In a nutshell: Religion is Eli's business. Business is Daniel's religion.
@sebanderson8 жыл бұрын
That actually makes alot of sense. Thanks for cracking the code. :)
@TheVarietyVendor8 жыл бұрын
exactly
@cherokeeanna9697 жыл бұрын
This.
@Radimkiller7 жыл бұрын
Oil is Daniels milkshake
@renel89646 жыл бұрын
in a nutshell, they're both the same person presenting a false sense of morality from each of their respective swamps. the funny part is that eli manages to steal daniel's soul even though daniel manages to physically kill him.
@OtherSideOfTheVoid5 жыл бұрын
Interesting analysis but Plainview isn't a sociopath. Plainview is a man who is torn between a need to connect with other human beings, and his inability to do so. He can't relate to normal people, but sees his salvation in family, and earning enough money to isolate himself from those he hates. He's not a monster, but a broken man. Family and isolation are the key themes of Plainviews character. The tragedy of his character is that he himself is responsible for destroying the few bonds that keep him tethered to sanity and happiness. He sends away his own adopted son after not being able to cope with the isolating effects of deafness. He kills the only man we see him trust and confide in (besides HW) from fear and paranoia at being betrayed. He finally destroys the last remnants of his relationship with HW in response to another perceived betrayal. After Plainview kills the man he thought was his brother, we see him breakdown in tears reading the diary of his dead brother, in mourning both over the brother he never knew, and the one he did. This is not the behavior of a remorseless sociopath. Even the killing of Eli comes back to family and isolation. It is when Eli leans on their new family ties in attempt to get money from him, and calls Daniel "brother" that he snaps into murderous rage, and of course Plainviews homicidal resentment towards Eli comes from Eli humiliating and exposing his abandonment of HW. But all the while Plainview shows a capacity to love. He has a clear aversion to hitting children, never hitting HW (which would be incredibly rare for the time), and even stopping Abel Sunday from hitting Mary. When Daniel cuts ties with HW, we see him yelling "BASTARD FROM A BASKET" even when deaf HW has left the room. It's clear Daniel is saying this for his own benefit, lashing out in pain, trying to deny he ever had any feelings for HW. In the very next scene we see a flashback to Plainview playing and laughing with HW, one of the only times we see Plainview as genuinely happy in the entire film, as he then walks off to the oil derrick that will set into motion the tragic events of the film. The derrick fire is not a metaphor for hell, but a metaphor for Plainviews self-destructive nature. That which fuels him also consumes him, burns him up until there is nothing left. "I'm finished".
@falamble7 жыл бұрын
That was very insightful/interesting! I feel like you're spot on!
@secretcountry7 жыл бұрын
This is the best analysis I've ever read about this film.
@alexblack86607 жыл бұрын
Yes! This is a much better analysis of the film. He was very loving to his son and that's not typical sociopathic behaviour. Also, the part about his son going deaf and then further isolating Daniel Plainview is spot on!
@TiberiusStorm7 жыл бұрын
Barvo, very good analysis. I was looking for more insight and meaning in the film, and your explanation is the best I've seen so far. Thanks for sharing, and great insight.
@insomatic4207 жыл бұрын
Great analysis. Tell me: How do you analyze like that? I would love to learn!
@Gudwell7 жыл бұрын
I always thought that when Daniel sees his brother's diary with the edges of the pages burnt, he realizes that H.W. set Henry's bed on fire because he must have figured out the man lied about who he was. So Daniel started crying because he realized H.W. actually wanted to help him yet he sent him away for what he did. That's why he decides to bring him back and tries so hard to make up for the sin of sending him away.
@zolibako48165 жыл бұрын
My man the kid deaf when herny arrives how can he know
@TheCozzyGaming3 жыл бұрын
@@TheCozzyGaming deaf people read lips bruh
@HenryYSuCanalSobreTodo2 жыл бұрын
@@TheCozzyGaming he found the diary while searching through his bag
@bing0b0ng02 жыл бұрын
He could still speak, why didn't he tell his father? At the end, on Daniel's mansion when H.W. told daniel he was going away to mexico, he managed to speak.
@robertimmanuel577 Жыл бұрын
He couldn’t read though. Never had not no schooling. He opened and thumbed through the journal completely upside down. It’s possible he may’ve had some inclination he wasn’t who he said he was, Senior certainly did, but the young boy was distressed which made him ornery, confused. At the very least he had the feeling he’w’s been replaced
@WestonEvans Жыл бұрын
Have any of you ever wondered why Daniel left Wisconsin in the first place? Money is the easy answer. But several times throughout the film he blatantly refuses to discuss his past life and it is implied that he keeps no correspondence at all with any of his family. Why? I think his origins explain his aversion to religion and overall cynicism. There's a scene where the false Henry says something along the lines of, "I know you and our father had your disagreements." And Daniel replies, "I don't want to talk about that." And earlier in the film, HW tells Daniel that Abel beats his daughter for not praying. Later on he confronts Abel in front of Mary and threatens him to never beat her again. Thus, a suspicious connection exists between Daniel and Mary and there's a rare moment in the film where we see Daniel actually sympathize with another character who just so happens to be a little girl and the daughter of an abusive fundamentalist. It should also be noted that Daniel shows no signs of distress when the false Henry informs him that his father is dead. From this, I think it's safe to infer that Daniel's father was also a Christian fundamentalist who beat him regularly. This also explains his aversion to religion and refusal to accept goodness as a real thing thereby making him inclined to only see the bad in people. Also, Daniel's bond with HW deteriorates as he gets older and loses his childlike innocence...now in the eyes of Daniel, HW is like any other adult; filled with hatred and lies and not to be trusted. And lastly, this might be a bit of a stretch, but when Daniel is explaining to Henry his attitude on life and his hatred and mistrust for people he say's, "If it's in me then it's also in you." And remember that the only connection between Daniel and Henry is that they share the same father who would've likely beat Henry as well for the same exact reasons. I think this explains why Daniel was so ready to open up to Henry despite just meeting him; Daniel was excited that he might've actually found someone he could relate to, someone with the same past and emotional trauma.
@Sup_Mate6 жыл бұрын
Drew This is great and shit but what I am really intrigued to know is how this thought came up in your mind in the first place
@divyenduraina6 жыл бұрын
this all seems reasonable
@bobpolo29644 жыл бұрын
Wow that’s an amazing analysis. I was thinking that but could’ve have put it in words.
@jonci97124 жыл бұрын
This is exactly what they wanted to convey. Thanks!
@kushparmar19894 жыл бұрын
Wow this is an incredible character analysis
@thomascross61503 жыл бұрын
His dislike of most people is solidified when he finds out his brother is an impostor.
