Comments on: Hunter Stephenson’s Movie Review of There Will Be Blood http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/02/29/must-read-hunter-stephensons-movie-review-of-there-will-be-blood/ Blogging the Reel World Sun, 7 Sep 2008 08:10:33 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: Tomi http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/02/29/must-read-hunter-stephensons-movie-review-of-there-will-be-blood/#comment-455057 Tomi Tue, 19 Aug 2008 02:38:51 +0000 http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/02/29/must-read-hunter-stephensons-movie-review-of-there-will-be-blood/#comment-455057 Thank you for the great read. I was looking for a nice analysis of this movie and this one here hit the right chord. Cheers!! Thank you for the great read. I was looking for a nice analysis of this movie and this one here hit the right chord. Cheers!!

]]> By: jim http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/02/29/must-read-hunter-stephensons-movie-review-of-there-will-be-blood/#comment-454035 jim Sat, 16 Aug 2008 01:32:31 +0000 http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/02/29/must-read-hunter-stephensons-movie-review-of-there-will-be-blood/#comment-454035 very good review but you did miss the baptism with oil thing and seriously you need to get out more. Great movie though very good review but you did miss the baptism with oil thing and seriously you need to get out more. Great movie though

]]> By: Ken Romig http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/02/29/must-read-hunter-stephensons-movie-review-of-there-will-be-blood/#comment-359959 Ken Romig Sun, 01 Jun 2008 18:20:40 +0000 http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/02/29/must-read-hunter-stephensons-movie-review-of-there-will-be-blood/#comment-359959 What about the most important religous aspects of the movie--- The annointing of his child with oil and the rant "I am the third revelation" before he kills the preacher? Your lack of religious education betrays you as incapable of reviewing this movie. What about the most important religous aspects of the movie— The annointing of his child with oil and the rant “I am the third revelation” before he kills the preacher? Your lack of religious education betrays you as incapable of reviewing this movie.

]]> By: cogezek http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/02/29/must-read-hunter-stephensons-movie-review-of-there-will-be-blood/#comment-311239 cogezek Wed, 30 Apr 2008 22:34:37 +0000 http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/02/29/must-read-hunter-stephensons-movie-review-of-there-will-be-blood/#comment-311239 I assure you, there are things. I assure you, there are things.

]]> By: cogezek http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/02/29/must-read-hunter-stephensons-movie-review-of-there-will-be-blood/#comment-311002 cogezek Wed, 30 Apr 2008 20:10:47 +0000 http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/02/29/must-read-hunter-stephensons-movie-review-of-there-will-be-blood/#comment-311002 A review of the previous comment: Farid, You really need to find better things to do on the internet. A review of the previous comment:

Farid, You really need to find better things to do on the internet.

]]> By: Farid http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/02/29/must-read-hunter-stephensons-movie-review-of-there-will-be-blood/#comment-310393 Farid Wed, 30 Apr 2008 13:48:34 +0000 http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/02/29/must-read-hunter-stephensons-movie-review-of-there-will-be-blood/#comment-310393 A review on your review. And be warned, as I tend to talk a lot, too. This is gonna get lengthy. But hey, this is for Hunter. So I hope he reads it if no one else. Apologies for blabbering too much where I do. And I'm not a pro myself by the way. I've never written a pro movie review. In fact I've never written one longer than a paragraph. I'm not an avid review-reader either, just to put things in perspective. I do read one here, one there, more often than not when one is recommended to me, and yours was one of those. I do seem to have a thing for good cinema though. I'd say I'm an avid good-movie-watcher. This WAS a good review. And I actually revised my own review of the movie after reading it (now want to see this movie one or two more times) and I added half a star to my rating because of what was revealed to me. Again, to put things in perspective, here's my original one-paragraph review on flixster: "Great acting, great music, great symbolism... Definitely a one-time must-see!" - and I changed that to "multiple-time must-see" after reading your review! However, a quick review on the review itself. The review is great, as a personal movie review. But I have to criticize a few things that made me think what the hell, did a teenager write this? 1. Despite the good vocabulary and grammar used, the literary value of the review is shattered into a thousand pieces every time you use the word "fuck" or a derivative of it. I mean come on, when you and a friend talk you say "fuck" and that's okay, I do too. But a reviewer like this deserves to be read and receive attention, and I'm all FOR freedom of everything, not just speech but also WAY of speech. But come on, anyone would admit it: talking like this in a professional context harnesses your progress and your reputation. 2. Along the same line, You completely ruin it where you mention the bit on your account balance being 6.66, claiming that you're not superstitious right away as if to clear yourself of charges you KNOW are going to be pressed upon you. Why say stuff like that in the first place? What good does it do for your review? For that matter I'm more assured you're superstitious right now. 6.66 my butt... pssh! 3. This is a good review where you ANALYZE the movie. You even mention once that this is probably not the best movie ever made, good job, realistic, true. (For can anyone ever say one movie IS?) You totally ruin it where you start glorifying the movie without reason, saying it's 11/11, effectively saying it IS "the best movie ever made". This may be pushing it a bit too far, but you know what such fanaticism reminds me of? Religion! (Also the bit about 6.66) You do your own review (and the movie) injustice by inducing idolatry. Maybe I'm being too hard on you. After all, i can understand your enthusiasm! It IS an amazing movie, and I say this thanks to your review after all! A review on your review.
And be warned, as I tend to talk a lot, too. This is gonna get lengthy. But hey, this is for Hunter. So I hope he reads it if no one else. Apologies for blabbering too much where I do.
And I’m not a pro myself by the way. I’ve never written a pro movie review. In fact I’ve never written one longer than a paragraph. I’m not an avid review-reader either, just to put things in perspective. I do read one here, one there, more often than not when one is recommended to me, and yours was one of those.
I do seem to have a thing for good cinema though. I’d say I’m an avid good-movie-watcher.
This WAS a good review. And I actually revised my own review of the movie after reading it (now want to see this movie one or two more times) and I added half a star to my rating because of what was revealed to me. Again, to put things in perspective, here’s my original one-paragraph review on flixster:
“Great acting, great music, great symbolism… Definitely a one-time must-see!” - and I changed that to “multiple-time must-see” after reading your review!

