I cannot even discern a plot, other than a story of how corrupt people can become, be they the Businessmen as depicted or the Churchmen as depicted.

    So, people can be bad and corrupt? We needed over 2.5 HOURS of wasted film for this?

    The performances were excellent, the cinematography was outstanding, but there was simply no real plot and nothing to care about in this tedious film.

    It is a pity I cannot score it lower than 0.
    Expand
  9. Jan 9, 2011
    2
    This is literally a terrible film. I love Daniel Day Lewis but NOT in this film, there is just nothing going on with the acting. A big yawn fest. A couple of good one liners so the script isn't awful but there is just not anything interesting about this film.
  10. Oct 4, 2010
    0
    I couldn't think of a more boring movie. Good acting? Looks more like imitating Sean Connery's accent. I hated this movie so much I would actually use the poster as toilet paper!
  11. phila
    Jan 5, 2010
    1
    I'm a movie buff and soon to be director. this movie was worthless. paul thomas anderson somehow got into the legion of "can do no wrong" with critics and gets a pass on all his movies. ever see one of his interviews? he cant answer 'yes or no' questions. does he have a rich daddy in politics or news media or something that gets him a free pass?
  12. MikeS
    Jan 5, 2010
    2
    Started off boring and progressively got worse.
  13. DW
    Dec 8, 2009
    4
    I loved this movie. I loved the photography. The character development. The realism. The premise. All for what? For nothing? Do not make a film if you do not know where the plot is going to go. The plot - goes nowhere. There will be blood? There won't be blood - at least no blood that has any meaning. If you expect to see a good man become evil you will not. If you expect to see an I loved this movie. I loved the photography. The character development. The realism. The premise. All for what? For nothing? Do not make a film if you do not know where the plot is going to go. The plot - goes nowhere. There will be blood? There won't be blood - at least no blood that has any meaning. If you expect to see a good man become evil you will not. If you expect to see an evil man be reformed you will not. If you expect to see an evil man get his comeuppance you will not. If you expect people to suffer terribly or prosper wonderfully, you will be mistaken in your estimation. You instead get: Daniel Day Lewis: a cranky, miserable miser... who is... a cranky miserable miser. The only person who really loses the plot in the film is the screenwriter. There is no plot. And this is why this is not a film, but a series of still of beautiful countryside. There is no plot. Expand
  14. AlexR
    Oct 22, 2009
    3
    I started whittling in the middle of this film to stave off boredom. Yeah. It starts off well and lays a solid foundation for what could be a captivating plot. Then functionally nothing happens for like two whole hours. No discernible plot, with only Day-Lewis' intense portrayal to carry the film. His performance is actually kind of squandered since they could have given him more I started whittling in the middle of this film to stave off boredom. Yeah. It starts off well and lays a solid foundation for what could be a captivating plot. Then functionally nothing happens for like two whole hours. No discernible plot, with only Day-Lewis' intense portrayal to carry the film. His performance is actually kind of squandered since they could have given him more interesting dialogue or action. But, no. Just two hours of nothing. Then the ending comes out of nowhere, spews one memorable catchphrase, and finishes on a completely ridiculous note. I understand that this is art, and the cinematography is nice, but why can't art be entertaining? Don't let this film trick you into thinking that it makes a profound statement about society or the human condition or whatever just because DDL plays a brooding, mean guy and it's really sparse and atmospheric. Without him, this movie has nothing and would easily be seen as such. There Will Be Blood is all set-up. All the pieces are in place for this to be a good film, they just forgot to write the plot. Expand
  15. CuthrinK.
    Aug 29, 2009
    3
    Quite overrated but the looks of it. Excellent acting by most of the actors, but the story is like an acid-time-travel trip to the olden times.
  16. RobertM
    Aug 25, 2009
    3
    I'm still trying to figure out what was so great about this movie!! The first fifteen minutes were addicting since it had no words. I found that compelling, but the movie failed to make me care about an ambitious, cold hearted oil tycoon! I was upset that he didn't die or get killed! This was 3 hours of a snorefest!
  17. WadM
    Aug 23, 2009
    0
    This movie Blows!!!
  18. NathanK.
    Jul 30, 2009
    4
    Boring and contrived... one of the most horrid movies i've ever seen. the best part was the credits.
  19. KevinB.
    May 2, 2009
    2
    Glad I waited to see this on dvd. Even so, I was barely able to sit through it. I guess I kept hoping it would get better, considering the critics rave reviews. The characters seemed shallow , and the plot too. A sad story about a sorry sad man. I did enjoy seeing the history of the early oil extraction techniques.