@robertdevoy31196 жыл бұрын
1:48 This is wrong. Daniel's first reaction when the explosion happened was to ensure the safety of his son. He didn't once look back as he was running to the mess hall with the injured HW in his arms.
@gmshadowtraders5 жыл бұрын
He then instantly leaves him tho
@Blank-414 жыл бұрын
@@Blank-41 Yeah, and the child constantly said not to leave him, but Daniel left anyways. Then when Daniels partner asked about his son, Daniel said he is hurt, but stayed on watching the oil.
@aussieraver71822 жыл бұрын
He was by oil. That's where he started to annoy me, right up until the end of the movie.
@desertrose012 жыл бұрын
Probably will go down as one of the most visual masterpieces for the next 30+ years
@nickmattio33977 жыл бұрын
Absolutely amazing film oh, it gets better with multiple viewings.
@jimmybanks1293 жыл бұрын
That score, man that score is incredible. The tension it adds is palpable.
@maxlethe39734 жыл бұрын
Reminds me of the Shining in parts
@possessedslig3 жыл бұрын
This is the best analysis I’ve seen on KZhead. It actually includes discussion of the symbolism and themes as opposed to simply being a plot summary
@Upside_Down_Guitar_Guy2 жыл бұрын
In my opinion if you just look at Daniel as just the bad guy you just miss the whole concept of the movie
@keithrichards41856 жыл бұрын
Keith Richards Absolutely
@ronindebeatrice6 жыл бұрын
Keith Richards How should you view Daniel as?
@jonci97124 жыл бұрын
@@jonci9712 as broken man, as normal human
@herkkoproductions60283 жыл бұрын
@KeithRichards completely agree, when someone looks at Daniel as “ the bad guy” I can’t even take their opinion of the film seriously.
@trevor_corey80373 жыл бұрын
He's an ego-maniacal sociopath, so yeah, he's the bad guy... He's also the protagonist of the movie, so he can't be considered "the bad guy", villain, antagonist... in that sense. He represents the evil and indifference in Humanity.
@0FFICERPROBLEM3 жыл бұрын
The best part is, he makes Eli deny his God, then kills him, sending him to hell
@michaelpeck16393 жыл бұрын
Presuming there is hell. Daniel doesn't believe in one particular faith.
@seanmatthewking3 жыл бұрын
He would’ve went to hell either way
@Borganov203 жыл бұрын
@@Borganov20 ur saying eli wouldve went to hell? why
@drose1413 жыл бұрын
@@drose141 he claimed he was a vessel for the Holy Spirit and that he had healing powers, but we never see that going beyond his heated sermons, he’s a false prophet and a violent liar
@WOLFGANG11253 жыл бұрын
Eli never believed in God, he was a fraud
@-SailorJupiter-2 жыл бұрын
Paul is the only one outta all of em who knew to avoid the whole fucking thing lol
@kennethdeloria4 жыл бұрын
this is more of a plot than analysis
@classactionsteve7 жыл бұрын
Never noticed how well fire was used to symbolize the sins Daniel commited which brought hell on earth
@bigstunna20494 жыл бұрын
what. no
@andrewaronson33644 жыл бұрын
for some fucking reason i never knew he adopted the boy. fuck. thank you!
@amateurwave35937 жыл бұрын
it can be easily overlooked
@mrnintendowii7 жыл бұрын
+mrnintendowii Aside from their climactic final encounter..."bastard in a basket"
@joe-bro_117 жыл бұрын
Wаtсh Тhеrе Will Bе Blооd onlinе hеre => twitter.com/f8b314c7f6fe50004/status/795842893135036416 Тhere Will Bе Blоооod Аnаlуsis
@andreanrissengalang71007 жыл бұрын
What's weird is that while Daniel does display attributes of a sociopath, he also seems to have empathy for others and a pretty strong conscience that guides his actions. The killing of the man who claimed to be his brother seemed to genuinely affect him and despite his claims later that his son was just a ruse to put up a front of a good business man, he does clearly want familial companionship and care about his adopted son. He's just a very peculiar character but I don't think he's quite an evil devil man that only cares about himself. Either way, Anderson created a great fuckin character and movie.
@honestinsincerity22704 жыл бұрын
The first narrative section of this video's analysis relies way too heavily on the concept of Daniel being the "evil capitalist oil tycoon" (which he surely is) to the point of oversimplifying the character and the movie. Also I highly disagree that Daniel does not care for or about his adopted son - in fact, the tension between his obvious strong devotion and love for his adopted son and his desire to find oil and become wealthy is what drives the central drama of the plot. In fact, you might read Daniel's final disavowal of his son for choosing to go to Mexico and become an oil man himself as Daniel's way (terribly crass and unsuccessful as it is) to show HW that being an oil man was for him (Daniel) just a means to and end - a means for providing for HW. Did you not see the man nearly break down when he had to trick HW on the train to San Francisco? You say Daniel descends into madness - I disagree - he was as equally sane or insane in the silver mine at the beginning of the film - he hated Eli the same the fist day he saw him as the day he murdered him. Note the Daniel must have crawled all the way across the desert with a broken leg to get to the essayer's office. This single (implied) act of bravery (almost) forgives everything else he does in the film. Daniel has to go through hell to attain every ounce of his wealth, both physically and emotionally. Daniel is a much more complicated figure that made out in this analysis - bad form!
@illwill24536 жыл бұрын
Such a thought provoking film. I thought about it for weeks after I watched it. I definitely need to watch it again to really understand it. The beginning orchestra tune got me hooked right away. Amazing how music can make someone feel.
@robpizzuti19522 жыл бұрын
Eli is not conflicted in the least. Eli is a mirror image of Plainview. Two manipulators trying to control humanity for their own gains. The main difference is Plainview admits his position whereas Eli won’t. Authenticity is the main theme and Plainview’s main ethic which is why he hates humanity and kills Eli after Eli refuses to admit his true nature.
@mountaingoat34865 жыл бұрын
It's interesting that Daniel kills a man whom is lying to gain an advantage, when part of Daniel's career was built on doing the same. I think a large portion of the film is about the internalized battle of what Daniel actually cares about, is it family or is it competition? At the end of the movie he is obviously upset with HW and begins to belittle him. User 5471122 says this is for Daniels own benefit in an attempt to counter his pain, but it isn't entirely obvious that is true. Daniel says earlier in the film that he has a competition in him and wants no one else to succeed. Does he care about family or did he just use family to succeed? He discards HW soon after Henry arrives. HW then resumes that position soon after Daniel disposes of the fraudulent Henry. The film shows scenes where Daniel seems to care about either of these characters and other scenes where he doesn't. HW announces his own enterprise in oil drilling and thusly becomes a competitor to Daniel. This is the biggest climax/culmination of the film: did Daniel ever actually care about family or did use family to gain success? Daniel is obviously angered. Even in his old age and with no need to gain any more wealth, Daniel is willing to disassociate himself with the only family he has due to his competitive nature.
