There Will Be Blood

What do Sup Forums think about this? Is it kino?

Can anyone explain the meaning/theme/moral behind this cause i dont seem to get it.

Other urls found in this thread:

nerdist.com/watch-a-supercut-of-150-movie-title-name-drops/
imdb.com/title/tt0469494/trivia
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15994722
youtu.be/4CF2PbJsaW8
guardian.ng/features/why-do-taller-men-have-more-sexual-partners/
bbc.com/future/story/20150928-tall-vs-small-which-is-it-better-to-be
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

its kino.

the point behind it is that a man that will for-go god, family, and humanity will be left with nothing at the end.

i mean, thats the broad stroke, dont need to be a fucking genius to get it.

and plus, its a cool movie, just a god watch.

a man that will forgo those things for money*** will be left with nothing at the end..

sorry, i didnt finish my thought.

>there will be blood
>no blood

give a hoot. go to school and read MANY MORE books you kukd pleb.

>blood whenever someone gets impaled by a drill bit

did you watch the censored TV version?

You can understand the entire film just from looking at the poster.

I didn't think it was that good btw. DDL puts on such a ridiculous voice that I cannot take him seriously. He's like a fucking cartoon character and the film overall is heavy-handed imo.

7/10

Most of DDL's voice in the film was adapted from John Huston, a famous old-timey actor.

Its a good start for watching kino, probably the best mainstream film of this century so far.

>the point behind it is that a man that will for-go god, family, and humanity will be left with nothing at the end.
Literally not what the film is even remotely about...

Plainview is what will happen to most all career women when they hit 40

>all the money they want
>status
>no family, no kids, alone in a nice house

ok whats it about then?

Nothing you said, christfag. But it was bait, you and I know what the subtext is about.

thanks for the input, mgtow.

bad film

Oh god, I thought it was just a meme but people like you exist.

reddit: the movie

Why don't you define what qualities are "reddit", bud?

Alienation, inability to connect, sociopathy.
Extremely high personal defenses, vengefulness, defensiveness, and so on.

Plainview was apparently impotent in one version of the script. Or was there a book? Hence the lack of children or wife, in any case.

Feminism is effectively WGTOW.

So what does the title refers to

>Feminism is effectively WGTOW.
Is that what your forums are telling you now, faggot?

are you the type of kid that gets fucking excited when they hear the title of a movie in the movie?

like this
nerdist.com/watch-a-supercut-of-150-movie-title-name-drops/

will probably go down as a true classic in the distant future

It already is considered a classic movie. You realize that it is almost 2018 in a few months, right?

In a few years, we are going to have our own 20s again.

It's the best film of the 2000's decade. This is a fairly popular (and correct) opinion among people who like the movies.

Multiple possibilities. Literal blood, from unsafe industry and the violence of Daniel personally, and the period generally.
Metaphorical blood - Oil. The name of the game is to make the oil flow at all costs. There will be Blood.
Spiritual blood. Jesus, communion, etc. Daniel's nemeis, Eli, plays this angle. A hymn can be heard when Daniel is being humiliated in the church: "There is power, power in the blood", one of the few times I can recall hearing the titular noun being said/sung aloud in the course of the film.

Familial blood (or lack thereof). A central theme of the film is the confused nature of the identity of male relatives. Two "Bandys" have the same name, but one is grandpa, and the other is grandson. H.W. spends most of the film being unaware that he is not Daniel's real son, until the end of the penultimate scene. An imposter brother appears at Daniel's step and hangs-on for a time until found out. There is plenty of room for legitimate speculation that Paul and Eli are the same person, but Sup Forums usually incorrectly looks down on this speculation because it's somehow "cringey", or the creative process is supposed to refute the idea as being totally invalid (it doesn't). Instead, the happy accident referred to dovetails that much more nicely with the already clearly-existing theme, irrespective of whether PTA expressly intended same or not. To interpret a work, first, consider the work.

I'm not a mgtow. What I mean is that these women will sacrifice having children and a family for a serious career and realize that there is more to life than just a job.

The same message is in the Hudsucker Proxy

Children of Men is the best film of the 00s. Most people agree, too.

