The Instigator
visionsofdylan
Pro (for)
Tied
24 Points
The Contender
MarxistKid
Con (against)
Tied
24 Points

Daniel Day-Lewis's Performance in There Will Be Blood is the Best performance in years

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/22/2008 Category: Arts
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 3,888 times Debate No: 2083
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (15)
Votes (16)

 

visionsofdylan

Pro

His performance as Daniel Plainview is one that will live forever and he will be taken home the gold on Feb 24. His career performance and possibly the best of the new millenium.
MarxistKid

Con

When my opponent and hopeful friend visionsofdylan says that Daniel Day-Lewis's performance of "There Will Be Blood" is the best performance in years I, at first, thought he was correct. Receiving critical acclaim, many various awards, and looking like a movie to remember for ages, it is an amazing movie. Not the best in years. But instead of taking a trip back in time to point out the several gems that surfaced these past years, I will point out another movie that has been released recently.

"No Country For Old Men" was, in my opinion (which I will present first) was an unexpected marvel in recent cinematic history. Featuring my personal favorite, Tommy Lee Jones as the old and tired Sheriff Ed Tom Bell in the midst of a drug deal gone wrong, and one Anton Chigurh (Javier Bardem) who is one of the most cruel villains in any movie I've seen or heard of.

Finally, response-wise, No Country For Old Men did receive more awards and nominations than There Will Be Blood

-No Country For Old Men http://www.imdb.com...
-There Will Be Blood http://www.imdb.com...
Debate Round No. 1
visionsofdylan

Pro

From your previous entry, it seems you did not attempt to prove me wrong.
I too have seen No Country For Old Men and I too have loved it. I think it might too be a better movie then There Will Be Blood, but for that, I am not sure. However, there was no performance, although all great, did not come close to Day- Lewis'. Bardem's was great but was one dimensional. Tommy Lee Jones was a very Tommy Lee Jones role. It did not require great acting from him, just for him to be himself . However, Daniel Plainview, although just a crazy and villianous, was not one-dimensional. And this was the first time anyone has ever seen such a role from Day-Lewis. He makes acting look like a serious artform by the way he really becomes his characters.
MarxistKid

Con

My opponent decided to completely overlook the vast number of award and nominations both movies received which, unlike opinion, is not a personal matter. If he would look at that, he would have seen that "No Country For Old Men" received much more awards and nominations from several different places than "There Will Be Blood." Nevertheless, I will look over what he said with the utmost care.

>>From your previous entry, it seems you did not attempt to prove me wrong.<<

I believe by presenting another movie to counter yours, I am indeed attempting to prove you wrong. Therefore, I am proving you wrong. Attempting to, at least.

>>I think it might too be a better movie then There Will Be Blood, but for that, I am not sure.<<

When you say "…but for that…" what do you mean? I do not understand what "that" is. Please clarify. If I cannot understand what you a disagreeing with concerning my reply, then you have made a weak argument.

>>Bardem's was great but was one dimensional.<<
This I will speak heavily on.
http://imdb.com...
Quote:
"It's no coincidence that Bardem's image haunts the film's poster art: he's a colossal presence, rolling through the picture like a Mack truck with its brakes shot to pieces, decimating everything--and everyone--in his path. Chigurh is likely to become one of cinema's veritable bad guys..."
David N. Butterworth speaks about Bardem with a fearful yet enthusiastic tone. He gives Javier much credit where credit is due calling his performance "...as intense as any put on film." For the movie, he gives "No Country for Old Men" 3.5 out of 4. An excellent review in my opinion. However, what does he give "There Will Be Blood?"
http://www.imdb.com...
A 3 out of 4. A good score, but not good enough for the masterminds behind "No Country For Old Men", the illustrious Coen brothers.
Now onto you calling him one-dimensional. Consider scene of the gas station. In this scene, Bardem was obviously decided on whether or not to execute this man. The result is an almost eerily humorous discussion between the gas station owner and Anton. I have to applaud Coen brothers for their genius involving this scene. I even found myself giggling when Javier gets mad at the station manager when he puts the life-saving coin into his pocket, telling him to put that coin anywhere else but his pocket. This shows that he can give the audience more than just a simple-minded killing machine. He can give them a self-appointed killer with his own morals and ways of life.