@Ethan541366 жыл бұрын
Eli represents everything Daniel hates in everyone.
@misslori664 жыл бұрын
I don't agree with the conclusion that Daniel adopted the boy as a prop. There's a side of deep humanity in him. But as wealth grows around him and his greed for more drives him to the point of using everyone around him to achieve his goals. The character develops to a greedy sociopath from a hardworking greedy man.
@deepushaji6684 Жыл бұрын
Your opening statement about Eli was terrible. He is a scam artist in the same regards as Danielle.
@justsomenerd89256 жыл бұрын
My sister and I spent two hours today discussing this film. I then see this up here. Very interesting analogy.
@jimmybanks1293 жыл бұрын
he wasnt a sociopath, he was obsessed, this film is about the american obsession.
@Lost_Hwasal7 жыл бұрын
If you can’t relate to “ I see the worst in people, I don’t have to look any further than that” and “ I don’t like to explain myself”, you’re just not going to fully understand what the inside of this antiheroes head is like, or be able to analyze it.
@trevor_corey80373 жыл бұрын
I didn't see him as an antihero, because he was not likeable at any point in the film. There was no journey. He was just a psycho throughout.
@0FFICERPROBLEM3 жыл бұрын
What most of these analyses seem to miss is that Daniel Plainview is a deeply moral man, evidenced more by what he doesn't do than by what he does. I wouldn't swear to it, but I don't think we ever hear him curse. He doesn't consort with wicked women--or women of any sort, apparently. He doesn't relegate jobs--he's down there in the muck and mud just like the lowest of his crew--and the one time he does (sending HW off with the foreman), both he and HW and even the foreman hold it against him. He doesn't send HW away because, deaf, he's of little value to Daniel; it's Daniel's guilt from the event that makes him want to put HW away from him. He weeps as he reads his brother's diary (if you look closely at the text, you can make out the words "...my brother, a stranger to me,") and some of his interactions with HW are as tender as any I've ever seen on film. "I hate most people" is not evidence of psychopathy; it's an honest assessment of "most people's" hypocrisy and lack of honor according to Daniel's code. Therefore, he doesn't kill the fake Henry until he confesses to his duplicity; he doesn't kill Eli until he himself acknowledges his phoniness. Had Eli refused to say the words Daniel provided him, even though they were true, his honor and strength would have saved him. Plainview is a code hero, and the fault is not with him for abiding by his own code, but with us for not understanding it. Makes for great cinema, but you really wouldn't want to know this guy in real life.
@pricklypear75165 жыл бұрын
Even though the actor who played Eli, and Paul (whose name escapes me at the moment,) did a terrific job portraying Eli Sunday, I can’t but wonder how a DiCaprio might have done with the role.
@pjincho4 жыл бұрын
His name is Paul Dano.
@seanmatthewking3 жыл бұрын
@no no no You clearly haven't seen Django Unchained. Holy shit DiCaprio is a good actor because his face is the epitome of punchable in that movie.
@0FFICERPROBLEM3 жыл бұрын
I think Leo would have been too old for the role but there's no denying his talent
@TC8787-yq7og9 ай бұрын
@@0FFICERPROBLEMleo was class in django, one of this best characters
@user-xu4xj2cd2j9 ай бұрын
Wow! Great analysis!
@marcleonidas70924 жыл бұрын
Very nice analysis on the different elements of this masterpiece. I always hand a similar thought about religious symbolism of Daniel raising the oil soaked hand to the heavens. The fire motif you describe was also enlightening. I never would’ve thought of that. The only part that didn’t work for me was during your overview of the plot. Eli didn’t really “ask” Daniel how to bless the well. With his delivery, it’s more like Eli *told* Daniel how they should conduct the blessing. There was a legitimate reason why Daniel didn’t let Eli bless the well. It was a face off for power, and Daniel wasn’t going to give Eli that pleasure.
@albertwalderhaug2601 Жыл бұрын
Best Acting Ever!!
@nickg29545 жыл бұрын
It's amazing how I can watch the same movie and come to the complete opposite conclusion on Plainview's life and motivations. Exactly every single thing you said I think the complete opposite
@RogueSabre4 жыл бұрын
Plainview has God Complex and he is Machiavellian Villian who does everything to gain what he really wants
@sarwinzelda10934 жыл бұрын
I don't about all that... All I know is Daniel Day Lewis is hands down the best Actor who ever lived..!!
@Michael-uv1gk6 жыл бұрын
This was quite enjoyable.
@gregruelas78307 жыл бұрын
Hoooly crap, I've been looking for this video since I first watched it like, 5 years ago!
@danielvalles9554 Жыл бұрын
No mention of Daniel making Eli deny bud before murdering him? Pretty important point.
@jameshorton36923 жыл бұрын
Amazing video!
@milantoot70532 жыл бұрын
What you guys don't know is that in the room down the hall from the bowling alley Daniel had a disco.
@duantorruellas7164 жыл бұрын
There’s an interesting connection between Daniel and Eli, they are both hypocrites and conmen to advance their own selfish goals. Both trying to out con each other, ultimately leading to their own destruction. He finished Eli’s life by killing him, and Daniel is finished by Eli and the crime he has committed. This film is about revelations, the good that people are willing to believe versus the evil that truly exists in the world. Cause underneath it all, there is only black. Cause what lies underground is truly hell itself. And what does that tell you of the men who willingly dig in search of it.
@ChuckBerrington3 жыл бұрын
I don't see Daniel as a bad man but broken probably a symptom of alot of men in those times it was a very hard life back then.
@ricoconti31415 жыл бұрын
Oil! Oil oil oil, man. That's the game
@borood11883 жыл бұрын
Daniel saved hw before he put out the oil rig explosion
@jacoreylee45842 жыл бұрын
Daniel is not a sociopath. He is a misanthrop that went berserk.
@alfredoduende95785 жыл бұрын
6:50 I think he opened with that to essentially imply what Daniel has to go through in that first scene. The movie opens with a sinister crescendo and a shot of the canyon, then Daniel breaks his leg, retrieves his gold and has to drag himself through that canyon. At the end of the scene the camera pans from Daniel to the canyon which is accompanied by the same sinister crescendo. It shows the type of person who would be willing to go to extreme lengths to earn and survive.
