There Will Be Blood

User Score
7.9

Generally favorable reviews- based on 1270 Ratings

User score distribution:

Where To Watch

Stream On
Stream 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

User Reviews

  1. RonA.
    Feb 24, 2008
    5
    There will be hype. The most interesting part of this movie involves Plainview's having to be "born again": he's forced, by financial motives, to say he's abandoned his son, and comes to realize, against his will, that he has. But little else remains, aside from the glorious cinematography. One simply doesn't care about Plainview, since he's merely a caricature, There will be hype. The most interesting part of this movie involves Plainview's having to be "born again": he's forced, by financial motives, to say he's abandoned his son, and comes to realize, against his will, that he has. But little else remains, aside from the glorious cinematography. One simply doesn't care about Plainview, since he's merely a caricature, overdrawn by both the script and Daniel Day-Lewis. There's just no story here that can live up to the money and talent expended on it. The deafness of HW is merely an occasion for cruelty, and the violent end of the movie clarifies nothing. One only wonders why Eli Sunday hasn't aged a day. The great Ciaran Hinds is barely used. Expand
  2. JackB
    May 12, 2008
    6
    It was good for the most part but just dragged on, the story became uninteresting and just plain bad at the end. I think its yet another movie where the critics thought "wow if we see this as a 10/10 we might be considered as lovers of real film" when really, it should all be down to how much you enjoy it as an individual.
  3. 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
  4. [Anonymous]
    Dec 23, 2007
    4
    Is there some kind of mass hallucination going on with these critics? This film is not good. The story is told excruciatingly slowly, and D Day Lewis basically reprises his Bill the Butcher role, but gives him the voice of John Huston. The guy playing the religious zealot is in WAY over his head, he's required to age 30 years yet in the last scene he still has adolescent acne and his Is there some kind of mass hallucination going on with these critics? This film is not good. The story is told excruciatingly slowly, and D Day Lewis basically reprises his Bill the Butcher role, but gives him the voice of John Huston. The guy playing the religious zealot is in WAY over his head, he's required to age 30 years yet in the last scene he still has adolescent acne and his voice squeaks as though his testacles are just dropping! All this nonsense about it being a big statement about religion vs money is trying to paste meaning onto a film that was lazily written. Unfortunately, Day Lewis is starting to have shark eyes which look dead and malevolent all the time, generating not much sympathy or interest within this viewer. Expand
  5. SashaS.
    Dec 28, 2007
    5
    Good and worthy attempt but sorry, no cigar. People are constantly comparing to other, better works while missing the basic fact that if it were THAT great it wouldn't need to be compared to other, better works. Shakespeare? Please.
  6. SteveC.
    Dec 29, 2007
    5
    Great acting undermined by overblown and ultimately embarassing plot. Anothe would be epic with nothing to say and 2.5 hours to not say it in. Lewis' incredible performance is sadly wasted.
  7. mathewB.
    Dec 29, 2007
    6
    Great cinematography, good editing, and a fantastic score cannot make-up for the fact the the films observations are superficial at best. Day-Lewis' preformance is over-the-top and not particularly convincing. More characture than character, he's supposed to be from Wisconsin... with that accent... not on your life.
  8. DWilly
    Dec 31, 2007
    5
    dThis might have been a character study... but no, it's not really, there's no revelation of character (he has no sex drive? he's pissed at the preacher as a rival for power or is it a God thing?); Daniel Day Lewis does give a bravura performance (doing the same character he did in "Gangs Of New York") but it's invulnerable and not by itself affecting; this could havedThis might have been a character study... but no, it's not really, there's no revelation of character (he has no sex drive? he's pissed at the preacher as a rival for power or is it a God thing?); Daniel Day Lewis does give a bravura performance (doing the same character he did in "Gangs Of New York") but it's invulnerable and not by itself affecting; this could have been a story about the clash of ideals, or no ideals or... no, it's not that either (the preacher character disappears for maybe an hour at one point). There's a lot of lot of good cinematography and atmospherics on location along with the style of mixing big theatrical performances with realist ones (using many non-actors), but NO STORY. Expand
  9. Nov 27, 2015
    5
    **********************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************Great screenplay. Awkward, inconsistent cinematography.
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. Daniel Day-Lewis stuns in Paul Thomas Anderson's saga of a soul-dead oil man.