10 replies to this topic

[dodge]

I just saw There Will Be Blood, a brilliant film that might have been a masterpiece...except, IMO, it's missing just one thing: a middle-aging Connery desperate to break free of Bond. Day-Lewis was superb, though his performance reminded me strongly of Bill the Butcher in Gangs of New York. But, if you've seen the film you were probably struck by his accent--which eerily resembles Connery's. And me, I couldn't help seeing Connery setting the screen on fire in a role that he was born to play. Con has the right balance of actor and movie star to have made the loathsome character more palatable to crowds. Hell, a younger Connery could have made him likable!

Anyone else see the film? Your thoughts?

[baerrtt]

I just saw There Will Be Blood, a brilliant film that might have been a masterpiece...except, IMO, it's missing just one thing: a middle-aging Connery desperate to break free of Bond. Day-Lewis was superb, though his performance reminded me strongly of Bill the Butcher in Gangs of New York. But, if you've seen the film you were probably struck by his accent--which eerily resembles Connery's. And me, I couldn't help seeing Connery setting the screen on fire in a role that he was born to play. Con has the right balance of actor and movie star to have made the loathsome character more palatable to crowds. Hell, a younger Connery could have made him likable!

Anyone else see the film? Your thoughts?

I've seen the film, enjoyed it, rate Day-Lewis's performance very highly and rate Connery as an actor very highly as well.

However the power of DDL's performance (indeed the power of all his performances) is that he doesn't try to consciously get the audience to like the character (and even on the occasions where were ARE supposed to sympathise with a Day-Lewis character i.e IN THE NAME OF THE FATHER he made/makes braver acting choices to present a human being who isn't entirely perfect). Plainview isn't supposed to be liked or cheered in any shape or form, he's a greedy oil baron who, in the end, cares for absolutely NO ONE but himself.

Connery barely played a 'villain' role throughout his career and whilst his characters (as has been suggested the real man himself) have rough edges he consciously has always made the acting choice (even when the script doesn't suggest it) to make his characters more 'likeable'. That may have worked for James Bond when him and Terence Young sought out to make Fleming's character palpatable to a wider audience, but a character whose principles are eventually eroded by the end of the film (TWBB)? Not much so.

If there is a problem with movie stars (Connery) as opposed to actors (DDL) is that they will change an unlikeable character to suit their persona and marketability and, quite frankly, in terms of quality it doesn't always suit the film. Look at Mel Gibson's hijacking of PAYBACK (1999) the remake of the Lee Marvin classic POINT BLANK where he took the film away from its director and reshot it to make his character (a vicious ex-con) more in line with his persona.

The film wouldn't be any better, even if Connery made the character more fuzzy, because the point the film is making (linking the craze the oil creates in him with the obvious contemporary issues) would be lost.

[Mr. Blofeld]

If you've seen the film you were probably struck by his accent--which eerily resembles Connery's.

Actually, most film reviewers noted its resemblance to John Huston... M from Casino Royale.

[bond 16.05.72]

I haven't seen TMBB but please Day Lewis wipes the floor with Connery in the acting stakes.

From the reviews I've read Plainview is not supposed to be likeable. Connery is the best Bond but apart from some very small amount of outside roles, he's very ltd in the acting range. He gets way with things like Untouchables & Red October because of his presence. The lack accent and no effort to try it's Connery himself that makes it work but acting talent, Connery's above average at best. The Oscar was one of those I suppose we better give him one scenario, I wouldn't call it that deserved, it's all politics anyway with the Academy

Day Lewis is one of the finest actors of all time, see My Left Foot, In the Name of the Father for proof, a true master at work, Connery doesn't even compare.

[dodge]

I'm not denying that DDL is the superior actor. But, critics aside, the performance wasn't that big of a stretch from Bill the Butcher in Gangs of New York--and Bill was far more compelling because he was more spectacular.

Likable may have been the wrong word to use. But some empathy was called for. As we have it, Daniel Plainview is a revolting monster from the get-go and I couldn't have cared less at his fate in the last scene. Whether you share my opinion about Connery in the lead role, he had more chops than some of you give him credit for--at least before his self-sanctification. (Check out Sidney Lumet's The Offence. And consider that Connery came within a hair of directing MacBeth, beaten out by Roman Polanski. Presumably, he would have starred in it too. Alas, the actor gave way soon enough to the movie star and the World's Oldest Sexiest Man Alive.)

Anyway, we need a reason to sit for 150 minutes watching a slimebucket get his desserts. We don't have to root for him. We don't have to like him. But we must be spellbound, as we are with Hopkin's Hannibal Lecter. Can can anyone really say they gave a hoot about Daniel Plainview? I say bury a stake in his heart--and give me back my money.

[dodge]

I

Connery barely played a 'villain' role throughout his career

Yet oddly in MARNIE he rapes his wife. Though I love that movie, I find the whole scene very distasteful, and the concept that somehow he will cure his cliptomaniac sexually traumatised neurosed wife by 'giving her one' very offensive. I find it hard to look at the character later in the movie without contempt. But then I try to remind myself that the whole scene was some strange psychotic attack on Tippi by Hitch and I don't mind so much.

