![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
I saw it Saturday afternoon, and am very glad I got to see it before the Oscars. I enjoyed it very much: from the amazing non-verbal opening twenty minutes or so to the end(which I guess some people had problems with).
Daniel Day Lewis was brilliant. The other actors fine.The musical score was brilliant (I haven't yet seen some of the other movies whose scores were nominated--including that of Atonement which won). The directing was excellent and I had no problem with the storytelling and the passage of time in the last half an hour. If that missing gap of what 10-15 years hadn't been there, the movie would have been twice as long.
I understood everyone's motivation pretty well --except for Plainview perhaps--who I guess is "greedy" in some weird way--but what is he greedy for? He never has a woman as far as we can tell --Eli Sunday claims Plainview has been a "sinner" with women but you could have fooled me. His house at the end is nothing spectacular--he has done nothing with his power. This may be the one flaw in the movie that bothers me. Rick Bowes compares the character to Citizen Kane, but ...Kane's ambition is demonstrated time and time again. Plainview's never is. Plainview is never shown as seeking (or holding) office, he has no women, never seems like a spendthrift...
Anyone like to weigh in on this? Do you think it's a flaw? If not, then why not and what DO you think Plainview wanted?
Daniel Day Lewis was brilliant. The other actors fine.The musical score was brilliant (I haven't yet seen some of the other movies whose scores were nominated--including that of Atonement which won). The directing was excellent and I had no problem with the storytelling and the passage of time in the last half an hour. If that missing gap of what 10-15 years hadn't been there, the movie would have been twice as long.
I understood everyone's motivation pretty well --except for Plainview perhaps--who I guess is "greedy" in some weird way--but what is he greedy for? He never has a woman as far as we can tell --Eli Sunday claims Plainview has been a "sinner" with women but you could have fooled me. His house at the end is nothing spectacular--he has done nothing with his power. This may be the one flaw in the movie that bothers me. Rick Bowes compares the character to Citizen Kane, but ...Kane's ambition is demonstrated time and time again. Plainview's never is. Plainview is never shown as seeking (or holding) office, he has no women, never seems like a spendthrift...
Anyone like to weigh in on this? Do you think it's a flaw? If not, then why not and what DO you think Plainview wanted?
From: (Anonymous)
no subject
My comparison of Plainview and Kane was that thire stories are both about American success. Hearst was once described as a billionaire who became a multi-millionaire. He inherited the Comstock Lode and started rich. Most of his enterprises failed to make significant money. What he was looking for was personal success - importance.
Plainview has nothing and builds himself a fortune. But the wealth in non-mythic.
BTW I took the story he tells the kid about finding him in a basket in the desert as the truth.
Rick Bowes
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
From:
no subject