  20. khcinOhio
    Apr 3, 2009
    0
    This is a movie that doesn't know what it is doing. The main character is a "soul-dead," grasping, ruthless man. OK. We know that before the movie starts. After this nothing happens. This is a truly awful movie and an utter waste of the leading actor's obvious talents. Why are the critics awed? Stay away!
  21. BB
    Mar 24, 2009
    0
    This is an awful movie. Just awful. Who do I see about getting the three hours back. I had to apologize to my DVR for wasting it's time. I like epic pictures. I like big vistas and stirring musical backgrounds but this isn't epic. It is trying to be epic. It is trying to be to much. It fails. Based on the ratings I watched through to the end to see if it would come together in This is an awful movie. Just awful. Who do I see about getting the three hours back. I had to apologize to my DVR for wasting it's time. I like epic pictures. I like big vistas and stirring musical backgrounds but this isn't epic. It is trying to be epic. It is trying to be to much. It fails. Based on the ratings I watched through to the end to see if it would come together in the end; it didn't. Did I say awful enough yet? Expand
  22. DougL.
    Feb 24, 2009
    1
    Just because a movie is "unlike any other" doesn't make it good. Is it too much to ask for a film to be inventive, thought-provoking, insightful, etc., while still entertaining its audience? I feel like I was being bludgeoned to death (or at least, to sleep) with the snail's pace of this film. To quote the late, great George Carlin, "It's like watching flies f***!!". I have Just because a movie is "unlike any other" doesn't make it good. Is it too much to ask for a film to be inventive, thought-provoking, insightful, etc., while still entertaining its audience? I feel like I was being bludgeoned to death (or at least, to sleep) with the snail's pace of this film. To quote the late, great George Carlin, "It's like watching flies f***!!". I have yet to hear a convincing explanation from anyone as to why they liked this movie. Expand
  23. 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
  24. 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
  25. 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.
  26. SteveS.
    Oct 3, 2008
    4
    Calling this a good movie is an insult to good movies. I wanted to like it, and DD Lewis is always entertaining, but let's face it - the movie is ultimately a failure.
  27. 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.
  28. 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
  29. TSD
    Aug 11, 2008
    0
    I spent hours waiting for it to get good, and then the credits rolled. No redeeming features whatsoever.
  30. 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.
  31. 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.
  32. Mark
    Jun 18, 2008
    4
    Only thing good about it was the acting. It was boring. I was expecting some kind of twist at the end or for the movie to rap up with some kind of moral theme, but the movie was pointless.
  33. 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
  34. 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!
  35. 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!
  36. ErinB.
    Jun 4, 2008
    1
    I HATED this movie! Could we have a little more over the top acting Mr. Lewis?!
  37. 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.
  38. CliffM.
    May 31, 2008
    0
    Most boring movie I ever saw. I can't believe the critic's ratings on this.
  39. SammyP.
    May 25, 2008
    0
    The man was horrible and what a waste of time watching this stinker!
  40. CaptainSpaulding
    May 25, 2008
    4
    To paraphrase Phil Hartman as Frank Sinatra, "What is all this crap?!" If not for the excellent acting of Daniel Day-Lewis, this movie would be horrid. If not for Mr. Day-Lewis, I'd give his a negative number if possible. A horrid movie and 2 hours of your life that you'll never get back! Quick advice? RENT SOMETHING ELSE!
  41. 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
  42. DanH.
    May 9, 2008
    1
    The most insanely boring and pointless movie i have ever seen in my life.
  43. 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.
  44. EL
    May 4, 2008
    3
    Slow and boring, wish I'd done my ironing instead. The film lacks any interesting story line and I found myself falling asleep more than once. I must admit however, that it was exciting in comparison to; Girl with a Pearl Earring and Lost in Translation.
  45. JoeM.
    May 4, 2008
    3
    I have to agree with Barbara M's review of all sound and fury coupled with slow pacing and extended melodrama. I sometimes found myself sighing over my labor to make it through to the end of this plodding film. Not to take away from Daniel Day-Lewis' effort, because he rivets you with his always incredible screen presence, but otherwise I really couldn't wait for this movie I have to agree with Barbara M's review of all sound and fury coupled with slow pacing and extended melodrama. I sometimes found myself sighing over my labor to make it through to the end of this plodding film. Not to take away from Daniel Day-Lewis' effort, because he rivets you with his always incredible screen presence, but otherwise I really couldn't wait for this movie to end. I'm glad I caught it on DVD rather than pay $9 to see it at the theater. Expand
  46. 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
  47. JimM.
    Apr 22, 2008
    4
    Didn't get it. Two hours I'll never get back.