However, a quick review on the review itself. The review is great, as a personal movie review. But I have to criticize a few things that made me think what the hell, did a teenager write this?
1. Despite the good vocabulary and grammar used, the literary value of the review is shattered into a thousand pieces every time you use the word “fuck” or a derivative of it. I mean come on, when you and a friend talk you say “fuck” and that’s okay, I do too. But a reviewer like this deserves to be read and receive attention, and I’m all FOR freedom of everything, not just speech but also WAY of speech. But come on, anyone would admit it: talking like this in a professional context harnesses your progress and your reputation.
2. Along the same line, You completely ruin it where you mention the bit on your account balance being 6.66, claiming that you’re not superstitious right away as if to clear yourself of charges you KNOW are going to be pressed upon you. Why say stuff like that in the first place? What good does it do for your review? For that matter I’m more assured you’re superstitious right now. 6.66 my butt… pssh!
3. This is a good review where you ANALYZE the movie. You even mention once that this is probably not the best movie ever made, good job, realistic, true. (For can anyone ever say one movie IS?) You totally ruin it where you start glorifying the movie without reason, saying it’s 11/11, effectively saying it IS “the best movie ever made”. This may be pushing it a bit too far, but you know what such fanaticism reminds me of? Religion! (Also the bit about 6.66) You do your own review (and the movie) injustice by inducing idolatry. Maybe I’m being too hard on you. After all, i can understand your enthusiasm! It IS an amazing movie, and I say this thanks to your review after all!

]]> By: Juha http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/02/29/must-read-hunter-stephensons-movie-review-of-there-will-be-blood/#comment-308845 Juha Tue, 29 Apr 2008 16:09:09 +0000 http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/02/29/must-read-hunter-stephensons-movie-review-of-there-will-be-blood/#comment-308845 So what I'm trying to say in this foreign language is that Daniel didn't end up too good either in his fight against god. He ended alone, hardened, sad and ugly. Maybe PTA is saying that a man who totally abandons god (or love) is not too much of a man either. So what I’m trying to say in this foreign language is that Daniel didn’t end up too good either in his fight against god. He ended alone, hardened, sad and ugly. Maybe PTA is saying that a man who totally abandons god (or love) is not too much of a man either.

