Noisewar Internetlainen

war and noise... the momentum and the medium... film, games, and more

  • About Me
  • Film Analysis
  • Game Articles
  • Photography

Lydia writes:Thanks for the fascinating analysis, and for the comments …

Posted by noisewar on February 21, 2019
Posted in: Uncategorized.

Comment on A Critical Analysis of There Will Be Blood: Intensional Godhood by anonymous.

Lydia writes:

Thanks for the fascinating analysis, and for the comments following it that contributed. My boyfriend and I have spent the last hour talking through our own ideas about it. Though the book is apparently quite different from the movie, I look forward to reading it now, for completely different reasons than I enjoyed TWBB. Now if only someone would make a movie adaptation of "The Jungle." Keep up the great work.

anonymous Also Commented

A Critical Analysis of There Will Be Blood: Intensional Godhood
Anonymous writes:

hi u people are rlly gay u know that?


A Critical Analysis of There Will Be Blood: Intensional Godhood
Anonymous writes:

After watching the movie for my third or fourth time I came across your analysis. I enjoyed it very much. Thank you for your insights.


A Critical Analysis of There Will Be Blood: Intensional Godhood
Brian writes:

So glad to see this thread still running. I was fortunate to watch the movie again and loved it just as much. It has to be up there in my top 3 favorite movies along with Revolutionary Road and Black Swan, yet more movies to draw endless conclusions from.

I have skimmed most all the comments and have gained insight and opinions from these and of course the movie itself. I would love feedback on my observations/questions.

*Mary plays a mysterious character to me. It is intriguing how often Daniel Physically touches her. Much can be drawn from this but her character baffles me.

*I don't see Eli as a fraud, or one who is fake in his Christian beliefs. At the town meeting his authenticity of asking about the road leading to the church seems sincere. What I see most with the Eli/Daniel spat is the Power struggle. Eli is Daniel's only threat (competition). Daniel doesn't want respect from the town, simply complete control. At the opening of the well Eli is expected to get the big stage in front of the towns people but is blown off by Daniel. Notice Eli does not ask really, it's more of a demand with specifics on how and when to introduce him. We know later that no one tells Daniel what to do and how to do it (standard oil confrontation). When Daniel goes to church and sees Eli's control over the congregation it makes him furious. Eli acts as competitor to the threat of the town worshiping something other than oil. Remember the speeches Daniel gave of what oil could do to a community? This was his version of a Prophecy but using Oil as worship instead of religion. The last power struggle attempt to "leverage" Daniel came in the final scene where Eli assumed he could name a price for the final piece of land. Not only does Daniel "win" by not needing the land but he was able to exploit the fault of Eli. Eli was money hungry and would alter his beliefs because of it. When Eli admitted to these things of being a fake he does not believe this but is under complete control of Daniel in order to get the money.

* Lastly, Daniels "brother form another mother." What is everyone's take on the scene before his death. They appear to be in some kind of Brothel in which he asks Daniel for money, and then has to ask again. Why the repetition and what is the significance in the Brothel.

Thanks


Recent Comments by anonymous

Bioshock Explained
Sam writes:

Hello from 2012 (Odd how great games can have such lasting impacts, huh?)! I thoroughly enjoyed your explanation of this very thought provoking game! In support of one argument of Ryan casting aside his morals for the best in Rapture, there is a tape in the Farmer's Market of Ryan deciding to use the ADAM to make people open to suggestion, which is one reason he's able to control the splicers himself. Upon my first playthrough, I agreed with most of your ideas presented here. However, I saw a connection between Ryan and Fontaine as a conflict between Capitalism and Socialism. Ryan clearly presented a capitalistic idealism through his following of both Smith and Rand. Fontaine was the people's man, he fought for the working class. However the game shows the horrid atrocities of both. In a socialist society, we have the splicers who've gone crazy and often fight each other for any and all ADAM. On the other hand, we have capitalists that established monarchies in business because others could not feed off another's idea, these elitests let the working class suffer. Either side they chose, the splicers suffered through the greed and selfishness of others. In a society that was ideally selfless as people worked for themselves which, in turn, benefited society, selfishness reigned true as people like Fontaine abused the system. In addition, Fontaine's world made people think they had a choice, that they could choose to better themselves through exploitation of others, yet they only made him stronger and hurt others. Ryan alike, made people think they had many choices, yet the elites forced the layman to work for them and made it impossible for their choice to lead anywhere but to the bottom of the ladder. Sorry if my ideas seem a bit off, I'm not sure how to phrase it other than the faults of Capitalism versus Socialism. Perhaps the faults of government today would be better. One side proposes free market, the actual outcome is one of exploitation. Was Hobbes or Locke correct? I think the game argues for human nature being "tainted". Bioshock isn't just a political critique but a human one, too.