@raid40007 жыл бұрын
I wish they hadn't used the music from The Shining. That really put me off.
@iyaramonk7 жыл бұрын
exactly. great comment. his journey dragging himself through the canyon could have been a movie in an of itself.
@cokothob7 жыл бұрын
Great video. I was sad to see this was your one and only film review.
@Blockhead1406 ай бұрын
Excellent
@grahambutler7347 жыл бұрын
@7:28 The sound of extremely crude machinery gone into a non-productive loop.
@millerman7799 Жыл бұрын
Reaching during the second half
@just_julian7 жыл бұрын
One word that can describe this brief analytic summarization. "Bravo"👏
@jackthaone7 жыл бұрын
I love this movie, and now even more
@juliosantiago17356 жыл бұрын
He didn't really strike me as a sociopath
@callumlyall49316 жыл бұрын
This was a really good analysis but I have a question: I noticed that there were multiple narrators for this video, so is this for a school project?
@mattlonergan56423 жыл бұрын
The real villain of this film is Eli. He was just , if not ,more manipulative than Daniel.
@Marconius177 жыл бұрын
When you realize that the violin plays to the syllables of the title
@NordicScheme3 жыл бұрын
There will be blood is fucking amazing. IM FINISHED!
@marchmcmadness7134 Жыл бұрын
Thanks for explanation appreciated
@sueturner7153 жыл бұрын
He murdered the imposter 😳
@lukelewis463 жыл бұрын
Amoger
@gerhard4002 жыл бұрын
Sus
@Rc161192 жыл бұрын
I have not read the book "Oil!", so I don't know the answer to this, but I did not think that HW was adopted. I got the impression that Daniel lashed out at his son because he felt betrayed. Will someone who read the book say if he was adopted or not?
@olseg97107 жыл бұрын
My all time favorite film.
@TangoOne5 жыл бұрын
Best film of the decade, shame this and no country were yo against each other, both brilliant but this takes it for me
@user-xu4xj2cd2j9 ай бұрын
There were some good bits in this analysis, but I feel it over simplifies Daniel's character.
@Shaewaros7 жыл бұрын
It's a 9 minute analysis of a 2 and a half hour film in which you could teach a month's worse of courses on. What the hell did you expect?
@yawgmoth56625 жыл бұрын
It sounds like Zach Woods was narrating a prob of this video. with that said, I can't believe that no one seems to have realized the parallels between There Will Be Blood and the Bush Iraq War.
@RexBagley6 жыл бұрын
Religion is the main theme of the movie. The movie isn't making a statement about religion, however, it is merely a religious movie. Even the ending scene is a sort of religious ritual.
@danceslob62113 жыл бұрын
thought by the title this video was about dexter.
@timschwerdter85577 жыл бұрын
Lot of people saying he isn’t a sociopath are wrong. Daniel is definitely on the anti social personality disorder spectrum. He says in the film that he hates most people. He wasn’t crying because he killed the fraud brother, but reading the diary.
@Chasearabbi4 жыл бұрын
Dam good review... Cheers mate
@OvidianHEX_3 жыл бұрын
who watch this film on netflix ? :D
@leaphengsok90563 жыл бұрын
With all due respect, you've deconstructed a masterpiece from a cheap, pop-psychological perspective. Consider William Butler Yeats poem "Blood and Oil," The life of Bill Mulholland, and "How the West was Won." You will see the deeper meaning.
@markpaulos34747 жыл бұрын
What's the deeper meaning, that capitalism is avaricious and heartless and that the west was won through violent predation? With all due respect, I don't see how your implied "deconstruction" is any more profound than the one under discussion.
@Xednis7 жыл бұрын
What is this deeper meaning? Enlighten us because your obviously highly intelligent and wise and not just an average sheep like everyone else. Your the lone successful and intelligent person lurking in the youtube comments section. Right.
@yawgmoth56625 жыл бұрын
Xednis That would be the surface layer meaning, and I mean very surface layer, it's basically just the base for a more complicated and personal story. It is, based off of those pieces of art. As well as great symbolism. I can agree with you there totally. It's got multiple layers and angles, that's why it's a masterpiece. It's a personal story about someone, a psychological one, and this kind if over arching reversed religious symbolism. As well as the capabilities of man. Greed, trust, religion, empathy, passion, capitalism, competition, whatever
@brucekendall98734 жыл бұрын
@@Xednis he offered a light critique asserting that the film and its story and central character are more sincerely nuanced than dubbing the man as unfeeling monster by calling him a sociopath would as the maker of the video term here would imply. He's not being a snob.
@oxtheunlikelycontemplator26823 жыл бұрын
@@yawgmoth5662 what were you so mad at while typing this? there was no need to be this heated at someone for commenting their own opinion on the video. and, the commenter asked for a deeper analysis rather than simply implying daniel is a bad man. this video is a plot summary more than an analysis.
@tylerarnold39713 жыл бұрын
Descent review al though there are parts you can't hear do to the loud music. Proof listening is actually a thing.
@chriswelch97866 жыл бұрын
delicious analysis
@omnaysayer7 жыл бұрын
Such a good movie... Top 10 for me
@amitnaamani57025 жыл бұрын
There was blood
@abhishekravindra40083 жыл бұрын
What I want to know is why the hell did they use the same actor to play both Paul and Eli. I think this movie is really really good. But that confusion ruined the story for me the first couple times I watched it. Why?! It makes no sense! Was it really important for them to be identical twins?
@seanshamblin11313 жыл бұрын
He's not a sociopath at all. He is in many ways a victim of his ambition, and preyed upon by others. He is torn apart by his unwitting support of a con artist preacher, and devastated by the imposter who surely killed his brother. He did betray HW, and pays for his attention to the burning well very dearly.
@xeroxre68376 жыл бұрын
I don't know how it didn't even occur to me that H.W was the workers son. I'm so stupid.
@joeldeakin20032 жыл бұрын
There was a scene before the workers death where he's stood up holding the baby, seemingly an attempt to show that he's the father
@gamewithgreg2 жыл бұрын
this isn't an analysis... he just says what happens...
@JP-rz4bs3 жыл бұрын
Really well done sir
@DKB-HI7 жыл бұрын
You missed the part where h damn kid burned the Shack down
@MisterFatherSir3107 жыл бұрын
I don't think he was a sociopath due to how loving he appeared to be with his son at several points in the movie.
@TiberiusStorm7 жыл бұрын
***** It's my understanding that psychopaths can't love. They certainly don't feel any empathy. He seemed to display signs of both at points in the movie for his adopted son.
