"There Will Be Blood" (4.75/5) Roundtable Interview Extravaganza -Three Geek Review

Last Friday, The Geeks saw "There Will Be Blood," Paul Thomas Anderson's adaptation of the Upton Sinclair book "Oil!"
The next day Thad brought out his tape recorder and the three of them sat down and discussed the movie. This is what transpired.

"There Will Be Blood" (4.75/5) Roundtable Interview Extravaganza -Three Geek Review

- CAST -

The Geeks:

Jeremiah Sherman (JS)
Richard Kloiber (RK)
Thaddeus Stoklasa (TS)

Also Featuring:

Dustin Blakeman (DB)
Eric Johnson (EJ)
Hank McCoy the Cat (HM)

(General, introductory ruckus)

TS: So, we went to a movie.

JS: Yes. It was physically and emotionally exhausting.

TS: That's a good place to start. I would highly recommend that everyone possible see this movie, but eat a meal beforehand or something.

JS: Eat a meal, be sure you're well-rested.

TS: Don't go into this at the end of a long day.

EJ: As you two know, how hard is it to get me to go to the movies?

TS: Fuck you.

EJ: I saw this movie twice, bitches.

JS: You didn't even go to the actual movie.

EJ: (Over 'movie') I saw it twice.

JS: You saw it on your little, piddly-ass television over there.

EJ: I watched it twice!

TS: I can see the transcript now. "Eric says stuff" we'll just have a big, blacked-out part.

EJ: It's the real, "Remove Garfield's talking, you only see Jon's."

TS: You are like a --

DB: (from basement) I think it reads more like a government document_ (Eric laughs.)

TS: Oh wait, how do you black things out if the background's black, do I have to white it out?

JS: Oh yeah, my mom complained about that.

TS: Kloiber hasn't said anything yet.

RK: I've heard a few complaints about that; those people are dumb or have crappy monitors.

JS: Yes.

TS: Okay, aside from bitching about the few people who deign to read our site, how about we... (Jeremiah laughs) How about we...

EJ: That's me.

RK: This movie is a downer.

JS: Oh yeah, it's a hell of a downer.

TS: But I love downers!

EJ: I love uppers.

JS: I mean --

RK: Eric! We will banish you to your room!

TS: No! We'll never get him out again.

JS: The movie is basically focused on greed and piousness and the downfall of -- what being focused solely on those two emotions can slowly do to you.

RK: I'm gonna go ahead and add, it is also -- as much as I hate the term -- about selling out your beliefs.

JS: Oh, yeah. It is about... exactly what you were saying.

TS: Yeah, that's solid. I like that. I gotta say -- what was it we said before? -- the one big complaint is the kind of weird transitions it has.

JS: I didn't mind that so much; as much as you did.

TS: It wasn't so much that I minded, but it was the one thing one thing that stuck out as -- well the sound cue, in the beginning, kind of freaked me out but I got used to that.

RK: I liked that choice.

JS: Yeah. I liked the whole, almost like a horror movie --

TS: It was! It was like a slasher-sound thing goin' on.

RK: Although I will say, I didn't think the first scene needed to be in the movie.

JS: Really?

RK: No.

TS: The, uh... the silver mine?

RK: Yeah. It didn't set anything up...

JS: I think the beginning shows just the pure dedication he has to the greed. Just the type of man that he is.

TS: Because it actually started where the story started, as opposed to starting where was most interesting?

JS: Yeah. It started, basically -- we saw this character start to build up, from ground zero. The only thing he could do more than that would be starting at childhood, which would be just a little...

TS: Yeah.

JS: They started at the point in his life when he gave into his competitiveness.

TS: They started at the beginning of the road that you follow through the movie.

JS: Right.

TS: I could see that.

JS: It's a flawed movie, but I don't know what I would change about it. And the only argument is to make it shorter, but even then... there was no one moment where I wasn't enjoying it.

RK: It doesn't need to be shorter.

