Imagine being Ciarán Hinds and having your only line of dialogue cut from the film.

@@jnkz987 He had way more than one line in this movie (and this scene). He also introduced himself to Paul, asked Daniel if H.W. was okay after the explosion, and discussed sending him off to the school for the deaf. Who REALLY got the short end of the stick was the actor who played Abel. This was far and away the most dialogue he got and it all got cut.

Jorn Krantz, Not Available- You're both wrong. It was Paul Sunday who got the short end of the stick. He is a GREAT actor and only got one brief scene. That guy should've gotten waaaay more screen time.

It will make the movie too long.

@@bookeblade I mean, I wasn't complaining about not including it in the first place. I just meant imagine the film being so good that even the cut material like this is this good that it almost stands alone as a short film or something. It was probably just cut for pacing rather than length, the film is already nearly 3 hours.

I agree.

Criterion should do it. Would be fantastic.

I've seen the cut. It's 4.5 hours long (There's ultimately a 10 hour cut that only a handful of people have seen). Anyways, the 2.5 hour movie is a fun version. In the 4.5 hour version you really see how much of a "cold hard bastard" this guy is. He's just cold and hard and therefore a villain.

@@bradleybeauclair8282 Where can I see this extended cut?!

@@jonw9119 I don't know. They like randomly played it in theaters or whatever random means.

no one said he wasn't a liar

Technically he said he didn’t spend months fishing so he wasn’t lying

@@SunDogGod oh yeah i forgot

He's a salesman

@@TheJoec2005 he's an oil man!

brilliant

Satan came through for Daniel.

@@furbabydaddy814 as he always does

That's not right. The moment Daniel knew he hit the jackpot was during the oil fire. He already had what he needed from Abel by purchasing the land. This is just a nice opportunity to put him in his place and Daniel can't resist because he despises his weakness and religion. This scene was before the fire because HW isn't deaf.

@truemangibson That's a fair point. I think you're probably right but I also STILL think that I have a point too. Either way I think he was still looking for some reassurance and a confident reason to insult him and once he got it, that's when he did so.

you should try it. it feels good and people won´t bother you

Smart man seeing religion for what it is, a scam.

Beautiful writing and acting.

@@mitchjust6688 One charlatan isn't an indictment of a 2,000 year old religion. Eli being a con artist is a testament to Eli's character, not the teachings of Christianity.

@@vladimirhorowitz Also I think I read somewhere about Paul Sunday being true to the word of God and became rather successful while at the same time had some desire on revealing how much of a charlatan his brother Eli really is. Eli's leadership of "his" church doesn't seem to stem from good honest intentions but from prideful ambitions. His move on mentioning "You Abandon Your Child", seemed like he wanted to gain leverage and a sense of power over Daniel instead of actually saving him. Paul is the chosen one, intelligent and righteous while Eli is not as smart as his brother and is very prideful and full of himself to the point of labeling himself as a prophet.

Even Abel's son called him names like that.

We knew how Daniel felt.

Same same!

You got two years on me!! One of my favorites.. if not, number one! My Pop and I watched it probably a dozen times together... I'm thankful we did, it reminds me of him ❤🙏🏼

‘And I think you’re a weak little man.’

@@qasimmir7117 HW -- "Dad, she tells me her father beats her, when she doesn't want to pray."

I guess you don't see how boring it is. A part of good writing is not to be boring. I'm very glad Anderson saw it and cut this one out.

No matter how good, every work of art needs to get its point across to the attention span that has given the work access to its precious time. Attention spans are growing ever shorter, so if this movie were even made today, it would be butchered even more in the service of telling its story concisely.

@@billplaney2585 your taste is a work in progress. Products do get more concise over time but u have to take the time it was made into account. This was perfectly paced. Also it's a DRAMA

@@mjxtacreaixe I guess Paul Thomas Anderson is not as brilliant as he thinks too since he cut that scene out, mister brilliant. It was BORING and it would damage the terrific pacing of the film. Put up with it or educate yourself.

@@pab1972 It's a short film. He was right to cut it out but it stands on it's own, that's what impresses me. Shooting the scene wasn't a mistake, it was part of the journey. U are trying to establish your intelligence over PTA rather than just appreciating this short film mastrpiece. corny

2021 and the relationship between the Company Man, the Crew, and the land owner is still pretty much the same. Except its generally reversed in roles. The Company Man is the weak little man, and the land owner the, sometimes violent, lunatic

I both agree and disagree with you here. I really enjoyed this sequence and think it adds to Daniel character. I also enjoyed all the technical stuff about drilling in this time, & would have been happy to see more. But most movies run long. This scene may add to aspects of the movie, but overall it isn't needed. If this part was included it wouldn't be seen as iconic. I do support other people's opinions that a longer cut of this movie could be a good thing.