@TiberiusStorm7 жыл бұрын
Sociopath: Impulsivity, deceitfulness, and a profound lack of remorse. Emotional attachments are often superficial and geared towards their own gain. Often lacks a sense of moral responsibility or social conscience. While he showed affection to his surrogate son for a time, his main motivation was to do business with a family image, once his son was inconvenient he sent him away. How he treats his son at the end shows his true nature with the facade removed.
@michaelnurse90898 ай бұрын
"And thus relieves the conflict between the two men." ffs, of course there is no conflict with 2 men when only 1 man is alive...
@filthisanacquiredtaste44216 жыл бұрын
Nemo's Tepid Sweep Yeah, conflict resolved.
@ronindebeatrice6 жыл бұрын
Thanks
@jeagleenterprises50753 жыл бұрын
Love this movie
@schillerstudio7265 жыл бұрын
This sounds like a high schoolers report on this movie
@pawel83653 жыл бұрын
so this is how america got crazy with oil......
@lenthokchom3 жыл бұрын
Question...... what what was the meaning behind the director having one actor play as Paul and Eli please explain?
@2Real2Fly7 жыл бұрын
Dewade Jones the other actor playing Eli wasn't working when they began filming so they had dano (who had already filmed his one scene) come in and do the other role as well.. playing it off as a twin (perhaps??)
@TheDukeWin6 жыл бұрын
the fall ? unsure about that. betting he got away with killing Eli.
@brennanc43217 жыл бұрын
“His intense desire to earn enough money to escape from contact with the rest of humanity” . I’m not sure about that. Yes Daniel says he doesn’t like other people but that doesn’t necessarily mean that’s the reason he does any of this. In fact I don’t think we know what Daniels motivations are exactly. I suspect he simply is overcome with greed and ambition. But as we see at the end of the film, it really was all for nothing
@JS-tg1hv4 жыл бұрын
He did say he want to escape from humanity
@EemreKrks3 жыл бұрын
Amazing movie
@wildmansamurai36637 жыл бұрын
Why don't I remember anything about his brother? I've seen this film twice and I don't recall that segment at all. Am I crazy?
@larrymclarry21984 жыл бұрын
Here is the real question. Who is the only truly honest character in the whole story? That is the point.
@hugh-johnfleming2897 жыл бұрын
No one, everyone surrender their own beliefs at some point in the movie.
@leftb4right7 жыл бұрын
Abel Sunday is a good person
@matthew63357 жыл бұрын
needs more volume. I had it on Max and could barely hear you
@LabrnMystic7 жыл бұрын
....But..that's not what happened. He left his son because he had to put the fire out. He left his son because he set fire to the cabin and couldn't handle the kid. He became"evil" by the end of the movie. Also the humiliation on the baptism was already an answer to the humiliation on the mud
@VitorMiguell2 жыл бұрын
Great analysis, I hope you make some more.
@goodtwitch7 жыл бұрын
HW lights that fire cause he knowsHenry is a fake
@nickg29545 жыл бұрын
This remenbers me a lot of "come and see" but not so shoking.
@srsaito92623 жыл бұрын
CONCERTO FOR VIOLIN 🎻 D-MAJOR OPUS 77
@bernardtassart72252 жыл бұрын
Does anyone remember when he made his son drink milk by force what did he pour in the milk was it alcohol?
@Avila7143 жыл бұрын
Yeah it was, he gives HW alcohol because that’s the only remedy that Daniel knows. So he try’s to ease his sons pain with it.
In a nutshell: Religion is Eli's business. Business is Daniel's religion.
That actually makes alot of sense. Thanks for cracking the code. :)
exactly
This.
Oil is Daniels milkshake
in a nutshell, they're both the same person presenting a false sense of morality from each of their respective swamps. the funny part is that eli manages to steal daniel's soul even though daniel manages to physically kill him.
Interesting analysis but Plainview isn't a sociopath. Plainview is a man who is torn between a need to connect with other human beings, and his inability to do so. He can't relate to normal people, but sees his salvation in family, and earning enough money to isolate himself from those he hates. He's not a monster, but a broken man. Family and isolation are the key themes of Plainviews character. The tragedy of his character is that he himself is responsible for destroying the few bonds that keep him tethered to sanity and happiness. He sends away his own adopted son after not being able to cope with the isolating effects of deafness. He kills the only man we see him trust and confide in (besides HW) from fear and paranoia at being betrayed. He finally destroys the last remnants of his relationship with HW in response to another perceived betrayal. After Plainview kills the man he thought was his brother, we see him breakdown in tears reading the diary of his dead brother, in mourning both over the brother he never knew, and the one he did. This is not the behavior of a remorseless sociopath. Even the killing of Eli comes back to family and isolation. It is when Eli leans on their new family ties in attempt to get money from him, and calls Daniel "brother" that he snaps into murderous rage, and of course Plainviews homicidal resentment towards Eli comes from Eli humiliating and exposing his abandonment of HW. But all the while Plainview shows a capacity to love. He has a clear aversion to hitting children, never hitting HW (which would be incredibly rare for the time), and even stopping Abel Sunday from hitting Mary. When Daniel cuts ties with HW, we see him yelling "BASTARD FROM A BASKET" even when deaf HW has left the room. It's clear Daniel is saying this for his own benefit, lashing out in pain, trying to deny he ever had any feelings for HW. In the very next scene we see a flashback to Plainview playing and laughing with HW, one of the only times we see Plainview as genuinely happy in the entire film, as he then walks off to the oil derrick that will set into motion the tragic events of the film. The derrick fire is not a metaphor for hell, but a metaphor for Plainviews self-destructive nature. That which fuels him also consumes him, burns him up until there is nothing left. "I'm finished".
That was very insightful/interesting! I feel like you're spot on!
This is the best analysis I've ever read about this film.
Yes! This is a much better analysis of the film. He was very loving to his son and that's not typical sociopathic behaviour. Also, the part about his son going deaf and then further isolating Daniel Plainview is spot on!
Barvo, very good analysis. I was looking for more insight and meaning in the film, and your explanation is the best I've seen so far. Thanks for sharing, and great insight.
Great analysis. Tell me: How do you analyze like that? I would love to learn!
I always thought that when Daniel sees his brother's diary with the edges of the pages burnt, he realizes that H.W. set Henry's bed on fire because he must have figured out the man lied about who he was. So Daniel started crying because he realized H.W. actually wanted to help him yet he sent him away for what he did. That's why he decides to bring him back and tries so hard to make up for the sin of sending him away.
