Daniel Day-Lewis in "There will be Blood"

[MikeWaters]

gives a truly masterful performance.

In a way, it is a very different movie. No action. No sex. Very little violence.

All character. To be able to pull off a 157 minute movie based on character is pretty remarkable in today's day and age, where audiences expect to be spoon-fed.

I mean, it's not even really plot driven. Nor is it a morality plan in the tradition of those films. It is about character.

I think the greatest two actors in mainstream films right now are Day-Lewis and Russell Crowe. It would be interesting to get these two actors in the same film. However Day-Lewis is really light-years ahead of any other actor right now.

Credit to Paul Thomas Anderson as well. Certainly among the most talented directors his generation, if not the most talented.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

gives a truly masterful performance.

In a way, it is a very different movie. No action. No sex. Very little violence.

Then why is it rated R? Do they cuss like Lingo on shore leave?

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

All character. To be able to pull off a 157 minute movie based on character is pretty remarkable in today's day and age, where audiences expect to be spoon-fed.

I mean, it's not even really plot driven. Nor is it a morality plan in the tradition of those films. It is about character.

I think the greatest two actors in mainstream films right now are Day-Lewis and Russell Crowe. It would be interesting to get these two actors in the same film. However Day-Lewis is really light-years ahead of any other actor right now.

Credit to Paul Thomas Anderson as well. Certainly among the most talented directors his generation, if not the most talented.

I have a copy and can't wait to watch it.

I re-watched "Last of the Mohicans" the other day with D.D. Lewis. Great movie.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Jeff Lebowski

I re-watched "Last of the Mohicans" the other day with D.D. Lewis. Great movie.

Hate to be trite, but the movie pales against the book. I read the book first, and was sorely disappointed in the film.

[il Padrino Ute]

Originally Posted by Tex

Hate to be trite, but the movie pales against the book. I read the book first, and was sorely disappointed in the film.

Has there ever been a movie that was better than the book? I can only think of one and that would be an instructional film I saw in mortuary school that was a lot better than the dry text book.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by Tex

Hate to be trite, but the movie pales against the book. I read the book first, and was sorely disappointed in the film.

That is always the case. It's the nature of the medium. But the cinematography in the movie was beautiful. And battle scenes were well done.

[MikeWaters]

Lords of the Rings movies were arguably better than the books.

[FMCoug]

Originally Posted by il Padrino Ute

Has there ever been a movie that was better than the book? I can only think of one and that would be an instructional film I saw in mortuary school that was a lot better than the dry text book.

Horton Hears The Who might qualify.

Though the excuse I'm using not to go see it is that I've already read the book and the book is always better.

[il Padrino Ute]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

Lords of the Rings movies were arguably better than the books.

I never read any of the Lord of the Rings series, though I did read The Hobbit.

[il Padrino Ute]

Originally Posted by FMCoug

Horton Hears The Who might qualify.

Though the excuse I'm using not to go see it is that I've already read the book and the book is always better.

My 9 year old son gives that movie a ringing endorsement. He said that it is the most awesome movie he's ever seen - even better than Jurassic Park 3.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

Lords of the Rings movies were arguably better than the books.

Yes, thanks for reminding me.