]]> By: Juha http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/02/29/must-read-hunter-stephensons-movie-review-of-there-will-be-blood/#comment-308834 Juha Tue, 29 Apr 2008 16:00:33 +0000 http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/02/29/must-read-hunter-stephensons-movie-review-of-there-will-be-blood/#comment-308834 Nice review. I've seen the film once yesterday. I thought I didn't like it at all at first but it's somehow growing on me now. I don't totally agree with you on the antireligion part though... I think Daniel has abandoned love/god and Eli on the other has abandoned the material. Both greedy in they own ways. Both mad in they own way. Both on the opposite ends of the same line. I think you didn't mention ,or did you, the fact that in the scene where Daniel tells H.W. that he is 'a bastard from the basket' and confirms himself that he never had love for H.W., images of Daniel with young H.W. are shown. I think these are Daniel's own memories flashing in his head and shown to us while H.W. the only and last person he had in his life walks away. Daniel is suffering for his madness too, wants to but cannot oppose his own ego eventhough memories of love are flashing in his mind and therefore is doomed to solitude. What about the part where he cries after killing his fake brother? Nice review. I’ve seen the film once yesterday. I thought I didn’t like it at all at first but it’s somehow growing on me now. I don’t totally agree with you on the antireligion part though… I think Daniel has abandoned love/god and Eli on the other has abandoned the material. Both greedy in they own ways. Both mad in they own way. Both on the opposite ends of the same line. I think you didn’t mention ,or did you, the fact that in the scene where Daniel tells H.W. that he is
‘a bastard from the basket’ and confirms himself that he never had love for H.W., images of Daniel with young H.W. are shown. I think these are Daniel’s own memories flashing in his head and shown to us while H.W. the only and last person he had in his life walks away. Daniel is suffering for his madness too, wants to but cannot oppose his own ego eventhough memories of love are flashing in his mind and therefore is doomed to solitude. What about the part where he cries after killing his fake brother?

]]> By: Joe http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/02/29/must-read-hunter-stephensons-movie-review-of-there-will-be-blood/#comment-308001 Joe Mon, 28 Apr 2008 23:45:01 +0000 http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/02/29/must-read-hunter-stephensons-movie-review-of-there-will-be-blood/#comment-308001 Pretty entertaining take on the film. And your're right, this film is the definition of BRILLIANCE. PTA made a definitive cinematic experience. Pretty entertaining take on the film. And your’re right, this film is the definition of BRILLIANCE. PTA made a definitive cinematic experience.

]]> By: jamie http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/02/29/must-read-hunter-stephensons-movie-review-of-there-will-be-blood/#comment-307591 jamie Mon, 28 Apr 2008 15:14:11 +0000 http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/02/29/must-read-hunter-stephensons-movie-review-of-there-will-be-blood/#comment-307591 It would be interesting to see a companion film made from Sunday's point of view. It would be interesting to see a companion film made from Sunday’s point of view.

]]> By: theater structure in classical era http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/02/29/must-read-hunter-stephensons-movie-review-of-there-will-be-blood/#comment-286193 theater structure in classical era Wed, 16 Apr 2008 13:30:24 +0000 http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/02/29/must-read-hunter-stephensons-movie-review-of-there-will-be-blood/#comment-286193 [...] a beguiling look at ...http://www.timeout.com/film/newyork/features/show-feature/4529/sky-high.htmlHunter Stephenson??s Movie Review of There Will Be Blood The following review contains spoilers and touches on topics and themes from the film, There Will [...] [...] a beguiling look at …http://www.timeout.com/film/newyork/features/show-feature/4529/sky-high.htmlHunter Stephenson??s Movie Review of There Will Be Blood The following review contains spoilers and touches on topics and themes from the film, There Will [...]

]]> By: In Which You Are Driven By A Solitary Passion « This Recording http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/02/29/must-read-hunter-stephensons-movie-review-of-there-will-be-blood/#comment-246269 In Which You Are Driven By A Solitary Passion « This Recording Mon, 24 Mar 2008 16:10:44 +0000 http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/02/29/must-read-hunter-stephensons-movie-review-of-there-will-be-blood/#comment-246269 [...] not hard to locate P.T.A.’s competitive drive and striving perfectionism in Daniel Plainview, or the Coens’ lifelong bond and unspoken [...] [...] not hard to locate P.T.A.’s competitive drive and striving perfectionism in Daniel Plainview, or the Coens’ lifelong bond and unspoken [...]

]]> By: juano http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/02/29/must-read-hunter-stephensons-movie-review-of-there-will-be-blood/#comment-228154 juano Fri, 07 Mar 2008 00:58:38 +0000 http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/02/29/must-read-hunter-stephensons-movie-review-of-there-will-be-blood/#comment-228154 this ain't no review this ain’t no review

]]> By: the REEL Addict » Blog Archive » REEL Reading: THERE WILL BE BLOOD http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/02/29/must-read-hunter-stephensons-movie-review-of-there-will-be-blood/#comment-223851 the REEL Addict » Blog Archive » REEL Reading: THERE WILL BE BLOOD Mon, 03 Mar 2008 20:54:40 +0000 http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/02/29/must-read-hunter-stephensons-movie-review-of-there-will-be-blood/#comment-223851 [...] real best film, THERE WILL BE BLOOD, over at the blog /film, Hunter Stephenson has written a review of the film that’s really more akin to an academic paper. It’s insanely long (be sure to grab [...] [...] real best film, THERE WILL BE BLOOD, over at the blog /film, Hunter Stephenson has written a review of the film that’s really more akin to an academic paper. It’s insanely long (be sure to grab [...]