My man the kid deaf when herny arrives how can he know
@@TheCozzyGaming deaf people read lips bruh
@@TheCozzyGaming he found the diary while searching through his bag
He could still speak, why didn't he tell his father? At the end, on Daniel's mansion when H.W. told daniel he was going away to mexico, he managed to speak.
He couldn’t read though. Never had not no schooling. He opened and thumbed through the journal completely upside down. It’s possible he may’ve had some inclination he wasn’t who he said he was, Senior certainly did, but the young boy was distressed which made him ornery, confused. At the very least he had the feeling he’w’s been replaced
Have any of you ever wondered why Daniel left Wisconsin in the first place? Money is the easy answer. But several times throughout the film he blatantly refuses to discuss his past life and it is implied that he keeps no correspondence at all with any of his family. Why? I think his origins explain his aversion to religion and overall cynicism. There's a scene where the false Henry says something along the lines of, "I know you and our father had your disagreements." And Daniel replies, "I don't want to talk about that." And earlier in the film, HW tells Daniel that Abel beats his daughter for not praying. Later on he confronts Abel in front of Mary and threatens him to never beat her again. Thus, a suspicious connection exists between Daniel and Mary and there's a rare moment in the film where we see Daniel actually sympathize with another character who just so happens to be a little girl and the daughter of an abusive fundamentalist. It should also be noted that Daniel shows no signs of distress when the false Henry informs him that his father is dead. From this, I think it's safe to infer that Daniel's father was also a Christian fundamentalist who beat him regularly. This also explains his aversion to religion and refusal to accept goodness as a real thing thereby making him inclined to only see the bad in people. Also, Daniel's bond with HW deteriorates as he gets older and loses his childlike innocence...now in the eyes of Daniel, HW is like any other adult; filled with hatred and lies and not to be trusted. And lastly, this might be a bit of a stretch, but when Daniel is explaining to Henry his attitude on life and his hatred and mistrust for people he say's, "If it's in me then it's also in you." And remember that the only connection between Daniel and Henry is that they share the same father who would've likely beat Henry as well for the same exact reasons. I think this explains why Daniel was so ready to open up to Henry despite just meeting him; Daniel was excited that he might've actually found someone he could relate to, someone with the same past and emotional trauma.
Drew This is great and shit but what I am really intrigued to know is how this thought came up in your mind in the first place
this all seems reasonable
Wow that’s an amazing analysis. I was thinking that but could’ve have put it in words.
This is exactly what they wanted to convey. Thanks!
Wow this is an incredible character analysis
His dislike of most people is solidified when he finds out his brother is an impostor.
1:48 This is wrong. Daniel's first reaction when the explosion happened was to ensure the safety of his son. He didn't once look back as he was running to the mess hall with the injured HW in his arms.
He then instantly leaves him tho
@@Blank-41 Yeah, and the child constantly said not to leave him, but Daniel left anyways. Then when Daniels partner asked about his son, Daniel said he is hurt, but stayed on watching the oil.
He was by oil. That's where he started to annoy me, right up until the end of the movie.
Probably will go down as one of the most visual masterpieces for the next 30+ years
Absolutely amazing film oh, it gets better with multiple viewings.
That score, man that score is incredible. The tension it adds is palpable.
Reminds me of the Shining in parts
This is the best analysis I’ve seen on KZhead. It actually includes discussion of the symbolism and themes as opposed to simply being a plot summary
In my opinion if you just look at Daniel as just the bad guy you just miss the whole concept of the movie
Keith Richards Absolutely
Keith Richards How should you view Daniel as?
@@jonci9712 as broken man, as normal human
@KeithRichards completely agree, when someone looks at Daniel as “ the bad guy” I can’t even take their opinion of the film seriously.
He's an ego-maniacal sociopath, so yeah, he's the bad guy... He's also the protagonist of the movie, so he can't be considered "the bad guy", villain, antagonist... in that sense. He represents the evil and indifference in Humanity.
The best part is, he makes Eli deny his God, then kills him, sending him to hell
Presuming there is hell. Daniel doesn't believe in one particular faith.
He would’ve went to hell either way
@@Borganov20 ur saying eli wouldve went to hell? why
@@drose141 he claimed he was a vessel for the Holy Spirit and that he had healing powers, but we never see that going beyond his heated sermons, he’s a false prophet and a violent liar
Eli never believed in God, he was a fraud
Paul is the only one outta all of em who knew to avoid the whole fucking thing lol
this is more of a plot than analysis
Never noticed how well fire was used to symbolize the sins Daniel commited which brought hell on earth
what. no
for some fucking reason i never knew he adopted the boy. fuck. thank you!
it can be easily overlooked
+mrnintendowii Aside from their climactic final encounter..."bastard in a basket"
Wаtсh Тhеrе Will Bе Blооd onlinе hеre => twitter.com/f8b314c7f6fe50004/status/795842893135036416 Тhere Will Bе Blоооod Аnаlуsis
What's weird is that while Daniel does display attributes of a sociopath, he also seems to have empathy for others and a pretty strong conscience that guides his actions. The killing of the man who claimed to be his brother seemed to genuinely affect him and despite his claims later that his son was just a ruse to put up a front of a good business man, he does clearly want familial companionship and care about his adopted son. He's just a very peculiar character but I don't think he's quite an evil devil man that only cares about himself. Either way, Anderson created a great fuckin character and movie.
The first narrative section of this video's analysis relies way too heavily on the concept of Daniel being the "evil capitalist oil tycoon" (which he surely is) to the point of oversimplifying the character and the movie. Also I highly disagree that Daniel does not care for or about his adopted son - in fact, the tension between his obvious strong devotion and love for his adopted son and his desire to find oil and become wealthy is what drives the central drama of the plot. In fact, you might read Daniel's final disavowal of his son for choosing to go to Mexico and become an oil man himself as Daniel's way (terribly crass and unsuccessful as it is) to show HW that being an oil man was for him (Daniel) just a means to and end - a means for providing for HW. Did you not see the man nearly break down when he had to trick HW on the train to San Francisco? You say Daniel descends into madness - I disagree - he was as equally sane or insane in the silver mine at the beginning of the film - he hated Eli the same the fist day he saw him as the day he murdered him. Note the Daniel must have crawled all the way across the desert with a broken leg to get to the essayer's office. This single (implied) act of bravery (almost) forgives everything else he does in the film. Daniel has to go through hell to attain every ounce of his wealth, both physically and emotionally. Daniel is a much more complicated figure that made out in this analysis - bad form!
Such a thought provoking film. I thought about it for weeks after I watched it. I definitely need to watch it again to really understand it. The beginning orchestra tune got me hooked right away. Amazing how music can make someone feel.