TS: No. I always find short movies to be criminal. But that, that's a me thing.

JS: Beautifully shot. Gorgeous cinematography. Just the landscape alone, the oil rig catching on fire.

TS: That was fantastic.

JS: Or the shot of Daniel Day-Lewis sitting in front of the burning oil rig, setting the dynamite.

RK: Him looking off into the ocean.

TS: Daniel Day-Lewis is a frighteningly good actor.

TS: It's what you were saying before, about making everything happen to the audience. That's why it's such a visceral experience.

JS: Yeah, it makes it a visceral experience.

TS: I love that word and I'm gonna end up using it to much in everything I write, forever.

JS: That's what movies should strive to do. That's why I made that reference last night, how it's like an American Herzog movie. Herzog movies tend to be visceral experiences.

TS: Yeah. And that is so important. People need to engage the audience.

JS: Yeah.

TS: Otherwise, y'know... I could see any movie.

JS: I will say that for a man who is not even 30 yet (according to Wikipedia, he is over 30), I believe -- Paul Thomas Anderson -- this being his fourth film, this is fantastic.

TS: How often does he come out with films?

RK: Every couple years.

JS: "Punch Drunk Love," if I can find it... came out in... 2002.

TS: Hold on. (snags the DVD from Jeremiah) That's goin' home with me.

JS: How about "Magnolia"?

TS: Probably that, too. I got a week, and I don't have a job.

RK: "Hard Eight."

JS: "Hard Eight" came out, ooh... early '90s (1996)?

RK: I'm guessing he's older than 30. I'm betting he's 35.

JS: That's still pretty incredible.

TS: You wanna put some money down on that?

JS: No, 'cause we don't have any money to bet.

TS: Exactly! Uhm... so give us money, viewers.

RK: I -- I said this last night --

TS: We'll take your word on that.

RK: This is a Faustian tale.

JS: I would agree totally.

RK: They don't actually sell their souls to the devil, but they do sell their souls whether they realize it or not.

JS: Well, one could make the argument that the devil was oil.

RK: Yeah.

JS: And they did sell their souls for the oil. Y'see, my two favorite emotions that movies deal with -- well, my first favorite is love. My second favorite is greed, and greed is really just the negative derivative of love. Greed is corrupt love.

TS: Yeah, it's loving yourself and your own success.

JS: That very much is a corrupt form of love. It takes the idea of love and puts in the dirty aspects of selfishness, obsessiveness...

TS: Bizarro Love.

JS: Yes. Exactly. For the comic book fans, Bizarro Love would be the perfect example of greed. But yeah, this movie is almost about 100% pure greed, and will make you uncomfortable. But in the best way.

TS: Oh, yeah.

JS: I haven't felt this breathless since "Grindhouse."

TS: But for entirely different reasons.

JS: For entirely different reasons.

TS: I think this is one of those movie that people have to see in the theater.

JS: Oh yeah, most definitely. Looking at someone else's way.

RK: It's a horror movie, without being one.

TS: It's sort of about the horror of humanity.

JS: Yeah.

RK: What Paul Thomas Anderson does to the audience, they do in slasher films. You are afraid for these characters, you feel it in the pit of your stomach...

TS: In a good one. Otherwise, you just want them to die.


RK: One thing I want to put in the review -- Upton Sinclair was a master of social commentary.

JS: Yes!

RK: Just amazing. The fact that he wrote a book that changed a nation with "The Jungle," and the way we get our food. And, in a way, if oil were as big of a deal back then as it is now, it might have changed the oil industry.

JS: Well, from what I understand, he (Anderson) substantially drew upon the book, like he took the idea from the book, and then made his own story. Apparently it's so widely different, you could read the book and watch the movie and get two different stories. But Upton Sinclain apparently took copies of ["Oil!"] and mailed them to Senators and Congressmen.

TS: Nice.