  48. 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.
  49. 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.
  50. 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
  51. 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
  52. John
    Apr 12, 2008
    2
    Terrible plot and very slow movie.
  53. RichardS.
    Apr 11, 2008
    4
    Well made movie about someone you don't like or care about. Too bad Day-Lewis can act in every way except to express pain. The editing was bad.
  54. MattB.
    Apr 11, 2008
    3
    I watched this movie because it was highly acclaimed and one many awards. I was very disappointed. The character development was great, but the movie felt like 4 or 5 hours and moved very slowly. The music was awful, and, in times seemed unnecessary.
  55. 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!
  56. 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
  57. JohnD.
    Apr 7, 2008
    2
    wow, this movie was so boring. great acting but this movie was painfully dull
  58. 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.
  59. cindynnevins
    Apr 3, 2008
    3
    No hero in movie. It was boring, long. I found it to be tedious. Waiting for something to happen. The ending was terrible. I still am not sure of the consequences of what he did. Save your money. It was over rated
  60. Steve
    Mar 30, 2008
    2
    can't think how this moves got so much praise. It has the world's worst music and Danny' boy's accent is even worser. A pitiful waste of film stock and my time and I like movies a lot. Makes Pirates of the Caribbean seem like Citizen Kane. Humans are crap is the message but I knew that already
  61. 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.
  62. AdamAdams
    Mar 21, 2008
    0
    Can't understand the appeal of this movie at all. I would like to think that I know a good movie when I see one, which is why this movie creates a disturbing dilemma for myself. But, do normally love Daniel Day Lewis. Amazing that he can win an Oscar for this craptastic movie.
  63. SeanF.
    Mar 16, 2008
    4
    Over the top acting kind of disguises the fact that plot is peppered with illogical scenes which make little sense. Like having one actor playing the two Henry brothers in same character. Left me wondering for the most part if the preacher was supposed to have two personalities. The ending was cliched ('luke I'm not your father') and complete with gratuitous violence which Over the top acting kind of disguises the fact that plot is peppered with illogical scenes which make little sense. Like having one actor playing the two Henry brothers in same character. Left me wondering for the most part if the preacher was supposed to have two personalities. The ending was cliched ('luke I'm not your father') and complete with gratuitous violence which added nothing and detracting from the film itself. Sure the acting is good but that alone doesn't make a great film. Expand
  64. 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.
  65. 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
  66. BillL.
    Mar 11, 2008
    3
    Terrible musical score meant to impress detracts from story and performance of Daniel Day Lewis.Not as interesting as the critics think it is. Full of bombast not epic story.
  67. 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".
  68. 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!
  69. 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
  70. 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
  71. JimmyS.
    Mar 5, 2008
    1
    besides some nice pictures, it was really really boring.
  72. JimmusM.
    Mar 4, 2008
    4
    Dull, awful, pointless movie. Daniel Day-Lewis is very good at his part, as unlikeable as it was. The soundtrack is mostly jarring noise. I struggled to find one character I could identify with, or admire. Yeah, yeah, film "critics", I get it - money is bad, religion is bad. Bad, like the taste this film left in my mouth after watching it.
  73. 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..
  74. 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.
  75. RaimondR.
    Feb 29, 2008
    4
    There Will Be Blood, a 2007 film directed, written, and produced by Paul Thomas Anderson (best known for his work directing and writing the Adam Sandler film Punch-Drunk Love), opened on December 26, 2007 to a limited release in New York and Los Angeles and then was later widely released on January 25, 2008. It follows the story of an
  76. IverP.
    Feb 26, 2008
    4
    Great looking, but ultimately quite tedious and unbalanced.
  77. 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
  78. TheoS
    Feb 24, 2008
    3
    Male movie. Hard, boring, easy message served in 3 Hours. Would have made a good short-movie. 30 minutes max. Aggressive music, anoying at best. (And i am actually musician (classic) but that combination did not worked out for me.
  79. 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.