I watched it and are not impressed by it. Its good directing and acting indeed but the story seems too normal for me, so i dont get anything out of it. Its just like seeing the daily life of this plainview guy. The ending milkshake scene is a bit interesting but thats all, nothing out of ordinary.

>Can anyone explain the meaning/theme/moral behind this cause i dont seem to get it.

Business/Capital vs Religious Dogma in the formation of America

Oh yes, that same bullshit meme...women are just lying to themselves about having careers and saving money by not having children, amirite? They are all just in denial about what REALLY would make them happy, being a housewife.

Kill yourself you fucking tard, your arguments are 100 years too late.

Good movie, yes. Best of 00's, not even close. Just better than average action movie

woman detected

This goes for men too, especially to MGTOWs. There is more to life than just a fucking job.

Men have the option of a family and a job, while if a woman only does a career, she'll realize there's no reprieve from the harsh competitive world

You sound stupid about this, mate. It literally is a tired mgtow argument. Sure, there is more to life than just a career but you faggots use that as a catch-all and then deduce that what women really want are to be caretakers and housewives. It's just part of your bullshit narrative.

I'm not a woman btw, just calling bullshit when I see it.

>Men have the option of a family and a job
>but women don't
...why?

Again, I'm not a mgtow. mgtows are stupid, but so are career women thinking they can sacrifice family life for a job.

When you're old (40), your joy will come from family, not from being a generic cog in a corporation.

>women only have a choice between being a housewife and a career woman
Or you know, neither? Both?

>When you're old (40), your joy will come from family
You can't speak for every woman in America. There are perfectly happy people without children. When will this meme of "women are only happy with a family", finally die?

>40
>is old
0/10 bait

The best film of the 2000s is Mulholland Dr. and it's not even close.

25 is where you're officially old(er). 30 is when you're old. at 40, your life is practically over unless you're actually a significant leader at your career rather than a grunt. I mean CEO or a very high level executive whose decisions affect the company.

Are you under 13?

>There are perfectly happy people without children. When will this meme of "women are only happy with a family", finally die?

are you kidding?

Men can work while the woman raises the kids. The mother either way will be taking off significant time from her job for maternal leave.

A man doesn't get pregnant. He's literally ALWAYS climbing the corporate ladder, even with a family.

Definitely one of my favorite movies.

I think it's ultimately about fulfillment.

The reason Plainview is able to attain what he does is because of his pure hatred for people. He's got a massive chip on his shoulder, and the only way for him to be fulfilled is to literally be better than other people through success. He'll do absolutely anything to reach his goals because it's the only way he feels happy. But as we can guess, this is a false happiness (as showcased by the ending of the film).

His opposite, Eli, also has a chip on his shoulder, and he also does what he does in order to feel superior to others. Both characters are completely self-centered but psychologically identical. This is why they constantly bash heads.

I'm 22.

If you have any significant ambition that isn't just related to your career, but rather personal cultivation, you'd realize that at 30 you're old.

If you start trying to cultivate yourself seriously at 25, you will be too far behind the power curve for it to mean anything.

>The best film of the 2000s is Mulholland Dr. and it's not even close
Sorry, you are wrong.

huh? Isn't it mostly about Plainview and his greed? Seems like its focused on one character and not some grand representation of humanity.

>you are "too far behind" at 25
You are actually retarded, aren't you? This is the dumbest thing I've ever heard.

Yeah except for the fact that Dano playing both Sunday brothers was a last minute decision. "In an interview on the National Public Radio program "Fresh Air with (((Terry Gross)))," Paul Dano told Gross that he had originally been cast in the much smaller role of Paul Sunday, Eli's brother, and another actor had been cast as Eli. However, after Dano had already started filming his one scene as Paul Sunday, Paul Thomas Anderson decided to replace the actor playing Eli. Anderson then asked Dano to play Eli Sunday (a much bigger role) as well as Paul Sunday, and they decided to change the film to make the brothers identical twins. Anderson asked Dano to play Eli on a Thursday, and filming for the role began four days later, on the next Monday. (((Daniel Day-Lewis))), by contrast, had a whole year to prepare to play Daniel Plainview." and the fact that during the final scene Daniel says that Paul has his own company.

imdb.com/title/tt0469494/trivia

Cant even finish watching this. Too boring.