Eli is not conflicted in the least. Eli is a mirror image of Plainview. Two manipulators trying to control humanity for their own gains. The main difference is Plainview admits his position whereas Eli won’t. Authenticity is the main theme and Plainview’s main ethic which is why he hates humanity and kills Eli after Eli refuses to admit his true nature.
It's interesting that Daniel kills a man whom is lying to gain an advantage, when part of Daniel's career was built on doing the same. I think a large portion of the film is about the internalized battle of what Daniel actually cares about, is it family or is it competition? At the end of the movie he is obviously upset with HW and begins to belittle him. User 5471122 says this is for Daniels own benefit in an attempt to counter his pain, but it isn't entirely obvious that is true. Daniel says earlier in the film that he has a competition in him and wants no one else to succeed. Does he care about family or did he just use family to succeed? He discards HW soon after Henry arrives. HW then resumes that position soon after Daniel disposes of the fraudulent Henry. The film shows scenes where Daniel seems to care about either of these characters and other scenes where he doesn't. HW announces his own enterprise in oil drilling and thusly becomes a competitor to Daniel. This is the biggest climax/culmination of the film: did Daniel ever actually care about family or did use family to gain success? Daniel is obviously angered. Even in his old age and with no need to gain any more wealth, Daniel is willing to disassociate himself with the only family he has due to his competitive nature.
Eli represents everything Daniel hates in everyone.
I don't agree with the conclusion that Daniel adopted the boy as a prop. There's a side of deep humanity in him. But as wealth grows around him and his greed for more drives him to the point of using everyone around him to achieve his goals. The character develops to a greedy sociopath from a hardworking greedy man.
Your opening statement about Eli was terrible. He is a scam artist in the same regards as Danielle.
My sister and I spent two hours today discussing this film. I then see this up here. Very interesting analogy.
he wasnt a sociopath, he was obsessed, this film is about the american obsession.
If you can’t relate to “ I see the worst in people, I don’t have to look any further than that” and “ I don’t like to explain myself”, you’re just not going to fully understand what the inside of this antiheroes head is like, or be able to analyze it.
I didn't see him as an antihero, because he was not likeable at any point in the film. There was no journey. He was just a psycho throughout.
What most of these analyses seem to miss is that Daniel Plainview is a deeply moral man, evidenced more by what he doesn't do than by what he does. I wouldn't swear to it, but I don't think we ever hear him curse. He doesn't consort with wicked women--or women of any sort, apparently. He doesn't relegate jobs--he's down there in the muck and mud just like the lowest of his crew--and the one time he does (sending HW off with the foreman), both he and HW and even the foreman hold it against him. He doesn't send HW away because, deaf, he's of little value to Daniel; it's Daniel's guilt from the event that makes him want to put HW away from him. He weeps as he reads his brother's diary (if you look closely at the text, you can make out the words "...my brother, a stranger to me,") and some of his interactions with HW are as tender as any I've ever seen on film. "I hate most people" is not evidence of psychopathy; it's an honest assessment of "most people's" hypocrisy and lack of honor according to Daniel's code. Therefore, he doesn't kill the fake Henry until he confesses to his duplicity; he doesn't kill Eli until he himself acknowledges his phoniness. Had Eli refused to say the words Daniel provided him, even though they were true, his honor and strength would have saved him. Plainview is a code hero, and the fault is not with him for abiding by his own code, but with us for not understanding it. Makes for great cinema, but you really wouldn't want to know this guy in real life.
Even though the actor who played Eli, and Paul (whose name escapes me at the moment,) did a terrific job portraying Eli Sunday, I can’t but wonder how a DiCaprio might have done with the role.
His name is Paul Dano.
@no no no You clearly haven't seen Django Unchained. Holy shit DiCaprio is a good actor because his face is the epitome of punchable in that movie.
I think Leo would have been too old for the role but there's no denying his talent
@@0FFICERPROBLEMleo was class in django, one of this best characters
Wow! Great analysis!
Very nice analysis on the different elements of this masterpiece. I always hand a similar thought about religious symbolism of Daniel raising the oil soaked hand to the heavens. The fire motif you describe was also enlightening. I never would’ve thought of that. The only part that didn’t work for me was during your overview of the plot. Eli didn’t really “ask” Daniel how to bless the well. With his delivery, it’s more like Eli *told* Daniel how they should conduct the blessing. There was a legitimate reason why Daniel didn’t let Eli bless the well. It was a face off for power, and Daniel wasn’t going to give Eli that pleasure.
Best Acting Ever!!
It's amazing how I can watch the same movie and come to the complete opposite conclusion on Plainview's life and motivations. Exactly every single thing you said I think the complete opposite
Plainview has God Complex and he is Machiavellian Villian who does everything to gain what he really wants
I don't about all that... All I know is Daniel Day Lewis is hands down the best Actor who ever lived..!!
This was quite enjoyable.
Hoooly crap, I've been looking for this video since I first watched it like, 5 years ago!
No mention of Daniel making Eli deny bud before murdering him? Pretty important point.
Amazing video!
What you guys don't know is that in the room down the hall from the bowling alley Daniel had a disco.
There’s an interesting connection between Daniel and Eli, they are both hypocrites and conmen to advance their own selfish goals. Both trying to out con each other, ultimately leading to their own destruction. He finished Eli’s life by killing him, and Daniel is finished by Eli and the crime he has committed. This film is about revelations, the good that people are willing to believe versus the evil that truly exists in the world. Cause underneath it all, there is only black. Cause what lies underground is truly hell itself. And what does that tell you of the men who willingly dig in search of it.
I don't see Daniel as a bad man but broken probably a symptom of alot of men in those times it was a very hard life back then.
Oil! Oil oil oil, man. That's the game
Daniel saved hw before he put out the oil rig explosion
Daniel is not a sociopath. He is a misanthrop that went berserk.
6:50 I think he opened with that to essentially imply what Daniel has to go through in that first scene. The movie opens with a sinister crescendo and a shot of the canyon, then Daniel breaks his leg, retrieves his gold and has to drag himself through that canyon. At the end of the scene the camera pans from Daniel to the canyon which is accompanied by the same sinister crescendo. It shows the type of person who would be willing to go to extreme lengths to earn and survive.
I wish they hadn't used the music from The Shining. That really put me off.
exactly. great comment. his journey dragging himself through the canyon could have been a movie in an of itself.
Great video. I was sad to see this was your one and only film review.
Excellent
@7:28 The sound of extremely crude machinery gone into a non-productive loop.