JS: I put this in my "Punch Drunk Love" review, that Paul Thomas Anderson likes to use music that almost goes against what he's filming. Like "Punch Drunk Love" has that very suspenseful type of music until the song comes on. There's the little clicking sounds and everything. It's very intense for the little things, like Adam Sandler coming out of his shell just a little bit.

RK: Same with "Magnolia."

JS: "Magnolia" is exactly the same way. He is, of the directors working today, one of the top five people who knows how to use music.

RK: At the same time, it doesn't stop at music... the cinematography. In the opening scene, when Daniel's going down the silver mine and that music is playing, he pans out across the western landscape for what seems like an eternity in the theater. And it bust builds the tension.

JS: In all of his movies he has a very panoramic view, even if it takes place in the city or something, he's very good at giving you this larger-than-life --

TS: Showing you the world.

JS: Yeah. And another trademark he has is that the camera almost never stops moving. But it's not a shaky-cam, it's smooth.

TS: Organic camera.

JS: Yeah. Even when they're talking the camera keeps moving, but it's a smooth transition, you barely even notice it.

TS: No, I didn't notice it. I guess you're right.

EJ: You're dealing a different breed in Sherman, Thad.

TS: Sherman's a pro.

JS: And, uh --

TS: That's getting cut too, by the way.

HM: (Meows.)

EJ: As is the Hank-squeak.

JS: No, the Hank-squeak should be left in there.

EJ: "Sherman's a pro. Squeak."

JS: Go ahead, Kloiber.

RK: Generally, a lot of music in a film is there to be ambient.

JS: Right.

RK: I do not believe that is the case with Paul Thomas Anderson.

JS: No he uses it to make his films like a living, breathing thing. It's like, for him it's the pulse of the movie.

TS: It's not there just because you're supposed to have music in a movie.

JS: Right.

TS: Which is good.

JS: Uhm... I think now that we've gone on about cinematography, music and Paul Thomas Anderson: Daniel Day-Lewis.

RK: Oh, my god!

EJ: I was gonna add one more thing. You realize the music for that movie was done by Jonny Greenwood?

JS: Yes! Kloiber pointed that out.

TS: (same time as above) Yeah, Kloiber pointed that out.

EJ: I knew that going into the movie, so I'm expecting like acoustic whatever. Which, I mean, as Mark will frequently point out: "Oh well, I mean it's easy to orchestrate stuff for strings if you play guitar, 'cause you're like 'this is gonna be the chord they're playing,'" but no! What he's doing in that movie, I'm like: "I... Wow!" That's all I wanted to add in.

JS: Daniel Day-Lewis, from what I understand, he hasn't said this, but a lot of people are basing his performance, like it's inspired by John Huston, the actor/director, which I can kinda see... but this performance is fantastic. I don't care if it's inspired from anyone.

RK: One thing I want to say, which I'm afraid is going to be overlooked by mass audiences: I do not know his name, the guy who played Eli --

JS: Paul Dano.

EJ: Paul Dano.

JS: He's the brother from "Little Miss Sunshine."

RK: And it's one of those things where I also am afraid that people are going to bash on his performance because his character was annoying. You wanted to hate his character, but it's... just because you don't like the character doesn't mean...

TS: Well that means he's doing a good job.

RK: I want to make sure that is known. This was an incredible, Oscar-worthy performance by both Dano and Day-Lewis.

JS: It was focused on two people, but everyone did a solid job.

TS: No one caused any damage to this picture. No one was able to deflate this.

RK: Paul Thomas Anderson does an amazing job using children in films.

JS: Oh yeah. His children are hardly ever annoying.

RK: Uh... this isn't the typical Dakota Fanning screaming or... oh, the kid from Star Wars.

JS: Oh!

EJ: Ja... Jake-something.

JS: Jake-something, but let's not even deem...

EJ: Don't give -- don't empower that child by invoking his name!

JS: I know the name but I WILL NOT SAY IT!

EJ: Say it two more time, he will appear! ... No, that's Beetlejuice.