Good point. And I also seem to remember a flawed, somewhat unsympathetic character in his first released film after Bond, Woman of Straw. My original point was never that Sean is a better actor than Day Lewis--but rather that his combination of acting chops and star power could have made him better able than DDL to play the part of Plainview in Blood. Jason Bourne was another potentially extremely unsympathetic character--a former coldblooded assassin, a cipher, a man without charm, wit or any saving social grace. But Matt Damon, while not a great Actor, turned Bourne into a compelling hero, something DDL couldn't have done. Anyway, God love DDL for the genius that he is...but if he's only doing a film every 2-3 years, I hope he'll pick more carefully the next time around. I'm still left wishing Connery--or Dan Craig--had played this part.

[baerrtt]

I

Connery barely played a 'villain' role throughout his career

Yet oddly in MARNIE he rapes his wife. Though I love that movie, I find the whole scene very distasteful, and the concept that somehow he will cure his cliptomaniac sexually traumatised neurosed wife by 'giving her one' very offensive. I find it hard to look at the character later in the movie without contempt. But then I try to remind myself that the whole scene was some strange psychotic attack on Tippi by Hitch and I don't mind so much.

Good point. And I also seem to remember a flawed, somewhat unsympathetic character in his first released film after Bond, Woman of Straw. My original point was never that Sean is a better actor than Day Lewis--but rather that his combination of acting chops and star power could have made him better able than DDL to play the part of Plainview in Blood. Jason Bourne was another potentially extremely unsympathetic character--a former coldblooded assassin, a cipher, a man without charm, wit or any saving social grace. But Matt Damon, while not a great Actor, turned Bourne into a compelling hero, something DDL couldn't have done. Anyway, God love DDL for the genius that he is...but if he's only doing a film every 2-3 years, I hope he'll pick more carefully the next time around. I'm still left wishing Connery--or Dan Craig--had played this part.

If a character is written as being unsympathetic then they should be played as unsympathetic throughout without 'this isn't who I really am' winks to the audience. I wouldn't say Jason Bourne is (memory or not) meant to be an unsympathetic character, (a flawed one given that he technically got himself into his later predicament) especially the hint in ULTIMATUM that he may have been brainwashed to complete his conditioning.

It might be a talent all on its own but Connery's basic ability is to soften the rough edges nearly all his characters have possessed (Bond, MARNIE etc). When a piece (as TWBB) calls for the audience (and not neccesarily a mass audience) to not root for the main character in any shape or form you don't want a performer softening the character (which one way or another Connery would've done) and thus not being true to the written character or point of the film (in this case the effect greed has on people). Is it truly neccesary to sympathise with every main character in every film even when in this case it wouldn't have fit the movie?

[Harmsway]

Anyway, we need a reason to sit for 150 minutes watching a slimebucket get his desserts. We don't have to root for him. We don't have to like him. But we must be spellbound, as we are with Hopkin's Hannibal Lecter. Can can anyone really say they gave a hoot about Daniel Plainview?

I can.

I was "spellbound" by Plainview, moreso than most film characters I've ever watched. Daniel Day Lewis made that character leap of the screen, and even as unsympathetic as he was, he was incredibly compelling to watch. Every scene with him was absolutely engrossing.

[Harry Fawkes]

Sean Connery may just make an appearance in the next Indian Jones movie. GL and SS may be keeping it one of the best kept secrets in Hollywood.

We'll just have to wait and see.

[dodge]

Anyway, we need a reason to sit for 150 minutes watching a slimebucket get his desserts. We don't have to root for him. We don't have to like him. But we must be spellbound, as we are with Hopkin's Hannibal Lecter. Can can anyone really say they gave a hoot about Daniel Plainview?

I can.

I was "spellbound" by Plainview, moreso than most film characters I've ever watched. Daniel Day Lewis made that character leap of the screen, and even as unsympathetic as he was, he was incredibly compelling to watch. Every scene with him was absolutely engrossing.

I respect your opinion and agree to disagree. If it's a shortcoming on my part, then it's one I'm stuck with because I simply have no interest in meanspirited, miserable people, especially when they are cowards. If they're bigger than life, then I'll sit there and watch the worst of the rotters at work. Plainview--as played by DDL--left me with the queasy feeling that his socks and underwear stank to the high heavens. Hannibal--say whatever else you will--keeps his shorts in good repair and has better manners.

[Harmsway]

I respect your opinion and agree to disagree. If it's a shortcoming on my part, then it's one I'm stuck with because I simply have no interest in meanspirited, miserable people, especially when they are cowards.

Well, then clearly you're not the sort who will enjoy THERE WILL BE BLOOD. Personally, I don't mind it, as long as the character is interesting and complex. Bring on humanity's dark, unlikable, bleak side, I say.

And there's a lot to find fascinating about Plainview. His struggle to find some connection with the rest of the human race, some way to empathize with people, while continually undermining himself with corruption and greed, was very powerful to me.

Also, I don't think he was quite all bad. There are some moments where he is desperately trying to do the right thing. By the end all his goodness has dried up, but he doesn't start out that way.

Hannibal--say whatever else you will--keeps his shorts in good repair and has better manners.

Sure. But Hannibal is audience friendly in a way that it would entirely inappropriate for Plainview. Plainview is a character you shouldn't be secretly cheering for.