]]> By: keeleon http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/02/29/must-read-hunter-stephensons-movie-review-of-there-will-be-blood/#comment-223697 keeleon Mon, 03 Mar 2008 17:48:03 +0000 http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/02/29/must-read-hunter-stephensons-movie-review-of-there-will-be-blood/#comment-223697 I just saw this last night, and I have to say I wasn't really that impressed. I can see that it is crafted well, the cinematography, the editing, the acting (I love DDL). It just seemd more like a piece of art than an "enjoyable" movie. I got that there was a lot of symbolism, but it just didn't "entertain". There really wasn't much of a story, and I have t osay, I do not understand why everyone keeps lauding the score. The music was actually rather irritating, and didn't help to "Set the corect mood" in my opinion. You shouldn't have "tense strings" building up in a scen where there is no payoff, it just makes the end of the seem feel dissapointing and empty. I just saw this last night, and I have to say I wasn’t really that impressed. I can see that it is crafted well, the cinematography, the editing, the acting (I love DDL). It just seemd more like a piece of art than an “enjoyable” movie. I got that there was a lot of symbolism, but it just didn’t “entertain”. There really wasn’t much of a story, and I have t osay, I do not understand why everyone keeps lauding the score. The music was actually rather irritating, and didn’t help to “Set the corect mood” in my opinion. You shouldn’t have “tense strings” building up in a scen where there is no payoff, it just makes the end of the seem feel dissapointing and empty.

]]> By: researchgirl : parse » Easily entertained - volume 4 http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/02/29/must-read-hunter-stephensons-movie-review-of-there-will-be-blood/#comment-223042 researchgirl : parse » Easily entertained - volume 4 Mon, 03 Mar 2008 01:20:26 +0000 http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/02/29/must-read-hunter-stephensons-movie-review-of-there-will-be-blood/#comment-223042 [...] A solid review/analysis of “There Will Be Blood” from /Film (spoiler-filled, so don’t read if you haven’t seen). I liked this bit: Many [...] [...] A solid review/analysis of “There Will Be Blood” from /Film (spoiler-filled, so don’t read if you haven’t seen). I liked this bit: Many [...]

]]> By: Hunter Stephenson http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/02/29/must-read-hunter-stephensons-movie-review-of-there-will-be-blood/#comment-223029 Hunter Stephenson Mon, 03 Mar 2008 01:04:00 +0000 http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/02/29/must-read-hunter-stephensons-movie-review-of-there-will-be-blood/#comment-223029 @ Tim Trust me when I say that I poured over PTA's interviews for TWBB. The man is also fond of saying he hates to explain what his films mean and that he will never ever do so. He said this about Magnolia and he's still quite ambiguous with TWBB, and will forever be. Why is this? Well, I feel that PTA could not be more friggin' clear with what he's saying with TWBB regarding religion, to a mass audience. I've already referenced the quote you posted in regards to the film's political undertones in the comments here. PTA doesn't need to say that Daniel Plainview toppled God, because he, uhh, doesn't need to. It's right there on the screen for nearly a three-hour runtime. And, as I explained in the review, I feel that a lot of film critics simply lacked the balls to examine TWBB's anti-religious message(s). I agree with Orange Cinema in that it is the job of reviewers to dive in and rip apart a film's meaning(s), especially when the film is this great (and @ maharba, YES, TWBB is in the top 200 films ever made. Period). Problem is, critics for Traditional Media simply cannot discuss religion, especially Christianity, when it is so controversially presented. "Liz and Owen" cannot do that at Entertainment Weekly. Nor can they write 6,000 words on a film. We can do that here at Slashfilm. TWBB is made for a new generation, our generation, and it is our job to cover this film the way it needs to be and deserves to be. To review this film and NOT reveal your own feelings on the subject matter, when the film and director confront them so viciously, brilliantly and relentlessly, when the subject matter is this entwined with the human experience, says so much about the state of movie criticism today (as cprestond pointed out, thanks) that it hurts to laugh. Masturbation? Maxim-type reviews are masturbation. Unfulfilling, quick, shallow and too lazy to remove the tissue when they're finished. Like with Maxim's recent music reviews. So sticky are those guys, they simply imagine the albums in their head and publish reviews on them. @ Fred In three months, it will be "too late" to review Semi-Pro and Step Up. In 50 years, there will be fresh reviews of There Will Be Blood. It's never too late, and hopefully the Internet will be central to changing movie reviews from their current state as mere product tie-ins, to in-depth breakdowns. Of course, the readers will have a huge say in this. If you're religious, put your hands together and make a difference. Otherwise, make it happen however you can. @ Tim

Trust me when I say that I poured over PTA’s interviews for TWBB. The man is also fond of saying he hates to explain what his films mean and that he will never ever do so. He said this about Magnolia and he’s still quite ambiguous with TWBB, and will forever be.

