There Will Be Dissent

Here are some (slightly edited)
messages I sent a friend, now that
I've had time to digest both titles.

I'm sorry to inform you that my biggest cinematic disappoint-
ment of the New Year is...There Will Be Blood. I realize I'm part of a tiny minority. I enjoyed much
of the film—especially the supporting performances, the cinema-
tography, and Jonny Greenwood's striking score—but I just can't abide that ham-fisted final act. And I'm a P.T. Anderson/Daniel Day-Lewis fan (though the jury's still out on Paul Dano).

Click here to hear Daniel Plainview's infamous milkshake line.

I'll spare you any more negativity. Instead, I have some-
thing positive to share. Though I had some reservations ab-
out the ending—or endings—to No Country for Old Men, Anderson's overheated oil opera has swept them from my mind.

I now appreciate the Coen Brothers' masterful achievement
more than ever (or as you termed it, "the Coen miracle"). I'm
not suggesting every movie should conclude on such an existen-
tial note, but I'll take it over yelling, screaming, bad food anal-
ogies, flying spittle, and slurping noises (?!) any day of the week.

And here's how I respond-
ed once my friend assured
me I hadn't offended him:

No Country was off my top 10 for a spell, but once I put
it back, it was there to stay.

I did read much of the commentary at Jim Emerson's Scanners site, and there's some great stuff. Then I came across the following:

"No Country for Old Men is one of those movies
I think provides a critical litmus test. You can quibble
about it all you like, but if you don't get the artistry at
work then, I submit, you don't get what movies are."

I couldn't disagree more, whether that statement is attached to
No Country, There Will Be Blood—or Inland Empire, which dropped off my list in favor of No Country. Consensus is nice in theory, but we shouldn't all be expected to agree on what con-
stitutes "artistry." That would be boring. It also implies that crit-
ics should evaluate movies using identical aesthetic criteria.

I'm not a contrarian by nat-
ure. Often, I like the same
films as everyone else, and
for many of the same rea-
sons. But sometimes I don't.

The placement of No Country at #10 on my list doesn't mean I "get what movies are" any less than you, Emer-
son, and everyone else who ranked it higher. It just means Away From Her, Into the Wild, and a few other titles moved me more.

And here's Godfrey Chesire in The Independent Weekly:

"Though I've regarded Anderson as something of a fraudu-
lent striver from the first, I go into every new film hoping to
be won over. And I must stress that in the first half of There
Will Be Blood, I was—completely. If there were Oscars for
portions of movies, I'll grant you that the initial hour of
Anderson's opus would deserve that Best Picture trophy."

Funny, but I've liked Anderson since
his debut, Hard Eight—though I found Magnolia bloated and self-indulgent—
yet I agree about There Will be
Blood. Click here for his full review.

Endnote: Coincidentally enough,
I recently came across a James Wol-
cott piece, in which he quotes The
New York Times: "If you don't end
up liking each one of [Jonathan]
Franzen's people, you probably just don't like people."

Though I haven't read Franzen's Corrections—I've been mean-
ing to for years—there's a distressing God-like quality to these sorts of statements, i.e. If you disagree with me, you're wrong. Yet, as this author reminds, "Criticism is an art, not a science."



I've always believed that. While I'm sure I've committed my share of critical crimes over the years, I try to explain what I think, and not what anyone else should think. For the record, I find Emerson to be a terrific writer and a fine person. I still value the film re-
views he wrote for The Rocket in the 1980s. Chances are good I would've discovered enduring favorites like David Lynch and Jim Jarmusch on my own, but I remain grateful for his wise counsel.

Images from I Drink Your Milkshake, The Original Playlist,
The Cinematic Art, and Film Comment (click the link for Rich-
ard T. Jameson's Hard Eight review). Note that an anachronistic
milk bottle—rather than a milkshake—figures in No Country.