I

Steak and Vodka:

THE MENTALITY OF DANIEL PLAINVIEW
a critical analysis of the flm
Tere Will Be Blood

There Will Be Blood is 2007 film adaptation of Upton Sinclairs novel Oil!. The film is
written and directed by film auteur Paul Thomas Anderson. The film chronicles turn of the
century oil prospector Daniel Plainview as he ascends the ladder of financial success. Plainview,
the protagonist, is a conflicted figure. The film highlights his descent into madness as he
becomes increasingly more successful. Despite being a protagonist, Plainview can be seen as a
"villain". Character allegiances are a very gray area. What is going through Plainview's head,
what is his mentality, is there a method to the madness of the character Daniel Plainview? Is
Plainview a hero, or a villain?
At the beginning of the film we see Plainview as a hard working man struggling to make
a living, slaving away as a mineral prospector. At this point of the film the audience can
understand Plainview's struggles. He goes on to discover oil in the mineral shaft. Daniel hires a
small crew to drill for the oil. One member is a young father, who brings his son to the drilling
site. The young father dies in a drilling accident. Plainview seems the most human when he
decides to adopt the orphan boy, yet Plainview's full intentions are not fully laid out.
Nine years later Plainview is a semi-successful oil prospector, making a good living for
him and his adopted son H.W. At this point Plainview is seen as the hero of the story. What is a
hero though? What is good and bad? That's subjective to opinion. Plainview has adopted H.W.
and one could view that as a heroic action. What makes the action heroic though? Once again,
II
this is subject to the opinion of the viewer, as there is nothing that designates hero nor villain.
Yet, there is a definition of protagonist. A protagonist is a main character of a film, play, book, or
any form of illustrating a story. Plainview is definitely the protagonist, yet a protagonist is not
required to have one clear alignment of what's good and bad. What is right and what is wrong?
This is the most interesting thing about the mentality of Plainview. You can never truly peg
Daniel's intentions, or his morals/alignment.
Most films have set in stone hero's and villains, yet in There Will Be Blood there is no
hero's, nor villains. No character has true alignment, and that is contrary to most movies, yet not
contrary to real life. In real life, no one is good and bad. There are good and bad acts, yet no
human has a true designation of good and evil, especially considering there is no good and evil.
Good and evil are two states of mind, subject to opinion. An example being a question of ethics:
"If your family is starving and you steal food, would it be considered good, or evil.". A similar
question being "Is it good or evil, for Plainview to prosper off of others land, for monetary gain,
even though the money he is earning helps to raise his son?". Plainview's ethics are never truly
panned out. Is he making money so he can supply for his son, or his he making money so he can
enjoy the spoils of money?
At one point in the film, his adopted son is angry at him, when he abandons H.W.,
because his recent deafness has become an inconvenience. Plainview eventually takes his son
back, to get in the good graces of the church, so he can build a drilling rig, on their land. To try to
bury the hatchet Plainview takes him to a fancy restaurant. Plainview says "Let's get some decent
food inside you. That's all we need here, is a good, strong, expensive, meal.". Plainview puts
emphasis on the word expensive, almost as if Plainview can purchase his sons affection. Possibly
III
Plainview has such a distorted view of the world and relationships, that he believes he is doing
the right thing, to mend his broken relationship with his son. Or, possibly Plainview does not
want to try hard to mend the relationship so, Plainview tries to use artificial items such as cash,
to show H.W. his false notions of love. Either way, this could be viewed as good, or bad.
Uncommon is it for a protagonist to not have some sort of love interest. Daniel does have
a love interest, but not a conventional one, such as a lover, or family. Plainviews love is money,
as depicted throughout the film. Plainview is willing to do anything to reach the top and earn,
earn, earn. Plainview at one point pledges himself to Christ to get a land mass, even though
Plainview does not care to believe in God, Christ, religion, or anything of that sort. Are Daniels
actions of falsely committing himself to God to gain prosperity evil, or could this be compared to
someone pledging themselves to God, as in to have a good standing in the afterlife? Many
commit to Christ everyday as to make sure Hell doesnt await. Is Daniel committing to Christ for
monetary gain any less false, and, or selfish? Plainview is willing to do anything to gain money,
just as some are willing to do anything to escape fear of damnation. Plainviews true love is
money and he is going to anything for it.
At the end of the film Plainview is close to completing his full ascent into madness,
through wealth, greed, religion, and success. At this point in the film Plainview gets a visit from
a friend/pastor of the church Daniel pledged himself to, named Eli Sunday. Sunday asks for help,
as he has fallen on harsh times. He begins to beg Daniel, to partner up with him on land that
could be very valuable, in terms of oil usage. Plainview says he can help on one condition.
Daniel now demands the devout pastor to say I am a false prophet and God is a superstition!.
After much hesitance and desperation, the Eli utters the phrase. Plainview demands it be said
IV
with more passion and charisma. The pastor now is repeatedly screaming the phrase: I am a
false prophet and God is a superstition!. The Pastor Eli Sunday has now sold out his beliefs for
money, and in turn becomes the false prophet the Plainview believes he is. Plainview is very
satisfied, yet angry. He now informs Sunday that the land is nothing but dry now and no money
can be made from it. Plainview is now even more nuts that usual. He starts to furiously chase Eli
around screaming at him. He proceeds to throw an object at him, as Sunday is begging him not to
hurt him. Plainview knocks Sunday to the floor and beats him to death.
The act of killing is almost always seen as pure evil. Daniel kills Eli, after Eli sells out his
beliefs and basically himself, for money. Eli became a false prophet by saying I am a false
prophet and God is a superstition!, almost becoming a self fulfilling prophecy. Possibly Daniel
killed Sunday for hypocrisy, lying, and greed, all of which Daniel is most likely guilty of.
Plainview could just be projecting his own human shame onto Sunday, or maybe there is just no
method to the madness. Killing is very synonymous with evil to most, as is greed. Was it really
evil for Plainview to kill Sunday, for what he possibly thought was greed? Was it evil of Sunday
to be greedy and sellout his religion for money? Did Sunday deserve death? Was Sunday even
being greedy? There is no clear answer.
Throughout Plainviews success, he fits himself in all the trappings of wealth. Plainview
loves expensive things, such as fine clothes, exquisite furniture, and great foods and drinks, such
as steak and vodka. Plainviews mindset could be that wealth is happiness. It seems throughout
the film, the more and more success that comes to Plainview, the more and more eccentric and
possibly crazy Plainview becomes, as though he is so deluded into the thought that money equals
happiness, and perhaps that becomes true for him. To Plainview, steak and vodka, make a
V
consummate, expensive meal, therefore in the meal there is a happiness, Plainview cannot
achieve through joy and relationships. In his love of cash, Plainview could be seen as greedy,
which in it self is very often considered evil.
Daniel Plainview is a very conflicted and complicated character. Though, the protagonist,
it is very hard to tell whether Plainview is good, or bad. In the actions described, Plainview has
done things that could be viewed both ways, or in ways similar to ways people considered
good act everyday. He has also done many things that are associated with evil, yet there is no
factual statement of right and wrong. I do have a personal opinion of whether Plainview is good,
or evil, yet I am not going to answer this, due to good and evil, being two subjective items, no
one could ever possibly define.