JS: They could be one in the same thing!

TS: I thought Beetlejuice was Batman.

JS: Okay, let me say this --

EJ: Yeah, we're done.

JS: The kid who played Anakin was NOT fucking Batman! I want that to stay in the translation.

TS: Everything else will be gone. That line will be there.

JS: I want that to be UNDERSTOOD!

TS: Right.

EJ: I concur.

JS: With the clarity of glass!

TS: Maybe we need to come up with a side-site just with quotes that are on the cutting-room floor.

JS: Okay. So the acting was wonderful, cinematography was wonderful and really... we all say it's not perfect, but we can't figure out what we would change other than Kloiber believes the beginning could be shortened.

RK: Uh... no. I believe it could be clarified.

JS: Clarified. Okay.

RK: I still, even though there were some pretty obvious times, like the name-signing, couldn't tell that it was Daniel.

TS: Yeah.

RK: It doesn't do a good enough job explaining how he got into the oil business, what he found.

JS: M'kay. So, what would you give this movie?

RK: 4.25.

EJ: Out of what?

RK: 5.

EJ: Okay. It helps if you mention what the rating is up to. "I give it a 37." "Out of what?" "12."

TS: Yeah, but we know.

RK: If you read our blog, you'd know that that's what we judge things by. It's like if I said, "I give it two thumbs up." "Out of how many thumbs?" "Well, you only have two thumbs."

EJ: There were two reviewers doing it, there were four. BAM!

JS: (laughing) I'm sorry, but that was brilliant.

TS: That was good.

JS: What about you, Thad?

TS: Well I, uh... I'm a giver. I've got a lot of love to give because I don't like people, as a rule. So I would probably give it a 5, because... I liked that movie a lot.

JS: I will have to give it a 5 also, because --

TS: You and I... people are gonna be like, "Oh, they just like everything! These guys are assholes!"

JS: "I like Kloiber, he's the reasonable one."

TS: "Kloiber's hardcore!"

RK: Yeah, but Thad can actually write, which we can't say.

TS: Aw, c'mon...

JS: But --

TS: No, really. Keep going.

JS: So, Thad's a douche.

TS: Is this news?

JS: I'm giving it a 5 as well. Breathtaking.

TS: Yeah, like physically.

JS: Yeah.

TS: People want to bandy that word about --

JS: Let me just also point out: people left during this movie. In my mind, that's how good it is. People left.

TS: I wasn't even watching the audience.

RK: Three people left, that I saw.

TS: I know the annoying woman sitting next to me left and came back.

RK: There were three people that left the theater and never came back.

TS: When did they leave?

JS: One was after one of the times someone got hit by -- there were at least three or four at he well when people get hit by lumber or something.

TS: Oh, yeah. With the drill-thing.

RK: I saw a woman leave during the scene with the son and the train.

TS: Okay. Wow, that's not what I was expecting.

JS: I think what it is is that a lot of people were expecting something faster, I don't know.

TS: People don't like pacing.

JS: They don't like slow, they don't like drawn-out.

TS: They don't like different paces; people like manic.

JS: Which is odd, because a lot of people complained to me that they thought "Cloverfield" was too short. And I know their complaint would be, "This movie's too long."

RK: I've also heard that they're already writing "Cloverfield 2."

TS: Boo! I loved the movie, but I don't think it needs a sequel. I loved "Star Wars," but I don't think they needed three more.

RK: I think we'll need to move these to different places. One: the blood that the title mentions is not literal blood, it's the blood of Christ.

JS: Yes.

RK: Two: I generally don't like this type of movie: the really tense -- I felt like I was going to have a heart attack the entire movie. It was still amazing, I think everyone else should see it and I'm glad I saw it. It will never be a movie I'll be able to just sit down and watch. I will need to prepare for it.

JS: We have anything else? This could be it.

TS: I'm good with it. (Richard nods)

---

And then they taunt the cat for a bit, trying to get him to speak.