>are you kidding?
No? Do you live in a bunker somewhere? Or under a rock?
>Men can work while the woman raises the kids.
Or vice versa...
>The mother either way will be taking off significant time from her job for maternal leave.
Or doing neither if she doesn't have kids.
>Men are literally ALWAYS climbing the corporate ladder, even with family
>I'm not mgtow I swear
Wew, boy.

If you start learning to be an artist at 25, it'll take 3 years just to be kinda good, while people who start at 18 will be masters by 25 who you can't compete with.

Same with an instrument. Same with martial arts. Lifting weights.

Even getting well read and articulate in knowledge takes years of study.

you need to be 18 to post here.

>women being okay with men being stay at home dads

as a woman, would you date a man shorter than you and more submissive? Would you be okay with you being the dominant sexual one?

Of course not. Literally most every woman who is normal wants a man who is better than them and dominant.

Perhaps you should practice what you preach and date some 5'2" guys who are timid and shy lmao.

You're just picking an arbitrary amount of time and applying it to an array of different skills as if there is some sort of fucking chart that applies to everyone. Am I just being baited here? Nothing you say is rooted in any real fact.

what are your hobbies so you can have some reference? No, video games don't count.

>as a woman, would you date a man shorter than you and more submissive? Would you be okay with you being the dominant sexual one?
I'm not a woman.
>Of course not.
I will bet money with you that there are women who exist in the world who look for these things.
>Literally most every woman who is normal wants a man who is better than them and dominant.
Am I dealing with a legitimate teenager here?
>Perhaps you should practice what you preach and date some 5'2" guys who are timid and shy lmao.
I'm not a woman...you sound retarded, matey.

It doesn't matter what my own personal hobbies are or aren't, your measurements are arbitrary and not an example of any real set standard, since there isn't any. Every person has their own level of skillset, you can't just apply "3 years" to everyone and get exactly the same result.

Christ, how am I debating this?

you are a woman or just a weird virginal guy.

Every woman I've been with or simply talked to expresses her need for the guy to be taller, stronger, confident, and dominant.

Whenever I've asked, they tell me that tall guys, joke, make them feel more feminine.

What are your hobbies which you've had to cultivate and how long has it taken you to get where you are?

I hate to be the one to break it to you laddie, but not every woman is the same. They aren't the Borg. Turns out, individual people have their own preferences.

Really rattles the old brain box.

It doesn't matter how long they take ME, if you are looking to gauge a standard for YOURSELF.

I DRINK YOUR MILKSHAKE

holy shit who are you fooling?

you have no actual hobbies. Gotcha.

>Like, I can't even!
Great arguments, I tip my fedora to you too, gentlesir McNiceGuy.

You have to be a woman. This is like arguing gravity doesn't exist while bouncing a basketball.

Height is important and there's a reason shorties blow their brains out at a higher rate than tall people.

>you have to be a woman if you don't agree with my underage and underdeveloped beliefs that literally ALL women want exactly the same thing and the exact same qualities in a partner.
I hope you grow up fast, or life is just going to make you frustrated when it doesn't mold itself into your autistic narrative of the world.

Sex and the City doesn't work when you're a dried up husk and were never very attractive to begin with.

Hence the sob sisters union, AKA feminism.

>there's a reason shorties blow their brains out at a higher rate than tall people.
Gonna need a source, kid.

ITT: 20yos pretend to be experts on life

most all women prefer tall men which is why tall men statistically have more sex partners, 90% of CEOs in fortune 500 companies are above average height, tall men are less likely to be depressed, short men commit more suicide, and why studies show men who are tall have an aura of dominance and leadership about them.

Those are the facts.

>the "only bitter old, unattractive women angry at men are feminists" meme.
Yes, Emma Watson is disgusting. ;)

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15994722

Only one faggot in this thread is going on about how he thinks he cracked some code about "all" women, samefag.

>There were 3,075 suicides over an average follow-up period of 15 years. There was a strong inverse association between height and suicide risk. In fully adjusted models, a 5-cm increase in height was associated with a 9% decrease in suicide risk.