>>Tommy Lee Jones was a very Tommy Lee Jones role. It did not require great acting from him, just for him to be himself.<<
When you say that, I feel like you are suggesting that his acting in this movie was not special or eye-catching. Tom Ed Bell was the perfect example of the older sheriff unable to move along with the times and the criminals that come with it well enough to handle them. Going further, Tommy Lee Jones is an incredible actor, even earning an Oscar nomination for "In the Valley of Elah." To be precise, the very same category that Daniel Day-Lewis is in.
>>And this was the first time anyone has ever seen such a role from Day-Lewis. He makes acting look like a serious artform by the way he really becomes his characters.<<
This was not the first time he had received so much acclaim in cinematography. Not by a long shot. I will give you two quality films that he has starred in that has given him just as much acclaim as "There Will Be Blood", if not much more.
http://www.imdb.com...
"Gangs of New York" is my favorite movie of all time. Hands down, this movie usually is popped into my DVD player once a week, at the least. It is because of the amazing talent of Leonardo DiCaprio and Daniel Day-Lewis, who plays as Bill 'The Butcher' Cutting, vicious leader of the Natives, whose bloody performance with a knife is both chilling and wondrous.

http://www.imdb.com...
"My Left Foot: The Story of Christy Brown" is a 2 Oscar award winning film starring, once again, Daniel Day-Lewis as a quadriplegic that manages to live out his life by controlling his only working limb, his left foot.

In conclusion, my opponent makes a rather short and weak argument. Daniel Day-Lewis's greatest achievement is not this movie, but his time on the silver screen in years past. I think everyone who reads this debate will easily see that. Despite making a few short flimsy attacks on "No Country For Old Men", he still refuses to recognize the number one obvious fact.
That "No Country For Old Men" received more positive acclaim that "There Will Be Blood." That has yet to be even put into question by my opponent, a poor move on his part.

That is all.
Debate Round No. 2
visionsofdylan

Pro

You are proving that No Country For Old Men is a better movie then There Will be Blood and that is not what this debate is about. You are not saying that Bardem's or Tommy Lee Jones' performances were better then Day-Lewis', you are just saying the movie is. And just to let you know, Day-Lewis has been up for and won more awards then any of the cast of No Country For Old Men. And in speaking about Gangs of New York, although I too love that movie and his perfomance, Daniel Day- Lewis was very much more cartoonish in it then Daniel Plainview. Therefore actually discuss something that goes with the debate topic next time.
MarxistKid

Con

My opponent has decided to stick with his view that my rebuttals are not related to this debate, although, unlike my responses, he does not show any new topics concerning the debate. Not in this round or the last. Maybe my response this time will stop him from being a broken record and present new evidence to support his claim. Now onto the debate.

---
>>You are proving that No Country For Old Men is a better movie then There Will be Blood and that is not what this debate is about.<<
Merriam-Webster defines counterexample as:
Function: A noun
"An example that refutes or disproves a proposition or theory"
Do you understand the idea of counterexample? If you do, then you would have realized that presenting counterexample is just what I have been doing this whole time. By presenting to you a movie with actors that perform better than the original one given, I am using the method of counterexample to prove that your proposition that Daniel's performance in "There Will Be Blood" is NOT the greatest performance in the last several years.

>>You are not saying that Bardem's or Tommy Lee Jones' performances were better then Day-Lewis', you are just saying the movie is.<<
On the contrary, that is exactly what I am doing. I think that both Bardem's and Tommy's performance in "No Country For Old Men" were better than Daniel Day-Lewis's performance. What makes a movie, when there is lack or no interest in special effects or the like, is the quality of the acting. Therefore, I am saying that Anton Chigurh and Ed Tom Bell (Bardem and Tommy's characters) were better preformed as than Daniel Plainview (Daniel's character) was. What's even funnier is that you challenged the performance of Tommy and Javier the last round, which I then described the acting of the two star performers in that film. It seems that you are even forgetting what you yourself says. That shows a lack of concern for this debate and that could hurt you in the end, in my opinion.

>>And just to let you know, Day-Lewis has been up for and won more awards then any of the cast of No Country For Old Men.<<
Ah, another easy contradiction. It is true that Daniel has won more awards that the cast of "No Country For Old Men", but that is not what we are debating, is it? We are debating the performance in "There Will Be Blood." Whether or not he preformed in any other films prior to this one is irrelevant to this statement. Perhaps it I that should be telling you to stay on topic in this debate.

>>And in speaking about Gangs of New York, although I too love that movie and his perfomance, Daniel Day- Lewis was very much more cartoonish in it then Daniel Plainview.<<
To cartoon-oriented? You say it like it is a bad thing. You have to keep in mind that "Gangs Of New York" is a "cartoonish" movie, in some views. Having his performance reflect the theme of the movie isn't wrong, is it?

>>Therefore actually discuss something that goes with the debate topic next time.<<
That, at this point, is obviously false. I have proven to you that I have not only been following the debate, but I have given you several valid points that you have forgotten or chosen to look over, because you do not want to accept the truth in them.