Bioshock Explained
Anonymous writes:

The meaning i got from this nightmare is "Your choice is never truly your own. Your will is tainted by even existing. To have true free will would to not exist."


A Philosophical Approach to a Better Mass Effect 3 Ending
Cyrgaan writes:

I completly agree with your deduction. Free will unity is the option I've missed from the whole picture, yet I couldn't explain the plot on the level you did.

Lack of this option (method, more likely) in the ending is the main inconvenience for me, because that was the way I always walked on in the whole story. There was one other point in the game, when this method was not present: at the choice you erase/rewrite the heretic geth. Though with Legion's explanation about the rewrite way is acceptable for the greater good, it's still a renegade method. There should be a way to communicate with the heretic geth, for example using Legion as an interpreter, and persuade them with reasons to bridge over the schism without forcing. Though, in fact, the lack of this option is logical because of the presence of the Reaper code (it can be seen as "indoctrination for synthetics").

(Sorry, if my bad english rendered my explanation to something uncomprehendable. I hope you can understand what I've tried to explain.)


A Philosophical Approach to a Better Mass Effect 3 Ending
Max Payne writes:

1hundred stars to this

I can agree with this

this make sense,

Inet is full of nonsense "indoctrination theory"
Too much people are persuaded to it and using 2sided blade arguments, ignoring facts, on first look you can see that they are justifying themselves that "destroy" is right choice and other are you loose and be full indoc.

Our race is still too young


A Philosophical Approach to a Better Mass Effect 3 Ending
Ruffian writes:

very good fix, in my opinion, This is more along the lines of what I was actually expecting. This and an actual final mission of some sort, where your intergalactic fleet did something or some kind of decisions to make regarding your crew. The lack of the latter wouldn't have been so bad though with the inclusion of the former.


Posts navigation

← Analysis of The Grey and The Revenant: Nature is Absurd
  • Recent Posts

    • Analysis of The Grey and The Revenant: Nature is Absurd
    • Analysis of Mad Max: Fury Road and the Return to Humanism
    • Analysis of Song of the Sea: Salvation by Folklore
    • A Philosophical Approach to a Better Mass Effect 3 Ending
    • Edessa Wang, the once and future queen
  • Tags

    360 ad&d animation art asia bioshock blizzard china controversy critical analysis culture DDO DS E3 EA economy film finance game industry games gta guitar hero hollywood japan ludology mass effect mortgage movies news nintendo opera pixar politics ps3 revolution sony stock market taiwan travel vacation wedding wii WoW Xbox xstine
  • Recent Comments

    • Ambuj on Analysis of Mad Max: Fury Road and the Return to Humanism
    • Ebi on A Critical Analysis of There Will Be Blood: Intensional Godhood
    • NanoCorps on A Philosophical Approach to a Better Mass Effect 3 Ending
    • James Sharp on A Critical Analysis of There Will Be Blood: Intensional Godhood
    • Policarpo Corvalan on Analysis of Mad Max: Fury Road and the Return to Humanism
  • Archives

    • January 2017
    • July 2015
    • March 2015
    • March 2012
    • July 2011
    • July 2010
    • April 2010
    • December 2009
    • October 2009
    • September 2009
    • February 2009
    • January 2009
    • December 2008
    • November 2008
    • October 2008
    • September 2008
    • August 2008
    • July 2008
    • June 2008
    • May 2008
    • April 2008
    • March 2008
    • February 2008
    • January 2008
    • December 2007
    • November 2007
    • October 2007
    • September 2007
    • August 2007
    • July 2007
    • June 2007
    • May 2007
    • April 2007
    • March 2007
    • February 2007
    • January 2007
    • December 2006
    • November 2006
    • October 2006
    • September 2006
    • August 2006
    • July 2006
    • June 2006
    • May 2006
    • April 2006
    • March 2006
    • February 2006
    • January 2006
    • December 2005
    • November 2005
  • Meta

    • Log in
    • Entries RSS
    • Comments RSS
    • WordPress.org
Proudly powered by WordPress Theme: Parament by Automattic.