Milkshakes, Reviews, and Assorted Things

So let me preface this all by saying that a lot of what's to come is familiar stuff—obvious facts and opinions that we're all aware of, even if we don't talk about them in the open on a regular basis (If this goes as many of my writings do, it will be like my thought processes put into words, so bear with me). Last night, I saw Paul Thomas Anderson's There Will Be Blood for the fifth time—fourth in theaters (once on DVD screener)—and had my best experience with it yet. Apparently anti-Kael, I thrive on repeated viewings, which allow me to probe deeper into a work for new textures, ideas, feelings, patterns, meaning, implications, and questions. Some thing that a required second viewing to have a formulated opinion on something is anywhere from lame to somehow indicative of weakness. Truly, I can't think of a more elitist and idiotic mindset, and one that, truly, could only come from someone with a rather superficial approach to movie-watching and movie-enjoying (unless, that is, they're really just God-like in their ability to "get" things, but one would think that omnipotence would carry with it a little decency). And seriously, why deprive yourself of further enjoyment; when one knows the area ahead, they're bound to navigate it a little differently, and doesn't experience itself deepen one's skill, one's enjoyment? Not including bad or unsatisfying experiences, would you only want to have sex with somebody one time? I think not, and there are two heads coming to that conclusion.

Environment is key to movie watching, and so too do I prefer to observe loved films in as many scenarios as possible; theaters and private viewings at different times and with different audiences. Last night's was my second of Blood with a public audience, and the more casual moviegoing vibe is, suffice to say, different from that of the doing-this-thing-for-a-living crowd. I can't speak to the expectations and reception of those who've come to know Blood through talk show interviews with its cast and 30-second TV spots (as opposed to the online community I've invested myself in), but sharing the experience with them seems to work at an intuitive level.

And so, I saw the film again, and found myself in a totally new "groove" which I hadn't noticed or felt in previous sittings (forgive me, Pauline, I the pedestrian worshiper of the monolith). What amazes me so much at this point with Blood—which I named my #2 film of last year but could have just as easily moved up a notch (they're both masterpieces)—is its endless emotional reflexivity, which seems to somehow flourish amidst Anderson's rigid and perfectionist style. This is another one of those cases where the musical accompaniment is an absolutely irreplaceable element, not unlike 2001, or, well, Jaws (those were the first that came to mind); Greenwood's score wraps itself around Anderson's structured imagery, exploring it, encasing it, and alternately reeling from and finding itself drawn to this horrific portrayal of (in)humanity.

Anderson's shots are ones of implicit call and response, his use of zooms, tracking shots, framing and establishing cuts bringing us closer and pushing us away—or does it simply back up with us, as we instinctively reel from Plainview's presence? The various chapters of There Will Be Blood—1898, 1902, 1911, and 1927, I think—never feel as if they're deliberately connected to each other in terms of traditional film narrative, and so too does the entire film seem to exist outside of expected narrative "engagement." The extended takes and eerie choices of angle seem oddly uneven and/or disjointed, something almost inhuman in the way they observe the events before them. The film seems to deliberately make us uncomfortable with its unforgivingly intimate close-ups, which, through their scrutiny, reveal more about their subjects than do mos. The film moves about—never with—its subjects, opening with a chilling Gods-eye-view of a desert mountain range and continuing on with a distinctly external emotional perspective, a new viewpoint to consider.

The aforementioned emotional reflexivity shows itself most clearly (and ably), I think, in the slick ways that There Will Be Blood meshes comedy and horror. Many have written, with opinions both positive and negative, and the bowling-alley conclusion and its either fiercely dark and depressing or unexpectedly farcical. I say, why not both? So much of what There Will Be Blood offers us (not to mention life in general) is so absurd in its "logic" and execution, that laughter seems the only response, lest we not know how to comprehend what lies before us. The chuckles I've had and heard have been of the uneasy sort, more the result of knowing no other way to respond than actually finding the material "ha ha, let's rewind that" funny. Indeed, laughter at oneself is often key to a more rounded character, and so too do I think that a smidgen of misanthropy is actually a healthy thing. One look at the world is indicative enough of our absurdities as an organism, and Daniel Plainview is one terrifying mother of a beast, all-out ridiculous as he declares himself—in a booming wall of noise—"the Third Revelation", but nothing short of petrifying as a swinging bowling pin confirms that he's absofuckinglutely serious.

And so I find it piteous that so many people are coming to the film and leaving with absolutely nothing, or something altogether off base. I mean not to say that I've had the definitive experience with There Will Be Blood and that there's a singular 'correct' way to watch it—one of the most incredible things about this or any art form is that every experience is unique—but to complain about a film not having a "likable character" or not having enough dialogue is tantamount to scoffing at black and white, widescreen, or silent films, ignorant of multiplicity as a result of a conditioned sense of standards of what "should" be.

For me, a singular trait exists that is shared by all great films: they communicate, honestly and fully and strongly, an experience, idea, feeling, or story. Many people look at movies as little-to-nothing more than a way to spend two hours, a social event at which one can relax and/or forget about the outside world. Escapism is a wondrous thing, no doubt, but there seems to exist a subculture that not only enjoys distraction, but reinforces it, preaching "it's only a movie" or "it should be entertaining" as if someone had died and made them Buddha. No film will ever be universally popular and I'd severely doubt any film's greatness if it were, but this notion bothers me mainly because it often comes with an absolutist and singular attitude, as if entertainment must be devoid of thought, or, worse yet, that entertainment must not be thought about. We don't even have to consider the diversity of tastes enjoyed by our race to see how problematic this can be, let alone the fact that many, like myself, enjoy film as much for its entertainment factor as for its cultural and anthropological qualities.

This has been all over the place, I know, so let me take this time now to wrap up with some lingering thoughts. Five viewings in, I think that There Will Be Blood is an absolute masterpiece, a confrontational period piece character study cum dark horror comedy. I wish more people would give it the necessary chance it needs, rather than stupidly reading the title expecting another Saw offshoot and then complaining ten minutes in that there hasn't been enough spillage of bodily fluids (seriously, clear your mind of expectations unless you want to be just another consumer bitch). And articles like this have proven so rewarding lately that I'm resolving to give up "reviewing" in general unless it is something I can more fully invest myself in. Yes, I've always tried to give everything due consideration (from Zoom to The Marine and back), and will continue to do so in my work for Slant, the House and any other publications I find myself at. But here in the blog setting, I'd like to adopt a more casual approach, one less structured around ratings and more prone to discussion.

Now, I can only hope you'll all forgive me for the following image...