In conclusion, my opponent has sown together a thin and flimsy argument in this debate, and at every corner, I have cut it apart. However, he chooses to forget this and make more accusations against me rather than the debate itself. I will give you, the viewer, three valid points that will hammer the nails into Dylan's coffin.
A. "No Country For Old Men" received more awards because of the performance of the actors, not the movie itself. No movie receives an award for being a movie.
B. Daniel's performance in "Gangs of New York" and "My Left Foot" both were better examples of acting on his part than "There Will Be Blood."
C. Using counterexample is not going off topic of the debate but instead furthers the debate, giving strong points and evidence for it. The assumption that I have been giving unrelated facts to the debate is a desperate attempt by my opponent to gain a foothold, which did, does, and will not work with in this debate.

Thank you.
Debate Round No. 3
15 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Renzzy 9 years ago
Renzzy
I am not following you, I have only commented on three of your debates. In fact, I was planning on leaving you alone to your insults after this conversation was over. I have commented on several debates of other people before, so your not the only one. Don't feel sinlged out simply because I am trying to encourage you not to insult your opponents and things like that.

All of these things that you quoted are not threats. A threat would be "If you are gay, I am going to kill you." "I don't like gays, and if you are gay and come on mty property, I will file a lawsuit.". Now I don't know if brainwashing was the best word choice, but it was by no means a threat. I too think that gays are damaging our society. Is that a threat? No, it is an opinion. There is a difference.
Posted by MarxistKid 9 years ago
MarxistKid
>>I feel that these groups of people are just as deadly as the Bubonic Plague and we should deal with this problem.<<
What does he mean by solve the problem?

>>How did I make threats of Harm TO GAY PEOPLE. I just feel we need to counter their brainwashing.<<
How would we counter the imaginary "brainwashing" that you say they perform?

Also, why do you NEED an explanation? Second, why does it matter to you? I've been wondering that for a while.
Perhaps I look down on some people, but what I do isn't the evil of Debate.org like you portray it as. As much as I like followers, what you are doing is just wrong. Please stop. I don't deserve this flat out badgering. I don't follow other peoples debates and pick out what is wrong about them. What gives you the right to do?
Posted by Renzzy 9 years ago
Renzzy
Yes, MarxistKid, I think we need an explaination.
Posted by visionsofdylan 9 years ago
visionsofdylan
How did I make threats of Harm TO GAY PEOPLE. I just feel we need to counter their brainwashing.
Posted by MarxistKid 9 years ago
MarxistKid
Why do you insist on following me where ever I go? Do you think you will teach some lesson some moral?
If your trying to do that, go rant at solarman, or visionsofDylan, both of them making threats to people based on their sexuality. Threats. Not simple insults. Threats of harm.
Posted by Renzzy 9 years ago
Renzzy
HE is insulting people?!?!

"I admire the fact that you follow me debates, insulting me where ever I go. That's dedication."

That was about the nicest thing anyone ever said to me.

"...unlike my responses, he does not show any new topics concerning the debate. Not in this round or the last. Maybe my response this time will stop him from being a broken record and present new evidence to support his claim. Now onto the debate."

Nope. No insult there.

"This debate is just too silly to pass up." (Differant debate of Marxistkids')

I'm sure that no one in their right mind would take that as an insult!

"I really don't like people like you."

Vision thought this was insulting? I surely don't.

I hope you detect the sarcasm in my writing, MarxistKid.
Posted by MarxistKid 9 years ago
MarxistKid
Also, your ad hom stuff is throw aside. I really don't like people like you. When did you learn that insulting people let you win? When did someone lie to you about that?
Posted by MarxistKid 9 years ago
MarxistKid
This is a tie. Neither of us are winning.
I don't really like talking to you now. You think that homosexuality is an abomination. I can't really get use to people like that.
Posted by visionsofdylan 9 years ago
visionsofdylan
U are an a@@hole marxistkid. Maybe that is why you are not winning.
Posted by MarxistKid 9 years ago
MarxistKid
I admire the fact that you follow me debates, insulting me where ever I go. That's dedication.
16 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by flyingtuna420 9 years ago
flyingtuna420
visionsofdylanMarxistKidTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Zonko_TM 9 years ago
Zonko_TM
visionsofdylanMarxistKidTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Clint 9 years ago
Clint
visionsofdylanMarxistKidTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Renzzy 9 years ago
Renzzy
visionsofdylanMarxistKidTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by griffinisright 9 years ago
griffinisright
visionsofdylanMarxistKidTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by mariahsaywhaaa 9 years ago
mariahsaywhaaa
visionsofdylanMarxistKidTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by visionsofdylan 9 years ago
visionsofdylan
visionsofdylanMarxistKidTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by polishgirlinar 9 years ago
polishgirlinar
visionsofdylanMarxistKidTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Undermining-Chaos 9 years ago
Undermining-Chaos
visionsofdylanMarxistKidTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by ContortedExistence 9 years ago
ContortedExistence
visionsofdylanMarxistKidTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03