Why is this? Well, I feel that PTA could not be more friggin’ clear with what he’s saying with TWBB regarding religion, to a mass audience. I’ve already referenced the quote you posted in regards to the film’s political undertones in the comments here. PTA doesn’t need to say that Daniel Plainview toppled God, because he, uhh, doesn’t need to. It’s right there on the screen for nearly a three-hour runtime.

And, as I explained in the review, I feel that a lot of film critics simply lacked the balls to examine TWBB’s anti-religious message(s). I agree with Orange Cinema in that it is the job of reviewers to dive in and rip apart a film’s meaning(s), especially when the film is this great (and @ maharba, YES, TWBB is in the top 200 films ever made. Period).

Problem is, critics for Traditional Media simply cannot discuss religion, especially Christianity, when it is so controversially presented. “Liz and Owen” cannot do that at Entertainment Weekly. Nor can they write 6,000 words on a film.

We can do that here at Slashfilm. TWBB is made for a new generation, our generation, and it is our job to cover this film the way it needs to be and deserves to be. To review this film and NOT reveal your own feelings on the subject matter, when the film and director confront them so viciously, brilliantly and relentlessly, when the subject matter is this entwined with the human experience, says so much about the state of movie criticism today (as cprestond pointed out, thanks) that it hurts to laugh.

Masturbation? Maxim-type reviews are masturbation. Unfulfilling, quick, shallow and too lazy to remove the tissue when they’re finished. Like with Maxim’s recent music reviews. So sticky are those guys, they simply imagine the albums in their head and publish reviews on them.

@ Fred

In three months, it will be “too late” to review Semi-Pro and Step Up. In 50 years, there will be fresh reviews of There Will Be Blood. It’s never too late, and hopefully the Internet will be central to changing movie reviews from their current state as mere product tie-ins, to in-depth breakdowns. Of course, the readers will have a huge say in this. If you’re religious, put your hands together and make a difference. Otherwise, make it happen however you can.

]]> By: maharba http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/02/29/must-read-hunter-stephensons-movie-review-of-there-will-be-blood/#comment-223005 maharba Mon, 03 Mar 2008 00:24:04 +0000 http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/02/29/must-read-hunter-stephensons-movie-review-of-there-will-be-blood/#comment-223005 I question your taste in film, in that you exaggerate, in some ways, the quality of this film. Yes, it is very good. Best ever? What, out of a Top 200? It is beautiful and yet there have been hundreds of movies with equal to or better than scenes throughout. This is not a flawless film. Is is a masterpiece? For PTA it is, but in regards to the history of film? No. I question your taste in film, in that you exaggerate, in some ways, the quality of this film. Yes, it is very good. Best ever? What, out of a Top 200? It is beautiful and yet there have been hundreds of movies with equal to or better than scenes throughout. This is not a flawless film. Is is a masterpiece? For PTA it is, but in regards to the history of film? No.

]]> By: Joseph http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/02/29/must-read-hunter-stephensons-movie-review-of-there-will-be-blood/#comment-222967 Joseph Sun, 02 Mar 2008 23:15:36 +0000 http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/02/29/must-read-hunter-stephensons-movie-review-of-there-will-be-blood/#comment-222967 "No one gives a shit about your overblown review of a movie that came out 3 months ago." Clarification: YOU don't give a shit. “No one gives a shit about your overblown review of a movie that came out 3 months ago.”

Clarification: YOU don’t give a shit.

]]> By: Fred http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/02/29/must-read-hunter-stephensons-movie-review-of-there-will-be-blood/#comment-222865 Fred Sun, 02 Mar 2008 20:29:12 +0000 http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/02/29/must-read-hunter-stephensons-movie-review-of-there-will-be-blood/#comment-222865 Jesus, what masturbation. No one gives a shit about your overblown review of a movie that came out 3 months ago. Jesus, what masturbation. No one gives a shit about your overblown review of a movie that came out 3 months ago.

]]>