I think Chris Orr and I may have rattled on about Juno and abortion a tad too long, but if that isn't your cup of tea maybe you'll enjoy our discussion of the dark, sexual magic of Michael Cera.
Update: And now, with embedding!
Copyright © 2009 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.
Interesting discussion, Ross, although I have to disagree with you and Chris about the ending to There Will Be Blood. I thought No Country for Old Men was a better movie overall as well, but I don't really see how There Will Be Blood could have ended any other way. It was a completely "hopeless" movie from the start. The baptism scene was farcical, and Dano's character was obviously just another version of Daniel Day-Lewis' character: they are both more or less psychopaths/sociopaths, in it for themselves. The movie presents a godless, pessimistic universe (and while No Country for Old Men certainly presents the latter, I think the ending talk about the "dream" presents a glimmer of hope), and for Plainview there is no salvation. He recognizes Sunday as his natural, although different, rival. Both manipulate others for power/wealth, but Sunday uses his religion as a ruse, and this is seen as disgusting by Plainview. Chris is right that the focus of the movie is Plainview, but Sunday stands as a type of opposition to him, and he is only "finished" after he has eliminated him. I thought the grotesque ending was pretty expected (even putting aside the title's promise that "there will be blood")...the natural progression of a man with no capacity for empathy (I think the talk of his love for his son is all imagined: his son is just a means for him to succeed). No, it did not suprise me at all that Plainview would kill his spiritual rival in such a way.
Posted by Derrick | January 11, 2008 11:39 AM