Reaching during the second half
One word that can describe this brief analytic summarization. "Bravo"👏
I love this movie, and now even more
He didn't really strike me as a sociopath
This was a really good analysis but I have a question: I noticed that there were multiple narrators for this video, so is this for a school project?
The real villain of this film is Eli. He was just , if not ,more manipulative than Daniel.
When you realize that the violin plays to the syllables of the title
There will be blood is fucking amazing. IM FINISHED!
Thanks for explanation appreciated
He murdered the imposter 😳
Amoger
Sus
I have not read the book "Oil!", so I don't know the answer to this, but I did not think that HW was adopted. I got the impression that Daniel lashed out at his son because he felt betrayed. Will someone who read the book say if he was adopted or not?
My all time favorite film.
Best film of the decade, shame this and no country were yo against each other, both brilliant but this takes it for me
There were some good bits in this analysis, but I feel it over simplifies Daniel's character.
It's a 9 minute analysis of a 2 and a half hour film in which you could teach a month's worse of courses on. What the hell did you expect?
It sounds like Zach Woods was narrating a prob of this video. with that said, I can't believe that no one seems to have realized the parallels between There Will Be Blood and the Bush Iraq War.
Religion is the main theme of the movie. The movie isn't making a statement about religion, however, it is merely a religious movie. Even the ending scene is a sort of religious ritual.
thought by the title this video was about dexter.
Lot of people saying he isn’t a sociopath are wrong. Daniel is definitely on the anti social personality disorder spectrum. He says in the film that he hates most people. He wasn’t crying because he killed the fraud brother, but reading the diary.
Dam good review... Cheers mate
who watch this film on netflix ? :D
With all due respect, you've deconstructed a masterpiece from a cheap, pop-psychological perspective. Consider William Butler Yeats poem "Blood and Oil," The life of Bill Mulholland, and "How the West was Won." You will see the deeper meaning.
What's the deeper meaning, that capitalism is avaricious and heartless and that the west was won through violent predation? With all due respect, I don't see how your implied "deconstruction" is any more profound than the one under discussion.
What is this deeper meaning? Enlighten us because your obviously highly intelligent and wise and not just an average sheep like everyone else. Your the lone successful and intelligent person lurking in the youtube comments section. Right.
Xednis That would be the surface layer meaning, and I mean very surface layer, it's basically just the base for a more complicated and personal story. It is, based off of those pieces of art. As well as great symbolism. I can agree with you there totally. It's got multiple layers and angles, that's why it's a masterpiece. It's a personal story about someone, a psychological one, and this kind if over arching reversed religious symbolism. As well as the capabilities of man. Greed, trust, religion, empathy, passion, capitalism, competition, whatever
@@Xednis he offered a light critique asserting that the film and its story and central character are more sincerely nuanced than dubbing the man as unfeeling monster by calling him a sociopath would as the maker of the video term here would imply. He's not being a snob.
@@yawgmoth5662 what were you so mad at while typing this? there was no need to be this heated at someone for commenting their own opinion on the video. and, the commenter asked for a deeper analysis rather than simply implying daniel is a bad man. this video is a plot summary more than an analysis.
Descent review al though there are parts you can't hear do to the loud music. Proof listening is actually a thing.
delicious analysis
Such a good movie... Top 10 for me
There was blood
What I want to know is why the hell did they use the same actor to play both Paul and Eli. I think this movie is really really good. But that confusion ruined the story for me the first couple times I watched it. Why?! It makes no sense! Was it really important for them to be identical twins?
He's not a sociopath at all. He is in many ways a victim of his ambition, and preyed upon by others. He is torn apart by his unwitting support of a con artist preacher, and devastated by the imposter who surely killed his brother. He did betray HW, and pays for his attention to the burning well very dearly.
I don't know how it didn't even occur to me that H.W was the workers son. I'm so stupid.
There was a scene before the workers death where he's stood up holding the baby, seemingly an attempt to show that he's the father
this isn't an analysis... he just says what happens...
Really well done sir
You missed the part where h damn kid burned the Shack down
I don't think he was a sociopath due to how loving he appeared to be with his son at several points in the movie.
***** It's my understanding that psychopaths can't love. They certainly don't feel any empathy. He seemed to display signs of both at points in the movie for his adopted son.
Sociopath: Impulsivity, deceitfulness, and a profound lack of remorse. Emotional attachments are often superficial and geared towards their own gain. Often lacks a sense of moral responsibility or social conscience. While he showed affection to his surrogate son for a time, his main motivation was to do business with a family image, once his son was inconvenient he sent him away. How he treats his son at the end shows his true nature with the facade removed.
"And thus relieves the conflict between the two men." ffs, of course there is no conflict with 2 men when only 1 man is alive...
Nemo's Tepid Sweep Yeah, conflict resolved.
Thanks
Love this movie
This sounds like a high schoolers report on this movie
so this is how america got crazy with oil......
Question...... what what was the meaning behind the director having one actor play as Paul and Eli please explain?
Dewade Jones the other actor playing Eli wasn't working when they began filming so they had dano (who had already filmed his one scene) come in and do the other role as well.. playing it off as a twin (perhaps??)
the fall ? unsure about that. betting he got away with killing Eli.
“His intense desire to earn enough money to escape from contact with the rest of humanity” . I’m not sure about that. Yes Daniel says he doesn’t like other people but that doesn’t necessarily mean that’s the reason he does any of this. In fact I don’t think we know what Daniels motivations are exactly. I suspect he simply is overcome with greed and ambition. But as we see at the end of the film, it really was all for nothing
He did say he want to escape from humanity
Amazing movie
Why don't I remember anything about his brother? I've seen this film twice and I don't recall that segment at all. Am I crazy?
Here is the real question. Who is the only truly honest character in the whole story? That is the point.
No one, everyone surrender their own beliefs at some point in the movie.
Abel Sunday is a good person
needs more volume. I had it on Max and could barely hear you
....But..that's not what happened. He left his son because he had to put the fire out. He left his son because he set fire to the cabin and couldn't handle the kid. He became"evil" by the end of the movie. Also the humiliation on the baptism was already an answer to the humiliation on the mud
Great analysis, I hope you make some more.
HW lights that fire cause he knowsHenry is a fake
This remenbers me a lot of "come and see" but not so shoking.
CONCERTO FOR VIOLIN 🎻 D-MAJOR OPUS 77
Does anyone remember when he made his son drink milk by force what did he pour in the milk was it alcohol?
Yeah it was, he gives HW alcohol because that’s the only remedy that Daniel knows. So he try’s to ease his sons pain with it.
@@matthewfeil7389 woooaaaah ur right!