There Will Be Blood - In Communications Class

I wanted to write a blog about the Academy Awards but I didn't really get around to it so I decided to just forget about it. Recently in my Communications class, we were asked to discuss the awards and our views about the future of the movie industry. Here's my response:



Topic: Movies - Discussion Group 3 Date: February 26, 2008 1:32 AM
Subject: Movies Author: Falcon, David View PeopleLink Options for this User
I was surprised to hear about the low viewer turnout for the Academy Awards. Then again, with the writer's strike lasting as long as it did, I'm surprised it aired on schedule. I did find it more watchable than the Grammys, however.

In regards to the winners: I wasn't at all shocked that Daniel Day-Lewis won the Oscar for lead actor for his role in There Will Be Blood (my personal favorite movie of the year). I was completely taken back at the Coen brothers dominance of the major categories. I thought No Country was a good movie but the subject matter was too ordinary to take home the award for best picture.

I don't see the Oscars as an award show that interests young viewers. The Grammys have just enough flair to keep a young audience tuned in, but both of MTVs award shows own that demographic.

I don't see the film industry as threatened as the music industry is by the digital age we live in now. That being said, I think movies will have a shorter turn-around time from theaters to DVDs to fight the illegal pirating of movies.


Pretty normal. Then, someone responded to my post and asked me why I thought There Will Be Blood was the best movie of the year:

Topic: Movies - Discussion Group 3 Date: February 29, 2008 2:34 PM
Subject: Re:Movies Author: Christopher, Steven View PeopleLink Options for this User
Please explain to me why you thought There Will Be Blood was one of the best this year.

O.K., so I did some research and found out this guy has some sort of chip on his shoulder about the movie. Here's my response to his question:

Topic: Movies - Discussion Group 3 Date: March 2, 2008 10:12 PM
Subject: Re:Movies Author: Falcon, David View PeopleLink Options for this User
Great acting, superb directing, compelling story, great score and, while it was a little long, it was far more interesting than a movie about teen pregnancy. Please explain to me why you thought it was "the worst 3-hour worthless fiasco" you've ever endured. Also, There Will Be Blood had possibly one of the best and definitely the most satisfying ending of any movie I've ever seen.

Again, normal and not in any way offensive. Then the kid starts to get gay.


Topic: Movies - Discussion Group 3 Date: March 3, 2008 1:48 PM
Subject: Re:Movies Author: Christopher, Steven View PeopleLink Options for this User
I looked at my watch 2 hours into the movie, wondering when something "compelling" was going to happen. I thought about leaving, but then figured since I'd already sat there for 2 worthless hours I might as well see if something worthwhile would happen. After another hour, your "satisfying" ending just digusted me. I am not impressed nor satisfied by watching someone be brutally murdered on screen.

Did you see this "movie about teen pregnancy," who's name cannot be mentioned?

Man, what a fag. Here's my response:

Topic: Movies - Discussion Group 3 Date: March 3, 2008 4:38 PM
Subject: Re:Movies Author: Falcon, David View PeopleLink Options for this User
Just because a movie doesn't have explosions, chase/fight scenes and fancy special effects, doesn't mean that the movie isn't compelling. The compelling story I'm referring to was the story of the protagonist who, lets face it, wasn't a good guy, try to make a living for himself and his son while fighting mother nature, a crazy evangelical preacher on a power trip and, ultimately, his own son's deafness. The superb acting by Daniel Day-Lewis allowed you to root for a guy for whom we should not being cheering. I didn't enjoy the ending because of its brutality. I enjoyed it because the antagonist, Eli, got what he deserved for exploiting his religion and family.

Now, I think we can both agree that I answered your question as to why I liked the movie properly; whereas you
answered mine with no substantial reason as to why you didn't other than you thought the movie was too long and "worthless." By what merit? It doesn't matter. Since you couldn't come up with a response the first time, I don't expect you to come up with one this time. Nor do I care.

The next time you've decided two hours into a movie that you don't like it, I suggest you use common sense and walk out. No one is forcing you to stay there. Or develop the patience to sit through it, examine it and come up with logical reasons as to why you don't like it.

This is the last time I will address you and this subject.
PLEASE LEAVE ME ALONE.

P.S. I'm not here to argue the vitures of Juno, I was just using it as a comparison.

You've been served. I'm hoping this kid leaves me alone but I'm secretly hoping he tries to talk shit to me after class so I can give him the beat down. Why do people walk into fights which they cannot win. Anyway, I kind of just wanted to keep a record of this because these discussions get deleted after a certain amount of time and I wanted evidence of my verbal ass-kicking.