>The strong inverse association between height and suicide may signify the importance of childhood exposure in the etiology of adult mental disorder or reflect stigmatization or discrimination encountered by short men in their adult lives.
You kids only read the titles of these, huh?

cont.
It's important to mention how this is a small sample size of Swedish men, not some factual overall trend.

youtu.be/4CF2PbJsaW8

If you had read and understood my post, then you would have understood that I both knew and anticipated what you just spent all that time writing out, thinking you're so smart.

Go back and re-read and see why you're dumb.

>it's only a social stigma

it's based on evolution. In physical combat sports like wrestling or mma, there are weight classes because the larger the opponent, the harder it is to beat him.

A featherweight champion literally could not beat a heavyweight champion. Hence why size in men is important or seen as a dominant thing.

When a guy is 6'3" vs 5'7", not only does the 5'7" guy have less reach and size to physically manipulate or pin him, but the 6'3" guy can actually put more weight behind his punch because tall guys weigh more.

you'd know this if you weren't a fag

>most all women prefer tall men
I'm sure you are willing to quantify what "most" means, right faggot? I'll await some sources.
>which is why tall men statistically have more sex partners
source?
>90% of CEOs in fortune 500 companies are above average height
source? And what does that prove?
>tall men are less likely to be depressed
That isn't what your link implies. The reverse of a study doesn't just automatically become true. That's not how research works.
>short men commit more suicide
You proved a small controlled sample size of Swedish men are less statistically involved in suicide risk due to their height. But it's funny to me how you didn't even read the fucking abstract to get a feel for what the study was even about.
>and why studies show men who are tall have an aura of dominance and leadership about them.
kek, this just sounds like some wishful bullshit you read on a forum once. Got a source?
>Those are the facts.
It's hilarious that you think any of these statements are "factual".

Are you an actual teenager?

This is the worst thread I've seen all year. It's basically tumblr vs reddit in here.

>there are weight classes because the larger the opponent, the harder it is to beat him.
I mean, you can be a retard and grossly oversimplify weight classes...sure.

A lot of your nonsense is extrapolating loosely correct things about human evolution hundreds of thousands of years ago, and shoving it into your stupid arguments.

>ridiculous voice
Fuck off to reddit

>sperging out this hard because he was called retarded for falling for mgtow "all women want the same thing" memes.

>it's buzzword versus buzzword in here
fuck off, you are making it worse.

Idk what i just started. Lets get back to the movid can we?

Tell the "nice guy" teenagers to fuck off, then. Back to (((you know where))).

>taller men = more sex partners
guardian.ng/features/why-do-taller-men-have-more-sexual-partners/

>90% of CEOs are above average height despite being a low percentage of the population

just google that one. You'll literally get multiple sources saying the same thing. It's very common knowledge.

>taller = more dominant
bbc.com/future/story/20150928-tall-vs-small-which-is-it-better-to-be

this one actually goes a bit into depth and touches on how taller = more attractive and on depression.

Yes you are a woman because literally every man knows height is a factor because we all size each other up all the time.

user, his point was that you were being silly thinking that "every woman" wants exactly the same thing just because you're some self-inserting goof that needs validation in a Sup Forums thread.

>just want to discuss best movie of the decade
>it turns into feminism debate

Will this place ever go back to normal?

have you never actually sparred before? That isn't an oversimplification.

If you've ever actually fought, the more you weigh, the harder you punch. Tall people weigh more.

The taller you are, the larger your hands. The taller you are, the longer your reach. Longer limbs enable you to pin your opponents and manipulate them in grappling more.

If you are OP then I hope you learned your lesson that TWBB attracts the worst retards on this board.

Or you could just ignore them you autist. You should realize feminists aren't worth debating by now.

>The expectation that tall men would have the most sex partners was only partially supported. In fact, there was little difference in number of sex partners across the height range, with just one exception.
HHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

read your fucking sources, kiddo.

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII AM THE THIRD REVELATION

Welcome to Sup Forums.

I highly doubt he is a feminist, I'm talking about the kid who is using mgtow-tier logic that all women want the same kind of partner, as if they are Borg drones and not people.

>only da big peeple win da fights
I've said this before, but I probably weigh twice the size of a Tibetan monk, I'm not retarded enough to think my "weight class bruh" or muh gains are going to beat out their skill.

When Trump gets shot or resigns.