I kinda think it gives insight to what drillers or oil men deal with. We see him eating his dinner only to go back to he rig floor to over see the issue. Fishing alone is not an ideal situation for a drill crew, let alone the pressure of side show characters being persistent. I think this scene could've fit in lieu of other scenes, say, for example when the bit comes loose and kills that man. Plainview is passed out drunk on the floor and woken in the dead of night to hear the news. Then the departeds faith forces Daniel to deal with Paul. I still think it wouldn't steal from any part of the movie because we don't know when the scene would've been placed, maybe we would've already known the characters and plot, and this was just another transition from when "scene closes, BUT another confrontation arises" situation. I think it shows insight to what we don't see beyond Daniel dealing with the multi faceted issues and pressure he faces with society, himself, and even his family.

The movie would have been too long. It was already 2 hours and 30 minutes. This movie realistically could have lasted for 4 hrs or longer. Glad the movie came out when it did because people actually appreciated serious acting and long performances. People have such a short attention span now I think if Anderson released this today he would have been told to cut the time of the movie down. I could also have seen this as a two part movie released in the same year. Oh well at least we get to see the deleted scenes and outtakes.

Exactly, that's why I think it would have been fine to get rid of all the background about fishing and just inserted the interaction with Daniel and Abel.

@@vladimirhorowitz nightcrawler profile pic

@@nukacolacompany2534 Correctomundo!

Agreed. The rest of it fit perfectly

Did we watch the same movie? Daniel is not a monster. He's a lonely, miserable man who struggled so much in life that it ruined his soul.

Disagree with you there. I always wondered why Abel and Daniel never had any more screen interactions after the introduction. I know Eli takes over in that aspect, but I still found myself wondering how Abel saw Daniel once he got to know him better... and now I know. Always felt that part was missing and frankly, Daniel reflects better off Abel than he does Eli because Eli is a crook (aswell), while Abel is an honest, god fearing man. And that dynamic is way more interesting. Having goodness translate to weakness,at least in Daniel's eyes.

@@rustneversleeps85 Couldn't agree more. Great scene!!

But they are brilliant.

It would have certainly made the final scene a lot more poignant, Daniel was tired of Sunday arrogance.

"This was omitted on my new theory that you could omit anything if you knew that you omitted and the omitted part would strengthen the story and make people feel something more than they understood." - Ernest Hemingway

The revelation in the end where "superstition loses" made more impact without this scene, could be lame if it could be disproven the second time in the end.

@@aldrinaldrin4618 I agree, this scene is brilliant but it’s ultimately redundant

Disagree with you there. I always wondered why Abel and Daniel never had any more screen interactions after the introduction. I know Eli takes over in that aspect, but I still found myself wondering how Abel saw Daniel once he got to know him better... and now I know. Always felt that part was missing and frankly, Daniel reflects better off Abel than he does Eli because Eli is a crook (aswell), while Abel is an honest, god fearing man. And that dynamic is way more interesting. Having goodness translate to weakness,at least in Daniel's eyes.

@@Tusc9969 Definitely agree. I can only assume this scene was cut for time and pacing, but he could have easily left just the last part with Abel and Daniel in but cut out the background about "fishing" and Fletcher's conversation with Mary. I think this was a really important interaction, but obviously the film stands on its own without it.

@@sebm3029 but compared to Daniel, he was. Abel might've not been the best parent but Daniel was a horrible human being who was antisocial, a crook and a scoundrel who used his own adopted son to lie and manipulate others, not to mention a cold blooded murderer.

is an excess cause is deleted . If this scene was in the movie no would dare say. Oh the scene is so unnecessary what they were thinking!!

Perhaps. Dangerous to light it close to the well. Most likely, he lit it near the dirt track leading to the station.

He's the sigmax

To be an anti-hero he still needs to do something heroic, which he never really does.

Steak and diced potatoes. Daniel is a simple man!

Lol “politely”??

​@@wacodraco1558 Yeah very polite; cuz he didn't crack his head open w/a bowl-oops, no spoilers;)