  80. 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
  81. 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
  82. 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
  83. BarryS.
    Feb 16, 2008
    3
    The most over-hyped movie perhaps ever- for those of you artsie freaks who think- 'well you just dont get it" - oh i get it all right- i understand DD Lewis is a brilliant actor and that the film is beautifully shot- but thats as far as anyone could go with this film- Paul Thomas Anderson needs to stay behind the camera- period. His screenplays are tired and not clever- no happy The most over-hyped movie perhaps ever- for those of you artsie freaks who think- 'well you just dont get it" - oh i get it all right- i understand DD Lewis is a brilliant actor and that the film is beautifully shot- but thats as far as anyone could go with this film- Paul Thomas Anderson needs to stay behind the camera- period. His screenplays are tired and not clever- no happy ending here and either hopefully for PTA career. Expand
  84. JoeyH
    Feb 15, 2008
    3
    It just wasn't that good. I have a lot of respect for PT Anderson, Paul Dano, and Daniel-Day Lewis. Especially Daniel. Unfortunately, great acting doesn't make a movie great. Kind of like how having Lebron doesn't make the Cavs great. I guess rating art is kind of pointless, but I really wouldn't tell anyone to go see this.
  85. sh
    Feb 15, 2008
    0
    THIS MOVIE FUCKING SUCKED! I SAT THERE FOR 2.5 HOURS AND FUCKING TRIED TO KILL MYSELF. IT WAS SO FUCKING POINTLESS AND IF I HAD A GUN I WOULD HAVE KILLED MYSELF, BECAUSE THE MOVIE SUCKED SO FUCKING MUCH. JUST WATCHING IT MADE ME WANT TO GO FIND THE ACTORS AND DIRECTORS AND FUCKING KILL THEM. WTF! IM SO FUCKING PISSED OFF AFTER WATCHING THAT MOVIE!!!!!!
  86. 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
  87. 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.
  88. 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!
  89. 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.
  90. 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
  91. JimI
    Feb 14, 2008
    2
    This movie moved slower than my grandma Helen, and she's been dead for 10 years! Not to take away from Daniel's performance or the guy who played the preacher, but come on, the first 15 minutes of the film I thought we reverted back to silent films. I get the point the movie was making, but cut maybe an hour off this movie and it would have been MUCH better. I was so bored with This movie moved slower than my grandma Helen, and she's been dead for 10 years! Not to take away from Daniel's performance or the guy who played the preacher, but come on, the first 15 minutes of the film I thought we reverted back to silent films. I get the point the movie was making, but cut maybe an hour off this movie and it would have been MUCH better. I was so bored with Daniels character mid way through the movie, and the sound track was grating on my nerves so badly, I had to walk out. Expand
  92. 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
  93. FredG
    Feb 10, 2008
    3
    Highly overrated in my opinion. A tale of greed. I wish I hadn't seen it, because it wasn't that entertaining. The story also wasn't crisp. There was a good movie in there somewhere.
  94. 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.
  95. JohnS.
    Feb 8, 2008
    3
    Great period settings and geographical scenes and clothing. Horrible story line with unredeeming qualities! Magnificent performance by Daniel Day Lewis. This started out great and then left me in a pool of black oil. Why would such a great actor let this happen? Was a short cut taken and the substance left on the cutting room floor? Daniel Plainfield the character shows compassion and Great period settings and geographical scenes and clothing. Horrible story line with unredeeming qualities! Magnificent performance by Daniel Day Lewis. This started out great and then left me in a pool of black oil. Why would such a great actor let this happen? Was a short cut taken and the substance left on the cutting room floor? Daniel Plainfield the character shows compassion and love in the beginning then sours into a pool of drunken insanity. Very long and boring, Daniel Day Lewis is great but the writer must of killed himself half way through! Or went on strike? Did this movie get made on the cutting room floor? Daniel Day Lewis needs to pick better movies to be in. Expand
  96. AmandaL.
    Feb 8, 2008
    0
    Boring! music hurt my ears and did not fit the movie. Terrible storyline.
  97. 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.
  98. FrankL.
    Feb 6, 2008
    3
    I expected much from this movie, especially after reading through critics and user-ratings in here and at other sites. To make it short i was mainly heavily disappointed on following points: 1) Music There are movies without music. There are movies with music, where the music can transport emotions or atmosphere and suspension. But there are also cases where the film music is so I expected much from this movie, especially after reading through critics and user-ratings in here and at other sites. To make it short i was mainly heavily disappointed on following points: 1) Music There are movies without music. There are movies with music, where the music can transport emotions or atmosphere and suspension. But there are also cases where the film music is so elaborated, so off limits that it simply puts itself way too much in the foreground. 2) i did not read the book, but only after reading to some user comments i understood that major parts of the underlying story were not told. It created on me the impression that i was just looking on some crazy, selfish ppl doing crazy and selfish things. No real message or system critic was really formulated. Frank@germany. Expand
  99. AlanH.
    Feb 5, 2008
    4
    A cinematically well-crafted movie that pays no regards to character truth or consistency or humanity. It's plodding and pretentious. Ditto for DDL's performance.
  100. 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
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.